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
Thomas J. Jackson 924 2 Browse Search
Winchester, Va. (Virginia, United States) 280 0 Browse Search
Virginia (Virginia, United States) 279 1 Browse Search
Cummings Jackson 278 0 Browse Search
George B. McClellan 269 1 Browse Search
Jackson (Mississippi, United States) 236 0 Browse Search
Tom Jackson 196 0 Browse Search
United States (United States) 178 0 Browse Search
A. P. Hill 175 19 Browse Search
Henry Jackson 169 1 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Robert Lewis Dabney, Life and Commands of Lieutenand- General Thomas J. Jackson. Search the whole document.

Found 639 total hits in 105 results.

... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Abraham Lincoln (search for this): chapter 6
in the defeat of Douglas and the election of Lincoln; a division, he predicted, which would renderated a purely sectional ticket, headed by Abraham Lincoln of Illinois. Their opponents called themte, now went over in a body to the support of Lincoln. The result of the election, held in November, 1860, was that Lincoln became President by a vote of the States strictly sectional (i. e., noBell of Tennessee. Thus the popular vote for Lincoln included less than half of all the citizens; dge, would have been larger than the vote for Lincoln. But this fact brought no consolation to thesoliciting, first of Mr. Buchanan and then of Lincoln, an equitable settlement of all questions in But they did not stop here: on April 14th, Lincoln made a proclamation, without the authority ofnd indignantly resigned. Immediately after Mr. Lincoln had entered on his office as President, in unced by General Scott, and other advisers of Lincoln, to be impracticable, except by artifice or s[3 more...]
John C. Breckinridge (search for this): chapter 6
ormy discussion and an adjournment to Baltimore, the caucus was severed into two fragments, of which the Southern, with a few Northern Democrats, nominated John C. Breckinridge of Kentucky, then the vice-President; and the other, Senator Douglas. To the former of these, called Breckinridge Democrats, Major Jackson adhered with hivoted for him), and in the North he failed to carry New Jersey. Of the popular vote he received about 1,800,000, while Douglas received about 1,276,000, and Mr. Breckinridge 812,000. The Whig party, retaining their old organization, cast about 735,000 votes for Senator Bell of Tennessee. Thus the popular vote for Lincoln included less than half of all the citizens; and that for Douglas, if joined to that for Mr. Breckinridge, would have been larger than the vote for Lincoln. But this fact brought no consolation to the South. The party of squatter-sovereignty in the North had also become manifestly a free-soil party. It was true they used the delusive
e the rabble of Imperial Rome, the colluvies gentium. The miseries and vices of their early homes had alike taught them to mistake license for liberty, and they were incapable of comprehending, much more of loving, the enlightened structure of English or Virginian freedom. The first step in their vast designs was to overwhelm the Conservative States of the South. This done, they boasted that they would proceed, first, to engross the whole of the American continent, and then to emancipate Ireland, to turn Great Britain into a democracy, to enthrone Red Republicanism in France, and to give the crowns of Germany to the Pantheistic humanitarians of that race, who deify self as the supreme end, and selfish desire, as the authoritative expression of the Divine Will. This, in truth, was the monster whose terrific pathway among the nations, the Confederate States undertook to obstruct, in behalf not only of their own children, but of all the children of men. To fight this battle, elev
ng this inalienable right of the States was logically consistent, and is as incapable of implying anything against, as for, its just exercise. How natural and fair this construction is, may be shown by the argument of the great English moralist, Paley, against the theory which founds the government of States over individuals upon the fiction of a social compact. He reasons unanswerably, that if this were so, the violation of the original compact by the government of a commonwealth, in any onet on the ordinance of God. But in the case of the United States the fact was precisely opposite, for the whole Central Government actually did originate avowedly in a social contract, to which the parties were States instead of persons. So that Paley's deduction is, in this case, perfectly true. But its results are, here, in no wise absurd or disorganizing; because the creation of the Federal Government did not originate a social order or civic life for the States, and its destruction, there
John Brown (search for this): chapter 6
ommand, while there, was conspicuous for its perfect drill and subordination; and he diligently improved their time, in manoeuvring them upon the roughest ground to be selected in that beautiful region. He was a spectator of the stoical death of Brown, and gave his friends a graphic account of the scene. This mad attempt of a handful of vulgar cut-throats, and its condign punishment, would have been a very trivial affair to the Southern people, but for the manner in which it was regarded b of their duty; and to exalt the blood-thirsty fanatic who led the party, to a public apotheosis. The pretext for this astounding outrage upon public opinion was, that it was the right of masters to property in the labor of their slaves, which John Brown sought to assail through this career of rapine and blood; a right, nevertheless, recognized by the laws of nearly every State in the Union, when at least as virtuous and Christian as now; by the laws of Virginia, and by the Federal Constitution
