USA > Alabama > Memorial record of Alabama. A concise account of the state's political, military, professional and industrial progress, together with the personal memoirs of many of its people. Volume I > Part 9
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90 | Part 91 | Part 92 | Part 93 | Part 94 | Part 95 | Part 96 | Part 97 | Part 98 | Part 99 | Part 100 | Part 101 | Part 102 | Part 103 | Part 104 | Part 105 | Part 106 | Part 107 | Part 108 | Part 109 | Part 110 | Part 111 | Part 112 | Part 113 | Part 114 | Part 115 | Part 116 | Part 117 | Part 118 | Part 119 | Part 120 | Part 121 | Part 122 | Part 123 | Part 124 | Part 125 | Part 126 | Part 127 | Part 128 | Part 129 | Part 130 | Part 131
During the same month this action was supplemented by the adoption of joint resolutions in the Alabama legislature which provided in sub- stance that, in the event of the election of a republican president, the governor should call together a state convention to consider and do whatever the rights, interests and honor of the state should require under the circumstances. The friends of peace and union, and of the national democracy, were not unmindful of the motives of those who had led the convention and the legislature to the adoption of these measures. Mr. John Forsyth of Mobile, the valiant supporter of Douglas, said in the legislature that no true democrat could support the action of the con- vention which had prepared to send to Charleston a platform "which
76
MEMORIAL RECORD OF ALABAMA.
it is known beforehand cannot be granted without scattering the democ- racy of the union to the winds." It was no secret to Mr. Forsyth that Mr. Yancey had deliberately planned to break in twain the national de- mocracy at Charleston by the forcing of his impossible resolutions; and then, after the election of a republican president, which would inevitably result, to force the secession of Alabama from the union. The sad de- tails of the success of the great agitator in the execution of his designs need not be recounted. Suffice it to say that when the convention met, from the high eminence to which he had climbed, he discharged the poisoned arrows of discord into the ranks of the only organized host which stood between the south and her foes. After all efforts at com- promise had failed, that wing of the democracy which had refused to abandon popular sovereignty in the territories nominated Douglas and Johnson; while the southern wing, which would yield nothing of their demands as formulated by Calhoun and Yancey, nominated Breckinridge and Lane. The American party, which now assumed the name of consti- tutional union, nominated Bell and Everett; while the republicans, who claimed that freedom was the normal condition of the territories which congress was bound to preserve and defend, nominated Lincoln and Hamlin. The outcome was the election of the last named, a consum- mation which the states' rights party of the south had declared before- hand would be regarded the casus belli which would compel the separate secession of the southern states from the union. Upon the night of the eventful 6th of November, 1860. the news of the result of the election was received in Montgomery, and in a mass meeting, which was soon called, Mr. Yancey declared for secession in a burning oration, which concluded with the dramatic announcement that rather than suffer longer the ills which the union inflicted, "I would in the cause of my state gather around me some brave spirits who, however few in number, would find a grave, which my countrymen, the world and all future ages, should recog- nize as a modern Thermopylæ!" Alabama was now face to face with the supreme question, and Mr. Yancey was soon to find that there was a great and patriotic body in her midst who demanded something more substantial than turgid rhetoric as a reason for her withdrawal from the union.
On February 24, 1860, the legislature of Alabama adopted the resolu- tions which required the governor, in the event of the election of a black republican to the presidency, at the election in the following No- vember, to order an election of delegates to a constitutional convention. The contemplated contingency having happened, the governor, imme- diately after the meeting of the electoral college, had writs of election issued in the several counties, and the one hundred delegates who were elected on December 4th met and organized at Montgomery, in the hall of the house of representatives, on the 7th of January, 1861. From exist- ing data it is hard to so analyze the vote as to determine just how many
77
POLITICAL HISTORY OF THE STATE.
of the voters were in favor of immediate secession, and just how many were in favor of co-operative and continued efforts to preserve the union. The secession journal at Montgomery computed the vote at the time at 36,000 for secession and 27,000 for co-operation, while the opposition journal computed it at 24,000 'for secession and 33,000 for co-operation. Certain it seems to be that not more than 36,000 votes were cast for im- mediate secession by a population which at the preceding presidential election had polled over 90,000 votes. In the face of such meager popu- lar support the secessionists were tremulous for the fate of their meas- ures. At first it was believed that the co-operationists would have a majority in the convention, and finally when the truth was ascertained it appeared that there were only fifty-four members for secession against forty-six for co-operation. And yet within and without the state events were fast drifting in the direction of revolution. Prior to the meeting of the convention the governor had assumed the responsibility of seizing the forts at the mouth of Mobile bay, and the United States arsenal at Mount Vernon. The senators from those southern states which had called conventions had met in caucus at Washington and had adopted resolu- tions favoring immediate secession, with the recommendation that a con- gress of all the seceding states be held at Montgomery on the 15th of February. South Carolina had already seceded and her commissioner, Andrew P. Calhoun, had on the second day of the convention presented his credentials and delivered an effective address, in which he urged that Alabama at once unite with South Carolina in the formation of a confederacy of the cotton states. In the face of all this pressure, at- tended with great popular excitement, the resolute and devoted band which still stood for the union began their defensive tactics by propos- ing, on the third day of the convention, a resolution that its action should be submitted to the people for their ratification. Thus did the minority justly challenge the right of a convention, which was called simply to consider the question of secession, to pass upon and settle that question without any farther popular authority. After this proposition to submit the work of the convention to the people had been rejected by a strict party vote, a resolution was offered pledging the power of Ala- bama to aid in resisting any attempt upon the part of the federal gov- ernment to coerce a seceding state. The debate upon that resolution brought matters to a crisis; it called Mr. Yancey to his feet, who, in a defiant and passionate speech; undertook to threaten with a traitor's doom those who still dared to pause before breaking the tie which bound Alabama to the union. Impressed with the unwisdom and impolicy of this ill-timed assault, Mr. Watts, an old whig who had all through the coming storm been wise, courageous and conservative, rose to his feet, and in that winning way peculiarly his own, did all he could to draw the sting which Mr. Yancey's bitter words had planted. But the effort was unavailing. The blow had been struck, the offense had been given, the
78
MEMORIAL RECORD OF ALABAMA.
time had come for the men from the mountains to teach the aggressive apostle of secession that there were limits to their patience. Mr. Jem- ison of Tuscaloosa, who was the first to rise, inquired by what authority any one should say that he who should dare to array himself against the ordinance of secession after its passage would be a traitor to Alabama; that such a one would occupy toward the true people of the state the relation which the tories bore to the whigs of the revolution? "Sir," said Mr. Jemison, "when the great leader of the majority shall call the minority parties tories, shall denounce us as traitors, and pronounce against us a traitor's doom, were I to pass it in silence the world would properly consider me worthy of denunciation and the doom." Stirred by the force of this response Mr. Yancey was quick to seek shelter in the avowal that what he had said was not intended for the minority of the convention, but for those in certain portions of the state where it was said the ordinance of secession, if passed, would be resisted. In this unfortunate attempt at an apology the original offense was double, be- cause it was clearly understood on all hands that, although the people of north Alabama had not been mentioned by name, it was against them that the imputation was directed. Thus aroused by an assault upon those who had honored his father and himself from the foundation of the state, Nicholas Davis of Madison, in reply to Mr. Yancey's suggestion that he had not named the people of north Alabama, said: "No, sir, you did not, but it is very well understood by every member upon this floor to whom your remarks were applicable. If it should turn out that the popular vote is against the act of secession, should it pass, I tell you, sir, that I believe it will and ought to be resisted. The minority of this state ought not to control the majority. But we are told that this is a representative government-not a pure democracy, and in this form minorities may rule. If our state government be representative in this sense, who made it so? The people, who in convention framed its con- stitution and organic law. They set it on foot, and whilst it moves in the orbit which they prescribed, I grant that it is representative and has the feature which it is claimed. Secession, however, destroys that constitution, and the people are muzzled in this convention by a legis- lature which derived its existence from the instrument to be destroyed. But I do not propose to discuss the matter. Judging from the speech of the gentleman from Montgomery, this is not the mode in which it is to be decided. We are told, sir, by him, that resistance to the action of this convention is treason, and those who undertake it traitors and rebels. The nomenclature of the revolution is to be revived, and the epithet of tory in future may ornament the names of Alabamians. I cannot accept this as applicable to my constituents; nor do I perceive the fullness or force of the intended illustration. The whigs of the revolution were the friends of this government, the tories its enemies. If names shall hold the same relation to the government now as then, I shall have no
79
POLITICAL HISTORY OF THE STATE.
objection to the historical reminiscences. And not less odious than the name of tory, is the doctrine which is claimed of the right to coerce an unwilling people. We must be dealt with as public enemies. But yester- day this convention condemned this doctrine. With one voice you de- clared against it, and expressed your determination to meet such an in- vasion of your rights as it ought to be met, with arms in your hands. It will be asserted as readily against a tyrant at home as abroad; as readily by the people of my. section against usurpation and outrage here as elsewhere. And when compelled to take this course, they will cheerfully, no doubt, assume all the responsibilities that follow the act. I seek no quarrel with the gentleman from Montgomery or his friends. Toward them personally I entertain none other than the kindest feelings. But I tell him, should he engage in that enterprise, that he will not be allowed to boast the character of an invader. Coming at the head of any force he can muster, aided and assisted by the executive of this state, we will meet him at the foot of our mountains, and there, with his own selected weapons, hand to hand, and face to face, settle the question of the sov- ereignty of the people." Strange to say, at this supreme moment, when the sovereignty of the people of a state was the paramount contention, not in a single instance, with the exception of Texas, were the sovereign people of any southern state permitted to speak directly upon the ques- tion of secession. After the voter had expressed his choice of delegates to his state convention, called only to consider the question of secession, he was not farther consulted. The conventions thus called resolved themselves into constituent assemblies which, without any further authority from the people, finally settled the question of secession, and then sent delegates to meet those chosen by the other seceding states for the purpose of forming a new national government. Such was the course pursued in Alabama. After the memorable proceedings of the 9th of January, which concluded with the speech of Mr. Davis, denouncing the refusal of the convention to submit its action to the people, an adjournment was taken to the 10th, when Mr. Yancey, in behalf of the majority and the committee of thirteen, reported the ordinance of seces- sion, which provided "That the state of Alabama now withdraws, and she is hereby withdrawn from the union known as the United States of America,' and henceforth ceases to be one of said United States, and is, and of right ought to be, a sovereign and independent state." At the same time an invitation was extended to the other slaveholding states inviting them "to meet the people of the state of Alabama, by their delegates, in convention assembled, on the 4th day of February, A. D. 1861, at the city of Montgomery, in the state of Alabama, for the purpose of consulting with each other as to the most effectual mode of securing concerted and harmonious action in whatever measures may be deemed most desirable for our common peace and security." Mr. Clemens then submitted a minority report, signed by six of the thirteen
80
MEMORIAL RECORD OF ALABAMA.
members, in which the convention was informed that the minority failed to see in separate secession the wisest course of action; that an effort should first be made to obtain the co-operation of all the states interested before a final conclusion should be reached; that in a matter so vitally important the people should again be consulted. The report then con- cluded with a recommendation that a convention of all the southern states be called to meet at Nashville on the 22d of February, to consider the wrongs of the south, and the surest means by which to right them. Upon a motion by Mr. Clemens to substitute the minority for the major- ity report, the motion was lost by a vote of forty-five ayes to fifty-four noes. Mr. Yancey then moved the adoption of the ordinance of seces- sion. which brought about an adjournment of the convention to the next day, the 11th. On that day, in that majestic spirit of self-abnegation which so generally characterized that large and influential body of union men who were eager, when war had become inevitable, to share the for- tunes of their people, Mr. Clemens said: "For the present it is enough to say that I am a son of Alabama; her destiny is mine; here people are mine; her enemies are mine. I see plainly enough that clouds and storms are gathering above us; but when the thunder rolls and lightning flashes, I trust that I shall neither shrink nor cower-neither murmur nor com- plain. Acting upon the convictions of a life-time, calmly and deliber- ately I walk with you into revolution. Be its perils, be its privations, be its sufferings what they may, I share them with you, although as a member of this convention I oppose your ordinance. Side by side with yours, Mr. President, my name shall stand upon the original roll; and side by side with you I brave the consequences." In this we have no idle babble about peaceful secession, but the clear foresight of a man who knew that a terrible civil war was at hand, a civil war which would inevitably inflict untold sufferings upon his people. Although he could not approve of the acts of those who were about to precipitate that war, he was willing, when he could no longer restrain them, to go with them even to the extent of sharing responsibility for that which to the last had received his condemnation. Animated by such motives as these seven of the minority went with Mr. Clemens over to the majority, and the result was that when final action upon the ordinance was taken it was adopted by a vote of sixty-one for it to thirty-nine against it. After an- nouncing the vote, the president of the convention declared that Alabama was a free, sovereign and independent state-a conclusion which the supreme court of the United States afterward declared (Texas vs. White, 7 Wall., 700) unsound as a matter of law.
On the 16th of January the special committee of thirteen reported fav- orably upon the formation of confederate relations with the other seced- ing states upon the basis of the constitution of the United States, and advised the election of delegates to the provisional congress called to meet at Montgomery on February 4th. When a motion was made that the
81
POLITICAL HISTORY OF THE STATE.
plan for confederate constitution should be submitted for ratification or rejection to a new convention, to be elected by the people, for the reason that the present convention, after having adopted the ordinance of seces- sion was functus officio-the motion was laid upon the table by a vote of forty-nine to thirty-nine. On the 12th of March, when the permanent constitution of the Confederate States was submitted to the convention for ratification, an effort was again made to refer it to a direct vote of the people. But the effort failed; and after its ratification a resolution was on the same day unanimously adopted, approving the election of Mr. Jefferson Davis as president and Mr. Alexander H. Stephens as vice-presi- dent of the provisional government of the Confederate States. The per- manent constitution of the new government thus ratified was a substantial reproduction of that of the United States, with variations designed to emphasize the doctrine of state sovereignty, to prevent the grant of bounties, the protective features in the tariff, as well as the maintenance of internal improvements at the general expense, and to recognize and protect "the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confed- erate States." The only really novel feature of the new instrument was that which gave to the ministers seats in congress, a provision which had its origin with the Hon. Robert H. Smith of Mobile, one of the great- est lawyers of his time, whose perfect knowledge of the political system of the mother country naturally led him to attempt to transfer to our shores, at least in part, that practical expedient which is the driving force of the English constitution in its modern form. The delegates who were chosen to the provisional congress of the Confederate States met at Montgomery on the 4th of February, 1861, formed a provisional constitu- tion, and elected the provisional president and vice-president, who were there inaugurated on the 18th. After the ratification of the permanent con- stitution in March, the seat of government was moved from Montgomery to Richmond.
The constitutional convention, after establishing annual instead of bien- nial sessions of the legislature, and after making some other minor changes in the fundamental law, adjourned sine die on March 21. To complete its work, the general assembly was in the same month convened in extraordinary session in order to enact such legislation as was made necessary by the state's changed relations, and in order to prepare for the coming of the war which was formally declared by the proclamation of President Lincloln on the 15th of April. At a second called session, which was held in October, Governor Moore reported in his message that, up to that time, the state had already furnished fully 27,000 men, and that five more regiments were forming. In November Governor Moore, after a service of four years which ended with the launching of the state upon the troubled sea of revolution, yielded the executive office to Hon. John Gill Shorter of Barbour, who, while he was serving in the 6
-
.
82
MEMORIAL RECORD OF ALABAMA.
provisional congress at Richmond, had been elected the first war gover- nor over the Hon. Thomas H. Watts of Montgomery. The task which the new executive was called upon to assume proved a difficult one in- deed. Borne into office by a call from a large majority of the people, he found his popularity soon passing away under the strain of dissatisfac- tion which naturally arose out of the vexed questions involved in the conscription, in the quota of state troops to be furnished the confederacy, in the collection of a tax in kind for the support of the army, in the col- lection of a revenue and specific tax under acts of congress, in the col- lection of a tax for the support of the state government and for the redemption of its bonds. Overcome by the popular feeling which grew out of his efforts to do his whole duty to the cause in which he had en- listed, he was beaten for re-election by a large majority by Mr. Watts, over whom he had triumphed in the preceding election.
Thomas Hill Watts, a native of the state, after he graduated at the uni- versity of Virginia, began his professional career as a lawyer in the county of Butler, which he several times represented in the legislature prior to his removal to Montgomery in 1846. From that time dates his career as a leader of the Alabama bar, which he has ever since adorned. By political conviction a whig, he soon became a leader of his party, and in 1855 he was one of its nominees for the lower house of congress against Colonel Dowdell of Chambers, who was successful by a very small majority. During the exciting years which preceded the war his voice was ever for peace and union, as long as there was a hope of hon- orably preserving either. He was a member of the constitutional con- vention of 1861, and in that year it was that he received what should be considered as a large complimentary vote for governor, as he only con- sented to the use of his name a very short time before the election. Then it was that he was elected colonel of the Seventeenth Alabama infantry, and while in command of it at Corinth in the March following, he was surprised by a notice of his appointment to the cabinet as attorney gen- eral of the Confederate States, an office whose duties he ably discharged up to October 1, 1863, when he resigned in order to accept the governor- ship of Alabama. During the eventful year and a half which followed, Governor Watts discharged with patience and fortitude all of the painful and perplexing duties which devolved upon him up to the occupation of the capital of Alabama by the federal troops on April 12, 1865, by which event his authority as chief magistrate was brought to an end.
RECONSTRUCTION AT WASHINGTON.
As on such event had ever happened before, the process by which the southern states attempetd to sever their connections with the union opened up a new chapter in American constitutional law. The closing of that chapter is made up of the equally novel process through which the federal government re-established the relations of
83
POLITICAL HISTORY OF THE STATE.
those states with the union, after the results of the war had left them really in the condition of conquered provinces. As early as 1861 Mr. Thaddeus Stevens announced the proposition that those who, by seced- ing, had defied the constitution could not invoke its protection, and that congress could legislate for the states in rebellion outside of and with- out regard to the constitution. Early in 1862 Mr. Sumner indorsed this idea in resolutions which declared that, by attempting to secede, the southern states had committed suicide, and that their soil was therefore subject to the supreme control of congress. This theory, which claimed for congress the supreme and exclusive power to regulate the matter of reconstruction, and which denied to the president any independent power whatsoever, was rudely assailed when, in his message of December 8th, 1863, President Lincoln said to congress that, "Looking now to the pres- ent and future, and with reference to a resumption of the national author- ity within the states wherein that authority had been suspended, I have thought fit to issue a proclamation, a copy of which is herewith trans- mitted." In that proclamation he offered pardon to all who would swear to henceforth support the constitution of the United States; and he fur- ther proclaimed that when those who, accepting the amnesty, shall have taken the oath of allegiance, each "being a qualified voter by the election laws of the state, existing immediately before the so-called act of seces- sion, and excluding all others, shall re-establish a state government, which shall be republican and in no wise contravening said oath, shall be recognized as the true government of the state." Under the plan, as formulated by the president, the whole work of reconstruction would devolve upon the executive, who would be fully competent to restore, without congressional aid, civil authority in the insurgent states, with the aid of the military power, by simply committing the reorganization of the several state governments to those who were qualified to vote under the laws existing at the date of secession. This theory rested of course upon the doctrine, afterward so clearly announced by Chief Justice Chase, in Texas vs. White (7 Wal., 700), that the ordinances of secession were null and void, and that the insurgent states had never, as a matter of law, been out of what he declared to be "an indestructible union composed of indestructible states." Mr. Lincoln's policy thus defined was in perfect accord with the declaration made by congress in July, 1861, to the effect that the war was being waged "to defend the con- stitution and all laws in pursuance thereof, and to preserve the union, with all the dignity. equality and rights of the several states unimpaired; that as soon as these objects were accomplished, the war ought to cease." This scheme of the president's, which rested upon the assumption that each of the insurgent states could settle for itself the question of negro suffrage as it might deem best, at once aroused the fierce antagonism of those republican leaders in congress, who claimed that congress had ex- clusive jurisdiction over the whole question of reconstruction under that
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.