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) 836 0 Browse Search
Frederick H. Dyer, Compendium of the War of the Rebellion: Regimental Histories 690 0 Browse Search
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 I. 532 0 Browse Search
John M. Schofield, Forty-six years in the Army 480 0 Browse Search
Rebellion Record: a Diary of American Events: Documents and Narratives, Volume 2. (ed. Frank Moore) 406 0 Browse Search
Rebellion Record: a Diary of American Events, Diary from December 17, 1860 - April 30, 1864 (ed. Frank Moore) 350 0 Browse Search
Wiley Britton, Memoirs of the Rebellion on the Border 1863. 332 0 Browse Search
Benson J. Lossing, Pictorial Field Book of the Civil War. Volume 2. 322 0 Browse Search
Col. John M. Harrell, Confederate Military History, a library of Confederate States Military History: Volume 10.2, Arkansas (ed. Clement Anselm Evans) 310 0 Browse Search
Col. John C. Moore, Confederate Military History, a library of Confederate States Military History: Volume 9.2, Missouri (ed. Clement Anselm Evans) 294 0 Browse Search
View all matching documents...

Browsing named entities in James Buchanan, Buchanan's administration on the eve of the rebellion. You can also browse the collection for Missouri (Missouri, United States) or search for Missouri (Missouri, United States) in all documents.

Your search returned 14 results in 6 document sections:

free State into the Union, and this notwithstanding a considerable part of it lies south of the Missouri line. Nevertheless, it gradually made its way to public favor, and was hailed by the conservathat was then called the Missouri restriction. U. S. Laws, 545. This proposed to require from Missouri, as a condition precedent to her admission as a State, that she should ordain and establish thaally effected, whilst the restrictionists were obliged to submit to the existence of slavery in Missouri, they obtained, on their part, a guarantee for perpetual freedom throughout the vast remaining sas and Nebraska, excepts there from the 8th section of the Act preparatory to the admission of Missouri into the Union, approved March sixth, eighteen hundred and twenty, which, being inconsistent wi0, on the question of slavery in the territories. Would be inconsistent with the long previous Missouri Compromise of 1820; because each applied to distinct and separate portions of our territorial
nd Florida. The committee, therefore, now stood 16 to 9 in favor of the nomination of Mr. Douglas, instead of 17 to 16 against it, according to its original organization. Pages 187-191. The committee, through their chairman, Mr. Krum, of Missouri, made their report on the 21st June, and Governor Stevens, of Oregon, at the same time presented a minority report, signed by himself and eight other members. It is unnecessary to give in detail these conflicting reports. It is Sufficient to certain that Mr. Lincoln would be the next President, and this added greatly to his strength. The result was, that of the 303 electoral votes, Mr. Douglas received but 12 Congressional Globe, 186-61, page 894. (3 from New Jersey, and 9 from Missouri), and Mr. Breckinridge only 72 (3 from Delaware, 8 from Maryland, 10 from North Carolina, 8 from South Carolina, 10 from Georgia, 6 from Louisiana, 7 from Mississippi, 9 from Alabama, 4 from Arkansas, 3 from Florida, and 4 from Texas). Virginia
c. But when the overwhelming weight of the great Northwest is taken in connection with the laws of trade, contiguity of territory, and the comparative indifference to free soil doctrines on the part of Western Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Missouri, it is evident that but little if any coercion, beyond moral force, would be needed to embrace them; and I have omitted the temptation of the unwasted public lands which would fall entire to this Confederacy—an appanage (well husbanded) sufficient for many generations. As to Missouri, Arkansas, and Mississippi, they would not stand out a month. Louisiana would coalesce without much solicitation, and Alabama with West Florida would be conquered the first winter from the absolute need of Pensacola for a naval depot. According to this arrangement of General Scott, all that would be left for the Northeast Confederacy would be the New England and Middle States; and our present proud Capitol at Washington, hallowed by so many patriotic
a vote of eight States to eleven. Those which voted in its favor were Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Tennessee. And those in the negative were Connecticut, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Virginia. It is but justice to say that Messrs Ruffin and Morehead, of North Carolina, and Messrs. Rives and Summers, of Virginia, two of. the five commissioners from each of these States, 27), the first section was adopted, but only by a majority of nine to eight States, nine being less than a majority of the States represented. This change was effected by a change of the vote of Illinois from the negative to the affirmative, by Missouri withholding her vote, and by a tie in the New York commissioners, on account of the absence of one of their number, rendering it impossible for the State to vote. Still Virginia and North Carolina, in the one extreme, and Connecticut, Maine, Ma
se the framers of the Constitution believed it to be possible that the Vice-President might be biassed by the fact that in case of the removal of the President from office the same shall devolve on the VicePres-ident. The preliminary proceedings in the House in the case of charges which may involve impeachment, have been well and wisely settled by long practice upon principles of equal justice both to the accused and to the people. The precedent established in the case of Judge Peck, of Missouri, in 1831, after a careful review of all former precedents, will, I venture to predict, stand the test of time. In that case, Luke Edward Lawless, the accuser, presented a petition to the House, in which he set forth minutely and specifically his causes of complaint. He prayed that the conduct and proceedings in this behalf of said Judge Peck may be inquired into by your honorable body, and such decision made thereon as to your wisdom and justice shall seem proper. This petition was refe
tc. But when the overwhelming weight of the great Northwest is taken in connection with the laws of trade, contiguity of territory, and the comparative indifference to free soil doctrines on the part of Western Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Missouri, it is evident that but little if any coercion, beyond moral force, would be needed to embrace them; and I have omitted the temptation of the unwasted public lands which would fall entire to this Confederacy—an apanage (well husbanded) sufficient for many generations. As to Missouri, Arkansas, and Mississippi, they would not stand out a month. Louisiana would coalesce without much solicitation, and Alabama, with West Florida, would be conquered the first winter from the absolute need of Pensacola for a naval depot. If I might presume to address the South, and particularly dear Virginia—being native here and to the manor born— would affectionately ask, Will not your slaves be less secure and their labor less profitable under the ne<