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
William Mahone 274 2 Browse Search
United States (United States) 224 0 Browse Search
David A. Weisiger 181 1 Browse Search
Robert Edward Lee 176 18 Browse Search
P. G. T. Beauregard 142 2 Browse Search
Hunter McGuire 122 4 Browse Search
Jefferson Davis 119 5 Browse Search
Stonewall Jackson 103 1 Browse Search
Robert E. Lee 100 0 Browse Search
James H. Grant 84 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 28. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones). Search the whole document.

Found 272 total hits in 65 results.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Ethan Allen (search for this): chapter 1.17
ther colonies. But, stimulated rather than deterred by this last act of aggression, the colonies, as advised, appointed delegates to another general Congress, all being represented except Canada and Georgia, as before, on its assemblage in May, 1775. Georgia was also represented some two months later. Hostilities had broken out between Great Britain and Massachusetts before this Congress met. The battle of Lexington had been fought, and volunteers from Connecticut and Vermont, under Colonel Ethan Allen, had seized upon the military posts of Ticonderoga and Crown Point. New England, says Mr. Grady, had now crossed the Rubicon; a step had been taken which imposed on the other colonies the necessity of choosing whether they would stand aloof and permit her to be crushed by Great Britain, or go to her relief with men and money. They choose the latter; the cause of Boston had become, in a new and fearful sense, the cause of all. In reciting the causes which brought about the Revolut
Josiah Quincy (search for this): chapter 1.17
of secession, each in turn excited opposition at the north because in one way or another, it seemed to menace the continuance of the undue profits derived by that section from the operation of the taxing power of the Federal Government. The famous resolutions of 1798 asserted the right of the States to interpose their authority in arrest of unwarranted action on the part of the Federal government. In regard to the acquisition of Louisiana, Alexander Johnston says: The Federalists felt, as Quincy expressed it afterwards, that this is not so much a question concerning sovereignty, as it is who shall be sovereign. The Federalists were favorable to the scheme of a strong central government, but the Federalists at the north desired to control that government in the interest of their own section. Mr. Jefferson, however, did not negotiate the purchase of Louisiana with a view to the extension of slavery, a consummation which he would not have regarded as desirable. He, in fact, had not
Mohawk Indians (search for this): chapter 1.17
ea. Another act, passed in 773, permitted the East India Company to carry their tea into the colonies and undersell the smugglers of Dutch tea. Mr. Grady asserts, on the authority of Montgomery's American History, that nine-tenths of all they imported was smuggled from Holland. There remained only a duty of three pence per pound to be paid in the port of entry; but the importation was resisted in the principal importing cities, notably in Boston, where the smugglers organized a band of Mohawk Indians and dumped into the sea about $100,000 worth of tea. Parliament thereupon passed several retaliatory and repressive acts, by the first of which the harbor of Boston was declared closed until a compensation should be made to the India Company for their tea, and 'till the inhabitants should discover an inclination to submit to the revenue laws. The effect of the second act was to take away the charter of the Massachusetts Bay, leaving the council to be appointed by the king, as in the so
Mother Goose (search for this): chapter 1.17
the union. Mr. Grady observes that this was an unfortunate move, aside from any merit in it; it united against those who held Mr. Hayne's opinions many of the honest and sincere friends of the union and all those who were, or hoped to be, beneficiaries of Federal legislation. Naturally, a champion of the union was sought for; and he was found in Daniel Webster, whose reply to Hayne added very much to his fame, was regarded as a coup de grace to States' rights, and became as familiar as Mother Goose's Melodies in every section of the union. Mr. Webster delivered two speeches in the course of the debate, one on January 25th, and the other two days after, as a rejoinder. Mr. Grady considers the two together and summarizes them as follows: First—He (Webster) asserts that the power of Congress is unlimited in granting public lands for roads, canals, education, etc., in Ohio and other western States, without regard to the conditions on which Virginia and other States ceded the lan
Daniel Webster (search for this): chapter 1.17
ecame as familiar as Mother Goose's Melodies in every section of the union. Mr. Webster delivered two speeches in the course of the debate, one on January 25th, andady considers the two together and summarizes them as follows: First—He (Webster) asserts that the power of Congress is unlimited in granting public lands for d approve it. In the same chapter Mr. Grady calls attention to the answer to Mr. Webster by Mr. Calhoun, and to the complete overthrow of his (Webster's) political dWebster's) political doctrines, by quoting his own former utterances (always scrupulously ignored and excluded by northern compilers of school readers, speakers, union text-books, etc.), delivered long after this debate at Capon Springs, Va. There, in June, 1851, Mr. Webster said: I have not hesitated to say, and I repeat, that, if the northern StateA bargain cannot be broken on one side, and still bind the other side. Here Mr. Webster seems to recognize very clearly the fact that the several States are distinc
