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
ZZZ 776 0 Browse Search
Robert Edward Lee 215 31 Browse Search
United States (United States) 194 0 Browse Search
Jefferson Davis 193 5 Browse Search
Robert Lee 180 0 Browse Search
Robert E. Lee 172 0 Browse Search
R. E. Lee 164 0 Browse Search
Abraham Lincoln 126 0 Browse Search
Georgia (Georgia, United States) 108 0 Browse Search
Savannah (Georgia, United States) 100 8 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 17. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones). Search the whole document.

Found 386 total hits in 127 results.

1 2 3 4 5 6 ...
1755 AD (search for this): chapter 1.9
corps then, commands you now. The same southern sky that witnessed the deeds of your comrades, stretches over you. The same sentinel mountains that guard the spot where they fought and fell, are around you, and you will be true to the glorious past. Fellow-soldiers of the young guard of the Army of Northern Virginia, the soldiers of the old guard extend to you the right hand of fellowship and greet you as comrades. After the war. When Lisbon was destroyed by the memorable earthquake of 1755, and the fair city lay in ruins, with thousands of its inhabitants crushed beneath the wreck of its homes and temples, the horrors of a great conflagration were added to a scene at which the heart sickens and which defies description. To this pathetic picture the condition of the South, at the close of the civil war, may justly be compared. To the ruin already wrought by the convulsions that had shaken her, and the storm that had swept over her, the fierce passions of reconstruction were ad
1776 AD (search for this): chapter 1.9
f its ancient dignity and strength, still lives to sustain and vitalize the grandest system of government which human wisdom has ever evolved, and must in some form always remain the grand conservator of American free institutions. Secession in 1776. From the first settlement of the English colonies in America, throughout their whole colonial existence up to the time when they were acknowledged by Great Britain to be free and independent States, community independence was guarded with the arose, and secession, plain and unadulterated, was preached by New England as a remedy for what she styled the abuse of the powers of the general government. Massachusetts, the mother of secession, which she had taught to her sister colonies in 1776, cannot repudiate the utterances of her most eminent statesmen in 1804 and 1811. Timothy Pickering, who had been in succession at the head of three different cabinet departments during the administration of Washington, and at that time United Sta
1787 AD (search for this): chapter 1.9
tified, and not only was the principle established by their success, but the remedy stamped with the seal of right. The Union formed. Eleven years later, when the men of ‘76 stood around the cradle of the present Union in the convention of 1787, the same principle, rechristened under the name of State sovereignty, dominated their counsels and moulded the form of the infant government, which, wrapped in the folds of the Constitution, they presented to the States for their several acceptaned by the whole tenor and spirit of the Constitution. That the power to coerce States under any circumstances was never intended to be invested in the general government, is conclusively settled by the action of the constitutional convention of 1787, when a scheme of government was introduced by Mr. Randolph, which, among other provisions, proposed to invest Congress with the power to call forth the force of the Union against any member of the Union failing to fulfill its duty under the artic
December, 1787 AD (search for this): chapter 1.9
exposition of the doctrine of State rights: That the powers of government may be reassumed by the people when-so-ever it may become necessary to their happiness; that every power, jurisdiction, and right which is not by the Constitution clearly delegated to the Congress of the United States * * * remain to the people of the several States, or to their respective State governments to which they may have granted the same. For nearly two years after the first ratification, by Delaware in December, 1787, North Carolina held aloof from the Union, and for more than a year after the government went into operation, the great State of Rhode Island remained a free and independent nation. No attempt was ever made, or even suggested, to force them into the new Union, or to infringe even the least of their rights as free and independent States. The secession of the other eleven States from the old confederation, which was expressly declared to be a perpetual union, furnishes the second precede
1798 AD (search for this): chapter 1.9
from the inception of the government, and to the student of our political history presaged the coming storm as surely as cause produces effect in the moral and as night follows the day in the physical world. Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798-‘99. The year 1798, scarcely a decade removed from the birth of the Union, witnessed the first infraction of the Constitution in the passage of the alien and sedition laws by Congress. The freedom of the press—that great muniment of personal l1798, scarcely a decade removed from the birth of the Union, witnessed the first infraction of the Constitution in the passage of the alien and sedition laws by Congress. The freedom of the press—that great muniment of personal liberty and political rights, a principle descended to us by right of inheritance from the mother country—was assailed in palpable violation of the first amendment to the Constitution under which it was guaranteed. It was then that Virginia, the great mother of States, followed by her eldest and fairest daughter, Kentucky, sounded the note of alarm, denounced the usurpation of unwarranted powers by the general government, and appealed to the Constitution as the great charter of her rights and
