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) 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 519 total hits in 108 results.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ...
New England (United States) (search for this): entry ship-building
nearly two-thirds of our English shipping, and thereby give constant subsistence to, it may be, 200,000 persons here at home. Notwithstanding these View in a New England ship-yard. restrictions, there were built, in the aggregate, in 1771, in the thirteen colonies, 128 square-rigged vessels and 241 sloops and schooners, with an ; but since 1890 it has been unusually active under the impetus given by the United States government in building its new navy. Ship-building and commerce in New England was begun at Salem about 1640, when Hugh Peters was active in getting up a company to engage in the fisheries on the Eastern coasts, which had been hitherto cara ready market. These vessels brought back wines, sugar, and dried fruit. So began the career of navigation and commerce which has specially distinguished the New England States. See navigation acts; naval ships; Great Lakes and the Navy. Ship-building on the Lakes. Henry Sherman Boutell, who has been a member of Congress
London (United Kingdom) (search for this): entry ship-building
1864, would have terminated the agreement May 23, 1865. June 15, 1865, Sir Frederick Bruce, who had succeeded Lord Lyons as British minister, wrote to Mr. Hunter, acting Secretary of State, inquiring whether the agreement of 1817 was virtually at an end, or whether the despatch to Mr. Adams of March 8 was intended as a formal withdrawal of the notice of Nov. 23, 1864. Secretary Seward replied in writing to these inquiries the next day that the instruction to the United States minister at London of March 8, 1865, was intended as a withdrawal of the previous notice within the time allowed, and that it is so held by this government. This is probably the only instance where an act of Congress has been set aside through instructions issued by our Secretary of State to one of our foreign ministers. It is not a legislative precedent that is likely to meet with the approval of modern Congresses, although it has been considered effective by the governments of the United States and Great
Gulf of Mexico (search for this): entry ship-building
ture from the views entertained by the framers of the convention. Our revenuecutter service is under the Treasury Department, and we have replied to the several remonstrances of Great Britain that the revenue-cutters were not naval vessels and were used exclusively for enforcing the revenue laws. This explanation has so far sufficed, although our revenue-cutters are always available for use by the navy in time of war. Many of the revenue-cutters in service on the Atlantic coast and the Gulf of Mexico were used by the naval commanders during the recent conflict with Spain. III. It only remains to consider what attitude the United States should assume towards this convention in the future. The convention reserves to both parties the right to abrogate the agreement upon giving six months notice, and, therefore, may be honorably terminated at any time by either of the parties. Shall we continue the present arrangement and keep up the pretence of complying with the spirit while
Lake Ontario (search for this): entry ship-building
n the American lakes by his Majesty and the government of the United States shall henceforth be confined to the following vessels on each side, that is: On Lake Ontario to one vessel not exceeding 100 tons burden and armed with one 18-pounder cannon. On the upper lakes to two vessels not exceeding like burden each and armeforce to be maintained upon the lakes by the United States and Great Britain shall henceforth be confined to the following vessels on each side, that is: On Lake Ontario to one vessel not exceeding 100 tons burden, and armed with one 18-pounder cannon. On the upper lakes to two vessels not exceeding the like burden each, and als agreed upon, no other vessels of war were to be maintained, built or armed on the lakes. As there was no navigable connection between the lakes, or between Lake Ontario and the ocean, when Mr. Bagot and Mr. Rush used these terms, they understood that a vessel could not be maintained upon the lakes unless it had been built ther
Pittsburgh (Pennsylvania, United States) (search for this): entry ship-building
ugh he had originally insisted upon a rigid compliance with the terms of the convention. In the mean time Congress had done something besides protest. The fortification act of Sept. 9, 1841, contained a clause authorizing the construction and armament of such vessels on the lakes as the President might think proper, and such as should be authorized by the existing stipulations between this and the British government. Under this authority the iron side-wheel bark Michigan was built at Pittsburg and taken in sections to Erie, where she was completed and launched in the summer of 1844. She registered 498 tons and carried two 8-inch guns and four 32-pounder carronades. It was now Great Britain's turn to remonstrate. All immediate necessity for increasing her navy had disappeared, and so her minister, Mr. Packenham, conveyed to Secretary Calhoun his conviction that it was by all means desirable that the convention of 1817 should be fulfilled to the letter by both contracting par
