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) 1,170 0 Browse Search
Kentucky (Kentucky, United States) 573 1 Browse Search
South Carolina (South Carolina, United States) 566 0 Browse Search
Missouri (Missouri, United States) 532 0 Browse Search
Texas (Texas, United States) 482 0 Browse Search
Charleston (South Carolina, United States) 470 8 Browse Search
Washington (United States) 449 3 Browse Search
Abraham Lincoln 405 1 Browse Search
Georgia (Georgia, United States) 340 0 Browse Search
Maryland (Maryland, United States) 324 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Horace Greeley, The American Conflict: A History of the Great Rebellion in the United States of America, 1860-65: its Causes, Incidents, and Results: Intended to exhibit especially its moral and political phases with the drift and progress of American opinion respecting human slavery from 1776 to the close of the War for the Union. Volume I.. Search the whole document.

Found 2,002 total hits in 319 results.

... 27 28 29 30 31 32
rror it was — by a final letter to The National Intelligencer, reasserting his unchanged and invincible objections to any such Annexation as was then proposed or practicable. This letter bears date Ashland, September 23, 1844, and says: In announcing my determination to permit no other letters to be drawn from me on public affairs, I think it right to avail myself of the present occasion to correct the erroneous interpretation of one or two of those which I had previously written. In April last, I addressed to you from Raleigh a letter in respect to the proposed treaty annexing Texas to the United States, and I have since addressed two letters to Alabama upon the same subject. Most unwarranted allegations have been made that those letters are inconsistent with each other, and, to make it out, particular phrases or expressions have been torn from their context, ind a meaning attributed to me which I never entertained. I wish now distinctly to say, that there is not a feelin
in the same drama, and all the work of the South. When a Tennessee slaveholder and unflinching devotee of the Slave Power, well known as an earnest and self-proclaimed Annexationist, had been chosen President, and thus invested with the Executive power and patronage of the Republic for the four years ensuing, the speedy and complete triumph of the measure was rendered inevitable. Mr. Tyler was still President, with John C. Calhoun as Secretary of State, and would so remain until the 4th of March. On the first Monday in December, the Twenty-Eighth Congress reassembled, and the President laid before it, among others, a dispatch from Mr. Calhoun, dated August 12, 1844, to Hon. William R. King, our Minister at Paris, instructing him to represent to the French Government the advantages and the necessity of Annexation on many grounds, but especially on that of its tendency to uphold Slavery, primarily in Texas itself; but ultimately in the United States, and throughout the whole of th
nactment of that rule which required a vote of two-thirds of the delegates to nominate a candidate. After a heated discussion, the two-thirds rule was adopted, on the second day, by 148 Yeas to 118 Nays, and the fate of Van Buren sealed. On the first ballot, he received 146 votes to 116 for all others; but he fell, on the second, to 127, and settled gradually to 104 on the eighth, when he was withdrawn--Gen. Cass, who began with 83, having run up to 114. On the next ballot, James K. Polk, ofof the Republic for the four years ensuing, the speedy and complete triumph of the measure was rendered inevitable. Mr. Tyler was still President, with John C. Calhoun as Secretary of State, and would so remain until the 4th of March. On the first Monday in December, the Twenty-Eighth Congress reassembled, and the President laid before it, among others, a dispatch from Mr. Calhoun, dated August 12, 1844, to Hon. William R. King, our Minister at Paris, instructing him to represent to the Fr
moved the adoption of the rules and regulations of the Democratic National Conventions of May, 1832, and May, 1835, for the government of this body; his object being the enactment of that rule which required a vote of two-thirds of the delegates to nominate a candidate. After a heated discussion, the two-thirds rule was adopted, on the second day, by 148 Yeas to 118 Nays, and the fate of Van Buren sealed. On the first ballot, he received 146 votes to 116 for all others; but he fell, on the second, to 127, and settled gradually to 104 on the eighth, when he was withdrawn--Gen. Cass, who began with 83, having run up to 114. On the next ballot, James K. Polk, of Tennessee, who had received no vote at all till the eighth ballot, and then but 44, was nominated, receiving 233 out of 266 votes. This was on the third day of the Convention, when Silas Wright, of New York, was immediately nominated for Vice-President. He peremptorily declined, and George M. Dallas, of Pennsylvania, was sele
June 19th, 1844 AD (search for this): chapter 12
f war with Mexico into a certainty — Annexation in defiance of the susceptibilities and convictions of the more conscientious and considerate half of the population of the Free States as to the evil and peril, the guilt and shame of extending and fortifying Slavery by the power and under the flag of our Union. No matter what the People meant by electing him President — they had voted with their eyes open; and he, while equivocating Witness the following letter: Columbia, Tenn., June 19, 1844. dear Sir:--I have recently received several letters in reference to my opinions on the subject of the Tariff, and among others yours of the 10th ultimo. My opinions on this subject have been often given to the public. They are to be found in my public acts, and in the public discussions in which I have participated. I am in favor of a Tariff for revenue, such a one as will yield a sufficient amount to the Treasury to defray the expenses of Government economically administered.
June 19th, 1826 AD (search for this): chapter 12
ed among our bereft slaveholders. Before this sum was received (1826-7), our Government had made application to the British for a mutual stipulation, by treaty, to return fugitives from labor. But, though Great Britain, through her colonies, was then a slave-holding nation, she peremptorily declined the proposed reciprocity. The first application for such a nice arrangement was made by Mr. Gallatin, our Minister at London, under instructions from Mr. Clay, as Secretary of State, dated June 19, 1826. On the 5th of July, 1827, Mr. Gallatin communicated to his Government the final answer of the British Minister, that it was utterly impossible for them to agree to the stipulation for the surrender of fugitive slaves ; and, when the application was renewed through our next Minister, Mr. James Barbour, the British Minister conclusively replied that the law of Parliament gives freedom to every slave who effects his landing on British ground. Yet a Democratic House of Representatives, in
ana, Illinois, Michigan, Missouri, and Arkansas--fifteen States, casting 170 electoral votes. The popular votes throughout the country, as returned, were, for Clay, 1,288,533; for Polk, 1,327,325; for Birney, 62,263. So the triumph of Annexation had been secured by the indirect aid of the more intense partisans of Abolition. The Presidential canvass of 1844 had been not only the most arduous but the most equal of any that the country had ever known, with the possible exception of that of 1800. The election of Madison in 1812, of Jackson in 1828, and of Harrison in 1840, had probably been contested with equal spirit and energy; but the disparity of forces in either case was, to the intelligent, impartial observer, quite obvious. In the contest of 1844, on the contrary, the battle raged with uniform fury from extreme North to furthest South--Maine and New Hampshire voting strongly for Polk, while Tennessee (his own State) went against him by a small majority, and Louisiana was car
January 12th (search for this): chapter 12
s, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted. And provided further, That this provision shall be considered as a compact between the people of the United States and the people of the said territory, and forever remain unalterable, unless by the consent of three-fourths of the States of the Union. Mr. Hale's motion that the rules be suspended, to enable him to offer this proposition, was defeated — Yeas 92 (not two-thirds) to Nays 81. Mr. Charles J. Ingersoll, of Pa., reported (Jan. 12), from the Committee on Foreign Affairs a joint resolve in favor of Annexation, which was sent to the Committee of the Whole January 25th, the debate was brought to a close, and the following joint resolution adopted — that portion relating to Slavery having been added in Committee, on motion of Mr. Milton Brown (Whig), of Tennessee: Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives in Congress assembled, That Congress doth consent that the territory properly included in, and rightfu
January 10th, 1845 AD (search for this): chapter 12
egards the defeat of the Annexation of Texas to our Union as so important. Such were the grounds on which France was asked to give her sympathy and moral support to the Annexation of Texas to this country. On the 19th of December, Mr. John B. Weller, of Ohio, by leave, introduced to the House a joint resolve, providing for the Annexation of Texas to the United States; which was sent to the Committee of the whole. Mr. John P. Hale, of New Hampshire, then also a Democrat, proposed (January 10, 1845), an amendment, as follows: Provided, That, immediately after the question of boundary between the United States of America and Mexico shall have been definitively settled by the two governments, and before any State formed out of the territory of Texas shall be admitted into the Union, the said territory of Texas shall be divided as follows, to wit: beginning at a point on the Gulf of Mexico midway between the Northern and Southern boundaries thereof on the coast; and thence by a l
... 27 28 29 30 31 32