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
Francis Bernard 453 39 Browse Search
T. Hutchinson 446 0 Browse Search
Samuel Adams 378 0 Browse Search
Thomas Hutchinson 283 3 Browse Search
Massachusetts (Massachusetts, United States) 260 0 Browse Search
Thomas Gage 256 0 Browse Search
Due Choiseul 220 2 Browse Search
George Grenville 206 0 Browse Search
William Samuel Johnson 188 2 Browse Search
England (United Kingdom) 178 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of George Bancroft, History of the United States from the Discovery of the American Continent, Vol. 6, 10th edition.. Search the whole document.

Found 350 total hits in 119 results.

... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Robert R. Livingston (search for this): chapter 16
Same, 3 June, 1769. with un- Chap. XXXIX.} 1769. Jan. surpassed distinctness, Andrew Eliot to T. Hollis, 29 January, 1769. Hutchinson to Richard Jackson, Jan. 1769. and appointing an intercolonial committee of correspondence. Compare R. R. Livingston to R. Livingston, 12 Dec. 1768. The New Year brought a dissolution Moore to Hillsborough, 24 Jan, 1769. of its Assembly; and in the new elections, the Government party employed every art to create confusion. It excused the violence of mouth on the nomination of their landlords, but as in New England, and the royalists professed to favor the introduction of the ballot. Above all; in New-York the old cry of No Presbyterian, gave place to that of No Lawyer. John Jay to R. R. Livingston Jr. Jan. 1769. Add to this, that all parties still hoped for an escape from strife by some Plan of Union; Chap. XXXIX.} 1769. Jan. that Grafton, who was much connected with New-York, was believed to be well disposed; that the population wa
ivingston, 12 Dec. 1768. The New Year brought a dissolution Moore to Hillsborough, 24 Jan, 1769. of its Assembly; and in the new elections, the Government party employed every art to create confusion. It excused the violence of recent disputes; concealing the ex tremes of difference between the British Parliament and the American people. It sought to gratify the cravings of every interest. It evaded conflicts with the merchants, and connived at importations from Saint Eustatia and Holland. The family of the Delanceys, which had long seemingly led the Opposition in the Province, was secretly won over to the side of authority. One of the Livingstons could no longer sit in the Assembly, for a law made the office of Judge and Representative incompatible; another who was to be returned from the Manor, was held to be ineligible because he resided in the city. The men of business desired an increase of the paper currency, and the Government gave support to the measure. The tena
William Samuel Johnson (search for this): chapter 16
House of Lords. Parliamentary History, XVI. 476, 477, Note. W. S. Johnson to the Governor of Connecticut, 3 Jan. 1769. Compare Du Chatelrlings, N. Rogers [connected with Hutchinson and Oliver], to W. S. Johnson, Jan. 1769. would cause us to reform. I sometimes wish, saiduined by this time, had not the troops arrived, N. Rogers to W. S. Johnson, 12 Jan. 1769. wrote one who was grasping at a lucrative offic Parliamentary History, XVI. 485, &c. Ms. Letters and Diary of W. S. Johnson; Cavendish Debates, i. 191 &c. Thomas Pownall to S. Cooper, 30 s to one; and the Address was carried by a decided majority. W. S. Johnson to Governor Pitkin, 9 Feb. 1769. Diary of W. S. Johnson, for FW. S. Johnson, for Friday 27 Jan. 1769. This adoption of a vengeful and impracticable policy renewed the wakefulness of France. An attempt to seize the defendertion in the House of Commons; Cavendish Debates, i. 207, &c. W. S. Johnson to Gov. Pitkin, 9 Feb. 1769. where once more on the eighth of F
tible; another who was to be returned from the Manor, was held to be ineligible because he resided in the city. The men of business desired an increase of the paper currency, and the Government gave support to the measure. The tenantry wished to vote not by word of mouth on the nomination of their landlords, but as in New England, and the royalists professed to favor the introduction of the ballot. Above all; in New-York the old cry of No Presbyterian, gave place to that of No Lawyer. John Jay to R. R. Livingston Jr. Jan. 1769. Add to this, that all parties still hoped for an escape from strife by some Plan of Union; Chap. XXXIX.} 1769. Jan. that Grafton, who was much connected with New-York, was believed to be well disposed; that the population was not homogeneous in religion, language, customs, or origin; that the Government and the churchmen acted together; that the city was a corporation in which the mayor was appointed by the king; and the reasons appear why at the hotly
Oeuvres Turgot (search for this): chapter 16
is a problem. The others whom birth, credit, wealth or eloquence, may destine to high places, are known to us, and not one of them appears likely to become a formidable enemy. Du Chatelet to Choiseul, London, 28 January, 1769. This letter from Du Chatelet to Choiseul, was Feb. inspired neither by the Courtiers, nor the Parliaments, nor the Aristocracy, nor even by the Burgesses of France; it was the philosophy of the Eighteenth Century, the ripened wisdom of the ages from Descartes to Turgot, uttering its oracles and its counsels in the palaces of absolute monarchs. It excited the most attentive curiosity of Louis the Fifteenth and of every one of his council. An extract of it was sent to Madrid, to ascertain the sentiments and Chap XXXIX.} 1769. Feb. intentions of the Catholic King; the Minister of the marine and the Minister of finance were directed to consult the Chambers of Commerce of the Kingdom; while Choiseul, aware of the novelty of a system founded on the principle
R. Livingston (search for this): chapter 16
sion of American opinion, by unanimously asserting its legislative rights Journal of New-York Assembly for 31 Dec. 1768, p. 70. Governor Moore to Hillsborough, 4 January, 1769; Compare Same to Same, 30 March, 1769, and Same to Same, 3 June, 1769. with un- Chap. XXXIX.} 1769. Jan. surpassed distinctness, Andrew Eliot to T. Hollis, 29 January, 1769. Hutchinson to Richard Jackson, Jan. 1769. and appointing an intercolonial committee of correspondence. Compare R. R. Livingston to R. Livingston, 12 Dec. 1768. The New Year brought a dissolution Moore to Hillsborough, 24 Jan, 1769. of its Assembly; and in the new elections, the Government party employed every art to create confusion. It excused the violence of recent disputes; concealing the ex tremes of difference between the British Parliament and the American people. It sought to gratify the cravings of every interest. It evaded conflicts with the merchants, and connived at importations from Saint Eustatia and Hollan
T. Whately (search for this): chapter 16
0 Jan. 1769. whose authority he wished it made treasonable to deny,—written for public purposes, Of a previous Letter Whately writes, I have not been wanting to signify through proper channels, &c. &c. Whately to Hutchinson, London, 11 Feb. 1769.Whately to Hutchinson, London, 11 Feb. 1769. and communicated to Grenville Compare for example, Whately to Grenville, 3 Dec. 1769. Another Correspondent, the same gentleman, one of whose letters I lately sent you, &c. &c. The gentleman was Hutchinson. This confirms Almon's statement. himsWhately to Grenville, 3 Dec. 1769. Another Correspondent, the same gentleman, one of whose letters I lately sent you, &c. &c. The gentleman was Hutchinson. This confirms Almon's statement. himself, to Temple, Almon's Biographical anecdotes of Eminent Men; II. 105. Biog. Of Thomas Whately. Mr. Whately showed them to Mr. Grenville, who showed them to Lord Temple, and they were seen by other gentlemen. This refers to the very letter ofle of Representative Government in England; where the love of order began to find apologists for absolute Government. Whately to Grenville, 25 March, 1769; in Grenville Papers, IV. 417. While England was enforcing its restrictive corn- Chap.
as open for talking them off; and Bernard and Oliver and Hutchinson, the three relentness enemies to Colonial freedom, with the Attorney-General, were very busy Bernard to Hillsborough, 24 January, 1769. in getting evidence especially against Samuel Adams; and affidavits, sworn to before Hutchinson, Copies of the Affidavits in my possession. were sent to England, to prove him fit to be transported under the Act of Henry the Eighth. Nor was he alone to be called to account; but Edes and Gill, also, the trumpeters of sedition, and through them all the chiefs of the Faction, all the authors of numberless treasonable and seditious writings. Bernard to Hillsborough, 25 January, 1769. A few individuals stigmatized, wrote one of Hutchinson's underlings, N. Rogers [connected with Hutchinson and Oliver], to W. S. Johnson, Jan. 1769. would cause us to reform. I sometimes wish, said one of a neighboring Colony, that two thirds of the gentlemen of the law, and as great a number of
William Meredith (search for this): chapter 16
single shilling to the exchequer; the money is all eaten up by the officers who collect it.—Your measures, cried Phipps after an admirable statement, are more calculated to raise than to quell a rebellion. It is our duty to stand between the victim and the altar.—The statute of the thirty-fifth year of Henry the Eighth, observed Frederic Montagu, was passed in the worst times of the worst reign, when the taste of blood had inflamed the savage disposition of Henry. The Act, declared Sir William Meredith, does not extend to America; and were I an American I would not submit to it. On the other side little was Chap. XXXIX.} 1769. Feb. urged, except that concession would endanger the Act of Navigation; and the British Parliament after long deliberation, by a great majority, refusing to consider the redress of American grievances, requested the King to make inquisition at Boston for Treason, and to bring over the accused for trial before a Special Commission, away from their country,
in, 9 Feb. 1769. where once more on the eighth of February, strenuous efforts were made to prove the illegality and cruelty of fetching Americans across the Atlantic for trial. They may save themselves, said Rose Fuller, by going still further, and bringing the question to the point of arms.—You have no right to tax the Colonies, repeated Beckford; the system has not produced a single shilling to the exchequer; the money is all eaten up by the officers who collect it.—Your measures, cried Phipps after an admirable statement, are more calculated to raise than to quell a rebellion. It is our duty to stand between the victim and the altar.—The statute of the thirty-fifth year of Henry the Eighth, observed Frederic Montagu, was passed in the worst times of the worst reign, when the taste of blood had inflamed the savage disposition of Henry. The Act, declared Sir William Meredith, does not extend to America; and were I an American I would not submit to it. On the other side little w<
... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12