The Negroes were then forced, because of the lack of cooperation on the part of the southern whites, to accept the leadership of certain northern men who came South for the sole purpose of personal gain and exploitation. These men were in some cases of an extremely low order and were in a large measure responsible for the corruption of Reconstruction days. They were contemptuously called "carpetbaggers"
by the southern whites because they were so poor that they could carry all of their possessions in a carpet bag. Some of these white men were conscientious, however, and served these States honorably. Most Negroes, therefore, were under the leadership of these three elements: southern men who were regarded by their neighbors as men of the lowest possible order, unscrupulous adventurers from the North, and some intelligent members of their own race like B. K. Bruce, John R. Lynch, R. B. Elliot, and John M. Langston. This ill-a.s.sorted group of politicians reconstructed the Southern States.
The wisdom of this policy has been widely questioned. From the point of view of most white men studying Reconstruction history this effort to make the Negro a factor in politics was a failure, the elimination of the Negro from politics was just, and the rise of the Negro to political power even today is viewed with alarm. The opinions of the biased historians in this field will be interesting. Several writers refer to the Negro carpet bag movement as an effort to found commonwealths upon the votes of an ignorant Negro electorate, as working an injustice both to the whites and the blacks in that it made the South solidly democratic.[3] J. G. de R. Hamilton, exaggerating the actual basis of Reconstruction in the southern commonwealths, which were never fully controlled by the Negroes, speaks of the work as having left as a legacy "a protest against anything that might threaten a repet.i.tion of the past, when selfish politicians, backed up by the Federal Government, for party purposes, attempted to Africanize the State and deprive the people through misrule and oppression of most that life held dear."[4] John W. Burgess calls the effort an "extravagant humanitarianism which had developed in the minds of the Reconstruction leaders to the point of justifying, not only the political equality of the races but the political superiority at least in loyalty to the Union, the const.i.tution and republican government, of the uncivilized Negroes of the South."[5] Burgess sees justice in subjecting the inferior to the superior cla.s.s but none in subjecting the superior to the inferior.
Of these radical utterances historians need take but little notice.
They are of value here for the reason that they show the lack of scientific Reconstruction history. No intelligent man who lived through this stormy period or who has read doc.u.ments bearing on its history will contend that these commonwealths were Africanized merely because the Negroes along with the formerly disfranchised and ignorant poor whites were given the right of suffrage. It will be difficult to prove that the majority of poor whites in the South were at this time sufficiently intelligent and experienced in statecraft to give those commonwealths a much better government than that administered by the Negroes and "Carpet baggers"; for the South had been ruled by few aristocratic families, most of whom because of partic.i.p.ation in the Civil War, could not on the cessation of hostilities be given the reins of government. A few who had not had any such connection with the Confederacy haughtily refused to cooperate with the Negroes in the reconstruction of these governments, although they were persistently invited by the Negroes who were thus advised by Thaddeus Stevens and Charles Sumner, who showed foresight in trying to secure the cooperation of the best white element in the South.[6] These statesmen, however, are generally slandered by uninformed writers who contend that Sumner and Stevens did not thus proceed. The Negroes not only sought the leadership of the whites but showed unusual humaneness toward their poverty-stricken former masters by pa.s.sing, as they did in South Carolina, stay laws to postpone the payment of their many war debts secured by mortgages on their property.
Statistics show, moreover, that with the exception of South Carolina and Mississippi, no State and not even any department of a State government was ever dominated altogether by Negroes. The Negroes never wanted and never had complete control in the Southern States.[7] The most important offices were generally held by white men. Only two Negroes ever served in the United States Senate, Hiram R. Revells and B. K. Bruce; and only twenty ever became Representatives in the House: and all of these did not serve at the same time, although some of them were elected for more than one term.
The charge that the men who were elected to office by the Negroes were always of the most debased and degenerate type is untrue. Because of the refusal of the southern aristocracy to cooperate with them, however, the Negroes were forced to elect such men as they were able to secure. Numerous promising and respectable whites who were elected to office by the Negroes, became corrupt and unprincipled on account of the treatment tendered them by the aristocratic whites. From among the Negroes themselves, the very best men available were chosen to hold offices. Among these were former slaves who had been made trustworthy servants of their masters and free Negroes who had received some education. Some of these Negroes served in their official capacity with honor and credit. A number of them were also respected by certain fairminded southern whites.[8]
Numerous examples of the high regard which the whites of certain communities had for the Negro leaders can be cited. Samuel J. Lee, of Charleston, South Carolina, was considered by his white contemporaries as one of the best criminal lawyers which the State had produced. At his death all local courts were declared adjourned and the entire city paid him homage. The late Bishop Isaac Clinton served, as Treasurer of Orangeburg, South Carolina, for eight years. Like Mr. Lee, he was held in high esteem by his white neighbors and upon the occasion of his funeral, the business of the community was suspended as a mark of respect to his memory. In certain communities, as in South Carolina, some Negroes were retained as office holders for a number of years after the supremacy of the Democratic party was a.s.sured. In Georgetown, South Carolina, Mr. George Harriot was Superintendent of Education for the county for years under the Democratic party.
Beaufort, South Carolina, retained Negroes as sheriffs and school officials until a few years ago.[9]
J. T. White, Commissioner of Public Works and Internal Improvements in the State of Arkansas; M. W. Gibbs, Munic.i.p.al judge in Little Rock, and J. C. Corbin, State Superintendent of Schools in the same State, had records equally as creditable. The same may be said of F. L.
Cardoza, State Treasurer of South Carolina, Richard T. Greener, a professor in the University of that commonwealth, Oscar Dunn, Lieutenant-Governor of Louisiana and P.B.S. Pinchback, Acting Governor of that State.[10] The record of Dubuclet, according to Dr. Woodson, should receive special mention. In contradistinction to the rule of stealing from the public treasury, this man who served as Treasurer of the State of Louisiana even after the other departments of the government had been taken from the Negroes, in as much as the term of service of the Treasurer was six years rather than four, was investigated with a view to finding out some act of misuse of the public funds that he might be impeached and thrown out of office. The committee, of which E.D. White, now Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, was chairman, reported after much deliberation that Dubuclet"s funds had been honestly handled and that there were no grounds on which proceedings against him could be inst.i.tuted.[11]
Despite the above mentioned instances of commendable Negro officials, however, the majority of the Negro functionaries were incompetent and as a result these governments could but collapse. The charge of corruption laid at the door of the Negro carpetbagger governments is to a large extent true. The corruption resulted largely from the work of the interlopers from the North and the "scalawags," using the Negroes to reach their own personal ends. In some of this corruption, however, the Negro was an apt scholar and freely partic.i.p.ated. The Negroes were not as a whole prepared for the political privileges which were vouchsafed to them and they were to a large extent under the wrong sort of leadership. It is equally true, however, that governments were corrupt throughout the United States at this period.
The Reconstruction period was one of corruption and if the Negro governments were of a lower order than a few others, they were not far out of accord with the times. The white people, who a.s.sumed control of the government on overthrowing the Reconstruction regime, inst.i.tuted in several States a rule of corruption surpa.s.sing even that of their predecessors. Coming back into office like hungry persons who had been exposed to the cold atmosphere of an exile, the radical whites filled their purses from the coffers of the public treasury and defaulted to the amount of thousands of dollars which the tax payers have had to replace in the years thereafter.[12] The disgraces of Reconstruction, therefore, have been exaggeratingly flaunted by the South for the same purpose that it proclaims the widespread false charge of rape of the present day to justify the persecution of the Negro for being "unusually criminal."
The Negro was finally driven from southern politics through violence and fraud. The chief agent of the southern whites in accomplishing this was a secret organization known as the Ku Klux Klan. This organized mob killed off or drove the leading "Carpetbaggers" out of the South and intimidated the Negroes into submission by perpetrating numerous outrages upon them. After the whites regained control of the government, through their agents of terror the political ascendancy of the Negro was at end. The unscrupulous northern friends of the Negro having discovered that they could no longer successfully exploit them, therefore, abandoned them in the midst of their calamity. The whites proceeded to solidify the Democratic party and to eliminate the Negro entirely from politics in the South.
Politically, however, Reconstruction was in several respects a success. In the first place, the reconstructed governments were democratic, lifting a standard that the backward commonwealths of the South must still struggle for years to reach. In this social upheaval the poor white man was politically emanc.i.p.ated by receiving the boon of suffrage theretofore restricted to persons owning property and given a free and open door to office holding, which, under the old regime had been restricted to the few aristocrats dominating the country and State governments. These Negroes gave the South its improved judicial system and did their work so well in framing some of the const.i.tutions that many of them with the exception of the clauses antagonistic to the Negro remained about as they were for many years.
Although the Democrats got control of the State in 1877, the const.i.tution of South Carolina of 1868 was not changed materially until 1893.
The Negro as a factor in reconstruction, moreover, inst.i.tuted education at the expense of the public. Through the establishment of public schools with well equipped buildings and prepared teachers they removed from that system the stigma formerly attached to persons[13]
educating their children at public expense. They, therefore, made of education a foundation upon which real democracy must build. It is only short sightedness on the part of writers to infer that because the Negro was in a few years thereafter deprived of the ballot that the good work which was done during the years that they were permitted to partic.i.p.ate in the affairs of these States could be so easily overthrown, especially so when this progressive part of the program of the reconstructed governments which the restored whites at first abandoned has later been taken up and carried out.
Although weakened by the reaction of the North against the methods employed by politicians in maintaining the reconstructed governments at the South, which moved President Hayes to withdraw the troops from that area, the Negroes were still of some concern to the Republicans.
To retain their support the Republicans often spoke of foisting upon the South the Force Bill to guarantee fair elections but rather abandoned the Negro to the fate of working out his own salvation with his oppressors. In all of the campaigns up to 1888 there was the usual waving of the "b.l.o.o.d.y shirt" to array the Negro against the South and of urging the Negro to vote the Republican ticket to pay the debt he owed the party for his freedom, hypocritically threatening also to undo many of the things which had been done to the Negro since Reconstruction. There was no sincerity in these vote-getting declarations, however, and the Negro in the South remained politically doomed.
Nothing will better bring out this treatment of the Negro by the Republican party than a study of the consideration given the race in the various platforms of that party following the Civil war. The Republicans in the convention of 1868 declared themselves in sympathy with all oppressed peoples struggling for their rights and recognized the principles laid down in the Declaration of Independence as a true foundation of democratic government. That same year, however, the Democratic party recognized the question of slavery and secession as having been settled but denounced Negro supremacy.[14]
In 1872 the platform of the Republican party was somewhat more outspoken. It carried a reference to the suppression of the rebellion, the emanc.i.p.ation of four million slaves, the grant of equal citizenship and the establishment of universal suffrage. It said, moreover, that "neither law nor its administration should attempt any discrimination in respect to citizens by reason of race, creed, color, or previous condition of servitude.[15] The Liberal Republicans, rallying in a different quarter that year, declared in their platform their belief in the equality of all men before the law and the duty of the government in all its dealings with the people to mete out equal and exact justice to all of whatever nativity, race, color or persuasion, religious or political. The Liberal Republicans pledged themselves to maintain the union of States, emanc.i.p.ation, and enfranchis.e.m.e.nt and to oppose any reopening of the questions settled by the Thirteenth, Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments of the Const.i.tution. They advocated the removal of the disabilities of Confederates, the establishment of civil government at the South, universal amnesty, and impartial suffrage.[16]
In 1876 the Negro was given further mention by the various parties.
The Prohibitionists took the lead in the declaration for equal suffrage and eligibility to office without distinction of race, religious creed, property or s.e.x.[17] The Republicans referred in their platform to the permanent restoration of the southern section to the Union and the complete protection of all citizens in the free enjoyment of all their rights as an issue to which the Republican party stood sacredly pledged. "The power to provide for the enforcement of the principles embodied by the recent const.i.tutional amendments," continues the platform, "is vested by those amendments in the Congress of the United States, and we declare it to be a solemn obligation of the legislative and executive departments of government to put into immediate and vigorous exercise all their const.i.tutional powers for removing any just cause of discontent on the part of any cla.s.s, and for securing to every American citizen complete liberty and exact equality in the exercise of all civil, political, and public rights. To this end we imperatively demand a congress and a chief executive whose courage and fidelity to these duties are placed beyond dispute or recall."[18]
The National Democratic platform of that year, however, spoke for the democracy of the whole country and declared its faith in the permanence of the Federal Union, and devotion to the Const.i.tution of the United States with its amendments universally accepted as a final settlement of the controversies that engendered the Civil War; but took a bold stand for reform as necessary to rebuild and establish in the hearts of the whole people of the Union eleven years ago happily rescued from the danger of a secession of States but now to be severed from a corrupt centralism which after inflicting upon ten States the rapacity of carpet bag tyrannies, had "honey-combed the offices of the Federal government itself with the contagion of misrule and locked fast the prosperity of an industrious people in the paralysis of hard times."[19]
In 1880 The Republican party made no particular mention of the grievances of the Negroes but recited its record in suppressing the rebellion, reconstructing the Union with freedom instead of slavery as its corner stone, the transformation of four million human beings from the likeness of things to the rank of citizens and removing Congress from the infamous work of hunting fugitive slaves and charging it to see that slavery shall not exist. It declared, moreover, that the South must be divided by the peaceful agencies of the ballot that all opinions might there find free expression and to this end the honest voter must be protected against terrorism, violence or fraud.[20]
In 1884 there was no specific reference to the Negro unless it be found in the statement that the Republican party had gained its strength by "quick and faithful response to the demands of the people for the freedom and equality of all men; for a united nation, a.s.suring the rights of all citizens."[21] The platform of the Democratic party carried a declaration equally as emphatic in that it said, "the preservation of personal rights; the equality of all citizens before the law; the reserved rights of the States and the supremacy of the Federal government within the limits of the const.i.tution will ever form the true basis of our liberties." It further said; "a.s.serting the equality of all men before the law, we hold that it is the duty of the government, in its dealings with the people, to mete out equal and exact justice to all citizens, of whatever nativity, race, color, or persuasion, religious or political."[22]
Giving some impetus to the movement for woman suffrage which the Republicans had by various platforms theretofore encouraged, the Prohibitionists carried in their platform in 1888 the declaration that the right of suffrage rests on no mere circ.u.mstance of race, color, s.e.x or nationality and that "where, from any cause, it has been held from citizens who are of suitable age and mentally and morally qualified for the exercise of an intelligent ballot, it should be restored by the people through the legislature of the several States, on such basis as they may deem wise.[23]
To protect the Negroes in their political rights, however, the Federal Government as administered by the Republican party during these years furnished little encouragement, through its much talked of enforcement of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. Bills providing for adequate military protection of the Negroes at the polls were enacted but the Supreme Court of the United States declared that the Federal Government did not possess the authority to restrain mobs from interfering with elections. The Supreme Court conceded that the Fifteenth Amendment forbade the denial of the right to vote by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude, but easily conceded that no violation of this amendment could occur when a hostile mob excluded Negroes from the polls. Yet although the mob thus quickly triumphed in undoing the democratic reforms of Reconstruction, the South hoped thereafter to reach the same end by imposing on the Negroes a legal disability; for the Fifteenth Amendment did not a.s.sert the right of the Negro to vote. It merely said that suffrage could not be denied on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. As the Negro was generally poor and in the midst of the economic depression of the South too often had to wander from place to place to seek a livelihood, he could be easily eliminated by the poll tax, the resident requirement, and educational tests.
Thus it happened. Mississippi under its new const.i.tution in 1890 eliminated the Negro and in the next twenty years all of the cotton States except Florida and Texas followed its example. Arkansas based the franchise on a one year poll tax in 1893; South Carolina required residence, enrollment, and poll tax in 1895; Delaware adopted an educational test in 1897, Louisiana resorted to the same test and poll tax in 1898 and North Carolina fell in line in 1900. Alabama established the residence, registry and poll tax requirement in 1901; and Virginia, Georgia and Oklahoma based suffrage on property, literacy or poll tax in 1902, 1908, and 1910 respectively. As these measures bore heavily also upon certain ignorant whites they were relieved of this disability by the "Grandfather Clause" specifying that the persons deprived by these regulations of the right to vote might be placed upon the roll of voters if they had exercised this privilege before the year 1867 or were descended from such voters.
This was essentially the clause adopted in North Carolina, Alabama, Virginia, and Georgia.[24] The Supreme Court, however, has declared the "Grandfather Clause" a violation of the Fifteenth Amendment.
During the campaigns after 1888 the Republican party made no special mention of the Negro as it had formerly and did not show any inclination to shoulder the grievances of the race. At this time the Republicans were face to face with a large element of political reformers led by the Democrats who, prior to the campaign of 1884 had carried Pennsylvania and New York and made such other inroads in northern strongholds as to convince the leaders of the Republican party that the Negro issue and the "b.l.o.o.d.y shirt" would no longer suffice to hold those voters who had been won by the intelligent appeal for deliverance from the corrupt practices in the local and national governments. This movement culminated in the election of Grover Cleveland in 1884 and in his election the second time in 1892.
To attach Negroes to their cause, to be sure, the Republicans were very deferential to them in the national conventions, where they were of much service in naming candidates for the national ticket although they could not vote in the South and were not sufficiently numerous in the North to be a large factor at the polls. At the convention in 1884, the national committee had named ex-Senator Powell Clayton of Arkansas as temporary chairman of the convention, an arrangement which was supposed to be in the interest of Mr. Blaine. The young men of the party led by Henry Cabot Lodge and Theodore Roosevelt effected the nomination from the floor of John R. Lynch, a distinguished man of color of Mississippi, and the vote by delegates elected him to the position by 431 to 387 given to Mr. Clayton.[25] Frederick Dougla.s.s received one vote for the nomination for President in 1888.[26]
After the complete undoing of the Reconstruction the Negroes were at a loss politically. A number of the foremost Negro politicians, among whom were Frederick Dougla.s.s, John R. Lynch, B. K. Bruce, John M.
Langston, John C. Dancy, and a few others, were given positions in the service of the Federal Government of high sounding t.i.tles and little importance, such as Registrar of the Treasury, Recorder of Deeds, Auditor of the Navy and diplomatic posts in Negro countries. A greater number of Negroes found an outlet in the civil service. Even up until the present day it is an ardent desire of the Negro to obtain a civil service appointment. In these positions the Negroes were able to earn a comparatively easy living but were not able to do anything constructive for the uplift of their people.
The Negroes, however, had continued to support the Republican party to the full extent of their strength. But it soon became clear that the support of Negro leaders was little more than an effort directed toward obtaining a few unimportant offices. The Republicans, having long since discovered that the Negro vote of most communities can be changed neither to harm nor to help them, have consequently ceased to consider the danger of losing their support of great import. The Democratic party, moreover, has continued almost unswervingly its att.i.tude of aloofness from the Negro. The onesidedness of the Negro vote has been declared by some Negroes to be the cause of its non-importance. With this political view some few of them have allied themselves with the Democratic party, feeling that the division of the Negro"s vote may work an improvement in his political status. Because of ex-President Taft"s att.i.tude of indifference toward the Negroes a number of the Negro politicians supported Roosevelt"s party in 1912 and many voted for Wilson in 1916.
With the Negro in this weak position, however, there developed in the South a movement to remove from the Republican party the stigma of its connection with the Negro by eliminating the members of that race from the circles of control in the South. This movement has been generally known as a "Lily-Whiteism." For the last twenty-five years, therefore, there have come to the National Republican Conventions from the various Southern States contesting delegations, one white and the other black, each one claiming to be the properly accredited representative of the Republican party in the State concerned. In some States the "Lily-Whites" have actually held conventions from which the Negroes were excluded or which they were not permitted to attend.
Because of the difficulty of making good their claim as properly accredited delegates they have abandoned this method for the subterfuge of holding their conventions in hotels or other exclusive places which Negroes, because of the social proscription of the race, are prohibited from entering by an already well established unwritten law.
