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 9 10 ...
Matamoras (Indiana, United States) (search for this): chapter 4
Grande as her western boundary, her dominion and her title did not extend beyond the Nueces. Nevertheless, President Polk, having already advanced our army to the Nueces and stationed our fleet in the Gulf, directed General Taylor, Jan. 13, 1846, to move the army to the left bank of the Rio Grande; and two months later that officer marched from Corpus Christi, with Mexicans armed and unarmed fleeing before him, to the river, and turned his guns on the public square of the Mexican town of Matamoras, which lay on its western side. At the same time the fleet blockaded the mouth of the river. These acts were war, and aggressive war, on the part of the United States. General Grant, who served in the war, regarded it as one of the most unjust ever waged by a stronger against a weaker power. (Personal Memoirs, p. 53.) He says that it was a political war, and that our troops were sent to provoke a fight. A collision between small bodies of the two forces occurred April 25. There is
Maine (Maine, United States) (search for this): chapter 4
ld 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. barbarous, cruel, unnatural, unjust, and diabolical war. There were, indeed, among the Whig members some—as Hudson of Massachusetts, Corwin of Ohio, Severance of Maine, and Garrett Davis of Kentucky—who were unsparing in their condemnation of the Administration; but even their votes were not always consistent with their speeches.him as the person to be selected. He had, however, no tastes for public life, and had freely expressed his unwillingness to enter it. He was at the time absent in Maine, where he was delivering lectures before lyceums; and before leaving Boston he had in interviews with Andrew positively refused to allow the use of his name for t
Savannah (Georgia, United States) (search for this): chapter 4
e and sanction of the illustrious statesman who presided could make the occasion respectable. Pearson, in defending himself and his captain against the free use of his name by the speakers, said that what he had done was commended by the merchants of the city, and that on 'Change five to one would, if inquired of, answer that they would do as he had done; and there is no reason to doubt his statement. Pearson was the owner of the brig Acorn, which carried Sims, a fugitive slave, back to Savannah in April, 1851. A letter to Sumner written soon after the meeting shows the temper of society at the time. Rev. Andrews Norton, a learned divine, was closely connected with leading families, and associated with the wealth and culture of the city. His kindly nature and Christian profession should have inclined him to listen with open ears to the cry of a pursued negro who had testified his longing for freedom by enterprise and endurance which in a better age would have drawn to him un
Benjamin R. Curtis (search for this): chapter 4
hwith the Atlas assailed Sumner, in successive articles, with coarse personalities. Dec. 30, 1847; Jan. 3, 27, 29, Feb. 3, March 17, 1848. G. T. Curtis entered into the controversy on the same side and with the same spirit, assuming a supercilious tone, and threatening him with the loss of private and public confidence. Boston Advertiser, Feb. 17, 1848. Sumner had been of service, two years before, in composing a difficulty between Mr. Curtis and W. W. Story, a relative, for which B. R. Curtis wrote Sumner, May 24, 1846, thanking him for disinterested, judicious, and kind exertions in this unhappy affair. It is hardly needful to say that the style of writing about him kept up for some weeks did not contribute to Sumner's peace of mind. Adams regretted the necessity for the controversy, and wrote to Giddings, Feb. 17, 1848: I deeply regret all this business, because it will make permanent enmities here, to last us all through life. Winthrop's ambition has pushed him into it,
R. H. Dana (search for this): chapter 4
of a past Adams as the last one. Palfrey described the slights and affronts received by himself, the changed countenances, the rude language, and the refused recognitions by old acquaintances and parishioners. A Letter to a Friend, pp. 25, 26. Dana, finding one day his salutations in the street, when addressed to one of the ruling class, met with only the slightest return, assumed that the cause was a recent bereavement; By the death of Greenough, the sculptor. and making an apology, drewThis social exclusion of others than Sumner came mostly later,—in 1850-1852,— when the conservative feeling in Boston was intense in favor of Mr. Webster and in support of the Compromise measures of 1850. It is referred to in Adams's Biography of Dana, vol. i. pp. 128, 129, 177. Naturally, Sumner felt keenly this social restriction. He had been a favorite in society, and had a genuine relish for the taste, luxury, and refined conversation which at the time distinguished the homes whose in
William H. Seward (search for this): chapter 4
concourse of citizens, received little attention from the public journals, which dismissed it in a brief paragraph or with unfriendly comments The Atlas was brief and the Advertiser cool. Sumner was a member of the committee appointed to issue an address and serve as a committee of vigilance to protect persons in danger of abduction. A pamphlet was issued containing the speeches at the meeting. the committee's address, and sympathetic letters from Gerrit Smith, R. W. Emerson, and William H. Seward. The address was probably prepared by Andrew, with touches from Sumner. It will be observed that the managers and speakers were either Abolitionists, or Whigs who had lost caste in the party on account of their radical opposition to slavery. The manufacturers, capitalists, and old politicians kept away; to them not even the name and sanction of the illustrious statesman who presided could make the occasion respectable. Pearson, in defending himself and his captain against the free u
James A. Briggs (search for this): chapter 4
which would not emphasize the slavery question to an extent which would repel the co-operation of Southern Whigs. Sumner was present at the conference, but did not speak. The convention met in Faneuil Hall, September 23. It was largely attended, and the session lasted from ten in the morning till nearly seven in the evening. No issue was made as to the organization or as to candidates. Charles Hudson, who had voted against the Mexican war bill in Congress, was chosen chairman, and Governor Briggs was renominated. There was, however, a general expectation, which had been noted in the newspapers, that there was to be a struggle as to the platform between the commercial and the antislavery Whigs,—between those who regarded the maintenance of a protective tariff and the unity of the Whig party as paramount, and those who regarded the questions growing out of slavery and the war as of supreme importance. The managers of the convention, who were of the former class, had arranged th
Alexander H. Stephens (search for this): chapter 4
ll naturally attracted to him the support of Southern Whigs; The Southern Whigs in the Whig caucus, acting under the lead of Stephens and Toombs. supported Winthrop in a body in preference to Vinton of Ohio. Johnston and Browne's Life of A. H. Stephens, p. 220. while for the same reasons he was distrusted by members like Giddings, Palfrey, and Tuck, who insisted upon the adoption of effective measures against the prosecution of the war and the extension of slavery. They therefore voted indted for an independent candidate of their own kind. In the interval they had been drawing nearer to South Carolina disunionism. Stephens had, perhaps, a personal reason, not having been assigned to the place on committees which he desired. A. H. Stephens's Life, by Johnston and Browne, pp. 220, 221, 237, 238. The spectacle of this small band of Free Soilers, immovable in spite of frowns and odious epithets from all sides, and threats from Southern members suggestive of disunion and violence,
Edward L. Keyes (search for this): chapter 4
mmarized its conclusions. The majority of the committee, of which Hayden, editor of the Atlas, was chairman, had been dilatory in taking any action, and finally agreed upon a report which was thought to be wanting in spirit and directness. Edward L. Keyes, of Dedham, from the minority of the committee, submitted the report and resolutions which Sumner had drawn. There was a contest in the House, attended with considerable excitement, and lasting for several days. Boston Whig, April 17, 21, 23, 24, 26, 27, 28. The resolutions reported by Keyes were on the motion of C. R. Train substituted for the majority report by a considerable majority, and were then passed by a vote of more than two to one. With a slight amendment, they then passed the Senate with no serious opposition. Sumner's resolutions thus became the declared opinions of the State. The antislavery Whigs, after their defeat at the State convention in September, took great satisfaction in this result, which, as they
C. F. Adams (search for this): chapter 4
rds wrote exceeded in substance the measure of Adams's severe condemnation of the vote. The Advertrop; he came to it after it had been opened by Adams, and then only at the request of friends, who 's critic, and his delay in becoming such till Adams had broken ground in the Whig, and Buckingham s life was not engrossed with home interests. Adams, such was his lineage, could not be set aside our leaders who sustained it—Sumner, Phillips, Adams, and Allen —were a combination of personal powith a resolution prepared in consultation with Adams, Sumner, and others, which proposed a test of th the safety of the Union. Later in the day, Adams, in some caustic remarks. received with hisse duties of men. These speeches of Palfrey, Adams, Sumner, and Allen met with demonstrations of articles to the Whig, taking the same view as Adams and Sumner. Dec. 29, 30, 31, 1847; Jan. 6, 8g school of politicians to which he belonged. Adams had a sharp controversy with the junior editor[11 more...]<
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ...