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.

... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
December 14th, 1868 AD (search for this): chapter 3
day to come when my friend from Massachusetts really thought 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, somet
December 15th, 1869 AD (search for this): chapter 3
om Massachusetts really thought 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 enou
en absent from his seat three minutes since it was taken up, or half an hour since the session began. May 30, 1862. Works, vol. VII. pp. 110, 111. Near the end of the session he spoke forcibly against a final adjournment until the public business was completed, 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,
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 protested against an early adjournment in the afternoon, and urged that the Senate go on with its calendar. Henderson of Missouri (May 16, 1868, Congressional Globe, p. 2494) referred to Sumner's constant votes against adjournments until after five or six P. M., and against final adjournments even in July or August, saying. If the senator had his way, he would remain here forever and ever. Edmunds said in relation to his opposition, April 17. 1869 (Globe, p. 726), I never knew the day to come when my friend from Massachusetts really thought 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 suspe
air the senator, who overcame all obstacles in an hour, and saw delivered to the manager the needed pass for the relief steamer up the Potomac. It came about from his fidelity and the general confidence in his efficiency that the people of his State confided to him their interests in pending legislation, or in business with the departments, rather than to others who had passed their lives in professional, industrial, or commercial pursuits. The Congressional Globe's Index for the session (1860-1862) will show how much more Sumner attended to the details of the internal tax bill than his colleague, who had been a manufacturer, but was lacking in method. George B. Upton, a leading Boston merchant for a long period, familiar with public men, a friend of Webster, and long regarding Sumner as a mere enthusiast, thus gave his testimony in a letter, Jan. 28, 1869: I neglected to say a single word in relation to your re-election to the Senate. Whatever differences of opinion have heretof
urse, as was often the case, changed Mr. Hooper's view of the senator, and he came to be his cordial and confidential friend, so remaining to the end. He dispensed a liberal hospitality; and in his house at Washington, as well as at Boston and on the seashore, Sumner was always welcome to lodge or dine. The intimacy which he had enjoyed with the family of Mr. Adams, already Minister to England, was now transferred to Mr. Hooper's, at whose house 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 cordial letter from Agassiz in the autumn urging attend
Chapter 46: qualities 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, ided to him their interests in pending legislation, or in business with the departments, rather than to others who had passed their lives in professional, industrial, or commercial pursuits. The Congressional Globe's Index for the session (1860-1862) will show how much more Sumner attended to the details of the internal tax bill than his colleague, who had been a manufacturer, but was lacking in method. George B. Upton, a leading Boston merchant for a long period, familiar with public men, a<
July 26th, 1866 AD (search for this): chapter 3
869 (Globe, p. 726), I never knew the day to come when my friend from Massachusetts really thought 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 o
ence contain many replies from those whose griefs he sought to assuage. The brother of Rev. Arthur B. Fuller, killed at Fredericksburg, whose widow's petition for a pension he promoted, wrote to him: As often as my brother's widow receives her pension for herself and little ones, she will think of the senator from Massachusetts. Sumner's admirers often named their children for him. His replies to them, when they announced this kind of recognition, were of uniform tenor, and one written in 1865 may be given as a specimen:— Don't make a mistake. Never name a child after a living man. This is the counsel I give always and most sincerely. Who knows that I may not fail? I, too, may grow faint, or may turn aside to false gods. I hope not; but this is one of the mysteries of the future. Therefore name your boy some good Christian name. It may be Charles if you will, for that is general; but do not compel him to bear all his days a label which he may dislike. I once met a stro
January 28th, 1869 AD (search for this): chapter 3
ho had passed their lives in professional, industrial, or commercial pursuits. The Congressional Globe's Index for the session (1860-1862) will show how much more Sumner attended to the details of the internal tax bill than his colleague, who had been a manufacturer, but was lacking in method. George B. Upton, a leading Boston merchant for a long period, familiar with public men, a friend of Webster, and long regarding Sumner as a mere enthusiast, thus gave his testimony in a letter, Jan. 28, 1869: I neglected to say a single word in relation to your re-election to the Senate. Whatever differences of opinion have heretofore existed, or may now exist, I desire to put this simple testimony in writing, that of all the gentlemen who have formerly represented Massachusetts, or who now have that honor, either in the Senate or House of Representatives, it has not been my good fortune to know one who has been as prompt and kindly attentive to the applications of his constituents as yours
... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13