Your search returned 38 results in 14 document sections:

1 2
Horace Greeley, The American Conflict: A History of the Great Rebellion in the United States of America, 1860-65: its Causes, Incidents, and Results: Intended to exhibit especially its moral and political phases with the drift and progress of American opinion respecting human slavery from 1776 to the close of the War for the Union. Volume II., chapter 21 (search)
nfidence the hopes of the Rebels and those who, whether in the loyal States or in foreign lands, were in sympathy, if not also in act, their virtual allies. No one in Europe but those who ardently desired our success spoke of disunion otherwise than as an accomplished fact, which only purblind obstinacy and the invincible lust of power constrained us for a time to ignore. Hence, when the French Emperor made, during the dark Winter of 1862-3, a formal, diplomatic proffer By dispatch of M. Drouyn de <*>uys, Jan. 9, 1863. of his good offices as a mediator between the American belligerents, he was regarded and treated on all hands as proposing to arrange the terms of a just, satisfactory, and conclusive separation between the North and the South. Even before this, and before the repulse of Burnside at Fredericksburg, Lord Lyons, British Embassador at Washington, had sent a confidential dispatch to his Government, narrating the incidents of a visit he had paid to New York directly af
Harper's Encyclopedia of United States History (ed. Benson Lossing), United States of America. (search)
2 Act admitting West Virginia, to date from June 20, 1863 (the thirty-fifth State), approved......Dec. 31, 1862 Battle of Murfreesboro, or Stone River......Dec. 31, 1862–Jan. 2, 1863 President Lincoln proclaims all slaves free in the seceding States......Jan. 1, 1863 Absent from duty in the army, 8,987 officers and 280,073 enlisted men......Jan. 1, 1863 Galveston, Tex., captured by the Confederates......Jan. 1, 1863 Gold at New York 133 1/4 to 133 7/8......Jan. 2, 1863 M. Drouyn de l'huys, French minister of foreign affairs, addresses M. Mercier, French minister at Washington, concerning mediation between the United States government and Confederate......Jan. 9, 1863 Arkansas post captured by the United States forces under W. T. Sherman and McClernand, with a fleet of gun-boats under Admiral Porter......Jan. 11, 1863 General Burnside resumes active operations, but is foiled by storms......Jan. 20-24, 1863 Gen. Fitz-John Porter cashiered and dismissed fr
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 48: Seward.—emancipation.—peace with France.—letters of marque and reprisal.—foreign mediation.—action on certain military appointments.—personal relations with foreigners at Washington.—letters to Bright, Cobden, and the Duchess of Argyll.—English opinion on the Civil War.—Earl Russell and Gladstone.—foreign relations.—1862-1863. (search)
in Washington at once requested an explanation from Mr. Seward, and the secretary in his reply, while stating that the resolution truly interpreted the unanimous sentiment of the people of the United States, explained in substance that the direction of the foreign policy of the government belonged to the executive department, which did not contemplate any change of policy in regard to the war between France and Mexico. This assurance quieted the French government, whose foreign minister, M. Drouyn de l'huys, had asked Mr. Dayton, at their first meeting after intelligence of the resolution had reached Paris (Mr. Seward's explanation not yet being known), Do you bring us peace or war? When the correspondence of the state department became public, Davis reported in the House from his committee, June 27, a resolution affirming that Congress has a constitutional right to an authoritative voice in matters of foreign policy, and that its declarations, while pending and undetermined, are
Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and letters of Charles Sumner: volume 4, Chapter 51: reconstruction under Johnson's policy.—the fourteenth amendment to the constitution.—defeat of equal suffrage for the District of Columbia, and for Colorado, Nebraska, and Tennessee.—fundamental conditions.— proposed trial of Jefferson Davis.—the neutrality acts. —Stockton's claim as a senator.—tributes to public men. —consolidation of the statutes.—excessive labor.— address on Johnson's Policy.—his mother's death.—his marriage.—1865-1866. (search)
ave lost his wits as well as principles. The President, of course, is driven into close relations with the latter; but it is only a short time ago that he said of him to a member of the Cabinet, Mr. Seward seems to have no cardinals. The French minister was with me last evening. I am satisfied that he expects the substantial withdrawal of the French troops from Mexico before next winter. It was on this assurance, given by me in my committee, that Congress was kept still, and I have let M. Drouyn de l'huys know this. I agree with you about our neutrality statutes. I think that in my last I let you know something of what passed on that head. Mr. Bemis is preparing an elaborate article on our statutes and Mr. Banks's madness. Meanwhile peace seems to be prevailing in Europe. I thank God for this; but I am also grateful for the changes brought by the war. I am for German unity, as well as Italian unity; indeed, I see little chance of permanent peace until these nations are establ
The Daily Dispatch: December 1, 1862., [Electronic resource], article 8 (search)
