hide Sorting

You can sort these results in two ways:

By entity
Chronological order for dates, alphabetical order for places and people.
By position (current method)
As the entities appear in the document.

You are currently sorting in ascending order. Sort in descending order.

hide Most Frequent Entities

The entities that appear most frequently in this document are shown below.

Entity Max. Freq Min. Freq
Lawrence W. Orton 22 0 Browse Search
Brownlow 19 1 Browse Search
Martinsburg (West Virginia, United States) 10 0 Browse Search
Lawrence Williams 9 1 Browse Search
Ewell 9 3 Browse Search
Jackson 8 0 Browse Search
Jenison 8 0 Browse Search
United States (United States) 8 0 Browse Search
Forrest 7 3 Browse Search
W. G. Peter 6 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in The Daily Dispatch: June 20, 1863., [Electronic resource].

Found 373 total hits in 156 results.

1 2 3 4 5 6 ...
Abraham Lincoln (search for this): article 1
man to recommend respect for the Constitution and obedience to its requirements. He would have continued to shout and throw up his cap at every fresh proof that Lincoln gave of his utter contempt for law, and his determination to be himself the State. But with the sagacity common to politicians of his calibre, he perceived that tdently, however, too late to provide against the danger. For the impatience of the audience, and their determination to hear nothing against the despotism of Lincoln, proves but too clearly that Abolitionism has done its work effectually, and that every vestige of respect for the Constitution has been eradicated from the mindsetty military tyrant a marshal of the Prussian Emperor. And yet these are the people who promised themselves that freedom would run riot with the election of Abraham Lincoln; that there should no longer be slavery, or the semblance of slavery, from the St. Johns to the Rio Grande; that professed themselves willing to go on a crusa
Trumbull (search for this): article 1
Significant. The speech of Senator Trumbull at Chicago is significant in more respects than one. It shows that those among the Abolitionists who are able to see an inch beyond their noses begin to look forward already to a time when they may have to invoke that protection from the Constitution and the laws which they have uniformly done their utmost to prevent their adversaries from receiving. Senator Trumbull is a very unscrupulous, at the same time that he is a very sagacious politician, and no man is more deeply committed against the South and in favor of Abolitionism. Did he believe that the tenure by which the Abolition party now hold power w was an incubus which they were not bound to submit to or respect, that they have all come to regard it in that light, and now let them unteach them if they can. Trumbull and his fellows resemble the pupil of the magician, who, having raised the d — l by means of his master's spells, was unable to lay him again, and was torn to pi
Saint Petersburg (Florida, United States) (search for this): article 1
potism has made in subduing the souls of its victims, and rendering them fit subjects for the iron rule of the tyrant. Every manly feeling, every free aspiration, every independent thought, seems to have been crushed out of the souls and bodies of these unhappy people. They no longer even claim to be a free people, governed by a written Constitution, and laws of their own enactment. They are as absolutely slaves as though they were the subjects of Alexander II., as though Chicago were St. Petersburg, and every petty military tyrant a marshal of the Prussian Emperor. And yet these are the people who promised themselves that freedom would run riot with the election of Abraham Lincoln; that there should no longer be slavery, or the semblance of slavery, from the St. Johns to the Rio Grande; that professed themselves willing to go on a crusade against the whole world in favor of freedom, and that have converted the Southern States into a huge slaughter-pen in pursuit of their favorite
May (search for this): article 1
Martial law. --Yesterday morning Napoleon Burke and John S. Hammond, two of the Provost Marshal's detectives, were before the May or to answer the charge of assaulting Michael Walls, contrary to law. The facts in the case are these: Under order of the Provost Marshal, the detectives are required to seize all ardent spirits brought to the city without written permission of the Marshal. On the morning in question these detective ascertained that Walls had received three barrels of liquor, and suspecting it to be contraband, repaired to his store to seize it. When about to seize the liquor found in Walls's house an altercation sprang up between W and Hammond, W. giving H. the file. H. immediately seized W. and took him off to the Provost Marshal, Burke merely preventing Mrs. W. from interfering in the arrest of her husband. As these officers hold their commissions as Confederate detectives, and claim to act under martial law, the Mayor contends that martial law is unconstitutiona
Davis (search for this): article 1
he allow them to ride about the streets with lewd women, to insult ladies and to outrage morality. He would not permit them to dog respectable citizens about and arrest them for passing city notes. With the laws of the State and the ordinances of the city the detectives have nothing to do, and should not interfere with them. Let them attend to the Confederate laws, and they will have enough to do. The Mayor believed that if that worthy patriot and estimable Christian gentleman, President Davis, knew of the abuses by these detectives, he would have them reformed at once. For himself, believing martial law to be unconstitutional, and the act with which the parties are charged to be in violation of the laws of the State, he should be compelled to send the parties on to the Grand Jury. Mr. Aylett thought the Mayor's Phillipe about the detectives entirely foreign to the question at issue. He was not there to inquire into the personnel or morale of the detectives. If any of
Winder (search for this): article 1
ter in charge, had their prisoner to escape from them in the night time, and fired their muskets at him as he fled through the streets.--Some of the watchmen being night, arrested the party by whom the musket was fired, and they did right. It were better that a deserter should escape than an innocent party should be killed. Two negroes were killed in the streets for attempting to escape the guards, and innocent parties might have been shot down at any moment but for a complaint mode to Gen. Winder, and an order issued by that General, which put an end to street shooting. The Mayor then reviewed the conduct of some of the detectives towards his police, and complained that they had been derelict in duty, as well as had men and officers. Without calling nacres, he stated that one of these detectives had interfered with his police, and attempted to prevent them from making arrests. When the facts were made known to him, be issued a warrant for the arrest of that party, and that
P. H. Aylett (search for this): article 1
efore their acts are illegal, and the arrest made by them no less than "assault and battery, " for which they are subject to indictment by the Grand Jury. P. H. Aylett, Esq., C. S. District Attorney, appeared in Court, at the invitation of the Mayor, but declined submitting any argument on the constitutionality of "Martial Lased under peculiar circumstances. The Mayor desired to see the law under which this power was exercised. He wished to be informed as to its legality. Mr. Aylett declined offering any argument or authorities, but contented himself with reading the commissions of the parties charged, and the orders under which the Provostnd the act with which the parties are charged to be in violation of the laws of the State, he should be compelled to send the parties on to the Grand Jury. Mr. Aylett thought the Mayor's Phillipe about the detectives entirely foreign to the question at issue. He was not there to inquire into the personnel or morale of the de
Lyons (search for this): article 1
f the Bill of Rights, had the right to enter another's house and drag him therefrom without first obtaining a warrant. He was glad to hear that the case, if sent on, would be fully argued in another Court. The Mayor then referred to the acts of some of the detectives when martial law was first proclaimed. He particularized the case of Theodore Whitman, who was dragged from his house under martial law for selling liquor, and thrown into prison. Whitman was afterwards carried before Judge Lyons on a writ of habeas corpus, and after a hearing discharged, the Judge being unable to discover any authority for the establishment of martial law. On this decision the officials threatened an appeal to a higher tribunal, and the record was prepared, but thus far it has not been taken. The Mayor next alluded to the complaints made by Government officials of the city police interfering with the Provost detectives in the discharge of their duty. He had always directed his officers not
Martial Law (search for this): article 1
these officers hold their commissions as Confederate detectives, and claim to act under martial law, the Mayor contends that martial law is unconstitutional, and that therefore their acts are illegal, and the arrest made by them no less than "assault and battery, " for which they are subject to indictment by the Grand Jury. P. H. Aylett, Esq., C. S. District Attorney, appeared in Court, at the invitation of the Mayor, but declined submitting any argument on the constitutionality of "Martial Law" before that Court. The parties were arraigned for assault and battery, and if they should be sent on to a higher Court the question might there be argued; but, with all his respect for the Mayor, he did not deem it essential to discuss before him the right of the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy, in war times like these, to exercise martial law. Military law, his Honor knew, was right and proper. It was clearly laid down in the law books, and its constitutionality could not be q
John S. Hammond (search for this): article 1
Martial law. --Yesterday morning Napoleon Burke and John S. Hammond, two of the Provost Marshal's detectives, were before the May or to answer the charge of assaulting Michael Walls, contrary to law. The facts in the case are these: Under order of the Provost Marshal, the detectives are required to seize all ardent spirits brought to the city without written permission of the Marshal. On the morning in question these detective ascertained that Walls had received three barrels of liquor, and suspecting it to be contraband, repaired to his store to seize it. When about to seize the liquor found in Walls's house an altercation sprang up between W and Hammond, W. giving H. the file. H. immediately seized W. and took him off to the Provost Marshal, Burke merely preventing Mrs. W. from interfering in the arrest of her husband. As these officers hold their commissions as Confederate detectives, and claim to act under martial law, the Mayor contends that martial law is unconstitution
1 2 3 4 5 6 ...