The Journal of Negro History, Volume 2, 1917

V >> Various >> The Journal of Negro History, Volume 2, 1917

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40

It is true there are some men whose party affiliations are based upon
principle and convictions regardless of consequences personal to
themselves. Occasionally there are found some who are even willing to
be martyrs, but they are exceptions to the general rule. The average
man is politically ambitious. He desires political distinction and
official recognition. In determining his party affiliations,
therefore, he is more than apt to cast his lot with the party through
which he believes that ambition may be gratified. After the
consummation of the events above referred to, the conviction became
settled in the minds of white men at the South that the Democratic
party in that section would be, for a generation, at least, the only
channel through which it would be possible for any one to have his
political ambition realized. Hence, thousands of those who had
previously joined the Republican party returned to the Democratic
since that party presented the only hope of their future political
salvation.

Mr. Rhodes would lead one to infer that the southern white men who
came into the Republican party in the South between 1868 and 1876 were
not among the most intelligent, cultivated, refined and representative
men of that section. As a rule, they were men who belonged to, and
were identified with, what was known as the "Southern aristocracy."
Such men, for instance, as Ex-Governors Orr of South Carolina, Parsons
of Alabama, Reynolds of Texas, and Brown of Georgia. Also such men as
Mosby, Wickham, and subsequently Mahone, Massey, Paul, Fulkerson and
Riddleberger, of Virginia. General R. E. Lee was known to have
leanings in the same direction, but since he was not politically
ambitious, his views were not made a matter of public discussion. In
addition to Ex-Governor Brown of Georgia, they included such men as
General Longstreet, Joshua Hill, Bullock and many others of like
caliber. Even Ben Hill was suspected by some and accused by others of
leaning in the same direction. In Louisiana, not less than 25 per
cent. of the best and most substantial white men of that State became
identified with the Republican party under the leadership of such men
as Ex-Governor Hahn and the Honorable Mr. Hunt (who was appointed
Secretary of the Navy by President Garfield), Wells, Anderson and many
others. General Beauregard was known, or at any rate believed, to be
in sympathy with these men and the cause they represented, although he
took no active part in politics. But it was in my own State of
Mississippi, where I had an intimate knowledge of, and acquaintance
with, the solid and substantial white men who identified themselves
with the Republican party and whose leadership the newly enfranchised
blacks faithfully followed. They included such men as James L. Alcorn,
who was elected Governor of the State by the Republicans in 1869 and
to the United States Senate by the legislature that was elected at the
same time. Alcorn was one of the aristocrats of the past. He served
with Mr. Lamar in the secession convention of 1861 and was a general
in the Confederate Army.

Mr. Rhodes failed to inform his readers of the fact that the
Democratic candidate for Governor against Alcorn, Judge Louis Dent,
belonged to that much abused class called "carpet baggers," but who,
like thousands of others of that class, both Democrats and
Republicans, was a man of honor and integrity. The same was true of
Tarbell, Powers, Pierce, McKee, Jeffords, Speed and others of the same
type in both parties. In addition to Alcorn, there was Col. R. W.
Flournoy, who also served with Mr. Lamar as a member of the secession
convention and who was the Republican candidate for Congress against
Mr. Lamar in 1872, also Judge Jason Niles, who served as a member of
the State legislature, Judge of the Circuit Court and member of
Congress. His able and brilliant son, Judge Henry Clay Niles, is now
the United States District Judge for that State, having been appointed
by President Harrison. He has the reputation of being one of the best
and finest Judges on the Federal Bench. The State never had before
and has not had since, a finer judiciary than it had under the
administrations of Alcorn, Powers and Ames, the three Republican
Governors. In referring to the three justices of the State Supreme
Court, Mr. Rhodes made the statement that eligible material in the
Republican party was so scarce that, in order to get three competent
judges the Governor was obliged to select a Democrat. This is not
true. Chief Justice E. G. Peyton and Associate Justice H. F. Simrall
were both southern Republicans. Justice Tarbell, though a so-called
"carpet bagger," was also a Republican and an able judge, who enjoyed
the confidence and respect of the bench and bar. When he retired from
the bench he was made Second Comptroller of the United States
Treasury.

In addition to these able and brilliant men, I feel justified in
naming a few others, such as R. W. Millsaps, in whose honor one of the
educational institutions at Jackson was named; W. M. Compton; T. W.
Hunt; J. B. Deason; W. H. Vasser; Luke Lea, who was at one time United
States District Attorney; his son, A. M. Lea, who subsequently held
the same office; J. L. Morphis, who was one of the first Republicans
elected to Congress; Judge Hiram Cassidy, who was the recognized
leader of the bar in the southern part of the State; his able and
brilliant son, Hiram Cassidy, Jr.; and his law partner, Hon. J. F.
Sessions. Among the circuit and chancery court judges there were such
jurists as Messrs. Chandler, Davis, Hancock, Walton, Smyley,
Henderson, Hill, Osgood, Walker, Millsaps, McMillan, and Drane.
Moreover, there were thousands of others, such as J. N. Carpenter and
James Surget, men of character, wealth and intelligence, who had no
ambition for official recognition or political distinction, but who
were actuated by what they honestly believed to be conducive to the
best interests of their country, their State and their section. In
fact, the southern white men that came into the Republican party were
typical representatives of the best blood and the finest manhood of
the South, than whom no better men ever lived. And yet to read what
Mr. Rhodes has written, one would naturally assume that the opposite
of this was true, that the Republican party in that section was under
the domination of northern "carpet baggers," a few worthless southern
whites and a number of dishonest and incompetent colored men. This, no
doubt, is the false, deceptive and misleading picture which had been
painted from the vividness of his partial, mistaken, prejudiced and
diseased imagination.

That many mistakes were made during the progress of Reconstruction
cannot and will not be denied. No friend and supporter of the
congressional plan of Reconstruction will maintain that every thing
was perfect. On the contrary, it is frankly admitted that quite a
number of grave blunders were made; but they were not confined to any
one party. Neither Republicans nor Democrats can justly lay claim to
all that was good or truthfully charge the other with all that was
bad. Of those who were selected as representatives of the two parties,
the Democrats had, in point of experience and intelligence, a slight
advantage over the Republicans; but in point of honesty and integrity
the impartial historian will record the fact that the advantage was
with the Republicans. How could either escape error? The Civil War had
just come to a close; sectional animosity was bitter and intense. The
Republican party was looked upon as the party of the North and,
therefore, the bitter enemy of the South. The southern white men who
joined the Republican party were accused of being traitors to their
section and false to their own race and blood; they were called
Scalawags. Through a process of intimidation, chiefly by means of
social ostracism, independent thought and action on the part of
southern whites, during the early period of Reconstruction, were
pretty effectually prevented. Through such methods, they were quite
successfully held under the subjection and control of those whose
leadership they had been accustomed to follow.

Under such circumstances, the reader may ask the question, why was it
and how was it that so many of the best white men of that section
joined the Republican party? The answer is that, prior to the election
of General Grant to the presidency in 1868, very few of them did so.
It was never a question of men. It was always a question of party.
Under such circumstances, thousands of white men were obliged to vote
for certain Democratic candidates who were otherwise objectionable as
against certain Republicans who were otherwise acceptable. In like
manner, thousands of colored men were obliged to vote for certain
Republican candidates who were otherwise objectionable as against
certain Democrats who were otherwise acceptable. The wonder,
therefore, is, not that so many, but that so few mistakes were made;
not that so many, but that so few objectionable persons were elected
to important and responsible positions.

After the election of Grant, however, in 1868 the feeling of
intolerance somewhat subsided, resulting in a large number of
accessions to the Republican party from the ranks of the best and most
substantial white men of that section. But it was not until the
reelection of Grant in 1872 that the feeling of political
proscription, social ostracism and intolerance among the whites
seemingly disappeared. It was then that white men came into, took
charge of and assumed the leadership of the Republican party, in large
numbers. They then had nothing to fear and nothing to lose by being
identified with the Republican party when social distinctions growing
out of politics ceased to be effective. The South then entered upon a
new era which was destined to bring to that section wealth and
prosperity with happiness and contentment among its people of both
races, all living under local governments successfully controlled by
the better element of native whites with the cooperation and
participation to some extent of the newly enfranchised blacks.

The writer of this article has always believed it to be a misfortune
to his race and to the country, if conditions be such as to make it
necessary for any race or group, of which our citizenship is composed,
to act in a solid body with any one political party. The writer timely
called attention to this in a speech which he delivered on the floor
of the House of Representatives over thirty years ago. He then made
an appeal to the Democrats to change the attitude of their party
towards the colored Americans. While the colored people, he said, were
grateful to the Republican party for their physical emancipation, they
would be equally grateful to the Democratic party for their political
emancipation. While he was a Republican from choice, he personally
knew of many members of his race who were Republicans, not from choice
but from necessity, and that the Democratic party was responsible for
the existence of that necessity. Upon economic questions there are
differences of opinion among colored as well as white persons. It is
an injustice to the colored race and a misfortune to the country, if
they can not vote in accordance with their convictions upon such
questions. No race or group can be true and independent American
citizens, as all should be, when they are made to feel that the
exercise and enjoyment by them of their civil and political rights are
contingent upon the result of an election. It must be said to the
credit of the late Grover Cleveland that he did all in his power both
as Governor of New York and as President of the United States to bring
about this necessary change and reform in his party. That his efforts
were not crowned with success, was through no fault of his.

The newly enfranchised blacks at the South, as I have endeavored to
show, had no other alternative than to act with the Republican party.
That some objectionable persons should have been elected by them under
such conditions, could not very well have been prevented. But the
reader of Mr. Rhodes's history cannot fail to see that he believed it
was a grave mistake to have given the colored men at the South the
right to vote, and in order to make the alleged historical facts
harmonize with his own views upon this point, he took particular pains
to magnify the virtues and minimize the faults of the Democrats and to
magnify the faults and minimize the virtues of the Republicans, the
colored men especially. On page 97 of his fifth volume, for instance,
Mr. Rhodes says: "But few Negroes were competent to perform the
duties; for instance, it was said that the colored man, who for four
years was Sheriff of DeSoto County, could neither read nor write. The
Negro incumbent generally farmed out his office to a white deputy for
a share of the revenue."

The foregoing is one of the most barefaced and glaring
misrepresentations that can possibly be made. The reader will notice
that the allegation is based upon "it has been said." But if Mr.
Rhodes had been anxious to record only what was accurate and true, he
should have, as he easily could have done, found out just what the
facts were, as I have done. The facts were these. When Tate County was
created the greater part of the territory composing the new county had
been taken from the county of DeSoto. The then sheriff of DeSoto
County lived in that section which was made a part of the new county
of Tate. It thus became necessary for a new sheriff to be appointed by
the Governor for DeSoto County to hold office until the election of a
sheriff at the next regular election. Rev. J. J. Evans, a colored
Baptist minister and a Union soldier, was thereupon appointed. Since
this took place in 1873, the appointment must have been made by
Governor R. C. Powers, who had been elected Lieutenant Governor on the
ticket with Alcorn in 1869 and had become Governor when Alcorn went to
the United States Senate in 1871. Although he was one of those who
belonged to that class called "carpet baggers," Governor Powers was
known to be an honest and an upright man and one who exercised great
care in all of his appointments. Governor Powers never could have been
induced to appoint as sheriff of any county a man who could neither
read nor write.

Mr. Evans discharged the duties of his position with such entire
satisfaction that he was nominated by the Republicans and elected to
succeed himself at the regular election in November, 1873, for the
full term of two years. In 1875 he was renominated by his party to
succeed himself. Mr. Evans's administration had been so satisfactory
that when the Democratic county convention met to nominate a local
ticket, no nomination was made for the office of sheriff. But between
the nomination and election the Democratic organization in the State
saw a new light. It was decided that the State must be "_redeemed_,"
and that nearly all of the counties must be included in that
redemption. The Democratic executive committee of DeSoto County was,
therefore, directed to meet and complete the local ticket by
nominating a candidate for sheriff. This was done, and the ticket as
thus completed was, of course, declared elected and DeSoto County
"_redeemed_."

It is a fact of which Mr. Rhodes may not be aware, that the county
sheriff in Mississippi is also the county tax collector, and as such
he is required to give a heavy bond. These bonds are usually given by
property owners of the county, nearly all of whom are white men and
Democrats. Had Mr. Evans been the man described by Mr. Rhodes, he
never could have qualified for the office. It is also a fact of which
Mr. Rhodes may not be aware, that the county sheriff in Mississippi as
the chief executive and administrative officer of his county, is
necessarily obliged, regardless of his own qualifications and fitness,
to employ a number of assistants and deputies to aid him in running
the office. The number of persons, with the salary or compensation of
each, is fixed by law or the court and they are paid according to law
out of money appropriated for that purpose. In making these
appointments, it is both reasonable and natural that the appointing
power would favorably consider a suggestion or recommendation from any
one of the sureties. At any rate, Mr. Evans had the good sense to
surround himself with honest, efficient and capable assistants. He is
still living at Hernando, DeSoto County, Mississippi. As I write these
lines, an autograph letter from him is before me. While it is clear
that he is not a college graduate, his letter effectually disproves
the allegation that he can neither read nor write. Moreover, even if
his education is limited, this cannot be considered exceptional, for
the sheriffs of many counties in the South today are illiterate and
mentally undeveloped. I judge from the contents of Mr. Evans's letter
that there is no truth in the allegation that he divided any part of
his own compensation with any one or more of his assistants. He left
the office with a spotless record, every dollar of the public funds
that passed through his hands, and for which he was liable, having
been honestly and faithfully accounted for.

But even if Mr. Evans had been the man described by Mr. Rhodes, it
would have been manifestly unfair and unjust to the colored voters of
Mississippi to select him as a typical representative of those who
were elected to important and responsible positions by the votes of
colored men. Out of seventy-two counties of which the State was then
composed, not more than twelve ever had colored sheriffs at any time,
and they did not all hold office at the same time. Of those who were
thus honored, the writer of these lines was personally acquainted with
not less than ten. Mr. Evans was one of the few whom he did not then
know personally. If Mr. Rhodes had desired to be fair and impartial,
he would have taken all of them into consideration and would have
drawn an average. But this would not have answered his purpose. It
would have shown that in point of intelligence, capacity, and honesty
the colored sheriffs would have favorably compared with the whites.

Take, for instance, the county of Adams-Natchez, my own home, where
two colored men at different times held the office of sheriff. The
first of the two was Wm. McCary, who was elected in 1873. He belonged
to that small class known as free persons of color during the days of
slavery. His father was the leading barber of Natchez for white
business men and a private school teacher. He taught the children of
those who were identified with his own class, of which there were
quite a number, having privileges and advantages which were denied to
the children of slaves. His own children, of course, were not
neglected. Wm. McCary, therefore, had a good English education. He was
also a property owner and a taxpayer. He was one of the two colored
men who qualified as a surety on the bond of the writer of these lines
when he was appointed a Justice of the Peace in 1869. Mr. McCary was
held in high esteem by the people of the city of Natchez and the
county of Adams, both white and colored. Prior to his election to the
office of sheriff he had served as a member of the board of aldermen
for the city of Natchez and also as treasurer of the county of Adams,
and subsequently as postmaster of Natchez, the duties of all of which
he discharged with credit to himself and satisfaction to the public.
In 1875 he was succeeded as sheriff by another colored man, Robert H.
Wood, who in all important particulars was about on a par with McCary.
Wood had previously served as mayor of Natchez, to which position he
was elected by popular vote in December, 1870. He was serving the
people of Natchez as their postmaster when he was elected to the
office of sheriff.

These men not only gave satisfaction to the people whom they served,
but they reflected credit upon themselves, their race, their party and
the community that was so fortunate as to have the benefit of their
services. What was true of these two men was also true in a large
measure of Harney of Hinds, Scott of Issaquena, Sumner of Holmes, and
several others. But, if Mr. Rhodes had desired to be impartial and
preferred to select but one man as a typical representative of those
who were elected to such positions by the votes of colored men, he
would have selected B. K. Bruce, who was sheriff of Bolivar County
when he was elected to the United States Senate. Mr. Bruce needs no
introduction to intelligent and reading Americans. He developed into a
national character. He reflected credit not only upon himself, his
race and his party but his country as well. And yet he typified in a
most remarkable degree the colored men who were elected to important
and responsible positions chiefly by the votes of members of that
race. But the reader of Rhodes's history will look in vain for
anything that will give him accurate information along these lines.
His history, therefore, is remarkable, not only for what it says, but
for what it leaves unsaid. In fact, it is plain to the intelligent
reader that he started out with preconceived notions as to what the
facts were or should have been, and that he took particular pains to
select such data and so to color the same as to make them harmonize
with his opinions. He thus passed over in silence all facts which
could not be so distorted as to make them thus harmonize. He could
find nothing that was creditable or meritorious in the career of any
colored member of either house of Congress, notwithstanding the
favorable impression made and the important and dignified service
rendered by Revels and Bruce in the Senate and by Rainey, Rapier,
Elliott, Smalls, Cain, Langston, Miller, Ohara, Cheatham, White and
others in the House.[403]

But, to return to Mississippi, let us take up another error of Mr.
Rhodes. Referring to the political and sanguinary revolution which
took place in Mississippi in 1875, Mr. Rhodes makes use of these
words: "Whilst regretting some of the means employed, all lovers of
good government must rejoice at the redemption of Mississippi....
Since 1876 Mississippi has increased in population and in wealth; her
bonded indebtedness and taxation are low."[404] It is difficult to
conceive how an intelligent man, claiming to be an impartial recorder
of historical events, could be induced to make such glaring statements
as the above, when he ought to have known that just the opposite of
what he affirms is true, except as to increase in population and in
wealth. "All lovers of good government must rejoice at the
_redemption_ of Mississippi." _Redemption_ from what? The reader is
led to believe that the "_redemption_" is from bad to good government,
from high to low taxes, from increased to decreased bonded
indebtedness, from incompetent, inefficient and dishonest
administration to one that was competent, efficient and honest.

Now let us see just what the facts were and are. In 1875 there was
just one State officer to be elected, that of State treasurer, to
fill the vacancy caused by the death of George H. Holland, who was
elected on the ticket with Ames in 1873. The Democrats nominated Hon.
Wm. L. Hemingway, of Carroll County, whose nomination was favorably
received. He had the reputation of being a capable, an honest and
upright man. In addition to this, he was identified with that wing of
his party which was known to be progressive, liberal and fair. In the
early days of Reconstruction, the Democratic party in the State was
sharply divided into two factions. One, the major faction, adopted
what they termed a policy of "masterly inactivity," which meant that
the white Democrats should take no part in the organization of a State
government under the Reconstruction Acts of Congress, with a view of
making the work of Reconstruction as odious, as objectionable and as
unpopular as possible. The other faction believed it to be the duty of
the white Democrats to take an active part in the formation of a State
government, elect as many Democrats to the State Constitutional
Convention of 1868 as possible with a view of framing a new
constitution that would have very few if any objectionable clauses.
Wm. L. Hemingway was one of that number, and as such he was elected to
the convention from Carroll County. The nomination of Hemingway for
State treasurer by the Democratic State Convention in 1875 was looked
upon as a concession to that element of the party.

The Republicans did not fail to see that in order to carry the State
they must nominate their strongest and best man, even if the election
should be fair and honest, which they hoped would be the case, but
which hope they had good reasons to apprehend would not be fully
realized. Capt. George M. Buchanan, of Marshal County, was nominated.
Buchanan had been a brave and gallant Confederate soldier. He had
served as sheriff of Marshal County for a number of years. He was
strong, able and popular. He was known to be the best fitted and best
qualified man for the office of State treasurer. With a half-way
decent election his triumph, even over so popular a man as Wm. L.
Hemingway, was an assured fact. The Democrats, however, had decided
that the time had come for the State to be "_redeemed_," peaceably and
fairly if possible, violently and unfairly if necessary. With George
M. Buchanan as the Republican candidate, it was necessary to employ
means which Mr. Rhodes so much regretted, but which he justifies
because, as he understands it, they were employed in the interest of
good government.

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40