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
United States (United States) 278 0 Browse Search
Stonewall Jackson 264 2 Browse Search
Braxton Bragg 185 1 Browse Search
North Carolina (North Carolina, United States) 180 0 Browse Search
W. M. Polk 178 2 Browse Search
J. B. Hood 174 0 Browse Search
Daniel Ruggles 165 1 Browse Search
N. H. Harris 143 3 Browse Search
B. F. Cheatham 143 5 Browse Search
Jackson (Mississippi, United States) 132 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 9. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones). Search the whole document.

Found 834 total hits in 95 results.

1 2 3 4 5 6 ...
North America (search for this): chapter 11.97
t all persons (inhabitants of the Colonies), who should disregard the agreement and act in violation thereof by publishing them in The Gazette, and by declaring that they should be deemed foes to the rights of British America, be regarded as unworthy the rights of freemen, and should be universally contemned as the foes of American liberty; and in the fourteenth article they resolved that they would have no trade, commerce, dealings, or intercourse whatever with any Colony or Province in North America, which shall not accede to or which shall hereafter violate this association. Although the articles of association were endorsed and adopted in some instances by colonial conventions; also by county meetings and lesser assemblages, they yet had not the sanctity and force of law, and nobody pretended that they had. They were merely the expression of a sentiment and a purpose that were entertained by a majority of the people of the Colonies, and an agreement, incapable of enforcement by l
North Carolina (North Carolina, United States) (search for this): chapter 11.97
ally and by legislative acts, acknowledged North Carolina and Rhode Island to be outside of the jurist four of these acts makes any mention of North Carolina or Rhode Island, nor do the two first actsme to operate on the commerce and ships of North Carolina and Rhode Island, and were intended to be the date of the act (over two months after North Carolina had ratified the Constitution), and from ton from the United States of that day than North Carolina and Rhode Island are mentioned and referred commenced to take effect on the ships of North Carolina and Rhode Island on the 15th of August, wor, thus showing that although the ships of North Carolina and Rhode Island are not mentioned as such wholly owned by citizens of the States of North Carolina and Rhode Island and Providence Plantations therein mentioned in respect to the State of North Carolina, and other purposes. [This is the acxtended certain privileges to the ships of North Carolina and Rhode Island until the 15th January, 1[36 more...]
Pennsylvania (Pennsylvania, United States) (search for this): chapter 11.97
tion of Rules of Conduct to be observed in debating and determining the questions that may come under consideration, Resolved, That, in determining questions in this Congress, each colony or province shall have one vote. What kind of a Republican one people, pray, was that which permitted the less than seventy thousand people of that tom-tit Rhode Island to have a voice equal in weight and influence with the voice of the several hundreds of thousands of the people of New York, or of Pennsylvania, or of Virginia? Is it presumable that the delegates from either of the three large States last mentioned, if they supposed the people of the Colonies, represented in that Congress, were the people of one sovereign political community, would have been or were such idiotic simpletons as to have agreed to such an utter absurdity (on the theory that the people of all the Colonies were one sovereign people) as the resolution last quoted? But they did agree to it; and why? because they knew
South Carolina (South Carolina, United States) (search for this): chapter 11.97
so far as its relations towards the several colonies were concerned, and it pretended to no govermental authority over them. Mr. Rutledge, a delegate from South Carolina to the Congress of 1774, said, in a speech in that body in September of that year, and without contradiction from any one, We have no legal authority, * * *. ves, edition of 1843.] Again, on 1st January, 1776, Congress, by resolution, declared that it be recommended to the Conventions or Committees of safety of South Carolina, Virginia, and the Provisional Council of North Carolina, to make a vigorous opposition to apprehended attacks by British forces on Charlestown in South CarolSouth Carolina, and several places in Virginia, and probably in North Carolina. [ American Archives. ] The city and county of New York having, in May, 1775, through their delegates to Congress, asked Congress for its advice (not its orders), how to conduct themselves with regard to the [British] troops shortly expected to arrive there, Co
Richmond (Virginia, United States) (search for this): chapter 11.97
State sovereignty-forgotten testimony. by Chas. Harris. Philadelphia, Nov. 30th, 1881. Rev'd J. Wm. Jones, Secretary of the Southern Historical Society, Richmond, Va.: Dear Sir--The Hon. Jefferson Davis in his admirable argument exposing the absurdity of Judge Story's theory, that the Declaration of Independence implied or declared that the people of the several revolted colonies were one whole people, (i. e. one sovereign political community,) forcibly says, at page 126, of Vol. I of The rise and fall of the Confederate Government, that if so, then the colony of Maryland must have been in a state of rebellion against the other colonies, as well as against Great Britain, from 1778 to 1781, during which period Maryland refused to ratify or be bound by the Articles of Confederation, which instrument, if Judge Story's theory be correct, was, as Mr. Davis pertinently remarks, binding upon her, as a majority of the whole people had adopted it. Mr. Davis then continues as follow
United States (United States) (search for this): chapter 11.97
position as to the attitude of the eleven United States towards North Carolina and Rhode Island, sd to be outside of the jurisdiction of the United States, and no more subject to the supremacy of tEurope or Asia designed ultimately for the United States would be sure, for obvious reasons, to be describe, nor was it meant to describe the United States of July, 1789, but that geographical area and complete political alienation from the United States of that day than North Carolina and Rhode wledged as countries wholly foreign to the United States? I omitted mentioning, in its more approps than thirty tons, from bringing into the United States goods not of their own growth or manufactueto, but to be found in any edition of the United States statutes at large ) Congress created the S their common agent, the government of the United States, to be their only medium of political inte, wares and merchandises imported into the United States. The first thirty-seven sections of thi[71 more...]