1803 AD (search for this): chapter 1.9
w—in one notable instance in this very city of Richmond—leaving to the sober, second thought of the country the vindication of her position and the reversal of an unconstitutional act. The Louisiana purchase. From this time onward came thick and fast, occasions for the opposition of the States to the acts of the general government, the assertion of what they conceived to be their rights and their construction of the Constitution. When the Louisiana territory was acquired from France in 1803, not only was the purchase denounced by the New England States, but threats of a withdrawal from the Union were heard on every hand. The Constitution was appealed to, to show that the United States had no right to the acquisition of foreign territory either by purchase, by treaty, or by conquest. Surely a most lame and impotent conclusion, to bind the strong limbs of the young giant of the West by the narrow territorial limits of the old colonial days. A conclusion which would have barred
1804 AD (search for this): chapter 1.9
and as a remedy for what she styled the abuse of the powers of the general government. Massachusetts, the mother of secession, which she had taught to her sister colonies in 1776, cannot repudiate the utterances of her most eminent statesmen in 1804 and 1811. Timothy Pickering, who had been in succession at the head of three different cabinet departments during the administration of Washington, and at that time United States senator from Massachusetts, in a letter referring to what he considcal line was fixed beyond which slavery could not go, and so by the Missouri Compromise the dominant section of the Union appropriated to itself the lion's share of the very territory against the acquisition of which it had threatened secession in 1804. The tariff and nullification. But the conflict between the sections did not always run on parallel lines. The points of antagonism were as numerous and diversified as the interests that underlaid them. The Northern States were commercial
1811 AD (search for this): chapter 1.9
remedy for what she styled the abuse of the powers of the general government. Massachusetts, the mother of secession, which she had taught to her sister colonies in 1776, cannot repudiate the utterances of her most eminent statesmen in 1804 and 1811. Timothy Pickering, who had been in succession at the head of three different cabinet departments during the administration of Washington, and at that time United States senator from Massachusetts, in a letter referring to what he considered the osition would be welcomed in Georgia, Alabama and Mississippi, and could we doubt of Louisiana and Texas? But Virginia must be associated. * * * Arkansas, Tennessee and North Carolina would follow of course, and Florida of necessity. Again, in 1811, when Louisiana knocked at the door of the Union for admission as a State, Josiah Quincy, of Massachusetts, said upon the floor of Congress, If this bill passes, it is my deliberate opinion that it is a virtual dissolution of the Union; that it wi
1820 AD (search for this): chapter 1.9
relations, let us hope forever, and both gave to the world men worthy to be ranked with the Homeric heroes of old. The negro appears upon the scene. When in 1820 Missouri applied for admission to the Union as a slave State, sectional interests and animosity again obtruded themselves into the counsels of the Union. The complack from his native jungles to the plantations of the South. Nor was it less a question of sectional predominance which was involved in the Missouri embroglio of 1820, which resulted in fixing the parallel of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes as the northern limit of slavery in all the territory west of that State, though it exis overthrow it very nearly involved in its ruins the liberties of the entire American people. The cry against the extension of slavery had been raised as early as 1820. When it was heard again in opposition to the annexation of Texas, and yet again in still louder tones, claiming for the dominant section the whole of the vast te
1832 AD (search for this): chapter 1.9
manufacturers of the North, it raised an issue, which, antedating that of slavery and surviving its extinction, stands to-day in the full strength of aggressive manhood, asserting its assumed prerogative to tax the weak for the benefit of the strong, to tax the workman for the benefit of his master, to tax labor for the benefit of capital, in short, to lay tribute upon every interest not identified with its own selfish self. Upon this issue was based the nullification of South Carolina in 1832. Then for the first time in our national history the doctrine of coercion was enunciated in the proclamation of President Jackson, asserting the right to the employment of the military arm of the government to enforce the execution of its laws in the territory of a recusant State. Nullification was indefensible in law or morals, as much so as coercion itself. On the broad principles of equity no party to a compact can be justified in resistance to laws made in ostensible conformity with th
1 2 3 4 5 6 ...