USA > Tennessee > Notable men of Tennessee, from 1833 to 1875, their times and their contemporaries > Part 39
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
In the early part of 1867, it became manifest to Congress that the ten Secession States would not ratify the Fourteenth Amendment. It became equally evident that the colored people would not have the right of the elective franchise conferred on them, and yet these States intended to claim the right of counting them in apportioning members of Congress and Presi- dential electors. The adoption of this amendment would have forced them either to confer upon the colored people the right of voting, or to submit to a diminished representa- tion. They sought to avoid both of these alternatives. This was probably one of the paramount obstacles in the way of ratification. They were unwilling to give up any of their power, and persistently refused either to do so or to enfran- chise the negro.
Here then was presented the anomaly of States lately in insurrection against the Government, by their conduct, if not their words, claiming in the national Legislature and in the electoral colleges a larger representation than was allowed to an equal number of white men in the loyal States. It would seem that no one could have been found so unreasonable as to entertain such an idea as that above indicated.
How wisely, or how unwisely, Congress dealt with this ques- tion of reconstruction, has been and will continue to be a source of controversy. It was, however, an unspeakable misfortune, which can never be sufficiently deplored, that it was necessary to deal with it at all. Out of it sprang, directly or indirectly, nearly all of the evils which the Southern people were afterward called on to endure.
Maddened by the obstructive policy of Mr. Johnson, as well as by the defiant attitude of the ten insurrectionary States, Congress came together in December, 1866, in a mood very different from that which animated it a year before. With- out much delay or faltering there followed during the next
427
NOTABLE MEN OF TENNESSEE
fifteen months four Acts which formed the Congressional plan of reconstruction. Under and by virtue of these Acts, the gov- ernments organized under the proclamation of Mr. Johnson were swept out of existence, and the ten States were put under mili- tary rule, until new governments could be constructed accord- ing to the terms of the Acts. As rapidly as could be the States were reorganized, and passed into the hands of loyal men, the colored men being the decided majority in every State. This domination of a small minority of white men, with a large majority of colored men, continued until the ever swell- ing tide of popular indignation on the part of those who had been deprived of political rights rose so high, that it became resistless, and finally swept away forever what was known as "Carpet-Bag Government."
It does not lie within the scope of this work to enter into a discussion of the working of these governments, nor the prac- tices which prevailed under them. Much less shall I undertake to defend them. It is sufficient to say, after making due allow- ance for exaggeration, that if one tithe of what has been said of these governments is true, they deserved demolition. It was these, with the antecedent and subsequent events accompanying them, that more than all things else, much more even than war itself, left a hatred in the minds and hearts of a majority of the Southern people which time alone can remove. This part of our national history is a sad one to contemplate. There can be but few genuine friends of our country who would not wish that the reconstruction measures had never been enacted; that the necessity for these acts had never arisen. But for them the great uprising in the South in behalf of its constitutional rights, suddenly precipitating a whole nation into the most stupendous civil war recorded in the annals of time, might have passed into history as simply an outburst of passion on the part of an impulsive people, and the deeds of marvelous gal- lantry could have been claimed as a common inheritance of glory, by every citizen within the broad limits of both North and South, and the war would have left behind it the impression of merely a brilliant military pageant, with scarcely a trace of bitterness remaining. Great deeds on the battlefield, whether at Gettysburg, or at Chancellorsville, or Chickamauga, and great Generals, whether Grant or Lee, Sherman or Johnston, Sheridan or Jackson, would have been proudly pointed to by
428
NOTABLE MEN OF TENNESSEE
all then as to-day, as American Generals and American deeds. Peace and fraternal love might soon have come to the hearts and homes of every good and patriotic citizen of the land. How splendid such an immediate ending of this deplorable contest ! This happy era was dawning on the country in 1865, when Mr. Johnson commenced reviving the dissensions between the two sections. By his perverseness, and his arrogant defiance of those who had elevated him to power, on one side, and by the delusive hope of easier terms and entire deliverance excited by him on the other, he drove the two sections further and further apart, both at last maddened to the very verge of frenzy. Then followed that long and bitter contest between Mr. Johnson and the Republican party. For over three years this new contest raged nearly as furiously as did the question of independence during the Civil War.
