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 1,580 0 Browse Search
George Sumner 1,494 0 Browse Search
Massachusetts (Massachusetts, United States) 642 0 Browse Search
Robert C. Winthrop 392 0 Browse Search
Henry Wilson 348 0 Browse Search
William H. Seward 342 0 Browse Search
Fletcher Webster 328 0 Browse Search
Douglas 236 8 Browse Search
Edward Everett 224 0 Browse Search
Benjamin F. Butler 208 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 3. Search the whole document.

Found 1,606 total hits in 432 results.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ...
France (France) (search for this): chapter 4
Tyler's, was in its origin and at every step a conspiracy of the aggressive and fanatical partisans of slavery to consolidate their power in the national government, and to strengthen and perpetuate their institution. It was one of the three great victories in our history won by the slaveholders over a feeble-spirited and submissive North. Texas was, indeed, a territory which might well be coveted by a people and race distinguished by a passion for empire, already fed by acquisitions from France and Spain. It was imperial in extent, fortunate in position, rejoicing in marvellous fertility, commanding the Gulf of mexico, and assuring military and commercial advantages; Sumner, in a letter to his brother George, Sept. 30, 1845, admitted that the material interests of the country might be forwarded by the acquisition, but insisted that sound morals were against it. but far different thoughts from such as appealed to a far-sighted patriotism filled the minds of Tyler and Calhoun and
Gulf of Mexico (search for this): chapter 4
ate their power in the national government, and to strengthen and perpetuate their institution. It was one of the three great victories in our history won by the slaveholders over a feeble-spirited and submissive North. Texas was, indeed, a territory which might well be coveted by a people and race distinguished by a passion for empire, already fed by acquisitions from France and Spain. It was imperial in extent, fortunate in position, rejoicing in marvellous fertility, commanding the Gulf of mexico, and assuring military and commercial advantages; Sumner, in a letter to his brother George, Sept. 30, 1845, admitted that the material interests of the country might be forwarded by the acquisition, but insisted that sound morals were against it. but far different thoughts from such as appealed to a far-sighted patriotism filled the minds of Tyler and Calhoun and their fellow-plotters. Their purpose, boldly avowed not only in Southern journals and conventions, but in Congress and st
Columbia (South Carolina, United States) (search for this): chapter 4
y may be, they can be of very little consequence, and I have stumbled into this explanation only in the spirit of friendship. You must sigh in your heart over the deplorable war in which we are now engaged. Public sentiment is becoming stronger against it. It is destined to be most unpopular. The ground which I took in my letter to Winthrop last autumn in favor of stopping the supplies, and withdrawing the troops, is now adopted by a large section of the Whig party. To Lieber, in Columbia, S. C., March 25:— The Mexican War has hastened by twenty or thirty years the question of slavery. The issue is now made; it will continue until slavery no longer has any recognition under the Constitution of the United States. . . .Massachusetts is fast becoming, if she be not now, a thorough, uncompromising antislavery State. To George Sumner:— April 30. The victories of Taylor promise to overthrow all political speculations. He has fastened himself upon the public mind, so
Brookline (Massachusetts, United States) (search for this): chapter 4
ion. They did not, after 1846, speak to each other until the autumn of 1861, when Sumner congratulated Winthrop on Boston Common, at the close of his address to Henry Wilson's regiment as it was leaving for the seat of war. From that time, in Washington and in Boston, they exchanged civilities, as invitations to dine. Winthrop was present in 1865 when Sumner delivered his oration on Lincoln, and gave him congratulations at its close. Just before going to Europe in 1872, Sumner drove to Brookline to call on Winthrop; and the latter, as survivor, paid in 1874, before the Massachusetts Historical Society, a cordial tribute to the memory of the dead senator. If the order had been reversed, the eulogist of Fessenden would have been the eulogist of Winthrop. The New York Tribune, March 16, 1874, made Winthrop's tribute in the Massachusetts Historical Society the occasion of a leader entitled Sumner and Winthrop, which, recalling former differences, united the two as entitled to publ
Georgia (Georgia, United States) (search for this): chapter 4
he bill as to the origin of the war; distinguished between hostilities which had begun and war which could alone he authorized and declared by Congress; and refused to vote on the bill. (See his speeches, Jan. 4, March 16, 17, 1848.) Berrien of Georgia, and Evans of Maine, senators, also refused to vote on it. Giddings's History of the Rebellion, pp. 253, 265. Thee Massachusetts members present, except two, voted with the minority. the mass of Whig members, except only the sixteen, thus voted Speech in the House, Dec. 13, 1849. Julian's Political Recollections, p. 77.—expressing their readiness, however, to vote for Thaddeus Stevens, or some other Whig of positive antislavery position. The result was the election of Howell Cobb of Georgia, a pro-slavery Democrat, on the sixty-third ballot, by a plurality vote, which it had been agreed should be decisive. Some of the Southern Whigs, holding advanced pro-slavery positions, as Stephens and Toombs, who had supported Winthrop two y
Montpellier (France) (search for this): chapter 4
s, pp. 147, 186. All this he met with dignity and serenity. He entered Congress in the prime of his powers, and he left that body an old man stricken with disease; but no crown was ever deserved by old age nobler than was his by right of heroism in the cause of humanity. Giddings, after a service of twenty years, failed, under strange conditions, to receive a renomination from a constituency whose confidence and gratitude he still retained. Sumner wrote to him, Feb. 1, 1859, from Montpellier, France, a letter which is printed in Giddings's Life by Julian, pp. 357, 358. It is full of affection and grateful appreciation. Their correspondence while Giddings was consul-general at Montreal. where he died May 27, 1864, will be found in the same volume, pp. 384-394. One of Giddings's last letters written to others than his family was to Sumner. Giddings had been deeply interested in Sumner's Fourth of July oration and other addresses. They met first at Springfield in the autumn o
Marshfield (Massachusetts, United States) (search for this): chapter 4
who came to salute and cheer him on that morning in 1846. Sumner, after the convention, addressed a letter to Mr. Webster, Webster and Sumner exchanged calls early in 1848. The agitation of the slavery question widely divided them from this time. Webster was Secretary of State during Sumner's first term in the Senate. It is believed that they met casually in Washington, without, however, any mutual recognition. to which the subjoined reply, Works, vol. i p. 316. written from Marshfield, October 5, was received:— I had the pleasure to receive yours of September 25, and thank you for the kind and friendly sentiments which you express. These sentiments are reciprocal. I have ever cherished high respect for your character and talents, and seen with pleasure the promise of your future and greater eminence and usefulness. In political affairs we happen to entertain, at the present moment, a difference of opinion respecting the relative importance of some of the politi
Franklin Mills, Portage County, Ohio (Ohio, United States) (search for this): chapter 4
ever could have voted for that bill. Speech at Lexington. Ky., Nov. 13, 1847. National Intelligencer, November 25. Colton's Last Years of Henry Clay, p. 62. Corwin publicly expressed regret for his vote for it in the Senate. Speech at Carthage, Ohio, September, 1847, printed in Boston Whig, Oct. 7, 1847. The American Review, a magazine devoted to the defence of the principles of the Whig party, strongly condemned the action of the Whigs in voting for the bill. May, 1847, p. 435 (Charlght take, and in which, as well as in an address to his constituents, he showed signs of wavering, and put the no territory from Mexico issue as a substitute for the Wilmot Proviso, and even put aside the latter as a dangerous question. At Carthage, Ohio, September, 1847. Boston Whig, October 7. A brilliant light went out. He was as a senator a sympathetic spectator of the surrender of the North in 1850, accepted during that period a place in Fillmore's reactionary Cabinet, and ten years la
Wilson, N. C. (North Carolina, United States) (search for this): chapter 4
r, for the sake of brevity, reduced his amendment by dropping three of his resolutions; but Samuel H. Walley renewed, even as to the remaining three, the objection which Child had made as to the whole,—that they were superfluous. The vote was now taken at a late hour, when the delegates from the country in large numbers had left, and the amendment was lost. The vote was 91 to 137. The Boston delegation numbered 105, and supplied the main part of the 137 See accounts of the convention in Wilson's Rise and Fall of the Slave Power, vol. II, pp. 118-121; Boston Times, September 24. Boston Atlas, September 24. The account in the Times, though interspersed with levity, is the most picturesque, and gives details which the Whig journals for the sake of harmony suppressed. Some of the Congressional conventions, notably the one which nominated John Quincy Adams, passed Phillips's resolutions. The regular series was then unanimously passed, the supporters of the amendment generally not v
Pala (New Mexico, United States) (search for this): chapter 4
pire others with the same sentiment. The style was highly rhetorical, and its form quite as much as its substance made it offensive to Winthrop. Sumner said:— Such, sir, is the Act of Congress to which by your affirmative vote the people of Boston are made parties. Through you they are made to declare unjust and cowardly war, with superadded falsehood, in the cause of slavery. Through You they are made partakers in the blockade of Vera Cruz, the seizure of California, the capture of Santa Fe, the bloodshed of Monterey. It were idle to suppose that the soldier or officer only is stained by this guilt. It reaches far back, and incarnadines the halls of Congress; nay, more, through you it reddens the hands of your constituents in Boston. . . . . Let me ask you to remember in your public course the rules of right which you obey in private life. The principles of morals are the same for nations as for individuals. Pardon me, if I suggest that you have not acted invariably accord
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ...