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) 384 0 Browse Search
South Carolina (South Carolina, United States) 272 0 Browse Search
James Buchanan 162 0 Browse Search
Winfield Scott 148 0 Browse Search
Kansas (Kansas, United States) 118 0 Browse Search
Abraham Lincoln 114 0 Browse Search
Mexico (Mexico, Mexico) 100 0 Browse Search
Anderson 68 68 Browse Search
John B. Floyd 60 0 Browse Search
Stephen A. Douglas 58 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of James Buchanan, Buchanan's administration on the eve of the rebellion. Search the whole document.

Found 171 total hits in 61 results.

1 2 3 4 5 6 ...
South Carolina (South Carolina, United States) (search for this): chapter 2
s failed in the beginning to resist its progress in an active and determined spirit. The anti-slavery party in its career never stopped to reflect that slavery was a domestic institution, exclusively under the control of the sovereign States where it existed; and therefore, if sinful in itself, it was certainly not the sin of the people of New England. With equal justice might conscience have impelled citizens of Massachusetts to agitate for the suppression of slavery in Brazil as in South Carolina. In both cases they were destitute of all rightful power over the subject. The Constitution having granted to Congress no power over slavery in the States, the abolitionists were obliged to resort to indirect means outside of the Constitution to accomplish their object. The most powerful of these was anti-slavery agitation: agitation for the double purpose of increasing the number of their partisans at home, and of exciting a spirit of discontent and resistance among the slaves of t
New England (United States) (search for this): chapter 2
eached from the pulpits and disseminated in numerous publications throughout New England. At the first, it was regarded with contempt as the work of misguided fanatherefore, if sinful in itself, it was certainly not the sin of the people of New England. With equal justice might conscience have impelled citizens of Massachusett3. Affiliated societies soon became numerous. After the formation of the New England society the agitation against Southern slavery proceeded with redoubled vigo very question. Unfortunately, at this moment the anti-slavery agitation in New England began to assume an alarming aspect for the peace and security of the Southers worthy of remark, that even at this early period not a single Senator from New England, whether political friend or opponent of General Jackson, voted in favor of position to the objections of Mr. Webster. This anti-slavery agitation in New England was prosecuted by other and different agencies. The pulpit, the press, Stat
Brazil (Brazil) (search for this): chapter 2
onservative masses failed in the beginning to resist its progress in an active and determined spirit. The anti-slavery party in its career never stopped to reflect that slavery was a domestic institution, exclusively under the control of the sovereign States where it existed; and therefore, if sinful in itself, it was certainly not the sin of the people of New England. With equal justice might conscience have impelled citizens of Massachusetts to agitate for the suppression of slavery in Brazil as in South Carolina. In both cases they were destitute of all rightful power over the subject. The Constitution having granted to Congress no power over slavery in the States, the abolitionists were obliged to resort to indirect means outside of the Constitution to accomplish their object. The most powerful of these was anti-slavery agitation: agitation for the double purpose of increasing the number of their partisans at home, and of exciting a spirit of discontent and resistance amon
Mason, N. H. (New Hampshire, United States) (search for this): chapter 2
indignation of the Southern people. The time of Congress was wasted in violent debates on the subject of slavery. In these it would be difficult to determine which of the opposing parties was guilty of the greatest excess. Whilst the South threatened disunion unless the agitation should cease, the North treated such threats with derision and defiance. It became manifest to every reflecting man that two geographical parties, the one embracing the people north and the other those south of Mason and Dixon's line, were in rapid process of formation—an event so much dreaded by the Father of his Country. It is easy to imagine the effect of this agitation upon the proud, sensitive, and excitable people of the South. One extreme naturally begets another. Among the latter there sprung up a party as fanatical in advocating slavery as were the abolitionists of the North in denouncing it. At the first, and for a long time, this party was small in numbers, and found it difficult to excit
Pacific Ocean (search for this): chapter 2
iso instantly caused the flames of fanaticism to burn with more intense ardor, both North and South, than they had ever done before. How wise is the Divine maxim, that sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof! The new territory afterwards acquired from Mexico, being outside of the ancient province of Louisiana, was not embraced by the Missouri Compromise. The late President, then Secretary of State, strongly urged the extension of the line of 36° 30′ through this territory to the Pacific Ocean, as the best mode of adjustment. He believed that its division by this ancient line, to which we had been long accustomed, would be more just in itself, and more acceptable to the people, both North and South, than any new plan which could be devised. Letter to Berks County, Aug. 25, 1847. This proposal was defeated by the Wilmot Proviso. That ill-starred measure continued to be forced upon the consideration of Congress, as well as of State Legislatures, session after session,
United States (United States) (search for this): chapter 2
ct of Columbia, and in the forts, magazines, arsenals, and dockyards of the United States within the slaveholding States. They also protested against the admission , who alone possessed the power. The late President, as a Senator of the United States, from December, 1834, until March, 1845, lost no opportunity of warning his. This was greatly increased by the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, at the January term, 1842, in the case of Prigg vs. the Commonwealth of Pezed and required State judges and magistrates, in common with judges of the United States, to carry its provisions into effect. At the date of its passage no doubt es from emigrating with their slave property to the common territory of the United States, which might be acquired by the war with Mexico. Thus was raised anew the ion to the acquisition of any territory from the Republic of Mexico by the United States, by virtue of any treaty which may be negotiated between them, and to the u
California (California, United States) (search for this): chapter 2
so proper in itself, it was both out of time and out of place. Out of time, because, whether any treaty could be made acquiring territory from Mexico, was future and contingent; and in fact that of Guadalupe Hidalgo, under which we acquired Upper California and New Mexico, was not concluded until almost eighteen months thereafter. Treaty, Feb. 2, 1848; 9 U. S. Statutes at Large, 922. But Mr. Wilmot was so eager to introduce this new subject for anti-slavery agitation, that he could not await resolutions pledging themselves to measures of resistance. The interposition of the proviso, in season and out of season, and the violent and protracted debates to which it gave rise, defeated the establishment of territorial governments in California and New Mexico throughout the whole of the thirtieth Congress (1847-8 and 1848-9). Meanwhile it placed the two sections of the Union in hostile array against each other. The people of the one, instead of regarding those of the other as brethre
Berks (Pennsylvania, United States) (search for this): chapter 2
e of the ancient province of Louisiana, was not embraced by the Missouri Compromise. The late President, then Secretary of State, strongly urged the extension of the line of 36° 30′ through this territory to the Pacific Ocean, as the best mode of adjustment. He believed that its division by this ancient line, to which we had been long accustomed, would be more just in itself, and more acceptable to the people, both North and South, than any new plan which could be devised. Letter to Berks County, Aug. 25, 1847. This proposal was defeated by the Wilmot Proviso. That ill-starred measure continued to be forced upon the consideration of Congress, as well as of State Legislatures, session after session, in various forms. Whilst Northern Legislatures were passing resolutions instructing their Senators and requesting their Representatives. to vote for the Wilmot Proviso, Southern Legislatures and conventions were passing resolutions pledging themselves to measures of resistance.
Pennsylvania (Pennsylvania, United States) (search for this): chapter 2
Proslavery party the Fugitive slave law of 1793, and the case of Prigg vs. Pennsylvania, and its pernicious effects the South threaten secession the course of Mr.s to pass the bill were earnestly urged by Mr. Buchanan, then a Senator from Pennsylvania, in opposition to the objections of Mr. Webster. This anti-slavery agitatpublic, will, I most devoutly trust and believe, never arrive. Although, in Pennsylvania, we are all opposed to slavery in the abstract, yet we will never violate thtes, at the January term, 1842, in the case of Prigg vs. the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 16 Peter, 689. It is true, the opinion of the Court, delivered by Mr. Juof little or no avail, by the decision of the Court in the case of Prigg vs. Pennsylvania, declaring that the Congress of 1793 had violated the Constitution by requirt experience. From the day of the decision of Prigg vs. the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the act of 1793 was, says his biographer, a dead letter in the free States.
Dixon, Ill. (Illinois, United States) (search for this): chapter 2
on of the Southern people. The time of Congress was wasted in violent debates on the subject of slavery. In these it would be difficult to determine which of the opposing parties was guilty of the greatest excess. Whilst the South threatened disunion unless the agitation should cease, the North treated such threats with derision and defiance. It became manifest to every reflecting man that two geographical parties, the one embracing the people north and the other those south of Mason and Dixon's line, were in rapid process of formation—an event so much dreaded by the Father of his Country. It is easy to imagine the effect of this agitation upon the proud, sensitive, and excitable people of the South. One extreme naturally begets another. Among the latter there sprung up a party as fanatical in advocating slavery as were the abolitionists of the North in denouncing it. At the first, and for a long time, this party was small in numbers, and found it difficult to excite the mass
1 2 3 4 5 6 ...