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
United States (United States) 32 0 Browse Search
Minnesota (Minnesota, United States) 18 0 Browse Search
Cook 16 0 Browse Search
William H. Macfarland 16 0 Browse Search
April, 2 AD 12 12 Browse Search
South Carolina (South Carolina, United States) 12 0 Browse Search
H. W. Thomas 11 1 Browse Search
John Johnson 10 0 Browse Search
Stuart 10 2 Browse Search
George W. Randolph 10 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of The Daily Dispatch: February 5, 1861., [Electronic resource]. Search the whole document.

Found 24 total hits in 3 results.

United States (United States) (search for this): article 2
miciled and doing business therein, and acknowledging allegiance thereto, and have abjured all allegiance to the United States of America; that said State of Louisiana has seceded from and revolted against the United States of America, and is at war United States of America, and is at war with the same; that the plaintiffs, and all other persons who are citizens of said State and domiciled therein and acknowledging allegiance thereto, are alien enemies of the United States of America and of the State of Missouri, and have no right to United States of America and of the State of Missouri, and have no right to maintain any suit in the Courts of the State of Missouri. This defence, if persisted in to the last resort, would carry the question of the right of a State to secede to the Supreme Court of the United States for settlement. Its prosecution opMissouri. This defence, if persisted in to the last resort, would carry the question of the right of a State to secede to the Supreme Court of the United States for settlement. Its prosecution opens the door to a variety of legal questions.
Missouri (Missouri, United States) (search for this): article 2
ates of America, and is at war with the same; that the plaintiffs, and all other persons who are citizens of said State and domiciled therein and acknowledging allegiance thereto, are alien enemies of the United States of America and of the State of Missouri, and have no right to maintain any suit in the Courts of the State of Missouri. This defence, if persisted in to the last resort, would carry the question of the right of a State to secede to the Supreme Court of the United States forr persons who are citizens of said State and domiciled therein and acknowledging allegiance thereto, are alien enemies of the United States of America and of the State of Missouri, and have no right to maintain any suit in the Courts of the State of Missouri. This defence, if persisted in to the last resort, would carry the question of the right of a State to secede to the Supreme Court of the United States for settlement. Its prosecution opens the door to a variety of legal questions.
Louisiana (Louisiana, United States) (search for this): article 2
of that county at the suit of a well-known New Orleans Bank against a prominent city banker of St. Louis, to recover a large sum: The defendants state in their answer that the plaintiffs are an association of persons, citizens of the State of Louisiana, domiciled and doing business therein, and acknowledging allegiance thereto, and have abjured all allegiance to the United States of America; that said State of Louisiana has seceded from and revolted against the United States of America, aState of Louisiana has seceded from and revolted against the United States of America, and is at war with the same; that the plaintiffs, and all other persons who are citizens of said State and domiciled therein and acknowledging allegiance thereto, are alien enemies of the United States of America and of the State of Missouri, and have no right to maintain any suit in the Courts of the State of Missouri. This defence, if persisted in to the last resort, would carry the question of the right of a State to secede to the Supreme Court of the United States for settlement. Its p