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) 296 0 Browse Search
Johnson Hagood 190 10 Browse Search
G. T. Beauregard 164 4 Browse Search
John Brown 138 2 Browse Search
South Carolina (South Carolina, United States) 110 0 Browse Search
Grant 107 25 Browse Search
Robert E. Lee 95 25 Browse Search
B. F. Cheatham 93 3 Browse Search
Braxton Bragg 87 1 Browse Search
Ohio (Ohio, United States) 80 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Southern Historical Society Papers, Volume 16. (ed. Reverend J. William Jones). Search the whole document.

Found 290 total hits in 95 results.

... 5 6 7 8 9 10
April, 1865 AD (search for this): chapter 1.28
which you, my comrades, will agree with me, was not heard among the men who had the whipping to do We who did meet the three Yankees, know well that we met men as brave as ourselves, if differing with us in temperament and in the manner of their warfare. But we did meet the three Yankees, and it did take, if not three, at least two and a half to one to destroy our armies at last. The total number of men called under arms by the Government of the United States, between April, 1861, and April, 1865, amounted to 2,759,049, of whom 2,656,053, were actually embodied in the Federal armies. Foreign military authorities have put down the number of men embodied in the Confederate armies as 1,100,000. But this we know to be a great exaggeration, taken from Northern sources; for even robbing the cradle and the grave, there was scarcely a million of men able to bear arms in the Confederate States, nor did we have arms to put in their hands had we so many. Let me give you here, my comrade
February, 1859 AD (search for this): chapter 1.28
d by our merchants and planters, while Rhode Islanders imported for us 8,338. (See Judge Smith's Statistics—Year Book City of Charleston, 1880.) Again. More than fifty years after this, in 1858, the London Times charged that New York had become the greatest slave-trading mart in the world; and Vice-President Wilson, in his work upon the Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America, quotes from the New York daily papers that there were eighty-five vessels fitted out from New York, from February, 1859, to July, 1860, for the slave trade; that an average of two vessels each week clear out of our harbor, bound for Africa and a human cargo; that from thirty to sixty thousand (negroes) a year are taken from Africa to Cuba by vessels from the single port of New York. (Rise and Fall of Slave Trade in America, Volume II, page 618.) Is it not absurd, with these historical facts upon record, for the Northern people, especially the New Englanders, to charge us with the moral offence of slav
with a bitterness not exceeded in 1860. As it is so often said that whatever may have been the nice theoretical distinctions as to the forms of government, the North became in favor of a strong consolidated central government, because its interests were in manufactures and protection, while the South was State's Rights in the defense of slavery, and that thus the real cause of the war was the antagonism between free labor and slave labor, I would call attention to the fact that as early as 1796, a year before the first slave had been freed in the United States, when slavery still existed in every State in the Union, North as well as South, even then the different political theories of the government had already found for themselves more decidedly local habitations than names. Washington, in his farewell address, observes: In contemplating the causes which may disturb our Union, it occurs as a matter of serious concern that any ground should have been furnished for characterizin
ng proximate cause on both sides—on the one as well as on the other, it was not the real, ultimate cause, the casa causans of it. (Volume I, p. 28.) Further, I believe and maintain that from the origin of our government the war was inevitable, had slavery never existed. The war was not commenced in December, 1860, when this State seceded, nor in April, 1861, when we fired into Fort Sumter. Its seeds were in the Constitution, and it was declared in the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions in 1798. The Convention which framed the Constitution was itself divided into the two parties which, after seventy years of discussion in the Senate chamber, adjourned the debate to the battlefields of our late war. The one as the National partly, under the leadership of General Hamilton and the elder Adams, and the other as the Federal party, under Jefferson, at that early day organized the forces for strife, and warred over the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions and the Alien and Sedition Laws with
longed to Rhode Islanders, or at least to New Englanders. But there is further evidence that I am not mistaken in charging that Rhode Island had much more to do with this negro importation than the people of this State, for it appears that but 2,006 of 39,075 slaves brought into Charleston were imported by our merchants and planters, while Rhode Islanders imported for us 8,338. (See Judge Smith's Statistics—Year Book City of Charleston, 1880.) Again. More than fifty years after this, in 1858, the London Times charged that New York had become the greatest slave-trading mart in the world; and Vice-President Wilson, in his work upon the Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America, quotes from the New York daily papers that there were eighty-five vessels fitted out from New York, from February, 1859, to July, 1860, for the slave trade; that an average of two vessels each week clear out of our harbor, bound for Africa and a human cargo; that from thirty to sixty thousand (negroes) a y
... 5 6 7 8 9 10