As a matter of fact the Republican party in such commonwealths no longer exists and these delegates whether white or black represent merely rotten boroughs. As they are of use, however, in selecting the candidate to be nominated for president, the administration has been very reluctant to interfere with the proposed reform in these quarters for the reason that such delegates are usually made up of persons appointed by the President of the United States to Federal positions in the South. As the President usually desires to be reelected and can control such a coterie, it has been very difficult to find one with the courage to give his influence in the direction of reform.
Early in the winter of the year when the president is to be nominated, persons supporting the administration usually visit the South laying plans for lining up these prospective delegates. Politicians interested in other candidates make similar tours through the South sometimes lavishly handling funds to the extent of buying up delegates. As the whites are in a much better position to secure the few Federal appointments allotted in the South, after the election, since the abandonment of the policy of appointing Negroes to these positions, the Negroes have usually exacted a much larger compensation for their services in the pre-convention struggle than whites have required, thus shamelessly disgracing themselves in the eyes of those who would expect the leaders of the race to play a more honorable role.
There are in certain sections of the South a number of men who devote all of their time to electing these delegates for service in these conventions and secure therefore adequate remuneration for a livelihood from administration to administration. The pliant Negro delegates at the convention in Chicago in 1908 and 1912 were unequal to the task of nominating a progressive candidate because of their machine like attachment to the candidacy of William Howard Taft, whom the American people would not accept. The Negro delegates, however, did much better in the convention of 1916 and still further improved by the time of the conventions of 1920, when it was impossible for any pre-convention arrangement or plan to be so carried out that any candidate could come to the convention saying that he had the Negroes to vote in any particular way. It is encouraging, moreover, to add that numbers of these delegates had received no funds from any quarter whatever, but along with white men promoting their party had contributed to the campaign funds and had paid their own expenses to the convention. They were, therefore, given a more dignified position in the management of the party affairs and were in many respects shown the same consideration as that given the white delegates, serving on various important committees and placed in strategic positions in the management of the campaign without regard to color.
In drawing to a close this discussion of the Negro in politics I wish to accentuate the fact that while the Negro is at present practically a political nonent.i.ty, he is yet potent, as is ill.u.s.trated in various parts of the country. For example, at present there are two Negro councilmen in Chicago, two aldermen in New York, one a.s.semblyman in New York, two councilmen in Baltimore, three Negro members in the West Virginia legislature, one in the California legislature, and one in the Indiana legislature. In several of the cities of the North there is such a large Negro population and so much appreciation among the Negroes of their political power that they are now launching a movement to nominate and elect members of their race to represent them in Congress. It is likely that this may soon be effected in Chicago, New York, and Philadelphia.
NORMAN P. ANDREWS
FOOTNOTES:
[1] This article was written under the direction of Dr. C. G. Woodson, under whom the writer prosecuted various courses in history during the year 1919-1920 at Howard University. The writer is indebted to him for valuable suggestions and many important facts which Dr. Woodson incorporated into the dissertation before publishing it. The writer was aided too by suggestions and facts obtained from Mr. W.T. Andrews, the editor of the _Baltimore Herald_, Professor Kelly Miller, and Mr.
A. Phillips Randolph, of New York City.
[2] _The Journal of Negro History_, Vol. V, pp. 110-111.
[3] Eckenrode, _Political History of Virginia during Reconstruction_, pp. 127, 128, and Thompson, _Reconstruction in Georgia_, p. 400.
[4] Hamilton, _Reconstruction in North Carolina_, p. 607.
[5] Burgess, _Reconstruction and the Const.i.tution_, p. 218.
[6] _The Journal of Negro History_, Vol. V, pp. 110-111.
[7] This statement is based on information obtained from numerous partic.i.p.ants in the Reconstruction of the Southern States. Among these are John R. Lynch, Thomas E. Miller, T. T. Allain, and P. B. S.
Pinchback.
[8] This is the testimony of white persons obtained by the writer.
[9] These facts were obtained through Mr. W. T. Andrews who lived in South Carolina.
[10] Simmons, _Men of Mark_, pp. 113, 829, 948, 1023; Woodson, _A Century of Negro Migration_, pp. 124-125.
[11] _Report of Joint Committee to Investigate the Treasurer"s Office, State of Louisiana, to the General a.s.sembly, 1877_, pp. 7-12.