hide Matching Documents

The documents where this entity occurs most often are shown below. Click on a document to open it.

Document Max. Freq Min. Freq
Harper's Encyclopedia of United States History (ed. Benson Lossing) 262 262 Browse Search
George P. Rowell and Company's American Newspaper Directory, containing accurate lists of all the newspapers and periodicals published in the United States and territories, and the dominion of Canada, and British Colonies of North America., together with a description of the towns and cities in which they are published. (ed. George P. Rowell and company) 188 188 Browse Search
Knight's Mechanical Encyclopedia (ed. Knight) 79 79 Browse Search
Abraham Lincoln, Stephen A. Douglas, Debates of Lincoln and Douglas: Carefully Prepared by the Reporters of Each Party at the times of their Delivery. 65 65 Browse Search
Lucius R. Paige, History of Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1630-1877, with a genealogical register 51 51 Browse Search
Brigadier-General Ellison Capers, Confederate Military History, a library of Confederate States Military History: Volume 5, South Carolina (ed. Clement Anselm Evans) 35 35 Browse Search
Cambridge History of American Literature: volume 3 (ed. Trent, William Peterfield, 1862-1939., Erskine, John, 1879-1951., Sherman, Stuart Pratt, 1881-1926., Van Doren, Carl, 1885-1950.) 28 28 Browse Search
Thomas Wentworth Higginson, Harvard Memorial Biographies 21 21 Browse Search
HISTORY OF THE TOWN OF MEDFORD, Middlesex County, Massachusetts, FROM ITS FIRST SETTLEMENT, IN 1630, TO THE PRESENT TIME, 1855. (ed. Charles Brooks) 18 18 Browse Search
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 3 17 17 Browse Search
View all matching documents...

Browsing named entities in Varina Davis, Jefferson Davis: Ex-President of the Confederate States of America, A Memoir by his Wife, Volume 1. You can also browse the collection for 1854 AD or search for 1854 AD in all documents.

Your search returned 6 results in 4 document sections:

As the suggestions for reform and the arguments in their favor would interest to-day only military students, I must content myself with a reference to the original report (Report of the Secretary of War, 2d Session, 33d Congress, Ex. Doc., No. I, 1854). He called the attention of Congress to the condition of coast defences, to the needs of material modifications in the armament of troops owing to recent inventions, and reported the results of his inquiries into the systems used by the light trotions models of what State papers should be, and necessarily increased his reputation as a far-seeing and able Minister. His care extended to the utmost parts of the United States. General George W. Jones, of Dubuque, Ia., says: In 1853 or 1854, while I was in the Senate of the United States, Colonel Long of the Engineer Corps came to Dubuque to inspect the improvement of the harbor, under an appropriation I had procured. He was applied to by Mr. Charles Gregoire, my wife's brother,
Varina Davis, Jefferson Davis: Ex-President of the Confederate States of America, A Memoir by his Wife, Volume 1, Chapter 40: social relations and incidents of Cabinet life, 1853-57. (search)
ite. Of General Scott I saw but little. He was a great-looking man, with the grandiose manner, in a less degree than his, quite common to the men of his day. Mr. Davis and he had an unfortunate difference about a claim of General Scott's for pay, which he could not allow. This led to a correspondence painful to both, which, having passed out of sight, it is useless to recall. An unusual number of pleasant people were in Washington during Mr. Pierce's Administration. In the winter of 1854, Mr. Charles O'Connor came there with his handsome bride, the ci-devant Mrs. McCracken. I knew so little then of New York lawyers, and had only heard of him through his knightly defence of Mrs. Forest, that I should not have noticed the announcement of his presence; but after his noble head, illumined by large sensitive gray eyes, met my sight, the impression he made was never forgotten. His deliberate manner of speaking in a man of less calibre would have been tiresome, but one can patien
Varina Davis, Jefferson Davis: Ex-President of the Confederate States of America, A Memoir by his Wife, Volume 1, Chapter 43: thirty-sixth Congress — Squatter sovereignty, 1859-61. (search)
generally discreet and conservative statesman, Mr. Cass, may have intended to convey, it is not at all probable that he foresaw the extent to which the suggestions would be carried and the consequences that would result from it. Of Mr. Douglas and his claim to the doctrine of squatter sovereignty, Mr. Davis says: In the organization of a government for California, in 1850, the theory was more distinctly advanced, but it was not until after the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Bill, in 1854, that it was fully developed, under the plastic and constructive genius of the Honorable Stephen A. Douglas, of Illinois. The leading part which that distinguished Senator had borne in the authorship and advocacy of the Kansas-Nebraska Bill, which affirmed the right of the people of the Territories to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the Constitution of the United States, had aroused against him a violent storm of denunciation in the State which
minutes to the Pacific Ocean, with all its political significance, was, in 1850, a denial of the obligation to recognize the existence of a compact between the North and South for a division upon that line; therefore it was illogically argued in 1854, by Mr. Douglas, chair. man of the Committee on Territories, and others, that the political line of 36°, 30‘ had been obliterated by the legislation of 1850, and that the bill introduced by him declared it to be the true intent and meaning of saious declaration. I think, therefore, that you are mistaken in the view you take of that subject. If the repeal of the Missouri Compromise line occurred in 1850, then the unprecedented change which you notice as resulting in the legislation of 1854, must be construed as in the first case, as being injurious to the South, and in the second case, as stripping the case to exclusiveness. The first conclusion involves the question of date, and by which section the repeal was made. Secon