Connecticut (Connecticut, United States) (search for this): chapter 11.97
something. For instance, on 10th June, 1775, even after the war with Great Britain had begun, Congress, On motion, Resolved, That it be, and it is hereby earnestly recommended to the several colonies of New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Connecticut, and the interior towns of Massachusetts Bay, that they immediately furnish the American army before Boston with as much powder, out of the towns and the publick stocks as they can possibly spare, &c. [ American Archives, edition of 1843.] tation agreement or association. I append some extracts from this agreement which contained fourteen articles. It commences-- We, his Majesty's most loyal subjects, the delegates of the several colonies of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, [naming all except Georgia, who sent no delegates,] deputed to represent them in a Continental Congress, held in the city of Philadelphia on the 5th day of September, 1774, avowing our allegiance to his Majesty, &c., &c. They then go on to sa
China (China) (search for this): chapter 11.97
nd sessions of the first Congress in 1789-90,) formally and by legislative acts, acknowledged North Carolina and Rhode Island to be outside of the jurisdiction of the United States, and no more subject to the supremacy of the Union than France or China was, and thereby acknowledged their independence. That Mr. Davis should not have been aware of the existence of this most important testimony is not at all to be wondered at, when we reflect that writers on constitutional questions, or questiollowed to other persons. Section 6th provides for the operation of the act up to June, 1796, and to the termination of the next session of Congress thereafter. No countries besides the United States are mentioned by name in this act, except China and India. The Act of July 20, 1789.--Its title is: An act imposing duties on tonnage. Section 1st imposes a duty of six cents per ton on ships wholly owned by a citizen or citizens of the United States; but on ships built in the United Sta
Georgia (Georgia, United States) (search for this): chapter 11.97
their position as public delegates, would exert great influence on the people at large, signed on 20th of October, 1774, certain articles of association termed by them the Non-Importation, Non-Consumption, and Non-Exportation agreement or association. I append some extracts from this agreement which contained fourteen articles. It commences-- We, his Majesty's most loyal subjects, the delegates of the several colonies of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, [naming all except Georgia, who sent no delegates,] deputed to represent them in a Continental Congress, held in the city of Philadelphia on the 5th day of September, 1774, avowing our allegiance to his Majesty, &c., &c. They then go on to say, among other things, that in order to obtain a redress of grievances, we are of opinion that a non-importation, non-consumption, and non-exportation agreement, faithfully adhered to, will prove the most speedy, effectual and peaceable Italicized by C. H. measure, and we ther
France (France) (search for this): chapter 11.97
ode Island to be outside of the jurisdiction of the United States, and no more subject to the supremacy of the Union than France or China was, and thereby acknowledged their independence. That Mr. Davis should not have been aware of the existence employing any roundabout, namby-pamby phraseology. Let any one read sections 2 and 3 of that act and he will see that if France and Spain had been the only and special subjects of those sections they could not have been mentioned and referred to thewere then not subject to the supremacy of the Union, and that they were countries as much foreign to the United States as France or Spain was; and it of course utterly demolishes Judge Story's theory (attempted to be based on an expression in the Dech separate State rests wholly and solely in the sovereign power and control of that distinct State. If the Government of France, or of Great Britain, or of Spain, should desire to take possession of and oust John Doe (their subject) from his three h
1 2 3 4 5 6 ...