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
United States (United States) 324 0 Browse Search
Richmond (Virginia, United States) 294 28 Browse Search
Virginia (Virginia, United States) 262 0 Browse Search
Jefferson Davis 210 2 Browse Search
Andersonville, Ga. (Georgia, United States) 177 1 Browse Search
Washington (United States) 162 2 Browse Search
Arkansas (Arkansas, United States) 116 0 Browse Search
R. E. Lee 114 0 Browse Search
Georgia (Georgia, United States) 106 0 Browse Search
William T. Sherman 105 1 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 1. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones). Search the whole document.

Found 574 total hits in 126 results.

... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Henry Clay Dean (search for this): chapter 3.18
ion, would not say for his life, the gentleman from Maine says to the country to keep himself and his party in power. The statement of Mr. Schade is confirmed by the following extract from the Cycle, of Mobile, Alabama: In the brief report of the speech of Mr. Hill in Congress on Monday last, copied in another place, it will be observed that he refers to a statement made by Captain Wirz to his counsel just before his death. The subjoined letter from Professor R. B. Winder, M. D. now Dean of the Baltimore Dental College, who was a prisoner in a cell near that of Wirz, will give a more detailed account of the same transaction. The letter was written in reply to an inquiry made in the course of investigation in the history of the transactions which have been made the subject of discussion in Congress. Dr. Winder speaks of the statement as having been already several times published. We do not remember to have seen it before. At any rate, it will well bear repetition, and w
R. G. H. Kean (search for this): chapter 3.18
cumstances afford the strongest proof of just the reverse. We inclosed the slip from the Sauk Rapids Sentinel to Hon. R. G. H. Kean, who was chief clerk of the Confederate War Department. We may say (for the benefit of readers in other sections; it is entirely unnecessary in this latitude), that Mr. Kean is now Rector of the University of Virginia, and is an accomplished scholar and a high-toned Christian gentleman, whose lightest word may be implicitly relied upon. Mr. Kean has sent us the Mr. Kean has sent us the following letter, which, though hastily written and not designed for publication, gives so clear a history of this report that we shall take the liberty of publishing it in full: Letter of Hon. B. G. H. Kean, Chief clerk of the Confederate war Depe or reported to me by those whose names I have mentioned, I vouch without hesitation. Respectfully, yours truly, R. G. H. Kean. We have also a Letter from Secretary Seddon, dated March 27th, 1876, from which we give the following ex
June 20th, 1867 AD (search for this): chapter 3.18
s yet surviving our terrible struggle, it may be hard still to have justice awarded to the true merits and noble qualities of your father, but in future and happier times I doubt not all mists of error obscuring his name and fame will be swept away under the light of impartial investigation, and he will be honored and revered, as he ought to be, among the most faithful patriots and gallant soldiers of the Southern Confederacy. Very truly yours, James A. Seddon. [Copy.] Montreal, 20th June, 1867. My Dear Sir--* * * I have never doubted that all had been done for the comfort and preservation of the prisoners at Andersonville that the circumstances rendered possible. General Winder I had known from my first entrance into the United States army as a gallant soldier and an honorable gentleman. Cruelty to those in his power, defenceless and sick men, was inconsistent with the character of either a soldier or a gentleman. I was always, therefore, confident that the charge was
July 19th, 1866 AD (search for this): chapter 3.18
in in the form in which they were presented by Honorable B. H. Hill in his masterly reply to Mr. Blaine. Mr. Hill said: Now, will the gentleman believe testimony from the dead? The Bible says, The tree is known by its fruits. And, after all, what is the test of suffering of these prisoners North and South? The test is the result. Now, I call the attention of gentlemen to this fact, that the report of Mr. Stanton, the Secretary of War--you will believe him, will you not?--on the 19th of July, 1866--send to the library and get it — exhibits the fact that of the Federal prisoners in Confederate hands during the war, only 22,576 died, while of the Confederate prisoners in Federal hands 26,436 died. And Surgeon-General Barnes reports in an official report — I suppose you will believe him — that in round numbers the Confederate prisoners in Federal hands amounted to 220,000, while the Federal prisoners in Confederate hands amounted to 270,000. Out of the 270,000 in Confederate hand<
August 1st, 1864 AD (search for this): chapter 3.18
works largely in our favor; in getting rid of a miserable set of wretches, and receive in return some of the best material I ever saw. This, of course, is between ourselves. S. gives as the date of my letter, in his first communication, August 1, 1864. In his last communication S. admits his mistake, or that of the compositor, and says that the true date is August 1, 1863. It will be seen, according to the copy in the Chronicle, that the letter has no date. It is the veriest pretence for S. to shift his date from August 1, 1864, to August 1, 1863. I am confident the letter had no date, and that it was written long before August, 1863. Your readers can draw their own conclusion as to this double attempt to change the face of my letter. But, dates aside, I ask your attention to the difference of the two versions. S. not only cuts off the first part of the letter, which explains the purport of the latter part, but he adds to the original the words, this of course is betw
