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) 56 0 Browse Search
Vienna (Virginia, United States) 40 0 Browse Search
Picayune Butler 28 0 Browse Search
Abraham Lincoln 20 0 Browse Search
France (France) 16 0 Browse Search
Maryland (Maryland, United States) 16 0 Browse Search
June 19th 15 15 Browse Search
Cadwallader 14 4 Browse Search
Sewell's Point (Virginia, United States) 14 0 Browse Search
Sampson Jordan 14 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of The Daily Dispatch: June 24, 1861., [Electronic resource]. Search the whole document.

Found 18 total hits in 9 results.

France (France) (search for this): article 15
ent men continue to call names and abuse men's reputations, already the effect is past, and the argument that a good cause requires no such assistance is beginning to be felt. Let not the reaction be too strong. Coming, as it is now, very rapidly, the danger which experience teaches is, that in reactions men too frequently lose all sense of right, and only remember their own wrong. The inventor of the guillotine is said to have suffered by it. The promoters of the maddest republicanism in France went in hordes to the block. But we trust that the American mind will reach its old balance-point without those great reactions which ordinarily occur in such cases. Three months ago the immense majority of Americans in the North believed and advocated the idea that the peaceable acknowledgment of the Southern Confederacy was preferable to war. The leading Republican newspapers in this city even pronounced the right of the Southern States to establish their own form of government to be
Harper's Ferry (West Virginia, United States) (search for this): article 15
In short, whatever is said, whatever is proposed, whatever is advocated that does not meet the views of the war newspapers, is treason. There are exceptions, it is true. It depends very much on who says the thing.--Thus, for a republican editor to propose to "supersede the President," is not treason.--For a man of the same sort to say that Gen. Scott is too old and too slow, and that we want John C. Fremont, or some such man in his place, and that we want the Pennsylvanians to march on Harper's Ferry, without waiting for Washington orders — this is not objectionable. For an out and out abolition shoot to print daily in its head-line that "the Constitution of the United States is a covenant with hell," is not treason. For the republican papers to argue that in war times the letter of the Constitution is to be disregarded, and the President of the United States ought to assume and exercise the powers of a dictator, is not treason. We might extend the Illustrations, but these are
United States (United States) (search for this): article 15
too slow, and that we want John C. Fremont, or some such man in his place, and that we want the Pennsylvanians to march on Harper's Ferry, without waiting for Washington orders — this is not objectionable. For an out and out abolition shoot to print daily in its head-line that "the Constitution of the United States is a covenant with hell," is not treason. For the republican papers to argue that in war times the letter of the Constitution is to be disregarded, and the President of the United States ought to assume and exercise the powers of a dictator, is not treason. We might extend the Illustrations, but these are sufficient. Instead of the former frank and hearty style of discussion, if perchance a peace loving newspaper treads on the toes of those warlike editors, the vocabulary of epithets is exhausted in the present style of reply. We counted the word "liar," repeated some ten times in the editorials of one paper a few days since. We are not censors of the press o
North Carolina (North Carolina, United States) (search for this): article 15
gland in 1776. The same paper declared that Fort Sumter was only built for the protection of Charleston, and not for offensive purposes against that city, and advocated the evacuation of the Fort. The universal American mind was averse to the idea of war. Even among men who favored a war against the Cotton States, it was common to hear conversation like this: "If Virginia secedes, are you in favor of war?" "Virginia will never secede; you cannot kick her out.""But if she does, and North Carolina with her, what then?""Why, I am not a fool; if so large a portion of the Union as that secede, then I think we may as well give it up and acknowledge them." This was the accepted doctrine of the entire Democratic party, and large numbers of Republicans openly advocated it — Truths are omnipotent. That is truth to-day which was truth a month or three months ago to-day. What process will men's minds have to go through after the late convulsions? How many oscillations shall we see, befo
John C. Fremont (search for this): article 15
if any man says this war is not a war for extermination of slavery, call him a traitor." In short, whatever is said, whatever is proposed, whatever is advocated that does not meet the views of the war newspapers, is treason. There are exceptions, it is true. It depends very much on who says the thing.--Thus, for a republican editor to propose to "supersede the President," is not treason.--For a man of the same sort to say that Gen. Scott is too old and too slow, and that we want John C. Fremont, or some such man in his place, and that we want the Pennsylvanians to march on Harper's Ferry, without waiting for Washington orders — this is not objectionable. For an out and out abolition shoot to print daily in its head-line that "the Constitution of the United States is a covenant with hell," is not treason. For the republican papers to argue that in war times the letter of the Constitution is to be disregarded, and the President of the United States ought to assume and exercise
Washington (search for this): article 15
er is proposed, whatever is advocated that does not meet the views of the war newspapers, is treason. There are exceptions, it is true. It depends very much on who says the thing.--Thus, for a republican editor to propose to "supersede the President," is not treason.--For a man of the same sort to say that Gen. Scott is too old and too slow, and that we want John C. Fremont, or some such man in his place, and that we want the Pennsylvanians to march on Harper's Ferry, without waiting for Washington orders — this is not objectionable. For an out and out abolition shoot to print daily in its head-line that "the Constitution of the United States is a covenant with hell," is not treason. For the republican papers to argue that in war times the letter of the Constitution is to be disregarded, and the President of the United States ought to assume and exercise the powers of a dictator, is not treason. We might extend the Illustrations, but these are sufficient. Instead of the forme
Action and reaction. It is perhape an inevitable, while it is a very painful characteristic of American politics in the present times, that differences of opinion beget violent personal animosities. Hitherto there has been no time when Americans, differing from each other however remotely, could not peacefully and quietly discuss the most radical questions; and now there is no trouble in talking freely one's opinion of direct taxation or the tariff; but when any line of policy relating tmaddest republicanism in France went in hordes to the block. But we trust that the American mind will reach its old balance-point without those great reactions which ordinarily occur in such cases. Three months ago the immense majority of Americans in the North believed and advocated the idea that the peaceable acknowledgment of the Southern Confederacy was preferable to war. The leading Republican newspapers in this city even pronounced the right of the Southern States to establish their
ays this war is an anti-slavery war, call him a traitor; if any man says this war is not a war for extermination of slavery, call him a traitor." In short, whatever is said, whatever is proposed, whatever is advocated that does not meet the views of the war newspapers, is treason. There are exceptions, it is true. It depends very much on who says the thing.--Thus, for a republican editor to propose to "supersede the President," is not treason.--For a man of the same sort to say that Gen. Scott is too old and too slow, and that we want John C. Fremont, or some such man in his place, and that we want the Pennsylvanians to march on Harper's Ferry, without waiting for Washington orders — this is not objectionable. For an out and out abolition shoot to print daily in its head-line that "the Constitution of the United States is a covenant with hell," is not treason. For the republican papers to argue that in war times the letter of the Constitution is to be disregarded, and the Pres
ill reach its old balance-point without those great reactions which ordinarily occur in such cases. Three months ago the immense majority of Americans in the North believed and advocated the idea that the peaceable acknowledgment of the Southern Confederacy was preferable to war. The leading Republican newspapers in this city even pronounced the right of the Southern States to establish their own form of government to be as clear as that of the American Colonies to revolt from England in 1776. The same paper declared that Fort Sumter was only built for the protection of Charleston, and not for offensive purposes against that city, and advocated the evacuation of the Fort. The universal American mind was averse to the idea of war. Even among men who favored a war against the Cotton States, it was common to hear conversation like this: "If Virginia secedes, are you in favor of war?" "Virginia will never secede; you cannot kick her out.""But if she does, and North Carolina wit