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 2,831 1 Browse Search
George Sumner 784 0 Browse Search
Saturday Seward 476 0 Browse Search
Hamilton Fish 446 0 Browse Search
United States (United States) 360 0 Browse Search
Abraham Lincoln 342 0 Browse Search
Ulysses S. Grant 328 0 Browse Search
Massachusetts (Massachusetts, United States) 308 0 Browse Search
H. C. Sumner 288 0 Browse Search
Dominican Republic (Dominican Republic) 216 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 4. Search the whole document.

Found 241 total hits in 123 results.

... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
June 8th, 1864 AD (search for this): chapter 3
scussion. His persistence in opposing a limitation of the session, even under the oppressive heat of the summer, brought him sometimes into collision with senators who, though not laggards, took a less exacting view of official duty, or who thought, sometimes quite rightly, that enough had already been done, and what remained would ripen for better action during the vacation. July 2, 1864 (Works, vol. IX. pp. 55-63; Globe, p. 3502). June 25, 1864 (Globe, p. 3263). March 31 and April 7 and 8, 1869 (Globe, pp. 384, 607, 609). Sumner's superlative fidelity may be thought finical, but it attests the seriousness with which he regarded all public duties. Sumner's presence in the Senate was always one of dignity, such as became the office and place. He never descended to frivolity; he did not, as is the habit of restless members, keep passing from seat to seat, indulging in small talk with one or another, but remained mostly in his own; Douglas's swagger up and down the aisles is
1870 AD (search for this): chapter 3
ght the Senate ought to adjourn; and three days later (Globe, pp. 733, 734) he referred to Sumner's chronic difficult about adjournments. Similar pressure from Sumner, with similar resistance from other senators who recalled his uniform position on the suspension of business, will be found in the record of later sessions (June 25, 1864, Globe, p. 3263; July 2, 1864, Works, vol. IX. pp. 55-63; July 26, 1866, Globe, pp. 4166, 4167; Dec. 14, 1868, Globe, p. 68; Dec. 15, 1869; May 5, 6, and 20, 1870, Globe, pp. 137, 3239, 3274, 3277, 3658; Feb 15, 1871, Globe, p. 1262). Thurman's tribute, April 27, 1874 (Globe, p. 3400), referred to Sumner's high estimate of the effect of full discussion. His persistence in opposing a limitation of the session, even under the oppressive heat of the summer, brought him sometimes into collision with senators who, though not laggards, took a less exacting view of official duty, or who thought, sometimes quite rightly, that enough had already been done, and
1869 AD (search for this): chapter 3
sion. His persistence in opposing a limitation of the session, even under the oppressive heat of the summer, brought him sometimes into collision with senators who, though not laggards, took a less exacting view of official duty, or who thought, sometimes quite rightly, that enough had already been done, and what remained would ripen for better action during the vacation. July 2, 1864 (Works, vol. IX. pp. 55-63; Globe, p. 3502). June 25, 1864 (Globe, p. 3263). March 31 and April 7 and 8, 1869 (Globe, pp. 384, 607, 609). Sumner's superlative fidelity may be thought finical, but it attests the seriousness with which he regarded all public duties. Sumner's presence in the Senate was always one of dignity, such as became the office and place. He never descended to frivolity; he did not, as is the habit of restless members, keep passing from seat to seat, indulging in small talk with one or another, but remained mostly in his own; Douglas's swagger up and down the aisles is stil
March 24th, 1866 AD (search for this): chapter 3
self, but of critical observers not bound to him by personal relations. It was often given in his lifetime, and more freely when death had set the seal on his career. Not denying to many of their contemporaries a certain measure of these noble qualities, their fullest development must be found in our time in two kindred characters,— John Bright and Charles Sumner. See estimates in W. H. Channing's Life, by O. B. Frothingham, p. 367; Pall Mall Gazette, Dec. 26, 1866; Harper's Weekly, March 24, 1866; New York Herald, Dec 28, 1871, containing an article, in the characteristic style of that journal, from a correspondent who mingles praise and dispraise. J. W. Forney wrote of Sumner (Anecdotes of public Men, vol. II. p. 262): We are all human; the best, like the worst, are controlled more or less by personal motives. But Sumner, I insist, was the supreme exception to this rule. I never knew any man less moved by selfish instincts. True, he had a lofty self-consciousness, or self-a
April 7th, 1864 AD (search for this): chapter 3
f full discussion. His persistence in opposing a limitation of the session, even under the oppressive heat of the summer, brought him sometimes into collision with senators who, though not laggards, took a less exacting view of official duty, or who thought, sometimes quite rightly, that enough had already been done, and what remained would ripen for better action during the vacation. July 2, 1864 (Works, vol. IX. pp. 55-63; Globe, p. 3502). June 25, 1864 (Globe, p. 3263). March 31 and April 7 and 8, 1869 (Globe, pp. 384, 607, 609). Sumner's superlative fidelity may be thought finical, but it attests the seriousness with which he regarded all public duties. Sumner's presence in the Senate was always one of dignity, such as became the office and place. He never descended to frivolity; he did not, as is the habit of restless members, keep passing from seat to seat, indulging in small talk with one or another, but remained mostly in his own; Douglas's swagger up and down the