April 3rd, 1868 AD (search for this): chapter 3.18
their best means and exertions to these ends. Yours truly, S. Cooper. To Dr. R. R. Stevenson, Stewiacke, Nova Scotia: The two following letters need no comment, except to call attention to the fact that General Beauregard's call for the prisoners was avowedly in retaliation for General Sherman's previous course, and that General Winder's refusal to fill the requisition is a most significant refutation of the charge of brutality to prisoners made against him: Alexandria, April 3, 1868. My Dear Captain — Yours of the 2d has been received, and in reply I beg leave to say that I have no copies of the letters and orders referred to, but I have an entry in my journal of the date of the 9th of January, 1865, whilst headquarters were at Montgomery, Alabama. The entry is substantially as follows: In pursuance of orders, I addressed a letter to General Winder, requesting him to turn over thirty Federal prisoners to Major Hottle, quartermaster, for the purpose of taking ou
S. seems to think otherwise, and makes use of a plain forgery to sustain his false charge against me. Could not S. have been content with suppressing that portion of my letter which explained its last paragraph, without forging an addition to it? Moreover, the version of S. makes me use worse grammar than is my wont. In addition to his attempt to show me to be a felon, does he desire to take from me the benefit of clergy ? When this letter of mine appeared in the Washington Chronicle, in 1868, I addressed a communication to the National Intelligencer, which was published in that paper on the 29th August, 1868, explaining the circumstances under which it was written, and showing very clearly that the latter paragraph of it did not relate to soldiers at all. In that communication I stated what I now repeat — that some three hundred and fifty political prisoners had arrived at City Point, and being anxious not to detain the Federal steamer, I wrote to General Winder to send all the p
August 1st, 1863 AD (search for this): chapter 3.18
ever saw. This, of course, is between ourselves. S. gives as the date of my letter, in his first communication, August 1, 1864. In his last communication S. admits his mistake, or that of the compositor, and says that the true date is August 1, 1863. It will be seen, according to the copy in the Chronicle, that the letter has no date. It is the veriest pretence for S. to shift his date from August 1, 1864, to August 1, 1863. I am confident the letter had no date, and that it was writAugust 1, 1863. I am confident the letter had no date, and that it was written long before August, 1863. Your readers can draw their own conclusion as to this double attempt to change the face of my letter. But, dates aside, I ask your attention to the difference of the two versions. S. not only cuts off the first part of the letter, which explains the purport of the latter part, but he adds to the original the words, this of course is between ourselves. In his last communication he makes great ado about these words, and lo! they now turn out to be a forgery.
July 9th, 1871 AD (search for this): chapter 3.18
ructed by the enemy in disregard of the cartel which had been agreed upon. * * * * I am, very respectfully and truly, yours, Jefferson Davis. To R. R. Stevenson, Stewiacke, N. S. Special attention is called to the following from the venerable Adjutant-General of the Confederacy, whose endorsement upon the report of Colonel Chandler has been as widely copied (and perverted) as the reported action of Mr. Seddon indignantly removing General Winder : [Copy.]Alexandria, Va., July 9, 1871. Dear Sir--* * * I can, however, with perfect truth declare as my conviction that General Winder, who had the control of the Northern prisoners, was an honest, upright and humane gentleman, and as such I had known him for many years. He had the reputation in the Confederacy of treating the prisoners confided to his general supervision with great kindness and consideration, and fully possessed the confidence of the Government, which would not have been the case had he adopted a differe
August 25th, 1868 AD (search for this): chapter 3.18
introductory paragraphs: Richmond, Va., October 5th, 1875. * * * * * * * * I will now give the history and contents of the letter which S. produces as the sole proof of my premeditated complicity in the murder of Federal prisoners. When Richmond was evacuated in April, 1865, this letter was found among the scattered debris of General Winder's office. The first time I ever saw it published in full was in the Washington Chronicle, a well-known Republican paper, of the date of August 25, 1868. It was then and there made the basis of a savage attack upon me. Of course, everything in the letter which could be damaging to me was set forth. The latter part of it was printed in italics. I will give the letter as it appeared in the Chronicle, and beneath it I will give the version of S. I did not retain a copy, but I believe the letter as it appeared in the Chronicle is exactly the one which I did write. Here, then, are the two versions: The Chronicle version.City Poi
... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13