Browsing named entities in Rebellion Record: a Diary of American Events: Documents and Narratives, Volume 1. (ed. Frank Moore). You can also browse the collection for April 19th or search for April 19th in all documents.

Your search returned 12 results in 9 document sections:

A true copy of the original by one delivered to Mr. F. W. Seward, Assistant Secretary of State of the United States, at 8 o'clock in the evening of April 9, 1861. Attest, J. T. Pickett, Secretary, &c., &c. Mr. Seward in reply to the Commissioners, acknowledges the receipt of their letter, but declines to answer it. Department of State, Wasuington, April 10, 1861. Messrs. Forsyth, Crawford, and Roman, having been apprised by a memorandum which has been delivered to them, that the Secretary of State is not at liberty to hold official intercourse with them, will, it is presumed, expect no notice from him of the new communication which they have addressed to him under date of the 9th inst., beyond the simple acknowledgment of the receipt thereof, which he hereby very cheerfully gives. A true copy of the original received by the Commissioners of the Confederate States, this 10th day of April, 1861. Attest, J. T. Pickett, Secretary &c., &c. --Tribune, April 19.
e have the honor to be, very respectfully, Your obedient servants, James Chesnut, jr. Aide-de-Camp. Stephen D. Lee, Captain S. C. Army and Aide-de-Camp. Major Robert Anderson, United States Army, Commanding Fort Sumter. --Charleston Mercury,April 19. --Times,April 18. The bombardment. On Thursday the demand to surrender the fort was made and declined, all the officers having been consulted by Major Anderson in regard to the summons. At about 3 o'clock on Friday morning notice which waved over them. It was a painful sight to all to see the Stars and Stripes finally hauled down, but we all felt that we had done our duty, and must submit. The fort was not surrendered, but evacuated almost upon our own terms. --Tribune, April 19. Opinions of the press. Fort Sumter is lost, but freedom is saved. There is no more thought of bribing or coaxing the traitors who have dared to aim their cannon balls at the flag of the Union, and those who gave their lives to defend it.
ficacy of the laws, and in supporting and invigorating all the measures which may be adopted for the common defence, and by which, under the blessings of Divine Providence, we may hope for a speedy, just, and honorable peace. In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand, and caused the Seal of the Confederate States to be affixed, this seventeenth day of April, 1861. By the President, (Signed) Jefferson Davis. R. Toombs, Secretary of State. The Charleston Mercury of the 19th April, in referring to this proclamation, says: To avoid any misunderstanding and prevent comment arising from the supposition that the President intends to assume the authority and responsibility of issuing these himself, without the action of Congress, we would say that the proclamation is merely a preparatory indication of what he intends to recommend to Congress, and what we have no doubt Congress will do and ought to do, in the event that war becomes inevitable. The secession of Virginia an
nt. Mayor Brown received a despatch from President Lincoln this morning, stating that no more troops would pass through this city. Mayor's office, Baltimore, April 19. To His Excellency the President of the United States: Sir:--A collision between the citizens and the northern troops has taken place in Baltimore, and the exs of Maryland. Respectfully, Geo. Wm. Brown. Thos. H. Hicks. By order of the Board of Police. Chas. Howard, President. Baltimore and Ohio Railroad, Baltimore, April 19. To his Excellency, Thomas H. Hicks, Governor; His Honor, Geo. W. Brown, Mayor of Baltimore, and Chas. Howard, Esq., President of the Board of Police Commissione Street) be returned to Philadelphia. It is also understood that no more troops will be carried by the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad.--Baltimore Clipper, extra, April 19. The rattlesnake's Fangs. The eighty-sixth anniversary of the fight at Lexington was signalized, at Baltimore yesterday, by the first blood shed north of C
people of these States have too large brains and too many ideas to fight blindly — to lock horns like a couple of beasts, in the sight of the world. (Applause.) Cannon think in this Nineteenth Century; and you must put the North in the right — wholly, undeniably, inside of the Constitution and out of it — before you can justify her in the face of the world; before you can pour Massachusetts like an avalanche through the streets of Baltimore, (great cheering,) and carry Lexington and the 19th of April south of Mason and Dixon's Line. (Renewed cheering.) Let us take an honest pride in the fact that our Sixth Regiment made a way for itself through Baltimore, and were the first to reach the threatened capital. In the war of opinions, Massachusetts has a right to be the first in the field. I said I knew the whole argument for secession. Very briefly let me state the points. No Government provides for its own death; therefore there can be no constitutional right to secede. But ther<
Doc. 85.--the Baltimore riot. The following is a recapitulation of and wounded during the collision, April 19th: Citizens Killed.--Robert W. Davis, Philip S. Miles, John McCann, John McMahon, Wm. R. Clark, James Carr, Sebastian Gies, Wm. Malloney, Michael Murphy. Citizens Wounded.--James Myers, mortally----Coney, Wm. Ree, boy unknown. Soldiers Killed.--Two, unknown. Soldiers Wounded.--S. H. Needham, Michael Green, D. B. Tyler, Edward Colwin, H. W. Danforth, Wm. Patch; three unknown. The total killed is nine citizens and two soldiers; wounded, three citizens and eight soldiers.--Baltimore American, April. 22. The Washington Star says: The wounded of the Massachusetts soldiers in the fight at Baltimore on Friday, are as follows: Company C, Stoneham Light Infantry--Capt. J. H. Dyke, ball wound in the head; left in Baltimore, and supposed to have died since; Henry Dyke, ball wound in the leg; W. H. Young, hit with a brickbat on the arm; Stephen Flanders, bad wound w
ssin, by burning bridges and tearing up railroads and cutting telegraph wires, as if it was not enough to commit murder and treason, unless war is waged at the same time against the noblest works of civilization and the most beneficent structures of peace. In this unexampled warfare, Providence, as in 1775, has accorded to Massachusetts the tearful glory of furnishing the first martyrs in the cause of the country, and, what would before have been thought impossible, has crowned even the 19th of April with new wreaths of immortal fame. In this state of things the President of the United States has called upon the people to rally to the rescue of the national Capital, and to the defence of the Government of the country. Wide as the summons has gone forth, it has been obeyed, with an alacrity and unanimity that knows no parallel in our history; and the volunteers of Massachusetts have been the first in the field. Unwarlike in their habits and tastes, a full proportion of them in ou
f Commons, Tuesday, May 28. Lord J. Russell brought up copies of a correspondence with the Government of the United States of America. The noble lord said: In moving that this correspondence should lie upon the table, it may be convenient to the House, and especially so to the commercial interests in his country, that I should state the substance of the correspondence which has lately taken place with the Government of the United States of America with regard to the blockade. On the 19th of April, the President of the United States issued a notification that it was intended to institute a blockade of the ports of the seven States which had seceded; and on the 27th of April another notification was issued, announcing that it was intended to blockade the ports of North Carolina and Virginia. When Lord Lyons applied for an official notification of the establishment and commencement of the blockade, he was told by the Secretary of State that it was not usual to make such a notificat
mony that such men as you are neither safe nor comfortable there. 2. Your note to me of April 23d (covering the printed letter, but not mentioning it) contains several phrases which I am persuaded you would not have used if left to your own free action. The note begins by stating its main object thus--I write hurriedly to say that I have consented to the publication of my letter to you, with the hope, &c. Which letter to me? I have received several letters from you, but none of the 19th of April. Consented to the publication --at whose instance? The phrase and the context invite the inference that the publication was made at my instance and that inference was, I believe, generally drawn in this city, and will probably be drawn all over the country; whereas, you do know that I had nothing to do with the publication. The note concludes with this very suggestive line:--I am not at liberty to speak of what is going on here. I can easily comprehend that humiliating fact; and I d