December 26th, 1866 AD (search for this): chapter 3
and habits as a senator.—1862. Sumner was from the beginning of his career in the Senate an interesting, and he had now become the most conspicuous, figure at the Capitol. His seat was first inquired for by visitors. Pall Mall Gazette, Dec. 26, 1866. The correspondent remarked upon the public interest in Sumner,—greater than in any other senator,—as also upon his qualities of intellect and character, saying that his motto might well be Frangi non flecti. Person, fame, suffering, accompltain measure of these noble qualities, their fullest development must be found in our time in two kindred characters,— John Bright and Charles Sumner. See estimates in W. H. Channing's Life, by O. B. Frothingham, p. 367; Pall Mall Gazette, Dec. 26, 1866; Harper's Weekly, March 24, 1866; New York Herald, Dec 28, 1871, containing an article, in the characteristic style of that journal, from a correspondent who mingles praise and dispraise. J. W. Forney wrote of Sumner (Anecdotes of public Me
March, 1862 AD (search for this): chapter 3
brought him a large number of letters from this class, in which they stated, often at great length, their hopes and fears, and their interest in the various measures concerning slavery. Wendell Phillips delivered a lecture in Washington in March, 1862, probably his first visit to the capital. He had an interview with Mr. Lincoln, and was introduced by Sumner on the floor of the Senate, where he was greeted by Mr. Hamlin, the Vice-Presidentdent, who left the chair to take his hand. Sumne he dined at least once or twice a week from 1861 to 1874. Later in these pages it will become necessary to refer to a near connection between the two friends. Two or three incidents in family and friendship may be noted here,—the death in March, 1862, of another of the Five of Clubs (Felton, of whose funeral Mr. Thies sent an account); the disability of George Sumner, stricken with paralysis, and after medical treatment in Northampton coming back to the old home in Hancock Street; a cordia
1867 AD (search for this): chapter 3
accomplish all his tasks, and yet give so much time to miscellaneous visitors, was something of a mystery. It was, however, his midnight vigils which brought up the arrears. The newspaper men were generally very friendly to him. He held tightly the secrets of the Senate notwithstanding he had no respect for the system of closed doors; but as far as consistent with a senator's oath, he talked freely and instructively to all who came to him. After he had a house of his own, which was not till 1867, he explained to Dr. Howe a contre-temps by which a well-known scholar whom he had wished to see had been refused admission, and added:— I am impatient and nervous, weary, fatigued, and unhappy, beginning the day weary and ending it weary. From the time I take my seat at the breakfast table interruptions begin; and such is the succession of visitors that during this vacation I have been detained daily at the table where I breakfasted till three o'clock P. M., without an opportunity of
July 14th, 1862 AD (search for this): chapter 3
ed, pointing out that Congress was by several weeks short of the limit which it was accustomed to reach when members were paid by the day instead of by the year. July 12 (Works, vol. VII. pp. 176-179). He had made similar remarks May 22 (Congressional Globe, p. 2225). The New York Evening Post, June 7, 1862, had an article of the same tenor. In declining an invitation to attend a public meeting in the city of New York, he said, A senator cannot leave his place more than a soldier. July 14, 1862. Works, vol. VII. pp. 180, 181. It has often occurred in the Senate,—and it occurred many times during this session, in which the duties of patriotism were most exacting,—that it was obliged to adjourn for want of a quorum, or for want of the attendance of a sufficient number to make its action decisive. Sumner's vacant chair, while he was in health, was never an obstruction to public business. Again and again, at this and at other sessions, as the official record shows, he prote
September 28th, 1890 AD (search for this): chapter 3
ability of colored citizens were his handiwork. The consolidation of the statutes of the United States was his first thought, and was finally effected by his constant pressure. Some critics, remembering that Sumner stood at some time in the way of their pretensions, or solicitous that their unrenowned services should not be overlooked, have suggested as a limitation to his sphere that he did not draw many statutes. General Butler's Book, p. 314; G. S. Boutwell in the Boston Globe, Sept. 28, 1890. This mechanical work falls largely to the solicitors of the departments, or to promoters of bills; The bankrupt bill, which has long engaged the attention of Congress, was drawn by an eminent judge,—John Lowell, of Boston. and Sumner did as much of it as most men holding his relation to general affairs,—as much, for instance, as Webster or Seward. Wilson probably did not, while chairman of the committee on military affairs during the Civil War, draw one of the bills reported by him,
... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13