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 1,034 total hits in 386 results.

... 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39
March 3rd (search for this): chapter 6
ing the objection made by Dixon, Conness, and Hale that his proposition was irrelevant,—and, as was often the case, failing at one stage of the bill, and at another, as the reward of his pertinacity, carrying his amendment. This Act took effect March 3; Sumner treated the exclusion of colored persons from the ordinary railway carriages as a corporate malfeasance, even at common law, and before the statute of March 3 took effect sought, Feb. 20, 1865, the repeal of the charter of a company wMarch 3 took effect sought, Feb. 20, 1865, the repeal of the charter of a company which enforced the exclusion. (Congressional Globe, pp. 915, 916.) He called attention in the Senate, Feb. 10 and 17, 1868 (Globe, pp. 1071, 1204), to a similar denial of right. He sought in the session of 1869-1870 the repeal of the charter of a medical society in Washington because of its exclusion of colored physicians as members. Dec. 9, 1860, Works, vol. XIII. pp. 186-188; March 4, 1870, Globe, pp. 1677, 1678. but as one of the companies maintained the exclusion in defiance of the stat
September 18th (search for this): chapter 6
in his book, America during and after the War (p. 32), quoted in Longfellow's Life (vol. II. pp. 414, 415), wrote his recollections of Craigie House: Sumner, with the poet's little daughter nestling in his lap,—for he is a man to whom all children come,—calmly discussing some question of European literature, seeming to feel deeply the defection of certain of the old antislavery leaders of England from the Northern cause in the great crisis of the struggle. Sumner wrote to Mr. Cobden, September 18:— Bear witness that I have never been over-confident of sudden success. I am not now; but I am none the less sure of the great result. This struggle can have but one end. You must observe how we have constantly gained. The lines of the enemy have been drawn in, and their strong places have been taken; and this will continue to the end. . . . The capture of Atlanta is surely a great point in the war. I have had great confidence in Sherman; he is a consummate soldier, and I think m<
July 2nd, 1862 AD (search for this): chapter 6
nce, saying, We, the people of the United States, acknowledging God as the ruler of nations, etc. This is all; I take it no Hebrew would differ with me on this point. The President had a clause in this sense prepared for his last message; but it was abandoned lest it might embarrass the other constitutional amendment. But you can quiet your Hebrew associates with regard to me. Loyalty in the Civil War was tested by what was known as the iron-clad oath, prescribed by Act of Congress, July 2, 1862, under which all persons in the civil and military service were required to take an oath which affirmed past loyalty, as well as pledged future allegiance to the government. At the special session in March, 1863, and at the regular session, which began in December of the same year, Sumner contended that this statute applied to senators. March 5, 1863; Jan. 25, 1864. Works, vol. VIII. pp. 53-72. He and other Republican senators took the oath voluntarily; but as the Democratic senator
September 16th (search for this): chapter 6
telaw Reid, both of Cincinnati. A large number of letters of public men written at the time to John Austin Stevens, and published in the New York Sun, June 30, 1889, throw light on the movement. Republican conferences were held in the city of New York for the purpose of making a change: one at D. D. Field's house, August 14, where representative men were present,—Greeley, Parke Godwin of the Evening Post, William Curtis Noyes, Henry Winter Davis, Dr. Lieber, Lieber wrote Sumner, September 16, that he wished Lincoln could know that the people were to vote not for him but against McClellan. and twenty or more besides. It was agreed that a committee should request Mr. Lincoln to withdraw, and Grant was the name which found most favor as a substitute. Lieber to Sumner, August 15. According to Lieber, Davis stated at the conference that Mr. Lincoln had said in Corwin's presence that he should be beaten unless victories intervened. At this time Mr. Lincoln himself faced defea
September 28th (search for this): chapter 6
States. He has a naivete in his avowals; witness that at the close of his speech of 27th of June. But we shall disappoint him. I thank you for your faith; but do not forget that we are fighting your battle here. Our triumph will help the liberal cause everywhere. Sumner made several popular addresses in the autumn of 1864,—one at Faneuil Hall on the national victories; September 6. Works, vol. IX. pp. 64-67. another at the same place in support of Mr. Lincoln's re-election; September 28. Works, vol. IX. pp. 68-82. another at Cooper Institute on the issues of the election; November 5. Works, vol. IX. pp. 83-133. and the last at Faneuil Hall on the evening of the election. November 5. Works, vol. IX. pp. 134-136. He put forward on these occasions, as patriotic aims, the complete suppression of the rebellion and the complete extinction of slavery. Never, said he, was grander cause or sublimer conflict; never holier sacrifice. At Cooper Institute he was receive
February 14th (search for this): chapter 6
s researches and labors in other lines of discussion and business were by themselves equal to those of senators who were deemed faithful and industrious. It was perhaps the most arduous session in which he served, and his friends feared that the excessive strain would bring back his old malady. The work of the two committees of which he was chairman fell wholly upon him, and he diverged from these specialties to take up many other topics which invited investigation. He wrote to Lieber, February 14:— I am tired. At this moment I have two important questions,—first, the capitalization of the duties paid by our commerce on the Scheldt, on which I expect to speak to-day in executive session; and secondly, a bill to pay five millions for French spoliations, on which I am now drawing a report. To these add business of all kinds, and the various questions of slavery and of England, and I wish for a day of rest. Lord Lyons said to him at this time, You do take good care of my tr
July 17th, 1862 AD (search for this): chapter 6
g all the measures concerning slavery which have prevailed at the late session, I regard as first in practical value the overthrow of the rule excluding colored testimony. For this result I have labored two years. The rate of pay for colored troops, particularly those enlisted for Massachusetts regiments, became a subject of controversy which involved a question of construction,—whether they were to be paid thirteen dollars a month, like other soldiers, or only ten, under the Act of July 17, 1862, which provided the smaller sum for persons of African descent employed under it. The Secretary of War, confirming an opinion of Mr. Whiting, the solicitor of that department, placed them under this Act; but Governor Andrew strenuously contended that they came under the general acts which determined the pay of enlisted men, and should be paid equally with other soldiers. He, as well as Sumner, urged the secretary to rectify his action, but without avail; and Stanton became very impatien
July 9th, 1864 AD (search for this): chapter 6
ey yielded. Under such pressure they changed their votes or withdrew to the lobby, fearing that their positions at home would be endangered with antislavery constituents who put their faith in this early and indomitable leader of their cause. Observers by no means in sympathy with the measures themselves recognized Sumner's power over reluctant associates as a new illustration of the supremacy fairly achieved by those who wish strongly where they wish at all. National Intelligencer, July 9, 1864. It is best, however, to note in this connection that senators whose votes had been thus forced naturally chafed under this kind of discipline, and some of them bore from that time a grudge which they were to wreak when the opportunity came. Sumner's associates in the Senate, even those of antislavery convictions, were at times weary with his constant urging of antislavery measures; and his persistency in that direction encountered some criticism in journals of his own party. Some tho
September 23rd (search for this): chapter 6
at of all men he was the best fitted for the high place which he filled during the Civil War. This also is to be said,—that whatever those who came near him thought, the popular instinct was with him; and plain men—the masses of the people—did not admit the limitations apparent to those who were present at the seat of government. Indeed, the very qualities and ways which repelled public men brought the President near to the people. His retention of Montgomery Blair, He removed Blair, September 23, yielding to the pressure. （Nicolay and Hay's Life of Lincoln, vol. IX. pp. 339-342.) A resolution of the Republican national convention was intended to call for a change in his case as well as Seward's. (New York Independent, June 20.) The President, in January, 1865, informed William Claflin, who had in 1864, as an active member of the Republican national committee, come into intimate relations with him, of his purpose to make a change in the office of Secretary of State during the c
February 10th (search for this): chapter 6
the carriage of passengers. The amendment passed by only one majority, several of the Republican senators—Anthony, Howe, and Lane among them—voting against it. Feb. 27, 1863. Congressional Globe, p. 1328. It was concurred in by the House, and became part of the Act of March 3, 1863. At the session now under review, he carried the same amendment to two charters, succeeding after spirited contests by a small majority in each case,—defeated at one stage and prevailing at a later one. Feb. 10, 25, March 16, 17, June 21, 1864; Works, vol. VIII. pp. 103-117. The amendment was rejected, June 21, by fourteen to sixteen,—Foster, Grimes, Sherman, and Trumbull voting nay; but moved again by Sumner on the same day, it passed by a vote of seventeen to sixteen. The opposition of Saulsbury, Powell, and Willey abounded in ribaldry. Republican senators—Trumbull, Sherman, Doolittle, and Grimes, as well as Reverdy Johnson—contended that an express prohibition was superfluous, as the exc
... 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39