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
Tennessee (Tennessee, United States) 18 0 Browse Search
Burnside 10 0 Browse Search
Fort Moultrie (South Carolina, United States) 8 0 Browse Search
W. H. Hayward 8 0 Browse Search
Atlanta (Georgia, United States) 7 1 Browse Search
W. C. Rives 6 0 Browse Search
Price 6 0 Browse Search
France (France) 6 0 Browse Search
Rosecrans 6 0 Browse Search
Alfred Winston 6 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in The Daily Dispatch: September 3, 1863., [Electronic resource].

Found 390 total hits in 188 results.

1 2 3 4 5 6 ...
S. B. Buckner (search for this): article 1
Evacuation of Knoxville. --The town of Knoxville, Tenn., was evacuated by our troops on Monday, and on Tuesday was occupied by the Yankee forces under Burnside. The Yankees came in so soon after the evacuation that they captured two or three trains of cars which had been left there by our troops. We hear nothing of the locality to which Gen. Buckner's command retreated. It is supposed that the burning of a bridge on the East Tennessee and Virginia Railroad prevented the removal of the cars noticed above as being captured. This feat was doubtless performed by the tories with which East Tennessee abounds.
Burnside (search for this): article 1
Evacuation of Knoxville. --The town of Knoxville, Tenn., was evacuated by our troops on Monday, and on Tuesday was occupied by the Yankee forces under Burnside. The Yankees came in so soon after the evacuation that they captured two or three trains of cars which had been left there by our troops. We hear nothing of the locality to which Gen. Buckner's command retreated. It is supposed that the burning of a bridge on the East Tennessee and Virginia Railroad prevented the removal of the cars noticed above as being captured. This feat was doubtless performed by the tories with which East Tennessee abounds.
Tennessee (Tennessee, United States) (search for this): article 1
Evacuation of Knoxville. --The town of Knoxville, Tenn., was evacuated by our troops on Monday, and on Tuesday was occupied by the Yankee forces under Burnside. The Yankees came in so soon after the evacuation that they captured two or three trains of cars which had been left there by our troops. We hear nothing of the locality to which Gen. Buckner's command retreated. It is supposed that the burning of a bridge on the East Tennessee and Virginia Railroad prevented the removal of the cars noticed above as being captured. This feat was doubtless performed by the tories with which East Tennessee abounds.
Knoxville (Tennessee, United States) (search for this): article 1
Evacuation of Knoxville. --The town of Knoxville, Tenn., was evacuated by our troops on Monday, and on Tuesday was occupied by the Yankee forces under Burnside. The Yankees came in so soon after the evacuation that they captured two or three trains of cars which had been left there by our troops. We hear nothing of the locality to which Gen. Buckner's command retreated. It is supposed that the burning of a bridge on the East Tennessee and Virginia Railroad prevented the removal of the cars noticed above as being captured. This feat was doubtless performed by the tories with which East Tennessee abounds.
Abraham Lincoln (search for this): article 1
d disgraced humanity and fixed an indelible stain on English jurisprudence by their tyranny on the bench and their exclusion of all proper defence. Where the difference between denying the right to be heard and the resulting consequences? There must be the right on the part of the accused, and the consequent absence of the power to deny on the part of the Court, or all conservatism was at an end. To deny this right and claim this power here would equal the high-handed measures of Abraham Lincoln in his odious proclamation of the 15th of April, 1861. He there in claimed the power to coerce--to trammel free political and State action — and deluged a continent in blood. The same principle is here involved. A party charged here was in the incipient stage of a new life, for weal or woe. Here was the precise place and opportunity to give the proper direction to the whole case, even though it should be sent on. He (Mr. Gilmer) had gained many a case in the Hustings Court without an
Jeffries (search for this): article 1
e that he could not be instructed; none so ignorant that he might not instruct. Let it be known that neither the powers of reason nor the voice of admonition from counsel could ever be heard in this Court except as a matter of favor, graciously allowed by the Court, and where, then, would be the guarantee, to the most innocent and virtuous, against the villainy, conspiracy and craftiness, of the vile and the depraved? History preserved for the execration of mankind the memory of a Jeffries and Williams, who had disgraced humanity and fixed an indelible stain on English jurisprudence by their tyranny on the bench and their exclusion of all proper defence. Where the difference between denying the right to be heard and the resulting consequences? There must be the right on the part of the accused, and the consequent absence of the power to deny on the part of the Court, or all conservatism was at an end. To deny this right and claim this power here would equal the high-ha
Williams (search for this): article 1
ld not be instructed; none so ignorant that he might not instruct. Let it be known that neither the powers of reason nor the voice of admonition from counsel could ever be heard in this Court except as a matter of favor, graciously allowed by the Court, and where, then, would be the guarantee, to the most innocent and virtuous, against the villainy, conspiracy and craftiness, of the vile and the depraved? History preserved for the execration of mankind the memory of a Jeffries and Williams, who had disgraced humanity and fixed an indelible stain on English jurisprudence by their tyranny on the bench and their exclusion of all proper defence. Where the difference between denying the right to be heard and the resulting consequences? There must be the right on the part of the accused, and the consequent absence of the power to deny on the part of the Court, or all conservatism was at an end. To deny this right and claim this power here would equal the high-handed measures
Leigh (search for this): article 1
on now presented for consideration was whether on an examination before the Mayor, in a case of felony or misdemeanor the Court had the rightful power to say to counsel, "You shall not discuss the law and evidence in this my mind is made up, and counsel to be beard; I remand the prisoner. This was, indeed, a grave question. There could not well be a graver one. It had been very fully and ably considered by the Court of Appeals in the case of Word as. The Commonwealth, reported in 3d Leigh, 805. The whole principle involved in this question was there fully adjudicated. It was the law of this case. It was in that case, both in the reasoning, argument, and judgment of the Court, yuled that the right to be heard before any Court by counsel in argument was absolute and it was beyond the power of the Court to prevent it. But this right was measured and qualified by the rules of judicial and professional propriety, and could never by disregarded by honorable or enlightened counsel
April 15th, 1861 AD (search for this): article 1
English jurisprudence by their tyranny on the bench and their exclusion of all proper defence. Where the difference between denying the right to be heard and the resulting consequences? There must be the right on the part of the accused, and the consequent absence of the power to deny on the part of the Court, or all conservatism was at an end. To deny this right and claim this power here would equal the high-handed measures of Abraham Lincoln in his odious proclamation of the 15th of April, 1861. He there in claimed the power to coerce--to trammel free political and State action — and deluged a continent in blood. The same principle is here involved. A party charged here was in the incipient stage of a new life, for weal or woe. Here was the precise place and opportunity to give the proper direction to the whole case, even though it should be sent on. He (Mr. Gilmer) had gained many a case in the Hustings Court without an argument from the results of an argument made in th
Howells (search for this): article 1
ore a magistrate in defence of his client. --Mr. J. H. Gilmer discussed at length, yesterday, the proposition before the Mayor, "Whether counsel for a party, on his trial before the Mayor has the right to be heard in his defence, in argument, on the merits of the case?" Mr. Gilmer's argument was full, and at too great length for us to do more than hint at the points raised and elaborately considered. Starting, with the proposition, that the case reported in 5th Grattan, Page 664, (Howells. The Commonwealth.) was in no sense authority on this point. The question adjudicated in that case was a collateral one--whether counsel had a right to discuss before a Judge, trying a criminal cause, the admissibility on evidence, or the propriety of the Judge ruling out certain improper questions as to the chastity of a female whereas for the purpose of assailing her credibility. The issue there was purely collateral. It did not touch and could not affect the merits of the issue-- "gui
1 2 3 4 5 6 ...