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
Robert E. Lee 523 9 Browse Search
United States (United States) 340 0 Browse Search
Joe Hooker 254 0 Browse Search
Fitzhugh Lee 216 2 Browse Search
Jefferson Davis 195 7 Browse Search
Stonewall Jackson 182 0 Browse Search
George B. McClellan 170 0 Browse Search
Sedgwick 168 2 Browse Search
R. E. Lee 160 0 Browse Search
J. A. Early 149 5 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 14. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones). Search the whole document.

Found 309 total hits in 111 results.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ...
Charles L. Webster (search for this): chapter 29
aracterized by the exhibition of the talent of such men as Webster, Clay, Calhoun, Tyler, Leigh, Archer, Badger, Berrien, Pree professed Democrats. It was under that influence that Mr. Webster said the Whigs had, in England, been a party opposed togs. Soon after this, the Cabinet, with the exception of Webster, resigned. The second veto message of the bank bill explad that he agreed with the other members who had resigned. Webster did not sustain the President, yet he expressed no censurehat would not be objectionable. We refer to the letter of Webster in the National Intelligencer of September 13, 1840. The thing reflective on their character. The cordial union of Webster and the President, and the Cabinet he appointed, consistinrtheastern boundary question by treaty with Great Britain, Webster being Secretary of State, and while Mr. Tyler did not secuirt, Calhoun, Rush, Kendall, Woodbury, Poinsett, Paulding, Webster, Legare, Walker, Bancroft, Marcy. It is also a striking
ocratic party, which was in no sense Democratic, is very fairly presented by the writer of the Letters and Times of the Two Tylers. It was characterized by the exhibition of the talent of such men as Webster, Clay, Calhoun, Tyler, Leigh, Archer, Badger, Berrien, Preston, White, Prentice, Reverdy Johnson, and many others, determined to resist the violent measures of Andrew Jackson as President of the United States. We will not enter into a discussion of the many points on which the Whig party aned. The second veto message of the bank bill explained the reasons actuating the President for the course taken, but it was unsatisfactory to a large portion of the Whig party. The members of the Cabinet resigning their seats were Ewing, Bell, Badger, Granger and Crittenden. They reflected severely on the President. Granger's letter was not published, but it was understood that he agreed with the other members who had resigned. Webster did not sustain the President, yet he expressed no cen
W. B. Gordon (search for this): chapter 29
The President called an extra session to meet in September, 1837. This extra session witnessed, to quote the language of our writer, the debut in Van Buren's message of the new system of finance, Vol. I, page 584. It also witnessed, as he observes, a split in the ranks of the Democratic party. This faction called themselves conservatives, among which were some men of great virtue and ability— Rives, Tallmadge and Legree being of that party. But what is also remarkable Calhoun, Tazewell, Gordon, Troup and many others of the Whig party, who had been bitter opponents of the Jackson measures, co-operated with the Democrats on the specie platform of the sub-treasury. We will not trace out at this time the history of the sub-treasury. It was a scheme used as a substitute for a national bank, and its very existence depended upon and practiced daily all of the essential features of banking, except lending money on good security. In the Whig National Convention, on December 4th, 1839,
crat; but when the Whig party took its rise, Tyler co-operated with them, and was never, in the Jackson sense, a Democrat, but a decided Whig. The history of the rise of the Whig party, occasioned by the violent Federal measures and principles of the Jackson Democratic party, which was in no sense Democratic, is very fairly presented by the writer of the Letters and Times of the Two Tylers. It was characterized by the exhibition of the talent of such men as Webster, Clay, Calhoun, Tyler, Leigh, Archer, Badger, Berrien, Preston, White, Prentice, Reverdy Johnson, and many others, determined to resist the violent measures of Andrew Jackson as President of the United States. We will not enter into a discussion of the many points on which the Whig party acted. It is known, historically, how Federal the so called Democratic party of the Jackson school became, and, in truth, the Whigs were more Democratic than the professed Democrats. It was under that influence that Mr. Webster said
United States; of Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe, distinguished for their writings, and also of Buchanan and Tyler. The same is true of cabinet officers from Hamilton, of Washington's administration, down through many administrations, embracing such learned authors and men distinguished in literature and science as are rarely found connected with official station. Among them may be found Rodney, Gallatin, Wirt, Calhoun, Rush, Kendall, Woodbury, Poinsett, Paulding, Webster, Legare, Walker, Bancroft, Marcy. It is also a striking truth that each branch of our national Congress has been elevated by many members distinguished for science, literature and authorship. With the United States there is in learning and science—and all the beautiful accomplishments of literature, as in the constitutional forms of government—a true republicanism that admits to favor the deserving and meritorious of all classes, and this constitutes its national nobility reflective of virtue, learning and culti
volved in a crisis of unprecedented severity; commerce and manufactures were prostrate. The President called an extra session to meet in September, 1837. This extra session witnessed, to quote the language of our writer, the debut in Van Buren's message of the new system of finance, Vol. I, page 584. It also witnessed, as he observes, a split in the ranks of the Democratic party. This faction called themselves conservatives, among which were some men of great virtue and ability— Rives, Tallmadge and Legree being of that party. But what is also remarkable Calhoun, Tazewell, Gordon, Troup and many others of the Whig party, who had been bitter opponents of the Jackson measures, co-operated with the Democrats on the specie platform of the sub-treasury. We will not trace out at this time the history of the sub-treasury. It was a scheme used as a substitute for a national bank, and its very existence depended upon and practiced daily all of the essential features of banking, except l
George F. Harrison (search for this): chapter 29
cept lending money on good security. In the Whig National Convention, on December 4th, 1839, Harrison was nominated for the Presidency and Tyler for Vice-President. Van Buren, as the representativ nominated without opposition by a national convention of May 5th, 1840. The contest between Harrison and Van Buren was conducted with more absorbing interest and public excitement than ever beforeficient valid political reasons to sustain the citizens in the overwhelming triumph that wafted Harrison and Tyler into office with a strong Congressional delegation to sustain them. Van Buren received only sixty electoral votes, while Harrison had two hundred and thirty-four. The death of Harrison occurring one month after inauguration, the administration devolved on Tyler, who became PresideHarrison occurring one month after inauguration, the administration devolved on Tyler, who became President. The Administration was very much perplexed by a dissent in the party on the bank question. The writer of the work under consideration does not enter into the history of this administration with
John C. Calhoun (search for this): chapter 29
the exhibition of the talent of such men as Webster, Clay, Calhoun, Tyler, Leigh, Archer, Badger, Berrien, Preston, White, Prch was composed of the followers of Jackson, Crawford, and Calhoun. He made, during the debate on Clay's tariff resolutions on and the opposition to the election of Martin Van Buren, Calhoun truly remarked: It is also true that a common party designd Legree being of that party. But what is also remarkable Calhoun, Tazewell, Gordon, Troup and many others of the Whig partyting of Forward, McLean, Upshur, Wickliff, Legare, Gilmer, Calhoun and Mason, is strong proof of his honor and integrity, andived, a treaty was signed by the Texan commissioners and Mr. Calhoun, Secretary of State, April 12th, 1844; in June of the sary of the annexation question, the proceedings present John C. Calhoun, whose fame requires no praise wherever his name is kn station. Among them may be found Rodney, Gallatin, Wirt, Calhoun, Rush, Kendall, Woodbury, Poinsett, Paulding, Webster, Leg
e said of Adams, father and son, each President of the United States; of Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe, distinguished for their writings, and also of Buchanan and Tyler. The same is true of cabinet officers from Hamilton, of Washington's administration, down through many administrations, embracing such learned authors and men distinguished in literature and science as are rarely found connected with official station. Among them may be found Rodney, Gallatin, Wirt, Calhoun, Rush, Kendall, Woodbury, Poinsett, Paulding, Webster, Legare, Walker, Bancroft, Marcy. It is also a striking truth that each branch of our national Congress has been elevated by many members distinguished for science, literature and authorship. With the United States there is in learning and science—and all the beautiful accomplishments of literature, as in the constitutional forms of government—a true republicanism that admits to favor the deserving and meritorious of all classes, and this constitutes its nat
of 120 to 98. In the Senate, after a month's delay and opposition, they passed by a vote of 27 to 25, with an amendment, which was concurred in by the House the next day by a vote of 132 to 76. It is due to history, and the statesmanship of President Tyler, to observe that the joint resolutions, on his suggestion, were introduced into the House by J. L. Ingersoll, of Pennsylvania, and George McDuffie, of South Carolina, in the Senate. Thus it is shown, as appears also by the vote in each House, that it was based on a statesmanship above sectional or party considerations. President Tyler approved these resolutions for annexation on March 1, 1845, three days before his term of office expired, thus concluding his administration, in what Thomas Ritchie, editor of the Enquirer, expresses as a blaze of glory. In the entire history of the annexation question, the proceedings present John C. Calhoun, whose fame requires no praise wherever his name is known, as one of the most prominen
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ...