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
Charles Sumner 1,580 0 Browse Search
George Sumner 1,494 0 Browse Search
Massachusetts (Massachusetts, United States) 642 0 Browse Search
Robert C. Winthrop 392 0 Browse Search
Henry Wilson 348 0 Browse Search
William H. Seward 342 0 Browse Search
Fletcher Webster 328 0 Browse Search
Douglas 236 8 Browse Search
Edward Everett 224 0 Browse Search
Benjamin F. Butler 208 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 3. Search the whole document.

Found 401 total hits in 141 results.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ...
A. H. Stephens (search for this): chapter 6
steady,—members changing or withholding votes, with no final advantage on either side. The contest was renewed in the next Congress,—1849-1850. It began with the debate on the election of Speaker in December, and continued during the session which ended September 30, 1850. It passed beyond the question of the territories, and comprehended all the relations of slavery to the nation. It was marked by profound interest on both sides, and watched with deep anxiety by the country. Toombs, Stephens, Clingman, Jefferson Davis, and Foote read elaborate speeches at the beginning of the session, and, supported by the bolder spirits of the South, declared themselves ready for disunion in the event of legislation by Congress prohibiting slavery in the territories, or even of the admission of California with her free State constitution. In Mississippi, Governor Quitman's inaugural message, in January. 1850, was an harangue for disunion. They seemed to be sincere in this aggressive and thr
Samuel A. Eliot (search for this): chapter 6
ong the signers were Howell Cobb, H. S. Foote, A. H. Stephens, R. Toombs, and J. B. Thompson. The only Whig member from New England who signed this paper was Samuel A. Eliot, of Boston. Mr. Appleton, his successor, alone of the Massachusetts delegation, voted that the Compromise, including the Fugitive Slave law, was a final and ), he treated the State personal liberty laws as an insuperable difficulty in the way of a jury trial. He uniformly defended the Fugitive Slave Act, and applauded Eliot's vote for it. Private Correspondence, vol. II. pp. 387. 380. He turned aside from the pending questions,—Clay's Compromise measures,—and committed himself on, 337. Webster's Private Correspondence. vol. II. pp. 366, 370, 388, 390, 391; Webster's Works, vol. VI. p. 547. Von Holst, vol. III. p. 505. The paper drawn by Eliot and signed by Boston merchants in support of the Compromise before it was passed put forward the beneficent legislation which would follow it. Boston Courier, June
Fletcher Webster (search for this): chapter 6
a. The Administration at Washington, under Mr. Webster's lead, determined that this proceeding shoate was again in question. Lodge's Life of Webster, pp. 292, 321; Wilson's Rise and Fall of the wer, vol. II. p. 241; G. T. Curtis's Life of Webster, vol. II. p. 307, note. He now announced thaiple, and of no real practical importance. Webster's Works, vol. v. pp. 421, 422, 423, 436; volTexas by sending our troops to New Mexico. Webster's Works, vol. II. pp. 557, 562, 571, 572; Prtive Slave law in Boston, Curtis's Life of Webster, vol. II. p. 490. and with his passionate cher's Works, vol. v. p. 432; Curtis's Life of Webster, vol. II. p. 438. The writer was present wheorators of 1860 and 1861. Curtis's Life of Webster, vol. II. pp. 517-520. Everett omitted this speech from his edition of Webster's Works. On the death of President Taylor, he did not conceal fr judgment of history is not likely to relieve Webster of the imputation that a desire to become Pre[39 more...]
Longfellow (search for this): chapter 6
people of Massachusetts. It was in conflict with the principles they had uniformly maintained, as well as with his general course as the representative of the State. See Sumner's letter to John Bigelow, May 22, 1850, post, p. 215. Still, Webster's efforts in Massachusetts in 1846 and 1847 to prevent slavery becoming the main political issue, and his lukewarm censures of the Mexican War, as well as his Creole letter of an earlier period, had already weakened Sumner's confidence in him. Longfellow was hardly surprised at the speech of March 7. He wrote in his journal, March 9, 1850: Yet what has there been in Webster's life to lead us to think that he would take any high moral ground on this slavery question? He was not, like Clay, the natural supporter of compromise. he wrote July 21, 1848: You need not fear that I shall vote for any compromises, or do anything inconsistent with the past. Curtis's Life of Webster, vol. II. p. 342. He had repeatedly affirmed his convictions ag
Boston Atlas (search for this): chapter 6
port it only as amended by himself. The transfer of the relative pronoun led to a controversy in the newspapers,——--Boston Courier, May 6, 1850 Advertiser, May 7; Atlas, May 8 and 9; Moses Stuart's Conscience and the Constitution, p. 67. He intimated his purpose to offer some amendments which would qualify its harshness, and latere, in which he stood alone among New England senators, prevented the exclusion of California from the Compromise, and delayed by some months her admission. Boston Atlas, April 16, 1850. He supported the Texas boundary bill, putting forth as his chief ground for yielding to the pretensions of that State that a collision with Texas g journals opposed to the Compromise measures, and transferred it to others (sometimes religious weeklies) which supported them. Boston Courier, April 5, 1851. Atlas, April 4. The motives of Mr. Webster, whether those of personal ambition of patriotism, or however these may have been combined, need not be considered in a st
Zachary Taylor (search for this): chapter 6
us left to themselves, holding a convention at President Taylor's instance in September, 1849, formed a constin of Fillmore, who became President on the death of Taylor, July 9. The latter had been an obstruction, as h Dr. Bailey wrote Sumner, July 5, 1850, that General Taylor had been growing more and more Northern in sentto a compromise. Horace Mann took the same view of Taylor. （Mann's Life, pp. 305, 307, 322.) But in the end p. 341, 350. He put himself in antagonism with President Taylor's plan of admitting California as a State indeis edition of Webster's Works. On the death of President Taylor, he did not conceal from his friends his satisol. II. pp. 376, 377, 386, 387, 395. And if he [General Taylor] had lived, it might have been doubtful whetherent would have been made. He wrote, two days after Taylor's death, There is no doubt that recent events have writers suggest that a disposition to obstruct President Taylor had something to do with the course of Clay as
John Y. Mason (search for this): chapter 6
tis's, Life of Webster, vol. II. p. 438. In this new direction he did not stop with the territorial question, but joined the Southern party on another measure, hitherto a subordinate subject among their grievances, and volunteered his support of Mason's fugitive-slave bill, with all its provisions, to the fullest extent. As the speech was first published, he pledged himself to support the bill with Butler's amendment; but in a revision the relative pronoun which was transferred so that he abster's Works, vol. II. pp. 560, 577, 578. He spoke of the city of Syracuse as that laboratory of abolitionism, libel, and treason. Wilson's Rise and Fall, vol. II. p. 361. In the Senate he paused in his argument to pay compliments to Calhoun, Mason, and the Nashville convention,— a body whose disunion purpose was already understood by men less intelligent than himself Webster's Works, vol. v. pp. 336, 337, 363. In a later speech he was obliged to admit the disunion character of the conv
R. Toombs (search for this): chapter 6
sion which ended September 30, 1850. It passed beyond the question of the territories, and comprehended all the relations of slavery to the nation. It was marked by profound interest on both sides, and watched with deep anxiety by the country. Toombs, Stephens, Clingman, Jefferson Davis, and Foote read elaborate speeches at the beginning of the session, and, supported by the bolder spirits of the South, declared themselves ready for disunion in the event of legislation by Congress prohibitingosed to the disturbance of the settlement aforesaid, and to the renewal in any form of agitation upon the subject of slavery. Giddings's History of the Rebellion, pp 348, 349. Among the signers were Howell Cobb, H. S. Foote, A. H. Stephens, R. Toombs, and J. B. Thompson. The only Whig member from New England who signed this paper was Samuel A. Eliot, of Boston. Mr. Appleton, his successor, alone of the Massachusetts delegation, voted that the Compromise, including the Fugitive Slave law,
Thomas Sims (search for this): chapter 6
aphy of Dana, vol. i. p. 228. Early in April, 1851, Thomas Sims, another negro living in Boston, was brought before the d States officers, surrounded the court house with chains. Sims's counsel, S. E. Sewall, R. Rantoul, Jr., C. G. Loring, andThe Boston Advertiser, April 14, announced the surrender of Sims as a matter of gratulation. While Sims's fate was pending, Sims's fate was pending, a public meeting was held to denounce the Fugitive Slave Act and its instruments,—in which, as before, only Free Soilers andsts took part. Sumner was also counsel in the defence of Sims. He did not enter the case at the beginning on account oe, maintaining that Commissioner Hallett's warrant charging Sims with assaulting the officer when arrested was defective, anng it as a cover to defeat a State criminal process against Sims which the prisoner's friends had procured in order to hold discharge was refused; and this was the last effort to save Sims. In the session of Congress 1850-1851 the partisans of t
R. H. Dana (search for this): chapter 6
legal committee for the protection of alleged fugitives. On the committee also were S. E Sewall, Dana, John C. Park, and William Minot. They called C. G. Loring to their aid. About the same time, a the prosecutions, although it properly belonged to the Attorney-General. Adams's Biography of Dana, vol. i. p. 228. Early in April, 1851, Thomas Sims, another negro living in Boston, was brouaccount of the pending election for senator, in which he was the candidate. Adams's Biography of Dana, vol. i. pp 183, 188, 189, 190. In association with Mr. Sewall he applied, without success, to JFugitive Slave Act; and it was presented to a committee of the Legislature. Adams's Biography of Dana, vol. i. p. 184. The judge was unfriendly and brusque,—breaking out, when Sewall in a quiet way ed as a mere political clap-trap speech, intended for the Southern market. （Adams's Biography of Dana, vol. i. p. 191.) The writer was present, and well remembers the scene. The room was crowded, ch
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ...