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) 640 0 Browse Search
Chattanooga (Tennessee, United States) 443 19 Browse Search
W. T. Sherman 321 3 Browse Search
Mobile Bay (Alabama, United States) 296 8 Browse Search
Doc 290 0 Browse Search
Knoxville (Tennessee, United States) 278 8 Browse Search
N. P. Banks 276 0 Browse Search
U. S. Grant 267 3 Browse Search
Tennessee (Tennessee, United States) 256 0 Browse Search
N. B. Forrest 240 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Rebellion Record: a Diary of American Events: Documents and Narratives, Volume 8. (ed. Frank Moore). Search the whole document.

Found 61 total hits in 16 results.

1 2
Russia (Russia) (search for this): chapter 65
most impossible to lay down rules, and I invariably leave this whole subject to the local commanders, but am willing to give them the benefit of my acquired knowledge and experience. In Europe, whence we derive our principles of war, as developed by their histories, wars are between kings or rulers, through hired armies, and not between peoples. These remain, as it were, neutral, and sell their produce to whatever army is in possession. Napoleon, when at war with Prussia, Austria, and Russia, bought forage and provisions of the inhabitants, and consequently had an interest to protect farms and factories which ministered to his wants. In like manner, the allied armies in France could buy of the French inhabitants whatever they needed, the produce of the soil or manufactures of the country. Therefore, the rule was and is, that wars are confined to the armies, and should not visit the homes of families or private interests. But, in other examples, a different rule obtained the
Austria (Austria) (search for this): chapter 65
y. It is almost impossible to lay down rules, and I invariably leave this whole subject to the local commanders, but am willing to give them the benefit of my acquired knowledge and experience. In Europe, whence we derive our principles of war, as developed by their histories, wars are between kings or rulers, through hired armies, and not between peoples. These remain, as it were, neutral, and sell their produce to whatever army is in possession. Napoleon, when at war with Prussia, Austria, and Russia, bought forage and provisions of the inhabitants, and consequently had an interest to protect farms and factories which ministered to his wants. In like manner, the allied armies in France could buy of the French inhabitants whatever they needed, the produce of the soil or manufactures of the country. Therefore, the rule was and is, that wars are confined to the armies, and should not visit the homes of families or private interests. But, in other examples, a different rule
Huntsville (Alabama, United States) (search for this): chapter 65
General W. T. Sherman's letter. headquarters Department of the Tennessee, Vicksburgh, January 31. Major R. M. Sawyer, A. A. General, Army of the Tennessee, Huntsville: dear Sawyer: In my former letter I have answered all your questions save one, and that relates to the treatment of inhabitants, known or suspected to be hoshe Southern people into war, anarchy, bloodshed, and the foulest crimes that have disgraced any time or any people. I would advise the commanding officers at Huntsville, and such other towns as are occupied by our troops, to assemble the inhabitants and explain to them these plain, self-evident propositions, and tell them that usands and millions of good people who, at simple notice, would come to North-Alabama and accept the elegant houses and plantations now there. If the people of Huntsville think differently, let them persist in war three years longer, and then they will not be consulted. Three years ago, by a little reflection and patience, they
North Carolina (North Carolina, United States) (search for this): chapter 65
rchy, bloodshed, and the foulest crimes that have disgraced any time or any people. I would advise the commanding officers at Huntsville, and such other towns as are occupied by our troops, to assemble the inhabitants and explain to them these plain, self-evident propositions, and tell them that it is for them now to say, whether they and their children shall inherit the beautiful land which, by the accident of nature, has fallen to their share. The Government of the United States has in North-Alabama any and all rights which they choose to enforce in war, to take their lives, their homes, their lands, their every thing, because they cannot deny that war does exist there, and war is simply power unrestrained by constitution or compact. If they want eternal war, well and good — we will accept the issue and dispossess them, and put our friends in possession. I know thousands and millions of good people who, at simple notice, would come to North-Alabama and accept the elegant house
Preussen (search for this): chapter 65
rn country. It is almost impossible to lay down rules, and I invariably leave this whole subject to the local commanders, but am willing to give them the benefit of my acquired knowledge and experience. In Europe, whence we derive our principles of war, as developed by their histories, wars are between kings or rulers, through hired armies, and not between peoples. These remain, as it were, neutral, and sell their produce to whatever army is in possession. Napoleon, when at war with Prussia, Austria, and Russia, bought forage and provisions of the inhabitants, and consequently had an interest to protect farms and factories which ministered to his wants. In like manner, the allied armies in France could buy of the French inhabitants whatever they needed, the produce of the soil or manufactures of the country. Therefore, the rule was and is, that wars are confined to the armies, and should not visit the homes of families or private interests. But, in other examples, a diffe
Scotia (search for this): chapter 65
should not visit the homes of families or private interests. But, in other examples, a different rule obtained the sanction of historical authority. I will only instance that, when, in the reign of William and Mary, the English army occupied Ireland, then in a state of revolt, the inhabitants were actually driven into foreign lands, and were actually dispossessed of their property, and a new population introduced. To this day, a large part of the north of Ireland is held by the descendantsIreland is held by the descendants of the Scotch emigrants, sent there by William's order and an act of Parliament. The war which prevails in our land is essentially a war of races. The Southern people entered into a clear compact of government, but still maintained a species of separate interests, history, and prejudices. These latter became stronger and stronger, till they have led to a war which has developed fruits of the bitterest kind. We of the North are, beyond all question, right in our lawful cause, but we are
United States (United States) (search for this): chapter 65
which they have practically and publicly defied. They have appealed to war, and must abide its rules and laws. The United States, as a belligerent party claiming right in the soil as the ultimate sovereign, have a right to change the population, t we should banish them and appropriate their lands to a more loyal and useful population. No man will deny that the United States would be benefited by dispossessing a single prejudiced, hardheaded, and disloyal planter, and substitute in his placousand millions--that they did not create the land — that their only title to its use and usufruct is the deed of the United States, and if they appeal to war, they hold their all by a very insecure tenure. For my part, I believe that this war is shall inherit the beautiful land which, by the accident of nature, has fallen to their share. The Government of the United States has in North-Alabama any and all rights which they choose to enforce in war, to take their lives, their homes, their
Alabama (Alabama, United States) (search for this): chapter 65
f-evident propositions, and tell them that it is for them now to say, whether they and their children shall inherit the beautiful land which, by the accident of nature, has fallen to their share. The Government of the United States has in North-Alabama any and all rights which they choose to enforce in war, to take their lives, their homes, their lands, their every thing, because they cannot deny that war does exist there, and war is simply power unrestrained by constitution or compact. If they want eternal war, well and good — we will accept the issue and dispossess them, and put our friends in possession. I know thousands and millions of good people who, at simple notice, would come to North-Alabama and accept the elegant houses and plantations now there. If the people of Huntsville think differently, let them persist in war three years longer, and then they will not be consulted. Three years ago, by a little reflection and patience, they could have had a hundred years of peac
Europe (search for this): chapter 65
, Huntsville: dear Sawyer: In my former letter I have answered all your questions save one, and that relates to the treatment of inhabitants, known or suspected to be hostile, or secesh. This is in truth the most difficult business of our army, as it advances and occupies the Southern country. It is almost impossible to lay down rules, and I invariably leave this whole subject to the local commanders, but am willing to give them the benefit of my acquired knowledge and experience. In Europe, whence we derive our principles of war, as developed by their histories, wars are between kings or rulers, through hired armies, and not between peoples. These remain, as it were, neutral, and sell their produce to whatever army is in possession. Napoleon, when at war with Prussia, Austria, and Russia, bought forage and provisions of the inhabitants, and consequently had an interest to protect farms and factories which ministered to his wants. In like manner, the allied armies in Franc
Vicksburg (Mississippi, United States) (search for this): chapter 65
Doc. 63.-treatment of Southerners. General W. T. Sherman's letter. headquarters Department of the Tennessee, Vicksburgh, January 31. Major R. M. Sawyer, A. A. General, Army of the Tennessee, Huntsville: dear Sawyer: In my former letter I have answered all your questions save one, and that relates to the treatment of inhabitants, known or suspected to be hostile, or secesh. This is in truth the most difficult business of our army, as it advances and occupies the Southern country. It is almost impossible to lay down rules, and I invariably leave this whole subject to the local commanders, but am willing to give them the benefit of my acquired knowledge and experience. In Europe, whence we derive our principles of war, as developed by their histories, wars are between kings or rulers, through hired armies, and not between peoples. These remain, as it were, neutral, and sell their produce to whatever army is in possession. Napoleon, when at war with Prussia, Austria,
1 2