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) 1,340 0 Browse Search
W. T. Sherman 340 6 Browse Search
Ulysses S. Grant 275 3 Browse Search
James Longstreet 260 4 Browse Search
J. E. Johnston 244 0 Browse Search
T. J. Jackson 240 4 Browse Search
Abraham Lincoln 225 3 Browse Search
Tennessee (Tennessee, United States) 219 1 Browse Search
R. E. Lee 180 0 Browse Search
A. P. Hill 168 14 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in Jefferson Davis, The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government.

Found 19,228 total hits in 4,311 results.

1 2 3 4 5 6 ...
1856 AD (search for this): chapter 1.1
s and privateers of both from carrying prizes into the waters of the United Kingdom or its colonies. All the other powers recognized the Confederate States to be belligerents, but closed their ports against the admission of prizes captured by either belligerent. It is worthy of notice that the United States government (though it had previously declined) at this time notified the English and French governments that it was now willing to adhere to all the conditions of the Paris Congress of 1856, provided the clause abolishing privateers might apply to the Confederate States. The offer, with the proviso, was honorably declined by both France and England. In the matter of the exchange of prisoners, which became important in consequence of these retaliatory measures, and the number taken by our troops at Manassas, the people of the Northern states were the victims of incessant mortification and distress through the vacillating and cruel conduct of their government. It based all it
1815 AD (search for this): chapter 1.1
perty of the enemy; when in 1781 Great Britain, attempting to reduce her revolted American colonies, took possession of the country around and about Point Comfort (Fortress Monroe), the homes quietly occupied by the rebellious people were spared by the armies of the self-asserting ruler of the land. At a later date, war existed between Great Britain and the independent states of the Union, during which Great Britain got possession of various points within the states. At the Treaty of Ghent, 1815, by which peace was restored to the two countries, it was stipulated in the first article that all captured places should be restored without causing any destruction, or carrying away any of the artillery or other public property originally captured in the said forts or places, and which shall remain therein upon the exchange of the ratifications of this treaty; or any slaves or other private property. Persistent efforts were made to avoid the return of deported slaves, and it was attempted
1781 AD (search for this): chapter 1.1
ene. Who pleads the Constitution against our proposed action? Congress of the United States, July, 1861. This subject is further considered in subsequent chapters on the measures of emancipation adopted by the United States government. It is to be remembered in this connection that pillage and the wanton destruction of private property are not permitted by the laws of war among civilized nations. When prosecuting the war with Mexico, we respected private property of the enemy; when in 1781 Great Britain, attempting to reduce her revolted American colonies, took possession of the country around and about Point Comfort (Fortress Monroe), the homes quietly occupied by the rebellious people were spared by the armies of the self-asserting ruler of the land. At a later date, war existed between Great Britain and the independent states of the Union, during which Great Britain got possession of various points within the states. At the Treaty of Ghent, 1815, by which peace was restore
1861 AD (search for this): chapter 1.1
could be no forfeiture until after conviction, and the Constitution says, No attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted. Ibid., Article III, section 3. The confiscation act of 1861 undertook to convict and sentence without a trial, and entirely to deprive the owner of slaves of his property by giving final freedom to the slaves. Still further to show how regardless the United States government was of the limitations imposedYork, Washington, Cairo, and Columbus, Kentucky, and by General McClellan in western Virginia and elsewhere. On the whole, the partial exchanges were inconsiderable and inconclusive as to the main question. The condition at the close of the year 1861, summarily stated, was that soldiers captured in battle were not protected by the usage of exchange, and citizens were arrested without due process of law, deported to distant states, and incarcerated without assigned cause. All this by persons a
John Quincy Adams (search for this): chapter 1.1
reaty; or any slaves or other private property. Persistent efforts were made to avoid the return of deported slaves, and it was attempted to put them in the category of artillery which had been removed before the exchange of ratification. John Quincy Adams, first as United States minister to England, and subsequently as United States Secretary of State, conducted with great vigor and earnestness a long correspondence to maintain the true construction of the treaty as recognizing and guarding ved, to return the former, but that the reasons did not apply to the latter, for, he proceeds to say, Private property, not having been subject to legitimate capture with the places, was not liable to the reason of limitation. In the same letter Adams writes: Merchant-vessels and effects captured on the high-seas are, by the laws of war between civilized nations, lawful prize, and by the capture become the property of the captors. . . . But, as by the same usage of civilized nations, private p