Count De Flahauit came to the Foreign office by appointment on Monday, the 10th instant, and read to me a dispatch from M. Drouyn de l'huys, relating to the civil war in North America. In this dispatch, the Minister for Foreign Affairs states that cease at sea as well as on land. This armistice might if necessary, be renewed for a further period. This proposal, Drouyn de l'huys proceeds to say, would not imply on the part of the three Powers any judgment on the origin of the war, or any y receive from Washington or Richmond bearing on this important subject. Your Excellency may read this dispatch to M. Drouyn de l'huys, and give him a copy of it. Russell. Reply of Russia to the Proposition of France. St. Petersburg. Nov. 15, 1862. The Journal of St. Petersburg contains the reply of Prince Gortschak to the note of Drouyn de l'huys, which is in substance as follows: After recalling the constant efforts of Russia in favor of conciliation, Prince Gortsch
The Daily Dispatch: December 25, 1862., [Electronic resource], Latest from the North. (search)
ing Day for our Albums. The Lord be merciful unto you, and protect you, is the wish of your sister, Amelia. Official letter about the Yankee relations with France. The following dispatch from Mr. Dayton, United States Minister at Paris, to Secretary Seward, is published in the newspapers: Paris, November 6, 1862. Sir: The receipt of your circular No. 25, and of dispatch No. 237, are hereby acknowledged. I have to-day had a conversation of some length with M. Drouyn de L'Huys in reference to our affairs. I told him that circumstances were such as to induce me to ask him distinctly whether any action was in contemplation by France, or by France conjointly with other Powers, in reference to the condition of things in our country. He said no; that everything remained as it had done for some time past; that France; in common with the other Powers of Europe very much regretted the war and its continuance, but they had no purpose to intervene or interfere
The Daily Dispatch: January 13, 1863., [Electronic resource], Foreign news. (search)
n, from Queenstown, on the 5th ult. There is no truth in the reported intention of the English Government to interfere with the Alabama: Mediation rumors. The Paris correspondent of the London Morning Herald, writing on the 21st, says rumors were current there in well informed circles that another attempt to put an end to the strife in America was about to be made by the great European powers. A semi-official denial had been given to the statement of some Belgian journals that M. Drouyn de L'Huys, during a reception at his hotel on the 18th December, spoke to the foreign ministers concerning the advisability of mediation in America. The Times has an editorial on the diplomatic correspondence communicated to Congress, and draws the deduction that such correspondence can hardly be regulated upon the wish to maintain and perpetuate amicable relations with foreign countries. After pointing to Mr. Clay's extraordinary recommendation from Russia in regard to England, and
The Daily Dispatch: March 3, 1863., [Electronic resource], article 4 (search)
Mr. Seward may not believe that France has any such intention — He may have been told so by Count though we don't believe he has. But that would by no means make it certain. There may be persons who confide in the perfect franka and voracity of all of a diplomatic character from the French Government; possibly Mr. Seward may be one. But, before we put implicit faith in them we should like some explanation of one or two past transactions in this department. On the 9th of November M. Drouyn de L'Huys, the French Foreign Secretary, assured Mr. Dayton, in the most client and explicit terms that the French Government had done nothing about intervention or mediation — that it had not even resolved on anything in connection with the subject; which his letter proposing mediation to England and had been written and sent a before, What was the object of this direct and unremarkable falsehood? After that project had failed, the French Secretary assured Mr. Dayton, and through him o
The Daily Dispatch: March 31, 1863., [Electronic resource], The intervention question. (search)
The intervention question. The New York Herald of the 27th, gives the following summery of the news by the Etna, which left Liverpool on the 12th instant: We believe that the question of French intervention in our affairs has received a quietus in a dispatch recently issued by M Drouyn de L'Huys to the Minister of the French Governments at Washington, which comprises an answer to Mr. Seward's memorable note of the 6th ult. The spirit of the dispatch forwarded by M. Drouyn de L'Huys involves a withdrawal on the part of France from all further offer of mediation — a course which she has adopted with regret — and assumes henceforth the part of a simple spectator in the contest confining herself to following merely the course of events. At the same time the Cabinet of Louis Napoleon expresses its sorrow that its suggestions, as expressed in its counsels on the 9th of January, were not more fully comprehended by Mr. Seward; but it declares that its opinions remain uncharged, no
The Daily Dispatch: October 15, 1863., [Electronic resource], The dismissal of the British Consuls — official correspondence. (search)
e, and it is proper that you should have it in your power to explain the grounds on which the President has been compelled to enforce it. Lest also the Government of His Imperial Majesty should be misled into the error of supposing that the rights of French citizens are in any manner involved in the action of the President which has been rendered necessary by the reprehensible conduct of the British Consular agents, you are requested to take an early occasion for giving such explanation to M. Drouyn de L'Huys as will obviate all risk of misapprehension. I am, sir, respectfully,Your ob't serv't, J. P. Benjamin, Secretary of State. Hon. John Slidell, Commissioner, &c., &c., Paris, France. Mr. Benjamin to Mr. Fullerton. Mr. Benjamin, writing Oct. 8th, 1863, to Mr. Fullerton, British Consul at Savannah, refers to the correspondence which has passed between that Consul and Gov. Brown, of Ga., (already published by the press,) and says: It thus appears that the Consular
1 2