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
United States (United States) 16,340 0 Browse Search
England (United Kingdom) 6,437 1 Browse Search
France (France) 2,462 0 Browse Search
Massachusetts (Massachusetts, United States) 2,310 0 Browse Search
Pennsylvania (Pennsylvania, United States) 1,788 0 Browse Search
Europe 1,632 0 Browse Search
New England (United States) 1,606 0 Browse Search
Canada (Canada) 1,474 0 Browse Search
South Carolina (South Carolina, United States) 1,468 0 Browse Search
Mexico (Mexico, Mexico) 1,404 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Harper's Encyclopedia of United States History (ed. Benson Lossing). Search the whole document.

Found 165 total hits in 51 results.

1 2 3 4 5 6
John Armstrong (search for this): entry embargo-acts
ution would be adopted. This measure would have led directly to war. To avert this calamity, Washington was inclined to send a special minister to England. The appointment of John Jay (q. v.) followed. On the receipt of despatches from Minister Armstrong, at Paris, containing information about the new interpretation of the Berlin decree and also of the British Orders in Council, President Jefferson, who had called Congress together earlier than usual (Oct. 25, 1807), sent a message to that7, 1808. He was there to dethrone his Spanish ally to make place for one of his own family. His decree authorized the seizure and confiscation of all American vessels in France, or which might arrive in France. It was craftily answered, when Armstrong remonstrated, that, as no American vessels could be lawfully abroad after the passage of the Embargo Act, those pretending to be such must be British vessels in disguise. Feeling the pressure of the opposition to the embargo at home, Pinckne
Guy Carleton (search for this): entry embargo-acts
Embargo acts. The British Orders in Council (Nov. 6, 1793) and a reported speech of Lord Dorchester (Guy Carleton) to a deputation of the Western Indians, produced much indignation against the British government. Under the stimulus of this excitement Congress passed (March 26, 1794) a joint resolution laying an embargo on commerce for thirty days. The measure seemed to have chiefly in view the obstructing the supply of provisions for the British fleet and army in the West Indies. It operated quite as much against the French. Subsequently (April 7) a resolution was introduced to discontinue all commercial intercourse with Great Britain and her subjects, as far as respected all articles of the growth or manufacture of Great Britain or Ireland, until the surrender of the Western posts and ample compensation should be given for all losses and damages growing out of British aggression on the neutral rights of the Americans. It was evident from the course that the debate assumed an
Stratford Canning (search for this): entry embargo-acts
at Britain, on condition of the recall of her Orders in Council. Not wishing to encounter a refusal, Pinckney sounded Canning, the secretary of foreign affairs, who gradually led the American Embargo minister into making a formal proposition. To this Canning made a reply (Sept. 28, 1808) in writing, unsurpassed in diplomatic cunning and partially concealed sarcasm. It also contained sound views on the whole subject of the orders and decrees. Canning insisted that, as France was the oriCanning insisted that, as France was the original aggressor, by the issuing of the Berlin decree, retaliation (the claimed cause of the embargo) ought, in the first instance, to have been directed against that power alone; and England could not consent to buy off a hostile procedure, of whichoin in that attempt; and the American embargo had, in fact, come in aid of Napoleon's continental system. This attempt, Canning said, was not likely to succeed, yet it was important to the reputation of Great Britain not to show the least sign of
John Caldwell Calhoun (search for this): entry embargo-acts
ied that feeling. Bills were speedily passed for augmenting the army, and other preparations for war were made soon after the opening of the year 1812. The President was averse to war, but his party urged and threatened him so pertinaciously that he consented to declare war against Great Britain. As a preliminary measure he sent a confidential message to Congress (April 1, 1812) recommending the passage of an act laying an embargo for sixty days. A bill was introduced to that effect by Mr. Calhoun, of South Carolina, which prohibited the sailing of any vessel for any foreign port, except foreign ships with such cargoes as they might have on board when notified of the act. The bill was passed (April 6), and was speedily followed by a supplementary act, (April 14) prohibiting exportations by land, whether of goods or specie. The latter measure was called the land embargo. It was vehemently denounced, for it suddenly suppressed an active and lucrative trade between the United States
Alexander Anderson (search for this): entry embargo-acts
ished in the Federal Republican newspaper of Georgetown, in the District of Columbia. These were reproduced in the New York Evening post, with an illustration designed by John Wesley Jarvis, the painter, and drawn and engraved on wood by Dr. Alexander Anderson. The picture was redrawn and engraved by Dr. Anderson, on a reduced scale, in 1864, after a lapse of exactly fifty years. The lines which it illustrates are as follows: Terrapin's address. Reflect, my friend as you pass by, As youDr. Anderson, on a reduced scale, in 1864, after a lapse of exactly fifty years. The lines which it illustrates are as follows: Terrapin's address. Reflect, my friend as you pass by, As you are now, so once was I: As I am now, so you may be— Laid on your back to die like me! I was, indeed, true sailor born; To quit my friend in death I scorn. Once Jemmy seemed to be my friend, But basely brought me to my end! Of head bereft, and light, and breath, I hold Fidelity in death: For Sailors' Rights I still will tug; And Madison to death I'll hug, For his perfidious zeal displayed For Sailors' Rights and for Free-trade. This small atonement I will have— I'll lug down Jemmy to the gra
James Madison (search for this): entry embargo-acts
in 1864, after a lapse of exactly fifty years. The lines which it illustrates are as follows: Terrapin's address. Reflect, my friend as you pass by, As you are now, so once was I: As I am now, so you may be— Laid on your back to die like me! I was, indeed, true sailor born; To quit my friend in death I scorn. Once Jemmy seemed to be my friend, But basely brought me to my end! Of head bereft, and light, and breath, I hold Fidelity in death: For Sailors' Rights I still will tug; And Madison to death I'll hug, For his perfidious zeal displayed For Sailors' Rights and for Free-trade. This small atonement I will have— I'll lug down Jemmy to the grave. Then trade and commerce shall be free, And sailors have their liberty. Of head bereft, and light, and breath, The Terrapin, still true in death, Will punish Jemmy's perfidy— Leave trade and brother sailors free. Death of Terrapin, or the embargo Passenger's reply Yes, Terrapin, bereft of breath, We see thee faithful stil<
Thomas Jefferson (search for this): entry embargo-acts
ent from the course that the debate assumed and from the temper manifested by the House that the resolution would be adopted. This measure would have led directly to war. To avert this calamity, Washington was inclined to send a special minister to England. The appointment of John Jay (q. v.) followed. On the receipt of despatches from Minister Armstrong, at Paris, containing information about the new interpretation of the Berlin decree and also of the British Orders in Council, President Jefferson, who had called Congress together earlier than usual (Oct. 25, 1807), sent a message to that body communicating facts in his possession and recommending the passage of an embargo act— an inhibition of the departure of our vessels from the ports of the United States. The Senate, after a session of four hours, passed a bill—22 to 6—laying an embargo on all shipping, foreign and domestic, in the ports of the United States, with specified exceptions and ordering all vessels abroad to ret<
1814 AD (search for this): entry embargo-acts
of this Embargo Act. It pretty effectually suppressed extensive smuggling, which was carried on between the United States and Canada and at many sea-ports, especially in New England. But the opposition clamored for its repeal. At the opening of 1814 there were expectations, speedily realized, of peace near; also of a general pacification of Europe. These signs were pointed to by the opposition as cogent reasons for the repeal. These considerations had weight, added to which was the necessity for increasing the revenue. Finally, on Jan. 19 (1814), the President recommended the repeal of the Embargo Act, and it was done by Congress on April 14. There were great rejoicings throughout the country, and the demise of the Terrapin was hailed as a good omen of commercial prosperity. The Death of the embargo was celebrated in verses published in the Federal Republican newspaper of Georgetown, in the District of Columbia. These were reproduced in the New York Evening post, with an ill
January 19th (search for this): entry embargo-acts
pressed extensive smuggling, which was carried on between the United States and Canada and at many sea-ports, especially in New England. But the opposition clamored for its repeal. At the opening of 1814 there were expectations, speedily realized, of peace near; also of a general pacification of Europe. These signs were pointed to by the opposition as cogent reasons for the repeal. These considerations had weight, added to which was the necessity for increasing the revenue. Finally, on Jan. 19 (1814), the President recommended the repeal of the Embargo Act, and it was done by Congress on April 14. There were great rejoicings throughout the country, and the demise of the Terrapin was hailed as a good omen of commercial prosperity. The Death of the embargo was celebrated in verses published in the Federal Republican newspaper of Georgetown, in the District of Columbia. These were reproduced in the New York Evening post, with an illustration designed by John Wesley Jarvis, the
1812 AD (search for this): entry embargo-acts
ger looks—then die for her salvation. Floreat Respublica. Banks of Goose Creek, City of Washington, 15th April, 1814. The continued aggressions of the British upon American commerce created a powerful war party in the United States in 811, and a stirring report of the committee on foreign relations, submitted to Congress in November, intensified that feeling. Bills were speedily passed for augmenting the army, and other preparations for war were made soon after the opening of the year 1812. The President was averse to war, but his party urged and threatened him so pertinaciously that he consented to declare war against Great Britain. As a preliminary measure he sent a confidential message to Congress (April 1, 1812) recommending the passage of an act laying an embargo for sixty days. A bill was introduced to that effect by Mr. Calhoun, of South Carolina, which prohibited the sailing of any vessel for any foreign port, except foreign ships with such cargoes as they might have
1 2 3 4 5 6