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 427 total hits in 149 results.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ...
Constitutional History (search for this): chapter 1.19
ths. But we come now to consider, who were the agressors who inaugurated this wicked war We think it important to make this inquiry, for the reasons already given and because we apprehend, there is a common impression, that inasmuch as the South fired the first gun at Fort Sumter, it really thereby brought on the war, and was hence responsible for the direful consequences which followed the firing of that first shot. Nothing could be further from the truth. Mr. Hallam, in his Constitutional History of England, states a universally recognized principle, when he says: The aggressor in a war (that is, he who begins it) is not the first who uses forces, but the first who renders force necessary. Now which side, according to this high authority, was the aggressor in this conflict? Which side was it that rendered the first blow necessary? What Mr. Stephens says. Says Mr. Stephens, in his War Between the States: I maintain that it (the war) was inaugurated and begun, thou
Hamilton (search for this): chapter 1.19
and in 1814, front that of South Carolina in 1830. The former point he touched upon lightly; the latter he discussed ably, eloquently and at length. Unfortunately the facts wear against him in both instances. And in this connection, Mr. Lodge then uses this language: When the Constitution was adopted by the votes of the States at Philadelphia, and accepted by the votes of the States in popular convention, it is safe to say that there was not a man in the country, from Washington and Hamilton on the one side, to George Clinton and George Mason on the other, who regarded the new system as anything but an experiment entered into by the States, and from which each and every Stale had the right peaceably to withdraw.—a right which was very likely to be exercised. Mr. James C. Carter, now of New York, but a native of New England, and perhaps the most distinguished lawyer in this country to-day, in a speech delivered by him at the University of Virginia, in 1898, said: I may
Chairman (search for this): chapter 1.19
d Camp of Confederate Veterans of Virginia: Some time in July last, Dr. Stuart McGuire, seeing that his father, Dr. Hunter McGuire, the able and distinguished Chairman of this Committee, was permanently disabled for longer discharging the duties devolving on him, sent his resignation to your Commander. A meeting of this Commitconsent to undertake a work for which I felt so poorly prepared. Since that time, the hand that strikes no erring blow, has taken from us our able and beloved Chairman, and he now sleeps in beautiful Hollywood. I have no words to express the personal loss I feel at this calamity, and I know that you, and each of you, share wit the splendid intellect that conceived it was a mournful wreck, and the tongue which gave it utterance was paralyzed. My task, therefore, is to show that your Chairman was right in saying that the South was not the aggressor in bringing on the war; that, on the contrary, we did all that honorable men could do in the vain attemp
Bv Greeley (search for this): chapter 1.19
hink they have been led to believe that we to-day, the dominant party, who are about to take the reins of government, are their mortal foes, and stand ready to trample their institutions under foot. And notwithstanding the expression of these sentiments, we know, as we say, that this man became one of the most ardent supporters of the miserable despotism established by Abraham Lincoln, and became the second officer in that despotism on the assassination of Mr. Lincoln. Doctrine held Bv Greeley. On the 9th of November, in 1860, Mr. Horace Greeley, the great apostle of the Republican party, and who was often referred to during Mr. Lincoln's administration as the power behind the throne —greater than the throne itself —said in his paper, the New York Tribune. If the Cotton States consider the value of the Union debatable, we maintain their perfect right to discuss it; nay, we hold with Jefferson, to the alienable right of communities to alter or abolish forms of government th
R. T. Barton (search for this): chapter 1.19
sion in which she was left by the results of the war, has accomplished what she has—(she has made greater material advances in proportion than any other section)— what could she not have done, if she had been the conqueror instead of the conquered? We simply allude to these material facts, with the hope that these, and every consideration dictated by self-respect, love of, and loyalty to, a sacred and glorious past, will prevent a repetition of the expressions of which we, as representatives of the Confederate cause and people, justly complain, and against which we earnestly protest. Committee on Publishing a School History for Use in Our Public and Private Schools. Geo. L. Christian, Acting Chairman, R. T. Barton, Rev. B. D. Tucker, R. S. B. Smith, John W. Fulton, Carter R. Bishop, John W. Daniel, T. H. Edwards, M. W. Hazelwood, R. A. Brock, James Mann, W. H. Hurkamp, Micajah woods, Thomas Ellett, Secretary. [From the Richmond, Va., Dispatch, January 20th, 19
