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
United States (United States) 502 0 Browse Search
W. T. Sherman 459 1 Browse Search
Ulysses S. Grant 368 6 Browse Search
Jefferson Davis 352 2 Browse Search
Stonewall Jackson 335 1 Browse Search
Robert E. Lee 328 16 Browse Search
Abraham Lincoln 293 1 Browse Search
Longstreet 288 22 Browse Search
Joseph E. Johnston 278 8 Browse Search
George B. McClellan 276 2 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Edward Alfred Pollard, The lost cause; a new Southern history of the War of the Confederates ... Drawn from official sources and approved by the most distinguished Confederate leaders.. Search the whole document.

Found 159 total hits in 38 results.

1 2 3 4
Argentine (Argentina) (search for this): chapter 1
aving measure. its ingenuity and conservatism. Calhoun's profound statesmanship. injustice to his memory. how the South has been injured by false party names There is nothing of political philosophy more plainly taught in history than the limited value of the Federal principle. It had been experimented upon in various ages of the world — in the Amphictyonic Council, in the Achaean league, in the United Provinces of Holland, in Mexico, in Central America, in Columbia, and in the Argentine republic; in all these instances the form of government established upon it had become extinct, or had passed into the alternative of consolidation or anarchy and disintegration. Indeed, it is plain enough that such a form of government is the resource only of small and weak communities; that it is essentially temporary in its nature; and that it has never been adopted by States which had approached a mature condition, and had passed the period of pupillage. It is not to be denied that the Fe
Central America (search for this): chapter 1
oun's doctrines. nullification a Union-saving measure. its ingenuity and conservatism. Calhoun's profound statesmanship. injustice to his memory. how the South has been injured by false party names There is nothing of political philosophy more plainly taught in history than the limited value of the Federal principle. It had been experimented upon in various ages of the world — in the Amphictyonic Council, in the Achaean league, in the United Provinces of Holland, in Mexico, in Central America, in Columbia, and in the Argentine republic; in all these instances the form of government established upon it had become extinct, or had passed into the alternative of consolidation or anarchy and disintegration. Indeed, it is plain enough that such a form of government is the resource only of small and weak communities; that it is essentially temporary in its nature; and that it has never been adopted by States which had approached a mature condition, and had passed the period of pup
Rhode Island (Rhode Island, United States) (search for this): chapter 1
delegates of the people of Virginia, duly elected, etc., etc., do, in the name and in behalf of the people of Virginia, declare and make known that the powers granted under the Constitution, being derived from the people of the United States, may be resurped by them whenever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression. The State of New York said that the powers of Government may be re-assumed by the people whenever it shall become necessary to their happiness. And the State of Rhode Island adopted the same language. The reader of American history must guard his mind against the errour that the Union was, in any sense, a constitutional revolution, or a proclamation of a new civil polity. The civil institutions of the States were already perfect and satisfactory. The Union was nothing more than a convenience of the States, and had no mission apart from them. It had no value as an additional guaranty of personal liberty, nor yet for its prohibitions of invasion of i
New York State (New York, United States) (search for this): chapter 1
which, in their acts of ratification, expressly reserved the right to secede again. Virginia, in giving her assent to the Constitution, said: We, the delegates of the people of Virginia, duly elected, etc., etc., do, in the name and in behalf of the people of Virginia, declare and make known that the powers granted under the Constitution, being derived from the people of the United States, may be resurped by them whenever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression. The State of New York said that the powers of Government may be re-assumed by the people whenever it shall become necessary to their happiness. And the State of Rhode Island adopted the same language. The reader of American history must guard his mind against the errour that the Union was, in any sense, a constitutional revolution, or a proclamation of a new civil polity. The civil institutions of the States were already perfect and satisfactory. The Union was nothing more than a convenience of the St
Brazil (Brazil) (search for this): chapter 1
