Chapter V: Front Matter (5)

There were three or four schools in Nashville, before the war. One was taught by Samuel Watkins. He taught school in an old church right over a branch. It was built up on stilts, and was a place of worship built for the slaves by their owners. Another one was taught by a Mrs. Tate, who was of a very excellent family. Mrs. Sallie Player, a most delightful teacher taught another one of these schools. Mrs. Player was a free woman but her husband was a slave. He belonged to a very excellent family of white people, whose slaves enjoyed every privilege that free people enjoyed. They were protected by their owner. She was a woman of some education. Her husband also had some education, although a slave. There was another school taught by a white man and his wife whose name was Westbrooks. They came to Nashville from St. Louis, Missouri and organized a school. These two gathered considerable money from the free and slave people who wanted to send their children to school. They taught school about three weeks when they suddenly disappeared.

SLAVES IN BUSINESS AND NEGROES WHO OWNED SLAVES

Slaves had more money than is generally thought. Henry Harding, a slave with some education, was a thorough business man from beginning to end. Everything he touched turned to money. His home in Nashville now is as pretty a home as you want to see. He was allowed every liberty by his owners that a free person enjoyed. He was a carpenter and contractor. He did all the construction work on three plantations, that of General Harding, his son's, John Harding and of David Gavock's. One of the Hardings was his father. He was held as a slave until Emancipation in '63. He immediately came to Nashville and went into business building houses. When he died he had considerable property.

Hardy Perry, a slave in Nashville, had a line of hacks and transfer teams during slavery time. He hired his own time. Steven Boyd and Mr. Napier kept a livery stable.

My father's father was a pioneer iron man in middle Tennessee. His parents came from England and went to Dixon county and established what is still known as the Napier Iron Works. He was a man of considerable force of character and influence. He had four colored sons and daughters. He had these sons go to school along with the white children. When he died his will provided that they should leave Tennessee and go to a free state or to Liberia. They went to Ohio and lived on Walnut Hill where they bought a farm. They concluded to sell the farm on Walnut Hill, trading it for a farm at New Richmond, Ohio. Two of the sons went to Richmond with my grandmother, another went to St. Louis, Mo., and my father went back to Nashville. Two of the brothers who went to Richmond with their mother became school teachers in Richmond. The one who went to Nashville went into the livery business.

My father's father was a physician, having graduated from the medical school of the University of Pennsylvania. He had great political influence and it was through his influence that one of the governors of Tennessee was elected.

Alice Bosley, whose husband was white, and her family owned two large plantations south of Nashville and the other north-east of Nashville. They owned about twenty-five or thirty slaves. She was a thoroughly religious woman and every Sunday would have her slaves and children attend church.

Manse Bryant was another large land owner and slave owner.

VIRGINIA STATE LIBRARY
RICHMOND, VA.

September 28, 1916.

MR. MONROE N. WORK, Editor,
Tuskegee, Alabama.

_My Dear Sir_:--

The Journals of the Senate and House of Delegates for the years in which there have been Negro members do not indicate which of the members were white and which negro. The almanacs, however, do as a general thing though the almanacs are not extremely reliable. I have gotten the following information from the almanacs. The first year in which negroes were allowed to hold office in Virginia was 1869.

The almanac for the year 1870 (which was printed the latter part of 1869 and which gives, therefore, the members of the General Assembly for the session of 1869-70) gives no negro members of the Senate of Virginia, but 18 negro members of the House. The total membership of the House was 137. The membership of the Senate was 40. For the session of 1870-71 there were, according to the almanac, no negro members of the Senate. For the session of 1870-71, I regret to say that the almanac does not differentiate between white and negro members. For the session of 1871-72, I regret to say that the almanac does not give the members of the House of Delegates; nor in the list of the members of the Senate does it differentiate between the two races. For the session of 1872-3 the almanac does not differentiate. For the session of 1873-4 the almanac gives 3 negro members out of 40 in the Senate, and 17 out of 132 members in the House. For the session of 1874-5 there were three negro members out of 40 in the Senate, and there were 17 negro members in the House. In the session of 1875-6 there were 3 negro Senators, and 13 negro members of the House. In the session of 1876-77 there were three negro members in the Senate, and 12 negro members of the House. In 1877-78 there were 3 negro members of the Senate, and four negro members of the House. In 1878-9 there were three negro members of the Senate and four negro members of the House. For the session of 1879-80 the almanac gives no marks of differentiation. For the session of 1880-81 the almanac makes no distinction. For the 1881-2 session the almanac has no list of the members. For the session of 1882-3 the almanac does not differentiate. For the session of 1883-4 there were 3 negro senators and 8 members of the House. For the session of 1884-5 there was one negro senator, and 7 members of the House, out of a total membership of one hundred. In the session of 1885-6 there was only one senator out of a membership of 39, and only one member of the House of Delegates, out of one hundred. In the session of 1886-7 there was one senator and one member of the House. In the session of 1887-8 there was one negro senator, and there were seven members of the House. In the session of 1889-9 there was one senator, and seven members of the House. In the session of 1889-90 there was one negro senator, and three members of the House. In the session of 1890-91 there was one negro senator, and three members of the House. In the session of 1891-2 there were no negroes in either the Senate or the House, that is, none marked. For the session of 1892-3 no negroes were marked. For the session of 1893-4 there seem to have been none. I have not looked further, but I do not believe there has been a negro member in either House since that time.

Very truly yours,
(Signed) H. R. MCILWAINE
_State Librarian._

FOOTNOTES:

[1] Compiled by Monroe N. Work.

[2] Beverly, _History of Alabama_, 202, 208.

[3] Not returned for the 1875-1876 session.

[4] Beverly, _History of Alabama_, pp. 202-208.

[5] Served only in the session of 1874-1875.

[6] Served only in the session of 1875-1876.

[7] Alexander is said to have been counted out. He is said to have held the position of postmaster at Madison and also to have had a deputy reserve collector.

[8] Lewis and Scott were the last Negro members of the Florida Legislature.

[9] Lewis and Scott were the last Negro members of the Florida Legislature.

[10] Letter on October 11, 1916, from L. L. Knight, official compiler of Georgia Records; Thompson, _Reconstruction in Georgia_, pp. 211-214, 262, 264.

[11] The names of these four were later stricken out. They were so nearly white that their race was indeterminate. They remained in the house after the others were expelled.--Thompson, _Reconstruction in Georgia_, p. 213; House Journal Georgia Legislature, p. 229.

[12] Letter on October 11, 1916, from L.L. Knight, official compiler of Georgia Records.

[13] Furnished by Major John R. Lynch, May 19, 1915.

[14] North Carolina Manual, by North Carolina Historical Commission, 1913, pp. 863-906.

[15] _Ibid._, pp. 481-862.

[16] Reynolds, _Reconstruction in South Carolina_, pp. 76-79.

[17] In 1895 South Carolina again revised her constitution. In the convention held for this purpose there were found Negro delegates, viz.: Thomas E. Miller, L. R. Reed, Robert Smalls, W. J. Whipper and James Wigg, all from Beaufort County. Smalls and Whipper had been delegates in the 1868 convention. (Reported by H. H. Wallace.)

[18] Furnished by Mr. H. A. Wallace, a former page in the South Carolina House of Representatives in the Reconstruction Period.

[19] Names marked with asterisk not in lists given in Reynold's _Reconstruction in South Carolina_, pp. 106-107, 394-396.

[20] Furnished by H. A. Wallace, a former page in the South Carolina House of Representatives in the Reconstruction Period.

[21] Names marked with asterisk not in lists given in Reynold's _Reconstruction in South Carolina_, pp. 107-108, 394-396.

[22] Reynolds, _Reconstruction in South Carolina_, pp. 106-108.

[23] Reynolds, _Reconstruction in South Carolina_, pp. 394-396.

[24] Furnished by H. A. Wallace, a former page in the South Carolina House of Representatives in the Reconstruction Period.

[25] _Ibid._

[26] _Ibid._

[27] George H. White, North Carolina, member of 55th and 56th Congresses, as the last Negro member. (Editor.)

[28] He was a page in the South Carolina House of Representatives in the Reconstruction Period.

[29] There were no colored members of the Tennessee Senate.

[30] Contested, not seated.

[31] 1868, 1870, see North Carolina list, Pasquotank County.

JAMES G. THOMPSON, THE ORIGINAL CARPETBAGGER[1]

"I suppose I might call myself the first Carpet Bagger." This expression casually let fall by Mr. J.G. Thompson, of this city, in a conversation with the writer, was so striking and so suggestive that I asked him to explain. He complied, and in so doing, gave the following extraordinary narrative, which he subsequently consented to have published:

From the 7th of November, 1861, when Hilton Head was captured by the United States naval forces, the sea islands of South Carolina never passed out of the hands of the United States. Those islands and a considerable portion of the mainland were thereupon brought under the operation of the United States direct tax act, and were in time sold for United States taxes to whoever would buy them. They were mainly bought in by the United States and were subsequently re-sold to soldiers, army followers and Negroes. Towards the close of the war, having concluded my service under the government, I resolved to settle in the South, and purchased in 1864, a plantation on St. Helena, one of these islands, with the intention of becoming a Southern planter. I was thus engaged when Andrew Johnson began his reconstruction efforts and appointed Benjamin F. Perry provisional governor. This was the first attempt at the reconstruction of the South, and South Carolina was the first state called upon to resume its relations with the Union, as she had been the first to go out. In October, 1865, the provisional governor issued a proclamation setting a day for an election of delegates to a

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION

His Proclamation called upon the people to repeal the ordinances of secession form a constitution and make such preparations as were necessary to obtain admission into the Union. St. Helena parish was entitled to one delegate to that constitutional convention.

All the original inhabitants of the parish, upon the approach of the Federal forces, had fled. There was but one man left in the whole parish when the United States took possession of the town of Beaufort, and he was found in a garret dead drunk. Consequently when the convention was called the question arose who were citizens of the parish. There were few white natives of South Carolina in the parish. The managers of election were not present. Governor Perry had named the managers of the previous elections held under the confederate government as the ones to conduct the election now to be held, but none of these people were there. So a town meeting in the New England style was called to consider the situation, at which the colored people were in a large majority. Probably one hundred white ex-soldiers, army officers, settlers, clerks, quartermasters, employes, etc., came to the meeting. An examination of the law of South Carolina as to

WHAT CONSTITUTED CITIZENSHIP

showed that it required a three years' residence to be a citizen, and that no person then a soldier of the United States could vote in the state at any election. A long discussion followed, whether to nominate a candidate or not, which ended in a decision to nominate. Then came the query whether every one at the town meeting could take part in naming a candidate to be voted for. The advocates of Negro suffrage claimed that the colored native citizens of South Carolina had a better right to select the candidate to be voted for than any of the white men present. It should be remembered that at this time the Fifteenth amendment had not been adopted. The point was made on the other side that only those who would have the right to vote for such a candidate had the right to participate in the nomination. This proposition was voted down, however, by a large majority, and H.G. Judd, a philanthropist engaged in the work of educating the Negroes, was nominated. Subsequently, however, another meeting was held by the white settlers who had acquired a residence, and who were entitled under the laws of South Carolina to vote, having resided there three years, at which meeting I was nominated.

THIS ELECTION

occurred the next day, and I received 36 votes and H.G. Judd 8 votes. There being no authorized managers of the election, the voters assembled at the polls on the morning of the election and elected three persons to act in that capacity. These persons made a certificate that I had received the largest number of votes at the election.

When the convention assembled in Columbia, I presented by credentials and could have been sworn in without question if I had preferred to make a statement to the convention that it might not act unadvisedly of the circumstances of my election. I asked that the credentials be referred to the committee on credentials. It was so ordered and I then appeared before the committee and related the facts. After the hearing a report was presented which stated that perhaps this was the only case known to legislative history in which a man contested his own seat, and that all the evidence for and against my right to the seat was presented by myself. The committee reported unanimously in favor of

SEATING ME

A long debate, however, ensued in the convention upon the question, and it was finally decided only by the close vote of 53 to 50 that I be seated. George D. Tillman, now a member of Congress from South Carolina, made a very bitter speech against seating me. He thought the insolence of this Yankee was beyond precedent in claiming to represent the grand old parish of St. Helena, which had been represented in the past by Middleton, Rhett, Bull and other distinguished citizens of the State. In a speech that was really prophetic, he predicted that to admit me would be to show dragons' teeth, and that ultimately I would be followed by a horde which should devour the state.

James L. Orr made a speech in favor of my admission, and said that he hoped to see the state overrun with just such newcomers. I was, perhaps, the youngest man in the convention, and was surrounded by men of the first rank of the State. Scarcely a man in that convention but had a title. There were ex-senators, ex-governors, ex-chancellors, ex-judges and ex-members of Congress. It was the intellectual power of the state to say nothing of ex-generals, colonels and ex-captains of the confederate army. Probably two-thirds of those men had been members of the convention which carried the state out of the Union, and had looked upon that act at the time it was performed as

THE CROWNING END

of a lifetime of agitation and anxiety. Now they were called upon to undo it all, but they seemed incapable of understanding the true position of affairs, and were totally ignorant of what had been accomplished by the war and blind to the logic of events.

For instance, one of the questions early raised and referred to the judiciary committee was whether Negroes should be allowed to testify in the courts. Judge Frost of Charleston introduced a resolution that the ordinance fixing the status of the Negro upon this question should be passed by the convention. Chancelor Ingalls, who recently died in Baltimore, opposed the proposition, claiming that a sovereign convention called as this was for a special purpose, ought not to legislate. Upon the question of discharging the committee from further consideration of the subject, there were but two votes in the negative, Judge Frost, the mover, a man of 80 years, and myself.

Isolated as I was from the start, I was treated by the convention with the utmost courtesy, and when I occasionally rose to speak, I received the

UNDIVIDED ATTENTION

of the members, and the rather obtrusive attention of the ladies who filled the galleries. Such remarks could be heard as: "There, that Yankee is going to speak."

Another point that agitated the convention was, what laws should be passed to fix the status of the Negro, and, after a long discussion, a committee was appointed to frame a code of laws to be submitted to the legislature, which should assemble under the constitution adopted by this convention. The product of that commission was "The Black Code." Its intentions and provisions were foreshadowed in the debates of the convention. At the close of the debate I spoke for five minutes, closing with the prediction that if the convention thought that its work would be of any value to the state, they were mistaken. If the convention thought it possible to provide a different code of laws for the government of the loyal black citizens of the United States, from that which governed the disloyal white citizens of South Carolina, they did not understand what the war had accomplished. I said that I knew more of the

OPINION OF THE WAR

than it was possible for any man in that convention or all of them to know. While I spoke with modesty before men who had occupied high political positions in the past, I spoke with confidence as to the opinion of the people of the North who had waged a successful war against secession and slavery. Speaking for them I predicted that their laws would be made by major-generals and executed by provost-marshals until the last man present would fall into his grave before the North would admit the state into the Union under a constitution which did not recognize that all men were equal before the law. When I sat down there was a dead silence and solemn faces.

To show the opposition I excited, let me give another anecdote.

James L. Orr came to my room one evening and asked me not to be offended if he requested that upon a certain question he proposed to bring before the convention the next day I would not speak in its favor. He said: "There are fools enough in this convention that do not want anything that you do want, and every time you speak on a measure you hinder its adoption." The proposition he had at hand was to

REDUCE THE TIME

requisite to obtain citizenship in the state from three years to one, and after much difficulty he persuaded the convention to make the change. He also wished to abolish the property qualification for state senators. Tillman appealed to him in an eloquent speech to spare this last relic of South Carolina conservatism. Orr, in reply, asked what in God's name had South Carolina conservatism done for South Carolina. He pointed to what its condition was once and what it now was, and charged South Carolina conservatism with the result. His speech was a powerful one, and brought the convention to his views, and no property qualification was thereafter imposed upon any officer.

Near the close of the convention I asked leave to present a petition from 250 colored property owners of the city of Charleston, who asked that the right of suffrage be extended to them. This, I suppose, was the first petition of the kind ever offered in the slave states. A member of the convention immediately moved that the petition be returned to me and not received by the convention. Mr. Orr said that the petition was respectful in form and ought to be received. He moved that it be laid on the table. Another delegate moved that

NO MENTION

of the reception of the petition be made in the journal. I then rose to speak upon the last of these motions, but the president of the convention entertained a motion to adjourn, and the convention did so.

The convention made a constitution which was not, however, submitted to the people for their approval. Under it a governor and legislature were elected.

THE BLACK CODE

was ratified by the legislature, and many preposterous laws relating to the Negroes were passed. It was evident that the freedman was to be reduced to a condition worse than slavery--he was to be made a serf, attached to the land, and to be under all the disabilities of slavery without having the protection of the property interest of the owner. CONGRESS took charge of the reconstruction, and the new government of South Carolina fell to pieces, after a brief and inglorious existence.

Although I was the first "carpet bagger," I did not pursue the occupation. I never held office again in the state, although I continued to live there for sixteen years, and taking part in politics as the editor of the Beaufort _Republican_ and the Columbia _Union-Herald_.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] This account was taken from James G. Thompson's Papers by his daughter, Caroline B. Stephen, of Washington, D.C. Special Correspondence of the _New York Tribune_.

BOOK REVIEWS

_The Negro in Virginia Politics, 1865-1902._ By RICHARD L.
MORTON, Ph.D., Phelps Stokes Fellow in the University of
Virginia, 1917-1918. Charlottesville, Virginia, 1919. Pp. 199.
Price, $1.50.

This is the fourth number of a series of studies in the race problem promoted by the Phelps Stokes Fund with a view to interesting a larger number of southern white scholars in this field. The seriousness of the problem during recent years has driven home the thought that without scientific investigation it will be extremely difficult to find a rational basis upon which the two races may cooperate for the greatest good of the greatest number. These monographs are very much like the addresses and studies of the University Commission making an effort to meet this need. Judged from the value of the monographs hitherto produced, however, one must express the regret that these works do not measure up to the desired standard. The chief difficulty lies in the misconception that the whole matter of readjustment may be effected by using the white man only. He is to do the thinking, outline the method of attack, and direct the movement. The Negro, the other half of the equation, has not been invited to share this work and the writers making these investigations are unfortunately biased rather than scientific.

The purpose of this monograph is to show the bad effects of Negro suffrage which had no place in Lincoln's plan of Reconstruction or in the early Congressional plan, but was forced upon the South by a group of aggressive radicals led by Thaddeus Stevens and Charles Sumner as a means of their personal aggrandizement and of executing punishment and revenge upon the Southern States. It is not true that these two statesmen desired to force Negro rule upon the South. They tried to give that section a democratic government. At first they advised the Negroes to choose for their leaders the intelligent southern whites and the Negroes entreated their former masters to serve them in this capacity. When the whites refused to cooeperate, therefore, Congress could do nothing else but make the Negroes the basis of the reconstructed governments. From this partisan point of view only then the monograph is very much of a success. The writer suffered from a preoccupation of mind and in his researches was governed accordingly. He knew what he wanted to write and found facts to assist him toward this end.

The book covers in detail form the beginnings of Negro suffrage in Virginia, the campaign of 1867 in which radicals and Negroes drew the color line, the constitutional convention of 1867-68, the committee of nine, the campaign of 1869, the restoration of Virginia, the elimination of the Carpetbaggers from 1869 to 1879, the Readjuster movement in Virginia from 1879 to 1883, politics and race friction from 1885 to 1900, the constitutional convention of 1901-1902, and the new constitution. He, therefore, discusses certain topics already treated in J.A.C. Chandler's _Representation in Virginia_, and _The History of Suffrage in Virginia_; J.P. McConnell's _Negroes and their Treatment in Virginia from 1865-1867_; H.J. Eckenrode's _The Political History of Virginia during Reconstruction_; and C.C. Pearson's _The Readjuster Movement in Virginia_.

The author makes a survey of the situation prior to the Civil War, explaining why the aristocratic Virginians long since accustomed to rule even by excluding the poor whites from the electorate could not tolerate the enfranchisement of the Negroes. An effort is made also to show that inasmuch as most of the Northern States prior to the Civil War had not accepted Negro suffrage, it was natural for the southern people to be opposed to such a policy. To strengthen this point he refers to such authorities as Oliver P. Morton, Governor Andrew and Abraham Lincoln.

The author considers the Negro a failure in politics and supports his contention by a quotation from George W. Murray, who felt that it was the mistake of the nineteenth century to attempt to make the ex-slave a governor before he had learned to be governed and of Booker T. Washington who said, "There is no doubt but that we made a mistake at the beginning of our freedom of putting the emphasis on the wrong end. Politics and the holding of office were too largely emphasized almost to the exclusion of every interest."

Since the Negro has been eliminated, the author seems to rejoice that the races in Virginia now work together in harmony and are friends. He believes that this relationship will continue only so long as no exterior factor disturbs the equilibrium and concludes with a quotation from John Sharp Williams who feels that "It will be well that wise men think more, that good men pray more and that all men talk less and curse less." If the author really intends to set forth the views of such radicals as John Sharp Williams as those upon which the races may expect to cooeperate in the South, he might have added his recent pronunciamento that "when it comes to maintaining the honor of a white woman the South respects no law human or divine."

These observations are sufficient to establish the idea of the book. The Negro during the Reconstruction period was a failure. The white man who has been restored to absolute power so as to establish social ostracism, segregation and lynching is a success. In other words, the whole study is from the white man's point of view. The Negro has no political rights which the white man should respect and unless things are in conformity with the white man's prejudice they are wrong.

No one would gainsay that the enfranchisement of all ex-slaves was a mistake. Oliver P. Morton, and Governor Andrew, of Massachusetts, were to some extent right in their criticism of such a policy. It would have been much better to have followed Abraham Lincoln's plan of enfranchising those Negroes who were owners of property or able to read and write and those white men who had not taken any part in the Rebellion. While it should not have been expected that ex-slaves could administer the affairs of the country it could not, on the other hand, have been imagined that their masters who had begrudgingly abandoned their title to men as property would in a few years deal with them as one should with human beings. As a matter of fact the black codes which the Southern States enacted immediately after the war show the inability of the aristocratic southerners to deal humanely with a subject people. If, therefore, Abraham Lincoln's policy, of gradually recruiting voters from such blacks as gave evidence of wealth and education and from such whites as manifested a disposition to do the right thing by the country and by the freedmen had been followed, the mistakes of the Reconstruction would have been avoided.

* * * * *

_The Negro Trail Blazers of California._ By DELILAH L. BEASLEY,
Los Angeles, California, 1919. Pp. 317.

This is, according to the author, a compilation of records from the California Archives in the Bancroft Library at the University of California and from the diaries, papers and conversations of pioneers in the State of California. It includes also a record of present-day Negroes in that State. The book is illustrated with portraits exhibiting the life of the people past and present. The work is divided into three parts, the first being historical, the second biographical, and the third an account of the present-day Negro.

Taking up the historical task, the author accounts for the discovery of California and mentions the important roles played by Estevanecito and the Negro priest accompanying the explorers. She then discusses the rule of Spain in California, the Bear Flag Party, the landing of Commodore John D. Sloate, the admission of California to the Union, the Pony Express, the right of testimony, the homestead law, the elective franchise, slavery in California, and freedom papers. Although intended as a continuous sketch, however, this portion of the work, like most of it, is a mixture of narratives and documents.

In the second part of the book giving biographical sketches there is a chapter on the first Negro settlers on the Pacific coast, a pioneer list and the Forty-Niners of color engaged in mining. Into this are worked all sorts of personal narratives without any organizing or unifying scheme as to place or achievement. Not much attention is paid to proportion. The author seemingly wrote all she had heard or collected in each case regardless of the worth of these personal achievements.

The same style holds in the treatment of the present-day Negro of California. There is something about almost everything. The Negro churches and the Negro in education, law and music have considerable space. The author next takes up distinguished women of color, doctors, dentists, literary persons, Negroes at the Panama Pacific International Exposition, and Negroes in the army. Then follow the notes on the text which, instead of being given throughout the work as footnotes are placed at the end of the work.

Judged from the point of view of the scientific investigator, the work is neither a popular nor a documented account. When one considers the numerous valuable facts in the book, however, he must regret that the author did not write the work under the direction of some one well grounded in English composition. As it is, it is so much of a hodge-podge that one is inclined to weep like the minister who felt that his congregation consisted of too many to be lost but not enough to be saved.

* * * * *

_A History of South Africa._ By DOROTHEA FAIRBRIDGE, Oxford
University Press, London, 1918. Pp. 319.

One hears much nowadays about the history of South Africa and the development of that recently enlarged domain under the direction of Great Britain adds further interest to the story. The present volume differs, however, from the type of most recent accounts of South Africa in that it is a small illustrated work within the reach of those too busy or not sufficiently well grounded in the social sciences to read an intensively scientific treatise. As such, it has a place in the current historical volumes growing out of the reconstruction of the countries revolutionized by the world war.

The work begins with a picture of the country as nature made it. There is an account of early plant life, prehistoric animals, paleoliths, and prehistoric man. The early inhabitants are then given more detailed treatment. Attention is directed to the Bushman, the Hottentot, and the Bantu as each figured in South Africa. An effort to contrast the country as the natives kept it with the country as the white man developed it, is a large part of this chapter.

Beginning then with Prince Henry of Portugal the author presents an array of "Great Adventurers." Following this sketch comes the account of the rounding of the Cape of Good Hope by Bartholomew Diaz and next Vasco da Gama's voyage around the Cape to India. The climbing of the Table Mountain by Antonio de Saldanha, the landing of Don Francisco of Almeida, the voyage of Sir Francis Drake, and the adventures of other travellers appear in chronological order.

The rise of settlements in South Africa or on the neighboring islands as half-way stations, show the early importance of the country which, after being conquered, soon experienced considerable expansion. Then followed in the seventeenth century an era of prosperity which paved the way for better beginnings the next century under Governors Hendrik, Swellengrebel and Tulbagh. The troubles of the eighteenth century when the settlements had to reckon with natives and foreigners constitute a critical period of the colony ending with the capture of the Cape by the English in 1795. Then follow the first British occupation, the restoration of the Cape to the Dutch by the Treaty of Amiens in 1802, the second rule of the Dutch and the second coming of the British.

With the nineteenth century the British were to be free to start upon an all but uninterrupted rule of prosperity. The establishment of courts, the rise of missions, the improvement in agriculture, and the extension of the frontier characterized the first efforts of the pioneering British. Their relations with the natives and difficulties with the Boers are treated in the chapters on the Story of Natal, the Vootrekkers, the founding of the Boer Republic and the retrocession of the Transvaal. The chapters covering the subsequent period consist of a discussion of new influences, the Uitlanders, the Jameson Raid, the War of 1899-1902, and the problems of peace and reconstruction.

* * * * *

RECONSTRUCTION IN LOUISIANA. By ELLA LONN, Assistant Professor in
Grinnell College. G.P. Putnam's Sons, New York and London, 1919.
Pp. 538. Price $3.00 net.

Miss Lonn's book is an exhibition of the true scholarly spirit. Her analysis of the situation in Louisiana politics during the period of Reconstruction is most ably executed. She has neglected no source which would throw light upon this very anachronistic epoch. Public documents of all kinds, and especially those which embody the debates in the Senate and assembly of Louisiana have been made to yield interesting testimonies of the passing shows of the years 1867-1876. Not content, however, with these testimonies, she has called to her aid many other sources including the newspapers of the day wherein is displayed popular reaction towards the orgies being indulged in the State House. And thus the reader's mind, by means of most carefully chosen quotations from these records, as if by a lightning flash, is frequently illumined; so that the whole comedy unfolds before the eyes in a most interesting fashion.

The book is not only filled with a wealth of detailed information concerning the period, it not only tells the story of political debauchery, ignorance and fraud; but notes also the few shreds of constructive work done by the legislators under the coercion of public opinion. All of these facts are put together in a logical manner and show that the author is not only gifted with keen analytic powers, but is also endowed with a peculiar faculty for organizing and marshalling facts in such a manner as to weave a beautiful mosaic of otherwise widely divergent elements.

Miss Lonn has succeeded in writing a very interesting narrative and her book will hold the attention of a widely differing clientele. The student of American politics will find an illuminative study of this very remarkable period, and therefore much food for thought. But this book offers to the lover of fiction a new field. There is the hero, Warmoth, the villain, whose protraiture has been limned by a masterly hand. Little by little, sometimes directly and sometimes indirectly; sometimes by the words of his own mouth, oftener by the mouths of those whom he attacked, and almost constantly by the unfriendly newspapers, she deftly portrays the elements of his character. Warmoth had almost unlimited power and he used it like Cataline to corrupt the corruptible elements of the State. He was essentially a Nero, callous to the last degree and indifferent to the progressive anemia which was destroying the State's finances. Like Julius Caesar he attained his gubernatorial power by making multiple false promises and kept it by a species of corrupt practices which were incredibly vile. There is the tragic setting, the broken, maimed, devastated State of Louisiana, just out of the War of Rebellion and struggling hard to regain her "former glory." There are the carpetbaggers, irresponsible, predatory and indigent, of whom an army estimated to have been five hundred thousand strong invaded the State attracted as vultures by the rich pickings of political conquest. There are scalawags, remnants of the Confederate army, also indigent, nevertheless troublesome and among whom many brigands, murderers and cut-throats sprang up. There were respectable Republicans and Democrats, whites and blacks who formed the background for the tragedy of Reconstruction in Louisiana. There were also the Manichean gods of sharply defined good and evil, sanity and insanity, righteousness and corruption, civic pride and utmost indifference; murder, theft, malfeasance, ignorance and crass stupidity. All these thrown in the pot of political regeneration made a situation that was tragically immoral and horrific.

During Warmoth's administration the legislature was a minstrel show. It was worse than a minstrel show; it was profoundly corrupt. Lobbyists openly paid legislators, black and white, for their votes. And what is more, the money was parceled out to each one on the very floor of the Senate and House. This corruption was so rife that it was sickening; it is even nauseating now to read about it. He was finally impeached by the Senate. When it became certain to him that the Senate would vote for his impeachment he cowardly sought to nullify the vote by resigning and fleeing the State. But he regained his power and influence and held office two years longer. And during this time his power was so absolute that the fear of him is manifest in the Senate and House debates. Speakers in making charges of corruption, and even when speaking against bills aimed at increasing the power of the governor, always added, so great was their fear of him, "no reflection is meant upon the present incumbent," or words to that effect. This although they knew well that it was his very abuse of power which called forth many of the bills under consideration.

It was scarcely possible, however, that such abuses, such corruption and infamy, such vile and degraded practices as those which characterized Warmoth's administration as Governor of Louisiana could long continue. So in 1871 came the crash. An open rupture in the ranks of the Republican party developed. The gatling gun convention, so-called, because federal troops with two gatling guns, guarded the convention building, was held. Warmoth, scenting a conspiracy, bolted and held an independent convention in Turner Hall. With him as the leading spirit of the gathering was Pinchback, then majority leader in the Senate.

The career of Pinchback sheds additional light upon this period. He held a high place in the political life of that day, rising from majority leader, by successive stages, to the lieutenant-governorship, and to the presidency of the Senate. He also became immensely wealthy on account of his association with Warmoth, who is said to have acquired a fortune of more than a million dollars during three years of his administration. While Pinchback was Park Commissioner he was accused by Antoine of cheating him out of $40,000 at one clip. For a time Pinchback was one of Warmoth's staunchest supporters, and when the party in Louisiana was split by the two factions, the Custom House ring and the Warmoth faction, Pinchback was elected permanent chairman of the Warmoth convention and made the keynote speech for the campaign. Subsequently, Warmoth's utter degeneracy alienated him and so they parted company. Warmoth's star descended, and he went down to ignominious defeat. Upon his name and memory were heaped derogations, curses and anathemas. And unfortunately these will always be associated with his memory. On the other hand, Pinchback's star rose to the ascendant and he was elected to the United States Senate.

Pinchback was a man of good breeding, education and culture; and if he yielded to the corrupt influences of his time, it was because he was unable to withstand the flood; it was because the corrupt hand of everyone in politics at that time, Ishmael-like, was turned against the forces of righteousness in political affairs. For, at that time, as the author clearly shows, crime, corruption and fraud were so rife, so common, that they were taken for granted. And the moral sense was so low, so negligible, that men did not think of their crimes as crimes. They committed them simply because "everybody was doing so," and unrighteousness filled the State as "the waters the great deeps."

Finally, by a species of corrupt and criminal practices which made those of the Warmoth regime pale into the utmost insignificance, the tide was turned. Another party came into power and the lily-white government was established. Out of such conditions as Miss Lonn has depicted the government of all the Southern States sprang. This book helps us to understand, in some slight degree, the curious political bias of these States. It is in part a heritage of unreasoning fear--not so much of Negro domination as of again being overwhelmed by a flood of corruption let loose by their own kind. How this fear has expressed itself in more recent times we all know too well.

Miss Lonn closes her book with this fitting paragraph: "And therewith the curtain fell upon the last act in this long and weary drama. One can hardly help feeling that surely if Louisiana had sinned, she had paid the penalty of her sins in full measure of atonement."

R. T. BROWNE

NOTES

Recently there passed from this life Sir T. F. Victor Buxton, Bart., a man attracted to Africa, no doubt, by the record of his distinguished great grandfather T. F. Buxton, Bart., who belonged to that group of English reformers instrumental in giving the death blow to the African slave trade. Early interested in the natives of Africa, the grandson soon became associated with the Church missionary movement. He was largely concerned in the establishment of two corporations, the Uganda Company and the East African Industries, both intended to benefit the natives.

Closely connected with Africa, he often visited various parts with a view to studying the many problems arising in the commercial, social and political world. On these occasions many Africans were entertained by him and he maintained friendly relations with them so as to bring together the representatives of various interests to work for the good of all. His interest in the African natives is further shown by his service as president of the Anti-Slavery and Aborigines Protection Society and as a firm supporter of the Native Races and Liquor Traffic Committee.

* * * * *

Owing to the printers' strike the publication of Dr. C.G. Woodson's illustrated textbook, _The Negro in our History_, has been delayed. It is highly probable that the volume will appear before spring.

THE JOURNAL

OF

NEGRO HISTORY

VOL. V--APRIL, 1920--NO. 2

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE NEGRO PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM IN MISSOURI[1]

THE PERIOD FROM 1865 TO 1875

On Tuesday, the eleventh day of January, 1865, the Negro of Missouri awoke a slave; that night he retired a free man.[2] His darkest hour had passed but before him loomed a great task, that of living up to the requirements of a man. His emancipators were confronted with the responsibility of preparing him for his new duties and for the proper use of suffrage which was to be granted him a few years later.

Prior to 1865 the State had seen fit to prohibit the education[3] of the slave because, although the educated slave was the more efficient, yet he was the more dangerous; as his training might aid him to make a better revolt against his position. But the qualities which were objectionable in the slave were necessary to the freed man, if he was to prove other than a menace to the State. His emancipators faced the education of the Negro fairly, and the same convention which had passed the Emancipation Act of 1865, drew up a new State constitution which was ratified the same year. This constitution[4] provided for the establishment and the maintenance of free public schools for the instruction of all persons in the State who were between the ages of five and twenty-one. It further provided that all funds for the support of the public schools should be appropriated in proportion to the number of children without regard to color.

The legislature, which met the same year, passed a law[5] which required that the township boards of education, and those in charge of the educational affairs in the cities and the incorporated villages of the State should establish and maintain one or more separate schools for the colored children of school age within their respective jurisdictions, provided the number of such children should exceed twenty. Persons over twenty-one were to be admitted to these schools. The same officers who were in charge of the educational interests of the white schools were to control the Negro schools. The length of the term and the other advantages to be enjoyed by these schools were to be the same as those enjoyed by the white schools of the same grade. This law further provided that if the average attendance for any month should drop below twelve the school might be closed for a period not to exceed six months. In districts where there were less than twenty Negro children, the money raised for their education was to be reserved by the boards of education in those districts and to be appropriated as the boards saw fit for the education of the Negro children upon whom the money had been raised. The same legislature[6] passed an act authorizing towns, cities, and villages to organize for school purposes with special privileges. This act, however, provided that any town, city or village so incorporated should be required to establish one or more Negro schools according to the law. At this session of the legislature[7] there was enacted a law to compel the school authorities in each sub-district to prepare a school census of their respective jurisdictions which should enumerate separately and according to sex the white and the Negro children who were permanently resident within the sub-district. In case the directors failed to perform this duty the township clerk was to have the census taken and to recover from the directors by judicial proceedings the cost of the work.

If we were to judge from the constitutional and the statutory laws of this period, we might conclude that the education of the Negro was very popular and that his needs were well taken care of. But before we can draw any conclusion we must study certain conditions. We must know something of the character of the men who were to enforce the law, of the desire of the Negroes for an education, of popular opinion concerning public education, and of the distribution of the Negro population.

The State Superintendents of this period were well trained men,[8] and their reports show that they were faithful in the discharge of their duty. One of these superintendents, John Monteith,[9] showed great zeal in the establishment and development of the Negro school system. He was born in the Western Reserve district of Ohio, a section noted for its strong anti-slavery sentiment. He belonged to a family of educators. His father was one of the first presidents of the University of Michigan. Monteith completed his education at Yale and served for a number of years as a minister in St. Louis. Upon becoming State Superintendent, he wrote in favor of Negro education a pamphlet which he sent to each of the county superintendents. His annual reports,[10] to which we shall refer later, show the interest and the effort which this man put forth to develop the Negro schools of the State.

The Negroes were not indifferent to the efforts which were put forth in their behalf. There is much evidence to show that they took an active part in the establishment[11] and the maintenance of schools for their children. In those districts in which Negro schools were maintained and an honest effort was made to better the conditions of the Negroes, they responded heartily to their opportunities. The following quotations are typical of the reports which the superintendents in those counties were able to make in 1874: "In most of the townships a commendable interest is manifested in the support of Negro schools, which I am happy to report, is appreciated by the Negroes[12] themselves. The schools have been well attended with considerable diligence manifested by the pupils." A.A. Neal, Superintendent of Pettis County, reported:[13] "The Negro schools are doing better than could be expected under existing circumstances." The Superintendent of Bay County said:[14] "The Negro schools have been well attended. The pupils have manifested great enthusiasm, and have made surprising advancement in the rudiments." _The Journal of Education_[15] which was printed in St. Louis, by J.B. Merwin in 1869, states: "It is a well known fact that our Negro population manifests the greatest zeal in taking advantage of every opportunity for acquiring education."

At the beginning of this period, popular opinion concerning free public schools in general and Negro schools in particular was not favorable. The school laws of the State were in advance of the people. These laws[16] were the product of a few statesmen who appeared at intervals, and who, in spite of well known social protests, pushed forward with great energy school laws modeled after those of the more progressive eastern States.[17] The State Superintendent complained in his report for 1867 that in those counties in which the southern sympathizers predominated, the people were either wholly negligent or bitterly opposed to their public school right. Three classes of opposers were enumerated;[18] those who believed that the public schools tended to foster infidelity, those who believed that the State, the county or a municipal body had no right to tax for educational purposes, and those who regarded as unnecessary any education beyond reading, writing, and simple arithmetic. In March of the year 1866, four months after the constitution of 1865 had gone into effect, of the thirty-four Negro schools[19] in the State only two were situated in counties in which the southern element predominated. Thus we see that the attitude toward public schools in general was reflected upon the Negro schools.