Secession (search for this): chapter 6
and resumed its independence. This action was had without discussion, and with perfect unanimity; the people of that State were convinced that the season for discussion had passed, and the season for action had arrived. But, in all the other Southern States, while there was no respectable party anywhere which wavered in the purpose of vigorous resistance, there was a division of opinion concerning the time and mode of commencing it, denoted by the terms, Separate Secession, and Co-operative Secession. The advocates of the former prevailed at first in the planting States, bordering upon the Gulf of Mexico; of the latter, in the States lying next to the Free States, and in Virginia. With these Major Jackson sympathized. Although this class of patriots embraced many shades of opinion, their distinctive views were these:--That while the sectional action, and especially the temper of the Northern people, would justify before God and man an immediate separation, yet it was not politi
Jefferson Davis (search for this): chapter 6
he retention of the strongest work commanding her chief city and harbor, Fort Sumter; and the manner in which this threatening act was accompanied, aggravated the indignation of the people. On the 9th of January, 1861, Mississippi left the Union; Alabama and Florida followed on the 11th; Georgia on the 20th; Louisiana on the 26th; and Texas on the 1st of February. On the 9th of February, a Provisional Government of the six seceding States was instituted at Montgomery, in Alabama, with Jefferson Davis for President, and Alexander H. Stephens for Vice-President. Meantime the border Slave States, headed by Virginia, while declaring that they would not remain passive spectators of an attempt to chastise the seceding States for thus exercising their unquestionable right, continued in the Union, and made strenuous efforts at conciliation. The General Assembly of Virginia proposed a conference of the Free and Slave States by their ambassadors, to devise some terms of mutual concessio
Jesus Christ (search for this): chapter 6
ted of immorality by any of the great masters of moral science, classic or scholastic, nor by any of the luminaries of the Church, patristic or reformed, until the dogma of modern abolition was born of atheistic parentage, amidst the radical disorganizers of France, in the Reign of Terror. In the Word of God, the only infallible standard of morality, that doctrine finds no support. Moses legalized domestic slavery for God's chosen people, in the very act of setting them aside to holiness. Christ, the great Reformer, lived and moved amidst it, teaching, healing, applauding slaveholders; and while He assailed every abuse, uttered no word against this lawful relation. His apostles admit slaveholders to the church, exacting no repentance nor renunciation. They leave, by inspiration, general precepts for the manner in which the duties of the relation are to be maintained. They command Christian slaves to obey and honor Christian masters. They remand the runaway to his injured owner,
rough the influence of the veteran politician, Henry Clay, and Senator Douglas of Illinois. The sum of the measures adopted, under their advisposed of in the Kansas-Nebraska law, the favorite project of Senator Douglas. But no sooner was this law passed, than the South found topted by the North; and at length, even the author of the law, Senator Douglas, deserted his own ground, and accepted it, becoming thus the lurred in the Democratic party, and which resulted in the defeat of Douglas and the election of Lincoln; a division, he predicted, which wouldckinridge of Kentucky, then the vice-President; and the other, Senator Douglas. To the former of these, called Breckinridge Democrats, Majorew Jersey. Of the popular vote he received about 1,800,000, while Douglas received about 1,276,000, and Mr. Breckinridge 812,000. The Whig Lincoln included less than half of all the citizens; and that for Douglas, if joined to that for Mr. Breckinridge, would have been larger th
vote, now went over in a body to the support of Lincoln. The result of the election, held in November, 1860, was that Lincoln became President by a vote of the States strictly sectional (i. e., not a single State in the South voted for him), and in the North he failed to carry New Jersey. Of the popular vote he received about 1,800,000, while Douglas received about 1,276,000, and Mr. Breckinridge 812,000. The Whig party, retaining their old organization, cast about 735,000 votes for Senator Bell of Tennessee. Thus the popular vote for Lincoln included less than half of all the citizens; and that for Douglas, if joined to that for Mr. Breckinridge, would have been larger than the vote for Lincoln. But this fact brought no consolation to the South. The party of squatter-sovereignty in the North had also become manifestly a free-soil party. It was true they used the delusive catch-word of non-intervention with slavery; and adduced the specious plea of popular sovereignty to cloa
... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11