hide Sorting

You can sort these results in two ways:

By entity (current method)
Chronological order for dates, alphabetical order for places and people.
By position
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) 502 0 Browse Search
W. T. Sherman 459 1 Browse Search
Ulysses S. Grant 368 6 Browse Search
Jefferson Davis 352 2 Browse Search
Stonewall Jackson 335 1 Browse Search
Robert E. Lee 328 16 Browse Search
Abraham Lincoln 293 1 Browse Search
Longstreet 288 22 Browse Search
Joseph E. Johnston 278 8 Browse Search
George B. McClellan 276 2 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Edward Alfred Pollard, The lost cause; a new Southern history of the War of the Confederates ... Drawn from official sources and approved by the most distinguished Confederate leaders.. Search the whole document.

Found 432 total hits in 93 results.

1 2 3 4 5 6 ...
June (search for this): chapter 4
country. The Democratic party of the South had cooperated with the Democratic party of the North in the Presidential canvass of 1856, upon the principles of the platform adopted by the National Democratic Convention assembled in Cincinnati, in June of that year. They expressed a willingness to continue this cooperation in the election of 1860, upon the principles of the Cincinnati platform; but demanded, as a condition precedent to this, that the question of the construction of this platfor vague and undefined enumeration of their political principles, as, The Constitution of the Country, the Union of the States, and Enforcement of the Laws. The National Convention of the Black Republican party was held at Chicago in the month of June. It adopted a platform declaring freedom to be the normal condition of the Territories; and protesting especial attachment to the Union of the States. The Presidential ticket nominated by the Convention was, Abraham Lincoln of Illinois for Presi
June 18th (search for this): chapter 4
e and extent of the powers of a Territorial Legislature, and as to the powers and duties of Congress under the Constitution of the United States, over the institution of slavery within the Territories: 2. Resolved, That the Democratic party will abide by the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States on the questions of constitutional law. This platform being unsatisfactory to the Southern delegates, a body of them seceded, and called a new Convention at Baltimore, on the 18th of June. The Cotton States all withdrew from the Charleston Convention; but the Border States remained in it, with the hope of effecting some ultimate settlement of the difficulty. But the reassembling of the Convention at Baltimore resulted in a final and embittered separation of the opposing delegations. The majority at Charleston exhibited a more uncompromising spirit than ever; and Virginia, and all the Border Slave States, with the exception of Missouri, withdrew from the Convention, and
1820 AD (search for this): chapter 4
Chapter 4: The sectional equilibrium. how disturbed in 1820. contest on the admission of Texas. Compromise measures of 1850. declaration of a Finality. President Pierce's Administration. the Kansas Nebraska bill. repeal of the Missouri Compromise. origin of the Republican party in the North. composition and character of this party. amazing progress of the Anti-slavery sentiment in the North. New interpretation of the Kansas Nebraska bill by Senator Douglas. intendet statesmen of America were convinced that the true and intelligent means of continuing the Union was to preserve the sectional equilibrium, and to keep a balance of power between North and South. That equilibrium had been violently disturbed, in 1820, at the time of the Missouri Compromise. The relative representations of the North and South in the United States Senate were then so evenly balanced that it came to be decisive of a continuance of political power in the South whether Missouri sh
1840 AD (search for this): chapter 4
r. Lincoln had been elected had been actually declared illegal by the supreme judicial authority of the country. In Congress the Northern States had 183 votes; the South, if unanimous, 120. If then the North was prepared to act in a mass its power was irresistible; and the election of Mr. Lincoln plainly showed that it was prepared so to act and to carry out a sectional design. The antislavery power in the North was now compact and invincible. A party opposed to slavery had organized in 1840, with about seven thousand voters; in 1860, it had polled nearly two million votes, and had succeeded in electing the President of the United States. The conservative party in the North had been thoroughly corrupted. They were beaten in every Northern State in 1860, with a single exception, by the avowed enemies of the South, who, but a few years ago, had been powerless in their midst. The leaders of the Northern Democratic party had, in 1856 and in 1860, openly taken the position that fre
1850 AD (search for this): chapter 4
w disturbed in 1820. contest on the admission of Texas. Compromise measures of 1850. declaration of a Finality. President Pierce's Administration. the Kansas nce on the part of her representatives in Congress to the compromise measures of 1850. South Carolina threatened secession; but the other Southern States were not preof the South, in agreeing to what was called, in severe irony, the Compromise of 1850, declared that it was the last concession they would make to the North; that theSouth; and it was hoped that under his administration the compromise measures of 1850 would indeed be realized as a finality, and the country be put upon a career of ed that the Missouri Compromise Act was superseded by the compromise measures of 1850, and had thus become inoperative. It held that the Missouri Compromise act, beis with slavery in the States and Territories as recognized by the legislation of 1850, commonly called the Compromise Measures, is hereby declared inoperative and voi
1852 AD (search for this): chapter 4
in severe irony, the Compromise of 1850, declared that it was the last concession they would make to the North; that they took it as a finality, and that the slavery question was thereafter to be excluded from the pale of Federal discussion. In 1852 Franklin Pierce was elected President of the United States. He was a favourite of the State Rights Democracy of the South; and it was hoped that under his administration the compromise measures of 1850 would indeed be realized as a finality, and It was also the Protectionist party. Its leaning was in favour of strong government, and whatever there might be of aristocracy in the North belonged to it. The new party sprung at once into an amazing power. In the Presidential canvass of 1852, which had resulted in the election of Mr. Pierce, John P. Hale, who ran upon what was called the straight-out Abolition ticket, did not receive the vote of a single State, and but 175,296 of the popular vote of the Union. But upon the repeal of
1854 AD (search for this): chapter 4
ny Territory or State, nor to exclude it therefrom, but to leave the people thereof perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic institutions, subject only to the Constitution of the United States. The bill passed both houses of Congress in 1854. The Kansas-Nebraska bill, involving as it did the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, was taken by the South as a sort of triumph. The latter measure, being viewed as an act of proscription against the South, was justly offensive to her; althoote of a single State, and but 175,296 of the popular vote of the Union. But upon the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, Abolitionism, in the guise of Republicanism, swept almost everything before it in the North and Northwest in the elections of 1854 and 1855; and in the Thirty-first Congress, Nathaniel Banks, an objectionable Abolitionist of the Massachusetts school, was elected to the speakership of the House. In the mean time, the language of the Kansas-Nebraska bill was the subject of n
1855 AD (search for this): chapter 4
single State, and but 175,296 of the popular vote of the Union. But upon the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, Abolitionism, in the guise of Republicanism, swept almost everything before it in the North and Northwest in the elections of 1854 and 1855; and in the Thirty-first Congress, Nathaniel Banks, an objectionable Abolitionist of the Massachusetts school, was elected to the speakership of the House. In the mean time, the language of the Kansas-Nebraska bill was the subject of no disputenvention, in not representing all the voters of the Territory, and in not submitting the entire result of their labours to a vote of the people. The Anti-Slavery or Free State party had also their Constitution to advocate, an instrument framed in 1855, at Topeka, which had been submitted to the people, and ratified by a large majority of those who voted. But the facts were that scarcely any but Abolitionists went to the polls ; and it was notorious that the Topeka Constitution was the fruit of
1856 AD (search for this): chapter 4
h, and war precipitated upon the country. The Democratic party of the South had cooperated with the Democratic party of the North in the Presidential canvass of 1856, upon the principles of the platform adopted by the National Democratic Convention assembled in Cincinnati, in June of that year. They expressed a willingness to reby declare our affirmance of the resolutions unanimously adopted and declared as a platform of principles by the Democratic Convention at Cincinnati, in the year 1856, believing that Democratic principles are unchangeable in their nature, when applied to the same subject-matters; and we recommend as the only further resolutions e exception, by the avowed enemies of the South, who, but a few years ago, had been powerless in their midst. The leaders of the Northern Democratic party had, in 1856 and in 1860, openly taken the position that freedom would be more certainly secured in the Territories by the rule of non-intervention than by any other policy or
1857 AD (search for this): chapter 4
his party, not a subscriber to the book, elected. But the fact remained that more than three-fourths of the entire Northern delegation had adhered to Mr. Sherman for nearly two months in a factious and fanatical spirit. Such an exhibition of obstinate rancour could not fail to produce a deep impression on the South; and the early dissolution of the Union had now come to be a subject freely canvassed in Congress and in the country. We have thus, in a rapid summary of political events from 1857 to 1860-the Kansas controversy, the John Brown raid, and the Helper book imbroglio-enabled the reader to discover and combine some of the most remarkable indications of the coming catastrophe of Disunion. In the historical succession of events we shall see that occurrence rapidly and steadily advancing, until at last the sharp and distinct issue of a sectional despotism was forced upon the South, and war precipitated upon the country. The Democratic party of the South had cooperated with
1 2 3 4 5 6 ...