hide Sorting

You can sort these results in two ways:

By entity (current method)
Chronological order for dates, alphabetical order for places and people.
By position
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
United States (United States) 1,170 0 Browse Search
Kentucky (Kentucky, United States) 573 1 Browse Search
South Carolina (South Carolina, United States) 566 0 Browse Search
Missouri (Missouri, United States) 532 0 Browse Search
Texas (Texas, United States) 482 0 Browse Search
Charleston (South Carolina, United States) 470 8 Browse Search
Washington (United States) 449 3 Browse Search
Abraham Lincoln 405 1 Browse Search
Georgia (Georgia, United States) 340 0 Browse Search
Maryland (Maryland, United States) 324 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Horace Greeley, The American Conflict: A History of the Great Rebellion in the United States of America, 1860-65: its Causes, Incidents, and Results: Intended to exhibit especially its moral and political phases with the drift and progress of American opinion respecting human slavery from 1776 to the close of the War for the Union. Volume I.. Search the whole document.

Found 795 total hits in 157 results.

1 2 3 4 5 6 ...
Silas Wright (search for this): chapter 8
, and in favor of Nullification as a reserved right of each State, having been embodied in an elaborate document known as The South Carolina exposition, adopted and put forth by the Legislature of his State near the close of 1828. The doctrines therein affirmed were those propounded by Hayne and refuted by Webster in the great debate already noticed. The Tariff of 1828--the highest and most protective ever adopted in this country — was passed by a Jackson Congress, of which Van Buren, Silas Wright, and the Jacksonian leaders in pennsylvania and Ohio, were master-spirits. It was opposed by most of the members from the Cotton States, and by a majority of those from New England--some provisions having been engrafted upon it with the alleged purpose and the certain effect of making it obnoxious to Massachusetts and the States which, on either side, adjoined her. On the other hand, the members from the Middle and Western Free States, without distinction of party, supported it almost un
John E. Wool (search for this): chapter 8
aster-spirits. It was opposed by most of the members from the Cotton States, and by a majority of those from New England--some provisions having been engrafted upon it with the alleged purpose and the certain effect of making it obnoxious to Massachusetts and the States which, on either side, adjoined her. On the other hand, the members from the Middle and Western Free States, without distinction of party, supported it almost unanimously. This Tariff imposed high duties on Iron, Lead, Hemp, Wool, and other bulky staples, and was very generally popular. Under it, the industry of the Free States, regarded as a whole, was more productive, more prosperous, better rewarded, than ever before, and the country exhibited a rapid growth in wealth, intelligence, and general comfort. The South--that is, the cottongrowing region — for Louisiana, through her sugar-planting interest, sustained the Protective policy, and shared in the prosperity thence resulting — now vehemently opposed the Tari
Wilson (search for this): chapter 8
argement of Federal power by latitudinous and unwarranted construction. In the Federal Convention of 1787 (Debate of Monday, June 18th): Mr. Hamilton, of New York, said: The General power, whatever be its form, if it preserves itself, must swallow up the State Governments. Otherwise, it would be swallowed up by them. It is against all the principles of good government to vest the requisite powers in such a body as Congress. Two sovereignties cannot exist within the same limits. Mr. Wilson. of Pennsylvania (June 20th), was tenacious of the idea of preserving the State Governments. But in the next day's debate: Taking the matter in the more general view, lie saw no danger to the States from the General Government. On the contrary, he conceived that, in spite of every precaution, the General (Government would be in perpetual danger of encroachments from the State Governments. And Mr. Madison, of Virginia, was of the opinion, in the first place, that there was less danger
Webster (search for this): chapter 8
ights—Nullification. Nullification Hayne Webster Jackson Calhoun Georgia and the Indiana. So lirer, November 1, 1814. and antagoistic parties. Mr. Webster, Debate on Foot's resolutions, January 26, 1830.and that this interposition is constitutional. Mr. Webster resumed:--So, Sir, I understood the gentleman, anbate, and finished the doctrine of Nullification, Mr. Webster said: Sir, if I were to concede to the gentlehe time of his great debate on Nullification with Mr. Webster. Each entered Congress before attaining his thirirmed were those propounded by Hayne and refuted by Webster in the great debate already noticed. The Tariff Nullifiers were an overwhelming majority, elected Mr. Webster's luckless antagonist, Robert Y. Hayne, Governor any ever propounded by Hamilton, by Marshall, or by Webster himself. After reciting the purport and effect oat the last moment, seemed exceedingly doubtful. Mr. Webster forcibly urged that no concession should be made
Bushrod Washington (search for this): chapter 8
tes in their primary and sovereign capacity; and why should not the fact be truly stated? General Washington did not hesitate to assert, in his plain, earnest, practical way, that the end sought by tsolidation of our Union, In the address of the Federal Convention to the people, signed by Washington as its President, September 17, 1787. which he never ceased to regard as of the highest importmatizing the negotiation and approval of Jay's treaty Signed November 19. 1794; ratified by Washington, August 14, 1795. with Great Britain, whereby our past differences and misunderstandings with nnessee (December 5, 1796), voted in a minority of twelve against the address tendering to General Washington, on his retirement from the Presidency, a respectful expression of the profound admiration though its earliest conspicuous champion in our national councils was Alexander Hamilton, General Washington's Secretary of the Treasury, came, at a later day, to be mainly championed by Republicans.
Gulian C. Verplanck (search for this): chapter 8
ction. The Jacksonian ascendency was decided in every department of the Government. Andrew Stevenson (anti-Tariff), of Virginia, was Speaker of the House, Gulian C. Verplanck (anti-Tariff) was Chairman of its Committee of Ways and Means, whence a bill containing sweeping reductions and equalizations of duties was, at an early pertion of the Nullifying Ordinance, and of course of all legislative acts subsidiary thereto, should be postponed till after the adjournment of that body! But Mr. Verplanck's bill Reported December 28th. made such slow progress that its passage, even at the last moment, seemed exceedingly doubtful. Mr. Webster forcibly urged tximum of twenty per cent. This Compromise Tariff, being accepted and supported by Mr. Calhoun and the Nullifiers, was offered in the House, as a substitute for Mr. Verplanck's bill, by Mr. Letcher, of Kentucky (Mr. Clay's immediate representative and devoted friend), on the 25th of February; adopted and passed at once by a vote of
Troup (search for this): chapter 8
r Governor, John Floyd, father of the late John B. Floyd, Mr. Buchanan's Secretary of War. in his annual Message, said something implying such a purpose. Ex-Governor Troup, of Georgia, and a few other doctrinaires of the extreme State Rights school, muttered some words of sympathy with the Nullifiers, about to be crushed under of the law upon him. McIntosh and another principal signer were shot dead on sight, and due notice given that the pretended treaty was utterly repudiated. Governor Troup, of Georgia, of course assumed the validity of the instrument, and prepared to take forcible possession of the Creek lands. The Creeks appealed to the Govern. Adams, who had now succeeded to the Presidency, looked fully into the matter, saw that their claim was just, and assured them that they should be defended. Governor Troup threatened to employ force; Mr. Adams did employ it. He ordered General Gaines, with a body of regulars, to the scene of apprehended conflict, and gave Georgi
Daniel D. Tompkins (search for this): chapter 8
uccess in the House. In 1828, their names were placed on the same ticket, and they were triumphantly elected President and Vice-President respectively, receiving more than two-thirds of the electoral votes, including those of every State south of the Potomac. This is the only instance wherein the President and Vice-President were both chosen from those distinctively known as Slave States; though New York was nominally and legally a Slave State when her Aaron Burr, George Clinton, and Daniel D. Tompkins were each chosen Vice-President with the last three Virginian Presidents respectively. Alike tall in stature, spare in frame, erect in carriage, austere in morals, imperious in temper, of dauntless courage, and inflexible will, Jackson and Calhoun were each fitted by nature to direct, to govern, and to mould feebler men to his ends; but they were not fitted to coalesce and work harmoniously together. They had hardly become the accepted chiefs of the same great, predominant party, bef
Alleghany Mountains (United States) (search for this): chapter 8
Federal ascendency. When John Adams became President, in 1797, the South had become the stronghold of the Opposition. Mr. Madison had dissolved his earlier association with the great body of the framers of the Constitution, and become the lieutenant of Mr. Jefferson. Kentucky--a Virginia colony and offset — was ardently and almost unanimously devoted to the ideas and the fortunes of Jefferson; and he was privately solicited to draft the manifesto, through which the new State beyond the Alleghanies proclaimed, in 1798, her intense hostility to Federal rule. The famous Resolutions of ‘98 were thus originated; Mr. Jefferson's authorship, though suspected, was never established until lie avowed it in a letter more than twenty years afterward. These resolutions are too long to be here quoted in full, but the first is as follows: Resolved, That the several States composing the United States of America are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Govern
Holland (Netherlands) (search for this): chapter 8
the Union. He says: But when I consider that the limits of the United States are precisely fixed by the treaty of 1783, and that the Constitution expressly declares itself to be made for the United States, I cannot help believing the intention was not to permit Congress to admit into the Union new States, which should be formed outside of the territory for which, and under whose authority alone, they were then acting. I do not believe it was meant that they might receive England, Ireland, Holland, etc., into it, which would be the case on your construction. After disposing in like manner of the opinion of those whole consider the grant of the treaty-making power as boundless, and completing his demonstration that there was no power whatever in the Constitution, as he construed it, to make this purchase, he, with more good sense than consistency, concludes: I confess, then, I think it important, in the present case, to set an example against broad construction, by appealing for new
1 2 3 4 5 6 ...