idated into one, slavery might have been abolished, or made universal throughout the whole; but they claimed that the States had retained their sovereignty, for the reason, among others, that they desired to avoid giving any pretext to the General Gov eminent for attempting to control their internal affairs; and they, therefore, contended that the Northern party could with no more reason assail the domestic institutions of the South than they could attack the similar institutions of Cuba and Brazil. The difference between the State Rights and Consolidation schools may be briefly and sharply stated. The one regarded the Union as a compact between the States: the other regarded the Union as a national government set up above and over the States. The first adopted its doctrine from the very words of the Constitution; the seventh article for the ratification of the Constitution reading as follows: The ratification of the Conventions of nine States shall be sufficient for the es
Runnymede (Virginia, United States) (search for this): chapter 1
was, in any sense, a constitutional revolution, or a proclamation of a new civil polity. The civil institutions of the States were already perfect and satisfactory. The Union was nothing more than a convenience of the States, and had no mission apart from them. It had no value as an additional guaranty of personal liberty, nor yet for its prohibitions of invasion of individual rights. These had been declared with equal clearness and vigour five centuries before in the Great Charter at Runnymede, had been engrafted upon the Colonial Governments, and were the recognized muniments of American liberty. The novelty and value of the Federal Constitution was the nice adjustment of the relations of the State and Federal Governments, by which they both became co-ordinate and essential parts of one harmonious system; the nice arrangement of the powers of the State and Federal Governments, by which was left to the States the exclusive guardianship of their domestic affairs, and of the in
dols in America: the Constitution of 1789 and the Union formed under it, and entitled itself to the extravagant adulation of three generations as the wisest and best of men. This adulation is simply absurd. The language in the call of the Convention was singularly confused. The men who composed it were common flesh and blood, very ignorant, very much embarrassed, many of them unlettered, and many educated just to that point where men are silly, visionary, dogmatic and impracticable. Hildreth, the American historian, has made a very just remark, which describes the cause of the unpopularity of his own compositions. He says: In dealing with our revolutionary annals, a great difficulty had to be encountered in the mythic, heroic character above, beyond, often wholly apart from the truth of history, with which, in the popular idea, the fathers and founders of our American Republic have been invested. American literature having been mainly of the rhetorical cast, and the Revolutio
tion the result of an accident. State Rights. Amendments to the Constitution. nature of the American Union. not a consolidated nationality. the right of Secession. the Union not the proclamation of a new civil polity. not a political revolution. a convenience of the States, with no mission apart from the States. the two political schools of America. Consolidation and State Rights. how the slavery question was involved. a sharp antithesis. the Kentucky and Virginia resolutions. Webster and Calhoun, the anti-types of Northern and Southern statesmanship. Mr. Calhoun's doctrines. nullification a Union-saving measure. its ingenuity and conservatism. Calhoun's profound statesmanship. injustice to his memory. how the South has been injured by false party names There is nothing of political philosophy more plainly taught in history than the limited value of the Federal principle. It had been experimented upon in various ages of the world — in the Amphictyonic Council,
Andrew Johnson (search for this): chapter 1
n and the old times of the forefathers forming standing subjects for periodical eulogies, in which every new orator strives to outvie his predecessors, the true history of those times, in spite of ample records, illustrated by the labors of many diligent and conscientious inquirers, has yet been almost obliterated by declamations which confound all discrimination and just appreciation in one confused glare of patriotic eulogium. We find in 1866, even after the experience of the war, President Johnson declaring that the authours of the Constitution were divinely inspired; that they needed and obtained a wisdom superiour to experience. This is silly extravagance, if not worse. We shall see that there was one element of originality and of great virtue in the Constitution; but apart from this, the sober student of history, looking over three generations of fierce political conflict in America, must be struck by the enormous defects and omissions of an instrument that has shared so mu
this constitution between the States so ratifying the same. The great text of the State Rights school is to be found in the famous Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798. These resolutions are properly to be taken as corollaries drawn from those carefully-worded clauses of the Constitution, which were designed to exclude the idea that the separate and independent sovereignty of each State was merged into one common government and nation. The Virginia resolutions were drawn up by Mr. Madison, and the Kentucky resolutions by Mr. Jefferson. The first Kentucky resolution was as follows: 1st. Resolved, That the several States comprising the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government, but that by compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a general government, for special purposes, delegated to that government certain definite powers,
1 2 3 4