B. J. Sage (search for this): chapter 1.17
ther authentic sources of information. If he is anywhere in error, he can be very easily corrected, because he has been extremely careful in the citation of his authorities. Moreover, his book is an answer. Though the South has submitted to the arbitrament of arms, it has yet a right to be heard before the august tribunal of history. It is true that the South has been defended with great ability by jurists and publicists of the learning, forcefulness and acuteness of A. T. Bledsoe and B. J. Sage; but these writers deal almost exclusively with questions of constitutional law. Mr. Grady, while he goes over the ground already traversed by them, is at pains to follow the actual course of Federal legislation, insofar as it appears to have a sectional significance. The general effect of his presentation of the case is to show that from the beginning of the history of the Federal Government, the Southern States have been compelled to occupy a defensive attitude. The British colonies in
March 5th, 1770 AD (search for this): chapter 1.17
by the king in June, 1767, and in February, 1768, the Legislature of Massachusetts invited the co-operation of the other colonies in an effort to secure a redress of grievances. The circular in which this invitation was conveyed was very offensive to the British government, and a demand was made for its rescission, but Massachusetts refused to rescind, reaffirming its position in still stronger language. A body of troops was then sent over to suppress the rebels, and finally, on the 5th of March, 1770, a number of the citizens of Boston, led by a negro named Crispus Attucks, attacked a military guard with clubs, sticks and snow-balls covering stones. Dared to fire by the mob, six of the soldiers discharged their muskets, killing three of the crowd and wounding five others. The captain and eight men were tried for murder and all were acquitted, except two, who were convicted of manslaughter. About this time parliament repealed all the taxes imposed by the act of 1767, except that
December 30th, 1900 AD (search for this): chapter 1.17
The case of the South against the North. [from New Orleans Picayune, December 30th, 1900.] by B. F. Grady. A review by William Walker. The importance of the study of history is universally recognized. It is especially obvious when one's own country is concerned. In practical acknowledgment of this fact, the history of the United States has been made a part of the curriculum of the common schools in the several States, which, together, constitute the Federal Union. It is to be regretted, however, that so far as they deal with the political development of this country, the text-books placed in the hands of American boys and girls are not only superficial, but, in too many instances, incorrect and misleading. This is not surprising, when it is remembered that school books are usually mere abridgements, and that so many of the larger works dealing professedly with the political history of the United States have been written from a sectional and partisan point of view. Mr. B
1838 AD (search for this): chapter 1.17
Government, at the time of the assumption of the State debts, the incorporation of the first national bank and the adoption of the funding system, all of which drew capital from the South to the North: It continued to increase, and, at the period (1838) to which this chapter relates, it had reached the stage of an organized sectional expression in a voluntary convention of the Southern States. * * * The changed relative condition of the two sections of the country, before and since the union, wastatistics of Federal taxation, and Mr. Grady pronounces him an undoubtedly impartial writer. In the passage just quoted from his Thirty Years in the United States Senate, he describes this relative condition of the two sections of the country in 1838. Ten years before that date, discussing the bill of abominations, he said: Wealth has fled from the South and settled in the regions north of the Potomac, and this in the midst of the fact that the south in four staples alone, in cotton, tobacco,
June, 1851 AD (search for this): chapter 1.17
ppointed to draft the declaration whether all the colonies would approve it. In the same chapter Mr. Grady calls attention to the answer to Mr. Webster by Mr. Calhoun, and to the complete overthrow of his (Webster's) political doctrines, by quoting his own former utterances (always scrupulously ignored and excluded by northern compilers of school readers, speakers, union text-books, etc.), and adds a quotation from an address delivered long after this debate at Capon Springs, Va. There, in June, 1851, Mr. Webster said: I have not hesitated to say, and I repeat, that, if the northern States refuse, willfully and deliberately, to carry into effect that part of the constitution which respects the restoration of fugitive slaves, and Congress provide no remedy, the South would no longer be bound to observe the compact. A bargain cannot be broken on one side, and still bind the other side. Here Mr. Webster seems to recognize very clearly the fact that the several States are distinct politi
1 2 3 4 5 6 7