Hunter McGuire (search for this): chapter 1.19
by their own testimony. To the Grand Camp of Confederate Veterans of Virginia: Some time in July last, Dr. Stuart McGuire, seeing that his father, Dr. Hunter McGuire, the able and distinguished Chairman of this Committee, was permanently disabled for longer discharging the duties devolving on him, sent his resignation toat my command, for the proper discharge of the duty thus assigned me, I earnestly asked to be excused from the undertaking, and nothing but my devotion, both to Dr. McGuire and the Confederate cause, could have induced me to consent to undertake a work for which I felt so poorly prepared. Since that time, the hand that strikes nructions, all unconsciously given. I persuade myself that in this attempt I shall have your kind indulgence. South not the aggressors. The evening before Dr. McGuire was stricken with the malady which forever incapacitated him for any earthly service, I was with him, and, as was frequently the case, we were talking of the Co
Madison (search for this): chapter 1.19
ropriety, and doubtless would, have rested for all time on the principles enunciated in the Virginia and Kentucky resolutions of 1798 and ‘99, and the report of Mr. Madison on these resolutions. The Virginia resolutions and report were drawn by Mr. Madison, the father of the Constitution; and those of Kentucky by Mr. Jefferson, thMr. Madison, the father of the Constitution; and those of Kentucky by Mr. Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence. These principles, emanating from these master-builders, would, as we have said, have settled the rights of the States on this question forever, but for the fact, as Mr. Henry Cabot Lodge, of Massachusetts tells us that the North was controlled by expediency, and not by principle, in tcommon judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress, as declared by Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Madison in the celebrated resolutions of ‘98, and the right of secession irresistibly follows. But aside from the doctrine either of partnership or compact, upon the
William Rawle (search for this): chapter 1.19
ns of the people of these States shall be alienated from each other, the bonds of political association will not long hold together parties no longer attracted by the magnetism of consolidated interests and kindly sympathies; and far better will it be for the people of the disunited States to part in friendship with each other than to be held together by, constraint. This same man presented to Congress the first petition ever presented in that body for a dissolution of the Union. Mr. William Rawle, a distinguished lawyer and jurist of Pennsylvania, in his work on the Constitution, says this: It depends on the State itself to retain or abolish the principle of representation, because it depends on itself whether it will continue a member of the Union. To deny this right would be inconsistent with the principles on which all our political systems are founded, which is that the people have in all cases a right to determine how they will be governed. In the case of the Bank o
John S. Mosby (search for this): chapter 1.19
olleges, so that the youth of our land may be taught the truth as to the formation of this government, and of the principles for which their fathers fought for the establishment and maintenance of Constitutional liberty in our land. Our attention has recently been called to the fact that in none of the histories used in our schools, is any mention made (certainly none compared with what it deserves) of the splendid services rendered our cause by the devoted and gallant band led by Colonel John S. Mosby. This organization, whilst forming a part of General Lee's Army, and at all times subject to his orders, was to all intents and purposes an independent command. We believe, that for its numbers and resources, it performed as gallant, faithful and efficient services as any other command in any part of our armies, and that no history of our cause is at all complete, that fails to give some general idea, at the least, of the deeds of devotion and daring performed by this gallant band
Daniel Webster (search for this): chapter 1.19
we are quoting, says in terms, in his Life of Webster, that when the resolutions were thus submitte a dissolution of the Union. The views of Webster. Daniel Webster (the great expounder of thdifferent is the language above quoted from Mr. Webster in his Capon Springs speech from the proposof quoting as their authority extracts from Mr. Webster's reply to Mr. Hayne, made in 1830. It is But it is all important to remember that Mr. Webster nowhere ill this whole speech refers to thegoverning ordinary co-partnerships, just as Mr. Webster did. And he then says: Now, if a partot be surpassed. But again: In his life of Webster, published in 1889, Mr. Henry Cabot Lodge, frchusetts, uses this language in speaking of Mr. Webster's reply to Mr. Hayne. He says: The weak places in his (Webster's) armor were historical in their nature. It was probably necessary (at all events Mr. Webster felt it to be so) to argue that the Constitution at the outset was not a compa
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ...