A Just and Lasting Peace: A Documentary History of Reconstruction (49 page)

(1872)

Before the Civil War, the Massachusetts-born abolitionist and journalist Charles B. Stearns (1818–1899) served as a reporter for two antislavery newspapers, the
Liberator
and the
National Anti-Slavery Standard
. Stearns was committed to nonresistance prior to the mid-1850s, but his experiences in “Bleeding Kansas” changed him. “When I deal with men made in God's image, I will never shoot them,” he explained, “but these pro-slavery Missourians are demons from the bottomless pit and may be shot with impunity.” During Reconstruction, Stearns settled on a fifteen-hundred-acre Georgia plantation, intending both to uplift the freedpeople and to share his profits with his African-American employees. In
The Black Man of the South, and the Rebels
, Stearns blamed slavery for what he considered the exasperating backwardness and immorality of the ex-slaves, but he made clear his outrage with the atrocities committed against blacks by native whites. As a result, Stearns welcomed President Grant's use of the army against Klansmen who understood “no power on earth except the military power of the United States.”

While this dark cloud was overhanging my own abode, events were transpiring in other places foreboding still more evil to all the friends of the Union in the state of Georgia. I allude to the expulsion from our House of Representatives of twenty-five “persons of color” simply on account of their being “guilty of a skin not colored like our own”; and the admission of an equal number of democrats to fill their places, thus lessening the republican majority by fifty votes. Of course all legislation after this was carried on in the interests of the democratic party, as the republican majority at the outset had been quite small, the republican candidate for speaker having been elected by a majority of only one vote. But the majority in the Senate was greater, so that on joint ballot the republicans had a respectable majority.

It was some draw back to the nefarious schemes of these insane disorganizers, that none of their corrupt legislation could receive the sanction of the governor, as he remained true to the party that had elected him, amid this, and all the other changes that came over the “body politic,” in our state. If it had not been for this well known fact, our situation would have been fearful indeed. The protection of the military had been withdrawn, and our representatives had been admitted to Congress, thus creating the impression that Georgia was a loyal state in the Union. But the triumph of these wretched men was short, for by the action of Congress, the entire admission of Georgia was delayed, and the seats of its senators declared vacated, until the rights of these ejected ones could be fully ascertained.

Far be it from me to criticise in a captious manner the action of Congress in this respect, but I cannot help feeling that it did wrong in afterwards admitting to their seats, the senators elected before the proper organization of the Legislature; in accordance with the provisions of the Reconstruction act, under which they were elected. This act declared that no “person prohibited from holding office under the United States, or under any state, by section third of the proposed amendment to the Constitution of the United States, known as article fourteen, shall be deemed eligible to any office in either of said states, unless relieved from disability, as provided by said amendment.” This section is as follows:

 

No person shall be a senator or representative in Congress, or elector of President or Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State Legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid and comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two thirds of each House remove such disability.

 

A supplementary act passed by Congress July 19, 1867, declared that “the words executive or judicial office in any State, shall be construed to include all civil offices created by law, for the administration of any general law, or the administration of justice.”

In accordance with these provisions, and with his duty as military commander of the district, four days after the organization of the Legislature, General Meade sent a letter to Governor Bullock, calling his attention to the matter, and declaring that he could not recognize the Legislature, until satisfied that these Reconstruction acts had been complied with. Gov. Bullock forwarded these documents to the Legislature, endorsing the position of Gen. Meade, and recommending to the Legislature an appointment of a committee, to ascertain the eligibility of its members. This committee was duly appointed, after various propositions to modify its powers, and an attempt on the part of Mr. Tumlin, of Randolph, to defy the power of Congress in reference to the matter, by introducing a resolution declaring that Congress had no right to “define the terms upon which the members of the Legislature might hold their office.” The names of the committee appointed were as follows: “O'Neal, of Lowndes, Shumate, of Whitfield, Harper, of Tirrell, Lee, of Newton, and Bryant, of Richmond,” three of whom were republicans, and two democrats.

The chairman of the committee reported that two of the members were ineligible, a minority of republicans reported that one person was ineligible, and a minority of democrats that none were ineligible. The house by a vote of 95 to 53, adopted the minority report of the democrats, and declared that all the members were eligible.

But behind all this, legislative scenes were enacted, which, to say the least, failed to do credit to the logical acumen or straightforward character of those concerned in this examination. It was a matter of common notoriety, that quite a large number of the members of the Legislature had participated in the rebellion, and by the wording of the Reconstruction acts, which asserted the ineligibility of
all
engaged in the rebellion, after having sworn to support the Const. of the United States, they were not entitled to their seats. Doubtless the members of Congress who voted for the Reconstruction acts, were aware of the omission of the word voluntary, in reference to those who rendered “aid and comfort” to the rebellion. But even if they did not intend to omit that word, the strict letter of the law must be complied with; and it was not proper for the Georgia Legislature to apply an interpretation of its own, to these acts, unless the language was susceptible of a variety of interpretations.

In this case, the language is so plain, that “he who runneth may read.” “No person who has supported the rebellion, after having sworn to support the Constitution of the United States, shall be eligible to office.”

But honesty and common sense were eschewed; darker counsels prevailed, and the whole committee, and a large majority of the House, endorsed the character of nearly all of the members, and the direst consequences ensued. About two months afterwards, according to the prophecy of those who opposed this unwise conduct, all the colored members of the Legislature, numbering some twenty-eight or thirty, I think, were excluded from their seats, and their places filled by good democrats.

It is very much to the discredit of the colored members of the Legislature, as far as perspicuity of vision is concerned, that they favored the reception of those ineligible members—except the three declared so by the committee. But it is accounted for, on the score of the known magnanimity of the colored race, towards their former oppressors; and should, therefore, be looked upon with leniency; especially as prominent republicans, and those to whom they had been accustomed to look for political guidance, urged them to this course.

What shall be said of such measures, on the part of sworn friends of the Union cause, and of the colored race? A more unfortunate movement could hardly have been made. By it, the balance of power was thrown into the hands of the vanquished party; and the fruits of our hotly contested election, were partially lost. It is true, that these mistaken men, solemnly assert their honesty and conscientiousness, in this matter; that, believing the Reconstruction act meant to say, “voluntary aid,” when it did not, and being satisfied that none of these men had rendered “voluntary aid,” they were bound by their consciences, to support them as entitled to their seats.

But honesty and conscientiousness, do not always prove safe guides, in political, any more than in moral matters. The result of all this conscientiousness, was as disastrous to the cause of freedom, as if there had been no “conscience” in the matter. When men's minds are made up to pursue a particular course, it is not always easy to detach firmness from conscientiousness. Doubtless the Puritan fathers imagined they were conscientious, in the hanging of Quaker women; but it is difficult for us to believe, to-day, that no other than conscientious feelings, influenced them in such cruel acts. Conscientiousness includes the exercise of our judgement, as to the facts in the case, and diligent attention to all the means of light, in the case under consideration. I cannot but believe, that if those republicans, who decided that these members were eligible, under the Reconstruction acts, had exercised their common sense a little more fully, they would have come to a far different conclusion.

And I am the more inclined to this opinion, from the fact that the judgement of the great body of the republican party of the State, outside of the Legislature, led them to deny the eligibility of these members, and the report of the committee was received with astonishment, by many of the members of the Legislature itself. I am free to confess, however, that some of those who favored the retention of these ineligible democrats, sincerely believed, with their great New York compeers, that amnesty and kind measures were better adapted to pacifying the lion of rebellion, than the severity and awe, usually practiced by professional lion-tamers. Patting a mad dog on the head, may ward off the danger of hydrophobia from his bite, but it requires considerable faith in a mad dog's divinity, to adopt such precautionary measures, and no others.

But notwithstanding the unfavorable aspect of the case at this time, “the wise were caught in their own craftiness,” for this action of the Legislature, led to the exclusion of Georgia from the Union, for nearly two years, until the country had become ready for the adoption of other measures of protection, and Andrew Johnson had been shorn of his power to do harm, by the inauguration of his successor. . . .

One day “Aunt Suky,” a colored woman seventy-five years old, and bent nearly double from weakness and hard usage, called upon me, and after looking around cautiously to see if any other white person was present, told me she had been beaten on her head by her employer, with a large hickory stick, until she was covered with blood, because she did not bring him some salt, immediately, when he called for it. Her head was then bound up from the effect of the blows, and she came to ask me, if there was no redress for her; but said, I must not tell any one she had been to see me, as they had threatened her life if she informed on them. I was obliged to tell her there was no remedy in her case.

In March, 1869, I learned of the killing of a colored man named Israel, not far from Apling, by a white man, who also cut Israel's father badly. The cause was, that the colored man had informed of a theft of cotton, committed by the white man. As usual, no notice was taken of the event. About the same time, Sam Buck, a colored man, was killed by a white man, not far from here, cause unknown, but no notice was taken of the occurrence.

In the same spring, a colored woman, sixty years old, named Sally, was brutally beaten on her head with a pair of tongs by her mistress, for refusing to leave her child and take care of a white woman's child. She lay for a long time in a very dangerous condition.

About the same time, some colored men stopped at my house, and reported the recent killing of three of their comrades by the Ku-Klux, in Lincoln county, adjoining ours.

The summer before, a colored man was attacked in the woods, by a party of white men, against whom he defended himself, and killed one of his assailants in so doing. He was immediately taken and hung by the remainder of the party.

About the same time, J. D., a colored man, living a few miles from here, was met in the road by three men, a horse-back, one of whom dismounted, and went up to him, and stabbed him terribly in different parts of his body. I am well acquainted with the assailant and with the colored man, and received from the lips of the colored man, the particulars of the case.

In 1867, three white men in front of my house, boasted of the crimes they had committed against the colored people; one of them laughing heartily while he described the appearance of the woman whom he had beaten; saying, “she was the bloodiest looking beast you ever saw.” Another of them said, he made it a point to whip one or more negroes soundly every year, as an example to the others. Another owned that he had fired at a negro for disobeying an order, and “should have shot him, but he dodged behind a tree.” Neither of these men were rowdies in the common acceptation of the term, but
well-to-do
farmers, living very near my place, and I do not suppose they imagined they had done wrong.

The first year of my residence here, a white and black man had some altercation on a plantation a few miles from here. The next day, a gang of armed white men rode up to the place, seized the black man's wife, and threatened to kill her, unless she would point out the hiding place of her husband. Overhearing this threat, with true connubial affection, he sprang from his concealment, when he was immediately fired upon by the whole crowd, as if he had been a dog or stray hog, and his body was literally riddled with bullets. Several of the white men were arrested for the cold-blooded murder, but of course were soon discharged.