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) 1,668 0 Browse Search
South Carolina (South Carolina, United States) 440 0 Browse Search
Kentucky (Kentucky, United States) 256 0 Browse Search
Jefferson Davis 239 3 Browse Search
Missouri (Missouri, United States) 172 0 Browse Search
Massachusetts (Massachusetts, United States) 168 0 Browse Search
J. E. Johnston 166 0 Browse Search
P. G. T. Beauregard 158 6 Browse Search
Robert Anderson 136 6 Browse Search
Abraham Lincoln 124 2 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Jefferson Davis, The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government. Search the whole document.

Found 103 total hits in 17 results.

1 2
North America (search for this): chapter 2.19
with halters around their necks, would have been the last to prescribe. Could any assertion be less credible than that they proceeded to institute another supreme government which it would be treason to resist? This confusion of ideas pervades the treatment of the whole subject of sovereignty. Webster has said, and very justly so far as these United States are concerned: The sovereignty of government is an idea belonging to the other side of the Atlantic. No such thing is known in North America. Our governments are all limited. In Europe sovereignty is of feudal origin, and imports no more than the state of the sovereign. It comprises his rights, duties, exemptions, prerogatives, and powers. But with us all power is with the people. They alone are sovereign, and they erect what governments they please, and confer on them such powers as they please. None of these governments are sovereign, in the European sense of the word, all being restrained by written constitutons. Co
Massachusetts (Massachusetts, United States) (search for this): chapter 2.19
when ratifying that instrument, but the particular one in which they substantially agreed, and upon which they most urgently insisted. Indeed, it is quite certain that the Constitution would never have received the assent and ratification of Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, and perhaps other states, but for a well-grounded assurance that the substance of this amendment would be adopted as soon as the requisite formalities could be complied with. That amendment is in theourts. The true intent and meaning of the provision, however, may be ascertained from an examination and comparison of the terms in which it was expressed by the various states which proposed it, and whose ideas it was intended to embody. Massachusetts and New Hampshire, in their ordinances of ratification, expressing the opinion that certain amendments and alterations in the said Constitution would remove the fears and quiet the apprehensions of many of the good people of this Commonwealth
United States (United States) (search for this): chapter 2.19
words: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution nor prohibited by it tis Constitution expressly delegated to the United States. This was in May, 1790, when nearly threserved unless expressly delegated to the United States or prohibited to the states? Here is an aremacy accorded to the general laws of the United States is expressly limited to those enacted in chat imaginary community, the people of the United States in the aggregate. Usurpations of power by the government of the United States, there may have been, and may be again, but there has never ber a direct vote of the whole people of the United States to demonstrate its existence as a corporatre is such a political organization as the United States, or that there exists, with large and distame idea, the states are the integers, the United States the multiple which results from them. Thehey had intended to do so, the very style, United States, would have been a palpable misnomer, nor [8 more...]
North Carolina (North Carolina, United States) (search for this): chapter 2.19
particular one in which they substantially agreed, and upon which they most urgently insisted. Indeed, it is quite certain that the Constitution would never have received the assent and ratification of Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, and perhaps other states, but for a well-grounded assurance that the substance of this amendment would be adopted as soon as the requisite formalities could be complied with. That amendment is in these words: The powers not delegated to Convention doth also declare that no section or paragraph of the said Constitution warrants a construction that the States do not retain every power not expressly relinquished by them and vested in the General Government of the Union. North Carolina proposed it in these terms: Each State in the Union shall respectively retain every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Constitution delegated to the Congress of the United States or to the departments of the General Gove
New Hampshire (New Hampshire, United States) (search for this): chapter 2.19
that instrument, but the particular one in which they substantially agreed, and upon which they most urgently insisted. Indeed, it is quite certain that the Constitution would never have received the assent and ratification of Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, and perhaps other states, but for a well-grounded assurance that the substance of this amendment would be adopted as soon as the requisite formalities could be complied with. That amendment is in these words: Tntent and meaning of the provision, however, may be ascertained from an examination and comparison of the terms in which it was expressed by the various states which proposed it, and whose ideas it was intended to embody. Massachusetts and New Hampshire, in their ordinances of ratification, expressing the opinion that certain amendments and alterations in the said Constitution would remove the fears and quiet the apprehensions of many of the good people of this Commonwealth [State (New Hamps
South Carolina (South Carolina, United States) (search for this): chapter 2.19
the Government thereof, remains to the people of the several States, or to their respective State governments, to whom they may have granted the same; and that those clauses in the said Constitution, which declare that Congress shall not have or exercise certain powers, do not imply that Congress is entitled to any powers not given by the said Constitution; but such clauses are to be construed either as exceptions to certain specified powers or as inserted merely for greater caution. South Carolina expressed the idea thus: This Convention doth also declare that no section or paragraph of the said Constitution warrants a construction that the States do not retain every power not expressly relinquished by them and vested in the General Government of the Union. North Carolina proposed it in these terms: Each State in the Union shall respectively retain every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Constitution delegated to the Congress of the United States
Europe (search for this): chapter 2.19
the last to prescribe. Could any assertion be less credible than that they proceeded to institute another supreme government which it would be treason to resist? This confusion of ideas pervades the treatment of the whole subject of sovereignty. Webster has said, and very justly so far as these United States are concerned: The sovereignty of government is an idea belonging to the other side of the Atlantic. No such thing is known in North America. Our governments are all limited. In Europe sovereignty is of feudal origin, and imports no more than the state of the sovereign. It comprises his rights, duties, exemptions, prerogatives, and powers. But with us all power is with the people. They alone are sovereign, and they erect what governments they please, and confer on them such powers as they please. None of these governments are sovereign, in the European sense of the word, all being restrained by written constitutons. Congressional Debates, Vol. IX, Part I, p. 565.
Rhode Island (Rhode Island, United States) (search for this): chapter 2.19
jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Constitution delegated to the Congress of the United States or to the departments of the General Government. Rhode Island gave in her long-withheld assent to the Constitution, in full confidence that certain proposed amendments would be adopted, the first of which was expressed instanding of its nature and principles. Under such circumstances, and in the full confidence that this language expressed its meaning and intent, the people of Rhode Island signfied their accession to the Confederate republic of the states already united. No objection was made from any quarter to the principle asserted in thesepeople of states. There are but two modes of expressing their sovereign will known to the people of this country. One is by direct vote—the mode adopted by Rhode Island in 1788, when she rejected the Constitution. The other is the method, more generally pursued, of acting by means of conventions of delegates elected expressly
Francis Palgrave (search for this): chapter 2.19
y upon the palpable misconstruction of a single expression in the preamble. In denying that there is any such collective unit as the people of the United States in the aggregate, of course I am not to be understood as denying that there is such a political organization as the United States, or that there exists, with large and distinct powers, a government of the United States; but it is claimed that the Union, as its name implies, is constituted of states. As a British author, Sir Francis Palgrave, quoted by Calhoun, Congressional Debates, Vol. IX, Part I, p. 541. referring to the old Teutonic system, has expressed the same idea, the states are the integers, the United States the multiple which results from them. The government of the United States derives its existence from the same source, and exercises its functions by the will of the same sovereignty that creates and confers authority upon the state governments. The people of each state are, in either case, the source.
John Lothrop Motley (search for this): chapter 2.19
n expressly declared, would have been a necessary deduction from the acceptance of the Constitution itself, has been magnified and perverted into a meaning and purpose entirely foreign to that which plain interpretation is sufficient to discern. Motley thus dilates on the subject: Could language be more imperial? Could the claim to State sovereignty be more completely disposed of at a word? How can that be sovereign, acknowledging no superior, supreme, which has voluntarily accepted a supreme law from something which it acknowledges as superior? Rebellion Record, Vol. I, Documents, p. 213. The mistake which Motley—like other writers of the same school— makes is one which is disposed of by a very simple correction. The states, which ordained and established the Constitution, accepted nothing besides what they themselves prescribe. They acknowledged no superior. The supremacy was both in degree and extent only that which was delegated by the states to their common agent.
1 2