Abraham Lincoln (search for this): chapter 1.1
interpreted who pleads the Constitution? wanton destruction of private property unlawful Adams on terms of the Treaty of Ghent sectional Hatred order of President Lincoln to army officers in regard to slaves Educating the people Fremont's proclamation proclamation of General W. T. Sherman proclamation of General Halleck anNew York. It appeared, from statements made without contradiction, that they were not treated as prisoners of war, whereupon a letter was addressed by me to President Lincoln, dated July 6th, stating explicitly that, painful as will be the necessity, this Government will deal out to the prisoners held by it the same treatment and vernment to commit judicial murder on prisoners of war was arrested. The attention of the British House of Lords was also attracted to the proclamation of President Lincoln, threatening the officers and crew of privateers with the punishment of piracy. It led to a discussion in which the Earl of Derby said: He apprehended that,
John A. Dix (search for this): chapter 1.1
rolina, was instructed on October 14, 1861 to receive all persons, whether slaves or not, and give them employment, assuring all loyal masters that Congress will provide just compensation to them for the loss of the services of the persons so employed. To others no relief was to be given. This was, by confiscation, to punish a class of citizens, in the emancipation of every slave whose owner rendered support to the Confederate States. Finally General Halleck, who succeeded Fremont, and General Dix, commanding near Fortress Monroe, issued orders not to permit slaves to come within their lines. They were speedily condemned for this action because it put a stop to the current of emancipation, which will be hereafter narrated. Reference has been made to our want of a navy, and the efforts made to supply the deficiency. The usual resort under such circumstances to privateers was, in our case, without the ordinary incentive of gain, as all foreign ports were closed against our priz
Thaddeus Stevens (search for this): chapter 1.1
icted in palpable violation of each and of all the cited clauses of the Constitution. One can scarcely anticipate such effrontery as would argue that due process of law meant an act of Congress, that judicial power could thus be conferred upon the President, and private property be confiscated for party success, without violating the Constitution which the actors had sworn to support. The unconstitutionality of the measure was so palpable that when the bill was under consideration Thaddeus Stevens, a member of Congress from Pennsylvania, said: I thought the time had come when the laws of war were to govern our action; when constitutions, if they stood in the way of the laws of war in dealing with the enemy, had no right to intervene. Who pleads the Constitution against our proposed action? Congress of the United States, July, 1861. This subject is further considered in subsequent chapters on the measures of emancipation adopted by the United States government. It is to be
July 6th (search for this): chapter 1.1
he Confederacy had become a power among the nations. On June 3, 1861, the little schooner Savannah, previously a pilot boat in Charleston harbor and sailing under a commission issued by authority of the Confederate States, was captured by the United States brig Perry. The crew was placed in irons and sent to New York. It appeared, from statements made without contradiction, that they were not treated as prisoners of war, whereupon a letter was addressed by me to President Lincoln, dated July 6th, stating explicitly that, painful as will be the necessity, this Government will deal out to the prisoners held by it the same treatment and the same fate as shall be experienced by those captured on the Savannah; and, if driven to the terrible necessity of retaliation by your execution of any of the officers or crew of the Savannah, that retaliation will be extended so far as shall be requisite to secure the abandonment of a practice unknown to the warfare of civilized man, and so barbaro
July 20th (search for this): chapter 1.1
equire here a more specific consideration. They were the antecedents of oppressive measures which the enemy strove to enforce upon us during the entire war. The third session of the provisional Congress commenced at Richmond on July 20, 1861, and ended on August 31st. At the previous session a resolution had been passed authorizing the President to cause the several executive departments, with the archives thereof, to be removed to Richmond at such time as he might determine prior to July 20th. In my message to the Congress of that date, the cause of removal was stated to be that the aggressive movements of the enemy required prompt, energetic action; that the accumulation of his forces on the Potomac sufficiently demonstrated that his first efforts were to be directed against Virginia, and from no point could necessary measures for her defense and protection be so effectively provided as from her own capital. My remarks to Congress at this session were confined to such import
1 2 3 4 5 6 ...