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 descending order. Sort in ascending order.

hide Most Frequent Entities

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

Entity Max. Freq Min. Freq
Jefferson Davis 100 6 Browse Search
United States (United States) 88 0 Browse Search
Rufus Choate 82 4 Browse Search
South Carolina (South Carolina, United States) 78 0 Browse Search
James Buchanan 66 2 Browse Search
England (United Kingdom) 62 0 Browse Search
Washington (United States) 52 0 Browse Search
John Y. Mason 48 0 Browse Search
Edward Pollard 48 4 Browse Search
Massachusetts (Massachusetts, United States) 44 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Charles Congdon, Tribune Essays: Leading Articles Contributing to the New York Tribune from 1857 to 1863. (ed. Horace Greeley). Search the whole document.

Found 20 total hits in 11 results.

1 2
Samuel (search for this): chapter 35
Ready-made Unity and the Society for its Promotion. it is a pleasant thing for brethren to dwell together in unity. There can be no mistake about it. The Scriptures say so, and The American Society for promoting National Unity backs up the Scripture; so that the thing may be considered as good as settled. Especially when we consider that Samuel and Sidney Morse, Hubbard Winslow and Seth Bliss indorse the Society, and that in so doing they approve the Scriptures. Gentlemen amorous of unity could not certainly have done a more sensible thing than to begin by uniting themselves. It is all very proper. The Patent Soap has its Company, and so has the celebrated Paste Blacking-and why not Unity?--not a Unitary Home, for that the gods forbid!--not a Unitarian Unity, for that would hardly suit those members whose names are as yet published — but what we may call a Religious-and-Political Unity-designed, as we are informed, to make everybody of one mind with everybody else upon the su
Sidney Morse (search for this): chapter 35
the thing may be considered as good as settled. Especially when we consider that Samuel and Sidney Morse, Hubbard Winslow and Seth Bliss indorse the Society, and that in so doing they approve the Sc. Well, this is one way of promoting Unity, we must confess. We should very much like to see Mr. Morse's small army of talented lecturers wrestling with Mr. Parker Pillsbury, and holding high debatho understood equal in that sense? We do not believe that there was; and we do not believe that Morse & Co. believe so. What is that ugly word Liberty doing in the Declaration? Liberty applies only in purely theological discussions, what has a free and equal slave to do with Liberty? Ah! say Morse & Co., the Fathers meant by using that word to refer to the more doubtful sentiment of the French school. What is this doubtful sentiment? Why are not Messrs. Morse, Winslow and Bliss a little more explicit? Why do they undertake to slander, not Thomas Jefferson who had Gallic proclivities,
Parker Pillsbury (search for this): chapter 35
lexicons. The Society of National Unity intends to go to work upon what in medicine would be called a counter-irritant plan. According to The Journal of Commerce the Society is to employ a small army of talented lecturers to follow in the wake of or to precede Abolition lecturers, to pluck up the Abolition tares and destroy them. Well, this is one way of promoting Unity, we must confess. We should very much like to see Mr. Morse's small army of talented lecturers wrestling with Mr. Parker Pillsbury, and holding high debate with Mrs. Lucy Stone. How the talented lecturers would fare in the scrimmage, or in what woeful plight they would come out of it, we can easily imagine; but how these mighty debaters, stirring up villages, distracting societies, and making the squabble chronic, would promote Unity is More than we can see. indicated The American Unity Society has briefly indicated its views in what it calls a Programme. It begins with an attempt, cold-blooded specos and de
Hubbard Winslow (search for this): chapter 35
n be no mistake about it. The Scriptures say so, and The American Society for promoting National Unity backs up the Scripture; so that the thing may be considered as good as settled. Especially when we consider that Samuel and Sidney Morse, Hubbard Winslow and Seth Bliss indorse the Society, and that in so doing they approve the Scriptures. Gentlemen amorous of unity could not certainly have done a more sensible thing than to begin by uniting themselves. It is all very proper. The Patent Soscussions, what has a free and equal slave to do with Liberty? Ah! say Morse & Co., the Fathers meant by using that word to refer to the more doubtful sentiment of the French school. What is this doubtful sentiment? Why are not Messrs. Morse, Winslow and Bliss a little more explicit? Why do they undertake to slander, not Thomas Jefferson who had Gallic proclivities, but such a man as John Adams, who hated French politics and French reforms? It would not have been altogether safe for Mr. Sa
John Adams (search for this): chapter 35
btful sentiment of the French school. What is this doubtful sentiment? Why are not Messrs. Morse, Winslow and Bliss a little more explicit? Why do they undertake to slander, not Thomas Jefferson who had Gallic proclivities, but such a man as John Adams, who hated French politics and French reforms? It would not have been altogether safe for Mr. Samuel J. B. Morse to have told John Adams that the Declaration to which he had deliberately set his hand, incorporated any doubtful sentiment of theJohn Adams that the Declaration to which he had deliberately set his hand, incorporated any doubtful sentiment of the French school. We can imagine the old man kindling into sublime wrath, and with fiery energy pouring out hot words of scorn and of refutation. We can imagine him exclaiming: No, sir! I did not mean any doubtful sentiment of the French school — I meant the undoubted sentiment of the old Saxon school; and I yet stand by my faith, sir! We presume that our readers have already had enough of the Programme. We promise not to detain them much longer, but here is a gem of a sentence: It is, so s
Samuel J. B. Morse (search for this): chapter 35
and Bliss a little more explicit? Why do they undertake to slander, not Thomas Jefferson who had Gallic proclivities, but such a man as John Adams, who hated French politics and French reforms? It would not have been altogether safe for Mr. Samuel J. B. Morse to have told John Adams that the Declaration to which he had deliberately set his hand, incorporated any doubtful sentiment of the French school. We can imagine the old man kindling into sublime wrath, and with fiery energy pouring out h, Whatever is, is right? Does providential mean something moral sometimes, and sometimes immoral, but whatever its character, in its sense of fatal, providential? If so, then Apuleius telling dirty Platonic stories was as good a Christian as Prof. Morse is. But there is something so hideous in this hair-splitting, in these quiddities and quodlibets with which men strive to cover the immorality and the impolicy of Slavery, that we do not care at present to pursue the subject. There is mor
Apuleius (search for this): chapter 35
t is, so say the Programmarians, by confounding the providential with the moral, instead of regarding the former as means wisely employed by the latter, that men become infidel and radical in their schemes of reformation. What are the men who say this? Are they Platonists or Christians? Do they hold to the divinoe providentioe fatalis dispositio? Do they literally interpret the maxim, Whatever is, is right? Does providential mean something moral sometimes, and sometimes immoral, but whatever its character, in its sense of fatal, providential? If so, then Apuleius telling dirty Platonic stories was as good a Christian as Prof. Morse is. But there is something so hideous in this hair-splitting, in these quiddities and quodlibets with which men strive to cover the immorality and the impolicy of Slavery, that we do not care at present to pursue the subject. There is more richness in the Unitary programme ; but let these reflections suffice at least for to-day. March 28, 1861.
Seth Bliss (search for this): chapter 35
bout it. The Scriptures say so, and The American Society for promoting National Unity backs up the Scripture; so that the thing may be considered as good as settled. Especially when we consider that Samuel and Sidney Morse, Hubbard Winslow and Seth Bliss indorse the Society, and that in so doing they approve the Scriptures. Gentlemen amorous of unity could not certainly have done a more sensible thing than to begin by uniting themselves. It is all very proper. The Patent Soap has its Companywhat has a free and equal slave to do with Liberty? Ah! say Morse & Co., the Fathers meant by using that word to refer to the more doubtful sentiment of the French school. What is this doubtful sentiment? Why are not Messrs. Morse, Winslow and Bliss a little more explicit? Why do they undertake to slander, not Thomas Jefferson who had Gallic proclivities, but such a man as John Adams, who hated French politics and French reforms? It would not have been altogether safe for Mr. Samuel J. B.
Thomas Jefferson (search for this): chapter 35
e is the proposition. What follows? That to secure these rights, governments are instituted. Not rights for government, but government for rights, higher, holier than the government itself. Government is secondary to right — that is what Thomas Jefferson meant to say, and did say, with a clearness which no guess nor gloss can obscure. Then see how these new Unitarians dishonestly — yes, that is the word; we shall not change it — dishonestly muddle the great charter! Men are created free the Fathers meant by using that word to refer to the more doubtful sentiment of the French school. What is this doubtful sentiment? Why are not Messrs. Morse, Winslow and Bliss a little more explicit? Why do they undertake to slander, not Thomas Jefferson who had Gallic proclivities, but such a man as John Adams, who hated French politics and French reforms? It would not have been altogether safe for Mr. Samuel J. B. Morse to have told John Adams that the Declaration to which he had delibera<
Lucy Stone (search for this): chapter 35
ds to go to work upon what in medicine would be called a counter-irritant plan. According to The Journal of Commerce the Society is to employ a small army of talented lecturers to follow in the wake of or to precede Abolition lecturers, to pluck up the Abolition tares and destroy them. Well, this is one way of promoting Unity, we must confess. We should very much like to see Mr. Morse's small army of talented lecturers wrestling with Mr. Parker Pillsbury, and holding high debate with Mrs. Lucy Stone. How the talented lecturers would fare in the scrimmage, or in what woeful plight they would come out of it, we can easily imagine; but how these mighty debaters, stirring up villages, distracting societies, and making the squabble chronic, would promote Unity is More than we can see. indicated The American Unity Society has briefly indicated its views in what it calls a Programme. It begins with an attempt, cold-blooded specos and deliberate, to falsify history — not a very good w
1 2