Finally Congress came to the conclusion that there was still one more measure necessary for the security of the country, and especially for the safety of the colored people. This was the Fifteenth Amendment to the Constitution. It is a singular fact that, at the close of the war, and for a good while after- ward, none of our public men or at least but a few of them, thought of conferring the right of suffrage indiscriminately on this race. In 1864 Mr. Lincoln, in a letter to Governor Hahn of Louisiana, cautiously and hesitatingly said: "I barely sug- gest for your private consideration whether some of the colored people may not be let in [as voters], as for instance the very intelligent, and especially those who have fought gallantly in our ranks. They would probably help in some trying time in the future to keep the jewel of Liberty in the family." John- son, in some of his letters to his provisional Governors, in 1865, suggested that the elective franchise might be extended to all persons of color "who can read the Constitution of the United States and write their names, also to those who owned estates of not 'ss than two hundred and fifty dollars, and pay taxes thereon." In 1864 Congress had passed an Act declaring the terms on which the insurrectionary States might be admitted to representation in Congress. One of these was that "involun- tary servitude shall be forever prohibited," but there was no provision that the right of suffrage, either partial or universal, should be conferred on the freedmen. The late Vice-President Wilson of Massachusetts, about that time, said "men might
429
NOTABLE MEN OF TENNESSEE
differ about the power or expediency of giving the right of suffrage to the negro." While the Fourteenth Amendment was in consideration in the Senate, Mr. Henderson proposed in the Senate an amendment to it which in effect provided for negro suffrage in all the States, but it received only ten votes. This was in the spring of 1866. In this same year Governor Mor- ton, the leader of the Republican party, in a message to the Legislature of Indiana, strongly opposed negro suffrage. Gen- eral Jacob D. Cox, one of the best and coolest-headed men in the Republican party, as a candidate for Governor of Ohio, in 1866, took open and decided ground against conferring this right.
Mr. Blaine says on this point: "The truth was that the Republicans of the North, constituting, as was shown by the elections of 1865, a majority in every State, were deeply con- cerned as to the fate and future of the colored population of the South. Only a minority of Republicans were ready to de- mand suffrage for those who had been recently emancipated, and who, from the ignorance peculiar to servitude, were pre- sumably unfit to be entrusted with the elective franchise. The great mass of the Republicans stopped short of the de- mand for the conferment of suffrage on the negro. That privilege was indeed still denied him in a majority of the loyal States, and it seemed illogical and unwarrantable to ex- pect a more advanced philanthrophy, a higher sense of justice from the South than had been attained by the North."*
In the great debate on reconstruction in the House of Repre- sentatives, which commenced in December, 1865-the longest in its history-Thaddeus Stevens, the brilliant leader of the House, in opening the discussion did not insist on negro suffrage. "Mr. Stevens' obvious theory at that time," says Mr. Blaine, "was not to touch the question of suffrage by national inter- position, but to reach it more effectively perhaps by excluding the entire colored population from the basis of Congressional representation until, by the action of the Southern States them- selves, the elective franchise should be conceded to the colored population."+
A few days after this speech of Stevens, Mr. Spalding, who represented one of the districts of the Western Reserve of Ohio
*Blaine, Volume II., p. 92. ¡Id., p. 129.
430
NOTABLE MEN OF TENNESSEE
-the most radical district in the United States-laid down five fundamental propositions as conditions to be observed in re- constructing insurrectionary States, and it is significant that colored suffrage was not among them. Ignatius Donnelly, a radical Republican, in an able speech in the House, left it clear that there was no disposition at that period among Republi- cans to confer on the negro the right to vote.
Mr. Fessenden, one of the most radical Republicans, dis- cussing the Freedman's Bureau Bill, said :
"I take it that no one contends-I think the Honorable Senator from Massachusetts himself [Sumner ] who is the great champion of universal suffrage, would hardly contend-that now, at this time, the whole of the' population of the recent slave States is fit to be admitted to the exercise of the right of suffrage. I presume that no man who looks at the question dispassionately and calmly could contend that the mass of those who were recently slaves (undoubtly there may be ex- ceptions) and who have been kept in ignorance all their lives, oppressed and more or less forbidden to acquire information, are fitted at this stage to exercise the right of suffrage, or could be trusted to do it unless under such good advice as those better informed might be prepared to give them."
In the House, when the reconstruction measures came up for consideration, "there was some apprehension in the minds of members on both sides that the broad character of the bill might include the right to suffrage, but to prevent that result Mr. Wilson moved to add a new section declaring that nothing in this Act shall be so construed as to affect the laws of any State concerning the right of suffrage. The amend- ment was unanimously agreed to, not one voice on either side of the House being raised against it."
As we have seen, the Fourteenth Amendment, which made the colored people citizens of the United States, did not confer the right of suffrage. It did provide, however, that they should not be counted in the apportionment of representatives in Congress, and in choosing electors for President and Vice- President, unless the right of suffrage was conferred. If they were counted without the conferring of this right, the South would gain thirty-five or forty more representatives in Congress over those accorded to an equal number of population in the Northern States. It was hoped that the people of the States re-
431
NOTABLE MEN OF TENNESSEE
cently in insurrection would see the justice of this proposition, and either confer on the colored people the right to vote, or adopt the Fourteenth Amendment, and submit to a diminished representation. There was no disposition on the part of Con- gress to force colored suffrage on the Southern people. They were left entirely free to adopt the amendment or not.
Slowly the Republican party and the public sentiment of the North had advanced from universal emancipation, by the Thir- teenth Amendment (passed January, 1865) to the conferment of citizenship by the Fourteenth Amendment (passed June, 1866) and from that to impartial suffrage in the enfranchise- ment of the colored race, by the Fifteenth Amendment, passed on February 26, 1869. It took a little more than four years to reach the last important step, from January, 1865, to Feb- ruary, 1869. These are important facts ; they conclusively prove that reconstruction, as finally adopted, and the Fifteenth Amend- ment were afterthoughts, the result of hostile developments in the South. The persistent efforts of President Johnson from May, 1865, to the close of his term, to thwart the action and will of the people, and the rejection of the Fourteenth Amendment and other evidences of hostility on the part of the Southern people, gradually forced Congress from one measure of public security to another, not dreamed of in 1865. In the same way the public sentiment in the North advanced toward the final consummation reached in 1869, just in proportion to the efforts made by Johnson to defeat the work of reconstruc- tion. If the people lately in insurrection had accepted the re- sults of the war in good faith, as they evidently did until Mr. Johnson became their leader and champion, and inspired them with the hope of regaining by the ballot what they had lost by the sword; if they had manifested a disposition as individuals in their legislative capacity, to treat the freedman with fairness ; if they had remembered that they had risked all on the wager of battle and lost-that they were hopelessly defeated; if they had relied on the clemency and magnanimity of their recent enemies in the war, as evident by the terms of surrender so generously accorded by General Grant to General Lee and his brave army, most of the measures of reconstruction, as well as the Fifteenth Amendment in all human probability, never would have been passed.
The wisdom of the reconstruction measures is not here as-
432
NOTABLE MEN OF TENNESSEE
serted. As to them, there were grave reasons of doubt, and they proved in the end to be most unwise and full of evil. It was a misfortune that the right of suffrage was conferred on a race nine-tenths of whom were then and still are wholly un- prepared for the exercise of this priceless privilege of a free citizen. And as long as a large part of them regard their votes as valuable simply as so much merchandise, to be sold to the highest bidder, they will be an unsafe depository of this sacred right.
That President Johnson, when he issued his proclamation of amnesty and pardon, influenced, as Mr. Blaine says, by the arguments and seductive eloquence of Mr. Seward, his brilliant Secretary of State, should have desired the restoration of peace and good feeling between the people of the two sections of the Union, is very probable. If he did not, we must reckon him as one of the worst men who ever lived. Judging him by his acts and professions, he appeared to be controlled at this par- ticular time by the noblest impulses and the most enlightened principles of statesmanship. If so, in this he had caught the spirit and reflected the feeling of a vast majority of the loyal people of the North. In the boundlessness of their joy over their unparalleled triumph with almost one voice they demanded peace, reconciliation, and a restored Union.
The pleasing hope was confidently entertained-how was it possible to entertain any other ?- that the Southern people, so distinguished for magnanimity, would receive the generous terms offered them in the same spirit which inspired their proffer on the part of the North. It was believed that the re- turn of peace would bring with it national repose and good will.
As to what was the wisest and best mode of reconstructing the States lately in insurrection, has never been settled by a general consensus of opinion. Mr. Johnson held to the opinion that the acts of secession were null and void, and therefore that these States had never been out of the Union; in this was im- plied a denial of the right to secede. Mr. Lincoln, the clear- est-headed statesman of his day, thought this question not a "practically material one," but merely a "pernicious abstrac- tion." He said: "We all agreed that the seceded States, so called, are out of their practical relations with the Union, and that the sole object of the Government is to get them back into their practical relation. I believe it is easier to do this
433
NOTABLE MEN OF TENNESSEE
without deciding or even considering whether these States have ever been out of the Union. The States finding themselves once more at home, it would seem immaterial to me to inquire whether they had ever been abroad."
Whether these States had been out of the Union or not, it was certain that their relations with it had been disturbed and suspended. Some act, either executive or legislative, was neces- sary to restore these relations. Having thrown off their al- legiance to the Government, and having been reduced to sub- mission by force of arms, they were not by that fact, ipso facto, restored to their old places as members of the Union. They now occupied a position somewhat analogous to that of terri- tories. Possibly it required an Act of Congress in order to be restored as States. Congress took this view of the question. Mr. Lincoln and Mr. Johnson held the opposite opinion.
But besides this question, as to which Congress or the Ex- ecutive should initiate and direct the proceedings preliminary to the reconstruction of the seceding States, there were other grave and perplexing questions to be solved. What were the terms upon which they should be so rehabilitated? Clearly the Government had the right to prescribe such terms as would guarantee to the people of those States a republican form of government, and protect them against invasion and domestic violence, and to adopt such measures as would tend to prevent a recurrence of secession.
Then who should participate in this work of reorganizing civil governments? Should those lately in arms perform this work, or aid in it; or should the whites who had been loyal alone perform it; or should the colored people be in part en- trusted with this duty?
Johnson probably adopted the only alternative practicable under the cimcumstances. He conferred this right, first, on the loyal whites, secondly, on the secessionists on the single con- dition of their taking the oath of loyalty and fidelity to the Government. It is a well-known fact that Congress denied the right of the Executive to carry on alone the work of re- construction. That was the beginning of the quarrel between Mr. Johnson and that body. Mr. Lincoln, however, had exer- cised the same power in reorganizing the State of Tennessee, and had previously reorganized Louisiana and Arkansas in the same way.
434
NOTABLE MEN OF TENNESSEE
On September 19, 1863, after the occupation of East Ten- nessee by General Burnside, as we have seen, Mr. Lincoln had given authority to Mr. Johnson, as Military Governor of Ten- nessee, "to exercise such powers as may be necessary and proper to enable the loyal people of Tennessee to present such a re- publican form of Government as will entitle the State to the guarantee of the United States therefor." Under this authority, by the advice and under the direction of Mr. Johnson, Ten- nessee was reorganized in January, 1865, and July 10, 1866, restored as one of the States of the Union.
When "telegraphic intelligence" of the action of the Ten- nessee Legislature, ratifying the Fourteenth Amendment, reached the Capitol, without waiting for official information of the fact, a joint resolution was at once introduced in the House, providing for the readmission of the State into the Union, with the right of representation in Congress, the preamble re- citing in effect that the State "had in good faith ratified the Fourteenth Amendment." This resolution under the previous question was pushed rapidly through Congress, the House adopt- ing it by a vote of 125 ayes to 12 nays. Six days after the ratification, Tennessee had her senators and representatives seated in Congress. So it is believed that it would have been with the other States if they had not rejected the terms of readmission so generously offered them.
Here was a precedent, almost as strong as law, for the read- mission of all the other secession States, on the single condition of the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment.
It can scarcely be credited that a people so lately overwhelmed in war and encompassed by many and great disasters, could have being guilty of the amazing folly of rejecting such mild terms of restoration to political rights.
At the close of the war, while there were some in the tri- umphant party, like Johnson, General Butler, Thaddeus Stevens, and Wade, who clamored for blood, the majority of the war party in the North, in the exuberance of joy at a restored Union and the return of peace, was ready to forgive and to spare those lately in hostility. Had Mr. Lincoln lived, his whole life is proof that his magnanimous heart would have been dedicated to the task of reconciliation, and that the last term of his administration would have been given to the work of peace, as the first had been to the work of war. After the death of
435
NOTABLE MEN OF TENNESSEE
the martyred President, the generous Grant stood as a wall of protection between the terrible ferocity of Johnson and those lately in arms. When trouble again arose, in 1866, in a letter to General Richard Taylor, the brother-in-law of Jefferson Davis, in the most tender terms Grant advised and appealed to the Southern people to adopt the Fourteenth Amendment, and to accept the situation in good faith on their own account.
Mr. Johnson, by his conversations and speeches "perverted the inclinations and intentions of the South, and by reflex action those of the North." He converted feelings of reconciliation on both sides into hatred and distrust.
It was subsequently clearly proved by telegraphic dispatches brought to light that Johnson used all his influence to prevent the Southern States from ratifying the Fourteenth Amendment.
Governor Parsons of Alabama telegraphed him that the Fourteenth Amendment might be reconsidered by the Legisla- ture, if an enabling Act could be passed by Congress for the admission of the State to representation, to whom he replied: "What possible good can be obtained by reconsidering the Constitutional Amendment? I know of none in the present con- dition of affairs. * *"
Drunk with the vast power he exercised, made giddy by the incense of flattery offered him by a mighty crowd of suppliants for favors and pardons, maddened by the terrible rebuke he had received in the election of 1866, and by the opposition of Congress, Johnson went forward in his course of defiance to the expressed will of the people and the policy of Congress. His stubbornness is without a parallel in our political annals. His influence exerted in favor of the Amendment, instead of against it, it is believed, would have secured its adoption in every one of the ten States which rejected it. Their Senators and Repre- sentatives would in all probability have been permitted to resume their seats in the national Legislature very soon after- ward.
What untold evils Mr. Johnson inflicted on the country, and especially on the unhappy South, need not be, and indeed can- not be, set forth in all their fearful reality.
His conduct is amazing when it is considered that the read- mission of insurrectionary States into the Union, even with the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, would have been the triumph of his own plan of reconstruction, inaugurated by
436
NOTABLE MEN OF TENNESSEE
him in July, 1865. Congress might have proclaimed ever so earnestly that the work of reconstructing the seceding States must originate with it, and be conducted under its authority, and yet, if in fact the reconstruction had been accomplished by the authority of the President alone, and not under an Act of Congress, the work would have been that of the President and not that of Congress. This was precisely the condition of the question when the Legislature of the several seceding States were considering the Fourteenth Amendment. These Legislatures owed their existence to and derived their power, primarily alone, from the President, and not from Congress. If the States had at that time, by the ratification of the Amend- ment, come back into the Union, they would have come through the door opened to them by him.
To comprehend the full force of this position it must be kept in mind that the Congressional measure of reconstruction was not enacted into a law until March 2, 1867, nearly twenty-one months after Mr. Johnson had inaugurated his plan. If the States had been readmitted as contemplated by Mr. Johnson, the Congressional plan would never have had an existence; there would have been no necessity for it.
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.