F. W. Wheeler (search for this): entry ship-building
he approval of modern Congresses, although it has been considered effective by the governments of the United States and Great Britain. Notwithstanding the passage by Congress of the joint resolution of 1865, the Rush-Bagot convention still exerts its neutralizing influence upon the waters of the Great Lakes, to the manifest satisfaction of the diplomatists of both countries, and with equally manifest injustice to the ship-builders and naval militia of the lake States. In April, 1890, F. W. Wheeler & Co., ship-builders of West Bay City, Mich., were the lowest bidders for the construction of a steel practice vessel for the Naval Academy, of about 800 tons displacement. Their bid was rejected on account of the agreement of 1817, and the contract was awarded to another firm, whose bid was $5,000 in excess of that of the Michigan firm. Other similar bids of lake ship-builders have been rejected by the Navy Department on the same ground. The department now rejects all bids for the co
George Fox (search for this): entry ship-building
This increase of the naval force led our Secretary of State, Mr. Forsyth, to remonstrate to Mr. Fox, the British minister. Mr. Fox replied that the increase was made necessary in consequence of Mr. Fox replied that the increase was made necessary in consequence of unlawful and piratical acts of hostility; that the armament was equipped for the sole purpose of guarding her Majesty's province against a manifest and acknowledged danger, and that it would be discod to exist. This reply satisfied Mr. Forsyth for a year, when he again called the attention of Mr. Fox to the matter and suggested that, the causes for the increase in the armament having ceased to otest from Mr. Webster, who had become Secretary of State. In replying to Mr. Webster's notes, Mr. Fox stated that the vessels of war serving on the Canadian lakes were equipped for the sole purpose States, in defiance of the efforts of the government to prevent them. The explanation made by Mr. Fox apparently satisfied Mr. Webster, although he had originally insisted upon a rigid compliance w
Lorraine (search for this): entry ship-building
been anticipated by its framers. In the first place, it debars the shipbuilders on the lakes from competing for the construction of such government warvessels as can pass the Canadian canals. This is a discrimination against a large and important industry which should not be tolerated except for the most urgent reasons. The American Ship-building Company now has nine plants on the lakes, located at West Superior, Milwaukee, Chicago, Bay City, Detroit, Wyandotte, Buffalo, Cleveland, and Lorraine. There are three other yards on the lakes, at Bay City, Port Huron, and Toledo. Owing to their proximity to the coal and iron deposits, all these lake ship-yards can compete successfully with any of the yards in this country or elsewhere. They have built several light-ships and other vessels for the Treasury Department, and have been, as we have seen, the lowest bidders for some of the naval vessels. The government is thus a loser as well by being deprived of the competition of these la
William McKinley (search for this): entry ship-building
o armament and tonnage in the construction of a gunboat for the lakes. To this Secretary Day replied, July 1, 1898, that the subject was one of the matters to come before the joint high commission on questions affecting the relations between the United States and Canada. Jan. 15, 1900, the House of Representatives passed a resolution requesting the Secretary of State to communicate to the House the status of this agreement between the United States and Great Britain. Feb. 27, 1900, President McKinley transmitted to the House a message containing a report of Secretary Hay in response to this resolution. Mr. Hay includes in his report the message of President Harrison of Dec. 7, 1892. From Mr. Hay's report it appears that, on May 30, 1898, the United States and Great Britain agreed upon the creation of a joint high commission, to which should be referred for settlement various pending questions between the United States and Canada, among which was a revision of the agreement of
Thomas Macdonough (search for this): entry ship-building
e agreement, therefore, although concluded in an unconventional manner, and partaking of none of the ordinary characteristics of a formal treaty, must be considered as possessing all the binding force and effect of a treaty. As such it has been, since April 29, 1817, a part of the supreme law of the land. The agreement became immediately operative upon the interchange of notes, and the work of dismantling the fleets was promptly begun. In a short time the victorious ships of Perry and Macdonough were rotting on the sands, or had been converted into peaceful merchantmen. I. A knowledge of the environment of the contracting parties is essential to an intelligent interpretation of every contract. The conditions which surrounded the framers of this convention differed so radically from the conditions which exist to-day, that a literal compliance with the terms of the agreement is little less than absurd, inasmuch as it often produces results which were not intended, or even con
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ...