Samuel Lee of Sumter, S. C.—

Born in South Carolina.

Delegate to the State Constitutional Convention.

A very strong character and one of the bright young men of the state.

He was elected to Congress but the Democrats counted him out.

He contested the seat and though the House was Republican and his case a good one, the Chairman of the Committee on Elections, a Republican from Indiana, who was personally antagonistic to him failed to report on the case and Congress adjourned without taking any action.

Jas. A. Bowley—

Member of the House of Representatives.

For one term he was chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means.

He wielded considerable power in legislation.

Was considered the "Beau Brummel" of the House.

F. H. Frost—

Born in South Carolina.

Member of the House of Representatives.

Active in all legislation.

Polished and highly cultured.

Henry J. Maxwell—

Born in South Carolina, at Charleston.

Senator from Marlboro County.

Active in all legislation.

Considered the best dressed member in the Senate.

Known to his associates at the "Duke of Marlboro."

W. H. Jones—

State Senator from Georgetown Co.

Quite a fluent speaker and well versed on all public questions.

On account of his bellicose nature he was given the sobriquet of "Red Hot Jones."

A. C. Jones—

Born in Washington, D. C.

Clerk of the House of Representatives during the whole Reconstruction Period.

A very capable officer and very popular.

Walter R. Jones—

Born in South Carolina at Charleston.

Graduate of Oberlin College.

Secretary of the State Financial Board, consisting of the Governor, Attorney General, State Treasurer and Comptroller, all white at that time.

Elected Clerk of the City Council of Columbia, S. C., by the unanimous vote of the members.

Resigned that position to accept the position of Private Secretary to Governor Chamberlain.

The best equipped and most brilliant young colored man I ever met.

J. E. Green—

Sergeant at Arms of the Senate during the whole Reconstruction Period.

A very efficient officer and a man of fine parts.

John Williams—

Sergeant at Arms of the House of Representatives during the whole period.

A very capable man and popular with the members.

There were many colored men who occupied positions of importance in the different countries—positions such as Sheriff, Treasurer, Auditor, Clerk of Court, Commissioner, Coroner and School Commissioner.

I never heard of any of them being removed for incompetency, dereliction of duty or malfeasance.

I regret very much that I cannot give you any information as to whether the men mentioned were free or slaves, as the persons from whom I could have gotten that information have all passed away. Had I received such inquiry eight or ten years ago I could have furnished it as there were several persons then living who, I know, were well posted on that subject.

Of the names noted in this paper the following were from the North.

Some of them may have been from the South originally and returned after the war: R. B. Elliott, D. A. Straker, Maj. M. R. Delaney, W. H. Jones, Dr. B. A. Bosemon, W. H. Thomas, H. W. Purvis, R. H. Gleaves, A. C. Jones, S. A. Swails, J. A. Bowley, J. E. Green.

The colored men of South Carolina played a more conspicuous part and held more offices of a high grade during the Reconstruction Period than the colored men of any other State.

South Carolina has the distinction of electing the first colored Congressman, (Joseph H. Rainey) and the last (George W. Murray.)[27]

South Carolina was represented in Congress by eight colored men—Rainey, Elliott, Ransier, Cain, Delarge, Smalls, Miller and Murray.

Mr. Miller and Mr. Murray served after the Reconstruction Period and most of Gen. Smalls' service was after that period.

When I compare the present political leaders in South Carolina with those of the Reconstruction Period I must confess that we have retrograted politically. They may be due to conditions. Not only in South Carolina, but where would you find in any State at the present time, political leaders who can measure up to the caliber of Elliott, Rainey, Straker, Cardozo, Swails, DeLarge, Bosemon, Wright, Ransier, Lee, McKinlay, Cain, Whipper and Wilder?

When the Negro race can again produce political leaders of the type named then we may look forward with some degree of hope for a solution of the Negro problem.

Your idea in collecting data relative to the Reconstruction Period is a laudable one, and the wonder is, and the pity of it is, that it had not been thought of long ere this. There are very few now left to tell the tale, and that in a very unsatisfactory way.

Some of the data relative to the Congressmen I got from Congressional Directories. To recall all names, dates and incidents pertaining to the Reconstruction Period after a period of fifty years would require the prodigious memory of a Macauley, even had I been an active participant in political affairs at that time. There may be a few errors but they are of a minor character. I am glad that I am able to be of some assistance to you in this matter, however, little, and I can only say in the words of Macbeth,

"The service and the loyalty I owe, In doing it, pays itself."

Very respectfully, (Signed) H. A. WALLACE.[28]

All names referred to in this paper are of colored men unless otherwise stated.

CORRECTIONS OF DATA SUBMITTED BY MR. H. A. WALLACE, OF NEW YORK CITY

103 WEST 131 ST., NEW YORK, N. Y., February 18, 1918.

MR. MONROE N. WORK, Editor—Negro Year Book, Tuskegee Institute, Ala,

Dear Sir:

In reply to your letter of the 11th inst., I beg leave to state that Hunter and Dickson were white. As to Brokenton I probably was thinking of a Brockenboro in Washington and got the names mixed.

Before leaving Washington in 1913 I let Whitfield McKinlay have my book, "Reconstruction in South Carolina" by John S. Reynolds, to read. When I received your letters asking for assistance in getting the data relative to reconstruction in South Carolina I wrote to Mr. McKinley for the book. I wrote for it several times but not until about a month ago did he send it. I did not care to delay sending you the data, consequently I mailed it before the book came to hand. Had I received the book in time I could have made my paper a little more readable and avoided the errors referred to.

As you have, no doubt, taken data from the book by Reynolds I would like to correct a few errors I found therein.

Reconstruction Convention

Colleton—W. M. Vinery, should be Viney Darlington—Richard Humbird, should be Humbert Edgefield—John Wooley, colored, should be white Greenville—Wilson Cook, should be Cooke Kershaw—John A. Chestnut, should be Chesnut

Chapter III—Scott's First Term

Senate— Chester—Lewis Wimbush, should be Lucius Wimbush Union—H. W. Duncan, colored, should be white This would make ten colored Senators

House of Representatives— Abbeville—James Martin, white, should be colored Charleston—B. A. Bosemon, should be Dr. B. A. Bosemon, Jr. William R. Jervay, should be Jarvey Chesterfield—H. L. Shrewsberry, should be Shrewsbury Colleton—W. R. Hoyt is in the Senate column Wm. Driffle, should be Wm. A. Driffle H. James and T. Richardson, as members in addition to Thomas and Driffle. Edgefield—John Wooley, colored should be white Georgetown—W. H. Jones, should be W. H. Jones Jr. Greenville—Wilson Cook, should be Cooke Kershaw—John A. Chestnut, should be Chesnut Williamsburg—Jeff. Pendergrass, should be Jeffery Prendergrass.

Jas. Martin, Lee Nance and Wade Perrin, representatives and B. F. Randolph, senator, were assassinated by the Ku-Klux Klan.

Page 111—"Among Mr Robertson's earliest official acts was the recommendation of an incompetent colored man to be postmaster at Columbia."

If you will look at the sketch I gave of Mr Wilder, the postmaster referred to, you will note that in 1880 when the Democrats had absolute control of South Carolina and Gens. Hampton and Butler represented the State in the U. S. Senate, Mr Wilder was confirmed for the fourth time, and as Columbia was the home post office of Senator Hampton it is not likely that he or Butler would have voted to confirm an imcompetent colored man when senatorial courtesy would have sustained them had they objected.

Page 229—W. R. Jervay, should be Jarvey.

Page 233—Relative to Henry E. Hayne going to the communion table I have to say that is all rot in so far as there were any objections. The communicants with the exception of Mr Babbitt and family were nearly all colored. I know that the wardens and vestrymen were colored.

Page 234—I do not know about all of the colored men mentioned as having matriculated in the School of Law, but I am certain that Mr Wilder did not.

Page 236—William R. Jervay, should be Jervey.

Page 333—With reference to Dr. Bosemon being under the influence of liquor I desire to state that he did not touch, taste nor handle the stuff. Dr Bosemon was a cultured gentleman, polished in his manners and was a surgeon in one of the colored regiments during the war.

Page 366—Instead of N. B. Myers being the elector for the fifth district I think it was his brother, Senator William F. Myers.

As N. B. Myers went over to the Hampton House it is not probable that he would stultify himself by voting for Hayes and acknowledging Hampton as Governor.

Page 462—Gen. Elliott did not become a department clerk in Washington. He moved to New Orleans where he practised law several years before his death.

All the Republican politicians who remained in South Carolina did not sink into actual obscurity or harmless inactivity after 1876.

Mr. Wilder was postmaster at Columbia until June 30, 1885.

Gen. Smalls represented the State in Congress for several terms after 1876, and was a delegate to the Constitutional Convention in 1895. Was also Collector of Port of Beaufort.

Thomas E. Miller was also a delegate to the same convention and served a term in Congress, and was a member of the S. C. House of Representatives.

W. J. Whipper was a member of the legislature. Probate judge of the county for ten years and a delegate to the Constitutional Convention of 1895.

John Lee was postmaster at Chester for several years.

Mr Rainey was a special agent of the Treasury Department with headquarters in South Carolina.

H. L. Shrewsbury and W. F. Myers were in the Revenue Service and active in politics as was A. W. Curtis.

There were others but I cannot recall their names.

Referring to the data mailed to you I desire to make the following corrections:

Page 2—J. H. Rainey was not a member of the House of Representatives but Senator from Georgetown.

Page 6—Relative to Judge Lee I desire to state that I am in error as to his case being the first where a colored man was elected to a municipal judgeship. Macon B. Allen was elected by the legislature as judge of the Inferior Court of Charlestown prior to Lee's election or appointment. Therefore Judge Allen should be given the honor.

Of course J. J. Wright who was elected an associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the State by the legislature was the first Negro in this country who ever occupied a judicial position.

Page 7—Henry W. Purvis was elected Adjutant General for the four year term 1872-1876. Member of Legislature 1868-1870.

Page 10—W. J. McKinlay was also a member of the House of Representatives for part of 1868-69 period but resigned his seat to accept the position of Register of Mesne Conveyanes for Charlestown, to which the legislature elected him.

Page 11—W. H. Jones, should be W H. Jones, Jr.

John Williams was Sergeant-at-Arms from 1870 to close of period.

As there were no free public schools for colored youth in South Carolina it is an error to state that Thomas E. Miller was educated in that way. It was against the law for anyone to teach a Negro even to read or write.

I am also told that I am in error as to giving him credit for the establishment of the " State College" at Orangeburg. I will try to find out something about that matter.

Very respectfully, H. A. WALLACE

SOME CORRECTIONS FOR DATA SUBMITTED BY MR. H. A. WALLACE OF NEW YORK CITY

103 WEST 131 ST., NEW YORK CITY. March 11, 1918.

MR. MONROE N. WORK, Editor Negro Year Book, Tuskegee Institute, Ala.

Dear Sir:

I presume you received my letter of February 18, also the one of January 19, relative to corrections in the data on Reconstruction.

I herewith send you a few more before you go to press on your book pertaining to the part the Negro played in the political history of the Southern States during the Reconstruction period:

I am in error as to James Martin, of Abbeville, who was assassinated, as being colored. I was informed that he was colored, but in reading the eulogies delivered by the different members of the House and Senate, I find that he was not even an American. He was a native of Ireland.

W. A. Bishop, who represented the Greenville district in the first legislature, was white, not colored. In the list of delegates to the Republican meeting at Charlestown, May 9, 1867, he is given as white in Reynolds' book. I met a friend from Greenville about ten days ago and in speaking to him about Bishop he said that he was white and that he knew of no colored Bishops in that district.

On page 9 of my data I state that Mr. Whipper was born in South Carolina. I met his son, who is living here, sometime ago and he informed me that his father was born in Pennsylvania.

With reference to Judge Whipper I would add that one of the first acts of the first legislature was to elect a commission of three members to revise and consolidate the Statute laws of the State and that he was the first member elected. Quite a tribute to his legal ability.

On page 12 add the following names as from the North.

Rev. B. F. Randolph—Senator—Orangeburg district.

W. J. Whipper—Member—Beaufort district.

Judge J. J. Wright—Beaufort district—afterwards Associate Judge Supreme Court, and on page 8, under his name please state—born in Pennsylvania.

On page 107 Reynolds' book—Abbeville Co.—W. J. Lomax, should be Hutson J. Lomax, this is official. On page 59 and 77 he has it H. J. which is correct.

Same page—Fairfield—Henry Jacob, should be Jacobs—He was also a delegate to the Constitutional Convention—See page 77.

Very Respectfully, (Signed) H. A. WALLACE

Copy.

SUMNER AND STEVENS ADVISE WITH REFERENCE TO RECONSTRUCTION POLICY IN SOUTH CAROLINA

The late Honorable Francis L. Cardoza at one time Secretary of State for South Carolina, several years before his death stated to the undersigned the following in substance:

That a number of colored men met and appointed a committee which was sent to Washington to get the advice of Charles Sumner and Thaddeus Stevens concerning the formation of the political organization for the newly enfranchised Negro citizen shortly after the adoption of the 14th Amendment.

Pains were taken to keep the plans from both the native whites and the so-called carpet baggers from the North. That both Mr. Sumner and Mr. Stevens advised the committee to tender the leadership to native whites of the former master class of conservative views: but this plan was frustrated because they were not able to secure the consent of desired representatives of the former master class to assume the proffered leadership.

(Signed) KELLY MILLER (Signed) WHITEFIELD MCKINLAY

WASHINGTON, D. C., December 14, 1917.

Subscribed to and sworn before me, SAMUEL E. LACY a Notary Public in and for the District of Columbia, this Fourteenth (14th) Day of December 1917.

(Signed) SAMUEL E. LACY, Notary Public, D. C.

SOME NEGRO MEMBERS OF RECONSTRUCTION LEGISLATURES

Texas

J. H. Stewart who now lives in Austin.

Edward Patton, San Jacinto County, now living in Washington is in Government service.

Nathan H. Haller, Brazoria County. House, 1892-94. Reelected and counted out. Contested his seat and won.

R. L. Smith, Colorado County, 1895-99, now living in Waco. Is president of the Farmers Bank and head of the Farmers Improvement Association. For sketch of, see Negro Year Book, p. 322. For his work in the Legislature, see attached letter.

Elias May, Brazos County, in the early days of Reconstruction.

R. J. Moore, Washington County, representative.

—— Gaines, senator, Lee County.

Copy.

COOPERATIVE EXTENSION WORK IN AGRICULTURE AND HOME ECONOMICS

COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS WACO, TEXAS, March 26, 1918.

PROF. MONROE N. WORK, Tuskegee Inst. Ala.

Dear Mr. Work:

I was elected in Nov. 1894 as representative for Colorado county and was re-elected in 1896.

My majority in 1894 was 168 and in 1896 at the next election it was 450 as I recollect it.

I was appointed on the committee on education and on privilege and election and on agriculture.

I introduced a bill restoring colored trustees which finally passed.

I fought a bill establishing separate waiting rooms for the races at R. R. Station and killed it for four years.

I introduced a resolution inviting manufacturing cotton plants to come to Texas. I introduced a resolution granting the use of the Hall of the House of Representatives to the colored citizens of Austin to hold their memorial services for Fred Douglas. When one understands the race feeling in the South this was indeed a triumph. I introduced a bill establishing a college course as a part of our curriculum at Prairie View Normal which passed carrying with it a grant of fifty thousand acres of land.

I worked hard to help carry a bill through making any peace officer automatically lose his office whenever a lynching took place in his county. This bill passed but was declared unconstitutional by the supreme court. I was appointed by the speaker as a member of the visiting board for Prairie View State Normal. As a member of the committee on privileges and Election I single handed fought for a colored man elected from Brazoria county, N. H. Haller by name who had the nerve to contest the seat of a white man to whom the certificate of election had been awarded. After a long and bitter fight in which three times I carried in and presented a minority report we won and Haller was seated. This isn't the only case of its kind that I know of in this state.

Haller of course had able legal talent to take care of his case.

I voted for the purchase of the battle field of San Jacinto which is in Harris country about twenty miles below Houston. It was on this battlefield that Texas won her independence from Mexico in 1836. It is now a beautiful state park. For this action I was publicly thanked by the Daughters of the Republic.

Respectfully (Signed) R. L. SMITH.

The legislatures which I served in were the 23d and 24th.

Charles A. Culberson, now U. S. senator was governor and our relations were very cordial.

In 1902 I was tendered and accepted a position in the U. S. Marshal's office for the Eastern Dist. of Texas by Pres. Roosevelt. Held same until 1909. This was the most honorable and best paid federal position ever held by a Negro in Texas except that held by Hon. N. W. Cuney who was collector of the Post of Galveston. In 1915 I took charge of the Extension Service work for Negroes in Texas which I now hold.

SOME NEGRO MEMBERS OF THE TENNESSEE LEGISLATURE DURING RECONSTRUCTION PERIOD AND AFTER[29]

By Honorable J. C. Napier, of Nashville, Tenn., register of United States Treasury, May, 1917

Year Name County

1871-73 Sampson W. Keeble Davidson 1877-79 Thos. A. Sykes? Davidson 1879-81 S.A. McElwee? Haywood 1881-83 T. Frank Cassells Shelby J.F. Norris Shelby Thos. A. Sykes? Davidson S.A. McElwee? Haywood 1883-85 J.W. Boyd Weakley S.A. McElwee Haywood D.F. Rivers Fayette 1885-87 G.E. Evans Shelby W.A. Fields Shelby W.C. Hodge Shelby S.A. McElwee Haywood D.F. Rivers[30] Fayette 1887-89 1889-91 —— Goodman Fayette 1891-93 1893-95 1895-97 J. M. H. Graham Montgomery

Davidson county, Tennessee, sent two colored men to the Legislature. The first colored member of the Legislature was Sampson W. Keeble from 71-73. From 77-79 the colored member was Thomas A. Sykes. Both of these were representatives. Tennessee never had any colored senators. Sampson W. Keeble was a native of Tennessee. Thomas A. Sykes was a native of North Carolina and had been a member of the North Carolina legislature.[31]

Captain James H. Sumner, of Davidson County, was elected a door-keeper of the House of Representatives for 1867-69. He was afterwards appointed captain of a Militia Company which rendered the State valuable service in putting down the Ku-Klux. Later by act of the Legislature a committee was authorized for Nashville consisting of three persons to audit claims against the State for destruction of property by soldiers of the Confederates and Federal armies during the war. Governor Brownlow appointed on this commission James H. Sumner, a white man named Lassiter, and J.C. Napier. They examined claims amounting to millions of dollars, some of which were afterwards paid and others rejected. There were other colored men on such commissions in other parts of the state whose names I do not now recall.

Haywood county first sent Samuel A. McElwee. He served from 79-83. The same county afterwards sent Rev. D.F. Rivers who is now pastor of the Berean Baptist Church in Washington, D.C. Rev. Rivers defeated the father of a very popular white girl and she met him in the street and spat in his face. McElwee made a very active member and was highly respected by all. He was a graduate of Fisk University and the law department of Walden University.

Weakley County sent John W. Boyd who served two or three terms in the legislature. He ran for the senate but was defeated.

Perhaps there was one from Hamilton county or Knox county.

Shelby county sent quite a delegation of colored men from time to time. Among them were T.F. Cassells and I.F. Norris, who is still living in North Dakota. Cassells was a lawyer, educated at Oberlin.

Mr. Norris was a successful business man of Memphis, Mr. Keeble was a barber in Nashville.

Mr. Sykes was Internal Revenue Collector in Nashville and came there with high revenue officials from North Carolina. He entered politics and was quite influential and finally died at Nashville.

Keeble was of a family highly respected and of very high standing in Nashville. The men from Memphis and Haywood counties were more highly educated than the others. They were free men of high class and up to the standard of the whites who were sent to the legislature in those days.

COLORED MEN IN OTHER POSITIONS

At one time the county government of Davidson County was run by three Commissioners; one of these commissioners was a colored man, named Randall Brown of limited education, but large experience and a large amount of good common sense. He was very influential and highly thought of by white and colored people.

Nashville city government during the days of reconstruction had among its membership, perhaps, one-third colored members. These men were not of the same calibre as the colored members of the legislature. They were picked up in the different wards by their friends. They were chosen for their popularity rather than for fitness for the work before them.

Immediately following the reconstruction days, Josiah T. Settle was elected Assistant Attorney General for Shelby county under General Patterson who afterwards served as Governor of the State of Tennessee. Mr. Settle had previously been a member of the Mississippi Legislature.

In Knoxville men have served in the legislature of the city government.

When they changed the form of government in Nashville, there was a colored man a member of the Board of Aldermen. Two colored men were elected to the council. As a result, two fire companies were given to colored men. Mr. Charles Gowdey and Mr. J.C. Napier were the colored members of the council. The first two brick school houses were erected for colored children during their term. They were the Pearl High School and the Meigs School. At that time the people of Nashville, the Democrats especially, showed a very liberal spirit to the colored people and divided the positions with them. Shorty after this with a more liberal spirit, they erected the third brick school house in the city of Nashville, The Napier School.

After things went out of the hands of the Republicans in Tennessee, Capt. Sumner went down into Mississippi, entered politics and was elected Sheriff of Holmes county. He became quite wealthy. His family was of high standing. Owned property in Nashville and the descendants still own it.

Settle and Cassells were free men. Keeble was owned by a very distinguished Tennessee family named Keeble.

SCHOOLS FOR FREE NEGROS AND SLAVES

In Tennessee before the war there were schools for Negroes. There were no laws against schools for free colored people until the agitation that brought on the war.

At Nashville, Franklin college graduated three colored men; that is the school gave them graduation papers. They were prepared for the ministry in the Christian church (Disciples). These men were Samuel Lowery, Daniel Watkins and James T. Rapier. Lowery, Rapier and Watkins were all free men. Rapier served a term or two from Florence, Ala., in Congress during the Reconstruction Period. He was a man of some wealth, was very active and traveled a good deal. Lowery's father was also a minister, before him, in the Christian Church. He had a farm as well as city property. Franklin College was a Campbellite Institution or what is now known as the Christian Church Institution.

When the agitation came about preceding the Civil War they closed all of the colored schools.

Mr. Napier's father and mother with some other colored people had a man named Rufus Conrad come down from Cincinnati, Ohio, to teach their children. This was in 1859. Both free and slave children went to this school. The school had been open two or three months when one day, while the class was spelling the word baker, an abrupt knock on the door interrupted the class and then a man entered without waiting to be admitted. He said to the teacher, "What is your name?" The teacher answered, "Rufus Conrad." "Where did you come from?" was the next question. The teacher answered, "From Cincinnati, Ohio." The man said, "I have been authorized by the powers that be in Nashville to send these children home, to close the doors of this school and give you just 24 hours to leave this town." This ended this school.

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.

The school laws themselves, which seem to have been adequate to provide equal school rights for all the children in the State, were easily evaded when the officials of a community were hostile to them. In his first annual report,[20] State Superintendent Parker called attention to the following facts: No remedy was provided in case the township board refused to comply with the statutes. There was no remedy in case the local board of directors refused to hire teachers for the school when the requisite number of pupils were in the district. In this manner, he reported, the Negro children in many districts were deprived of an opportunity to attend school. Even where there was no apparent hostility to the statutes and to the education of the Negroes there was a failure to make the requisite enumeration of the Negro children in many townships and consequently many children were by the very law itself deprived of the benefits of the State school fund. He pointed out that in the year 1867 many would thus be deprived, since the law regulating the apportionment of the State school fund, compelled the apportionment to be made on the basis of the enumeration which had already been made, and which in many cases did not include the Negro children. The law concerning the establishment of Negro schools was abused here and there throughout the entire period. As late as 1876 the State Superintendent complained[21] that in many cases through ignorance of the law and in other cases through willful disobedience of the law, schools for the Negroes had not been established. In the first case, he reported that merely explaining the law had the desired effect and in the other case it was necessary to call the assistance of county clerks and of grand juries.

During this period there was a growing sentiment in favor of public schools. This is shown by the reports which came from the various counties to the State Superintendent's office, and also by the increase in the number of children enumerated and by the increasing number of schools. In 1870,[22] the county superintendents reported a great deal of opposition and indifference to the schools especially on the part of the tax-payers. In 1872 a majority of the county superintendents were able to report[23] a growing sentiment in favor of public education. They could then say that the enemies of this institution were becoming its friends. The State Superintendent[24] reported in 1874 that in the four years of his administration there had been a steady growth in the popularity of the public school system. We can better appreciate the progress made in this period when we remember that prior to the Civil War, the public school in Missouri had been considered a pauper's school. The Constitution[25] of 1820 had provided: "One or more schools shall be established in each county township as soon as practicable and necessary where the poor shall be taught gratis." The attendance also showed a healthy growth. In 1870[26] there were 280,473 pupils attending 7,547 public schools in the State. There were 389,956 pupils attending these schools in 1872. In 1874 the enumeration showed that there were 708,354 children of school age in the State.

As sentiment in favor of the public school grew, the willingness to enumerate and to provide schools for the Negro children also increased. In 1867 the number of Negro children enumerated was 33,619. This was an increase of 13,709 over the previous year. Fifty-six public schools were provided for these children. In 1869 forty counties reported 12,871 Negro children and 80 schoolhouses which were devoted to their use. The average school term was four and one-third months. In 1871 the enumeration had increased to 37,173, and the number of public schools to 212. These schools had an enrollment of 4,358 pupils. In 1873[27] the enumeration had increased to 38,234 and the number of schools to 252.

The work of the public school for the education of the Negro was supplemented by two other classes of schools. In 1867[28] the State Superintendent called attention to three classes of schools which were educating the Negroes in the State. In the first place there were those supported by benevolent societies in other States. These schools were generally supplied with white teachers and were doing good work. There were then the private or subscription schools, which were supported by the tuition of the pupils and in many cases these were taught by colored teachers of inferior qualifications. Finally there were the public schools as contemplated by the law. A few such schools had been established in the large towns and cities.

In 1869[29] it was estimated that there were in the State 34,000 Negro children of educable age. For their accommodation there were 59 Negro public schools with an average attendance of 2,000. This report also states that the majority of these schools were taught in churches and cabins with walls admirably adapted for ventilation and for admission of copious shower baths of rain. The same year Colonel Seely, Agent for the Freedman's Bureau in Missouri, reported 114 schools for the freedmen. Most of these were public schools and the attendance was 6,240. The ninth census for 1870, reported that 9,080 Negro children were attending school in Missouri. Thus we see that the public schools of this period were greatly aided by mission and private schools.

In 1868 the legislature enacted a law[30] which gave the State Superintendent the authority to assume the powers of the school board for establishing and maintaining a school for Negro children when the township, city, or village, neglected to establish and to maintain such a school in accordance with the law. The same year the school law was amended[31] so as to require the township, the city or the incorporated village to establish one or more schools for Negro children when there was more than fifteen children in the jurisdiction. A Negro school could be closed for six months when the attendance for any month dropped below ten.

There is evidence to show that the State Superintendent used his power to establish Negro schools when the local authorities neglected this task. In 1873, he reported:[32] "I have established between 50 and 60 Negro schools in the State without resorting to the expedient of a tax as indicated and authorized by law." In 1875 he reported: "I have levied taxes for Negro schools in three instances. The medicine is good and effective and I trust it will be administered in every similar case in the State until the Negroes enjoy schools equally good in every way as the white schools." Thus we see that by the Law of 1868 the State Superintendent had the power to remedy conditions as far as the Negroes were concerned but there was no evidence to show that he used this power prior to 1872, although there are reports of violations of the law. In 1874 there was passed a law[33] which made a school official subject to a fine of not less than fifty or more than five hundred dollars, for the persistent neglect or refusal to perform any duty or duties pertaining to his office. In view of this and the offensiveness of the results threatened in the civil rights bill,[34] the State Superintendent[35] was astonished at the number of delinquencies and persistent evasions of the law.

The Commissioner of Education was able to report in 1870: "This State has a larger proportion of schools[36] for Negro children than any former slave State. Opposition to the education of the Negroes is rapidly disappearing. Their rapid improvement and good conduct help to disarm prejudice." Among the methods of evading the law the following were reported; the failure to enumerate the Negro children, the complaints of a lack of funds, and the plea of an inability to secure teachers. In 1875 the State Superintendent reported[37] that the citizens of Calloway County, the most strongly southern county in the State during the Civil War, were evincing the greatest readiness to provide good schools for their large Negro population. This, he believed, augured well for the future of the Negro schools of the State, since it indicated a growing kindly disposition of the southern element of the State towards them. How great was the change in sentiment can be readily seen by contrasting this report with those of the county superintendent for 1866 and 1867. In 1866 the Superintendent of Calloway reported[38] much objection to public schools in that county on account of the impartial application to children of all races and colors. The only Negro school in the county had been established under very discouraging circumstances at Fulton. In many rural districts there were not enough children to permit the establishment of a school and in other districts the existing opposition to Negro schools made their establishment impossible. The next year it was reported[39] that the white schools were better fitted for pigs than for children and that there was no interest at all in the education of Negro children.

Another factor which effected the development of the Negro school system was the sparseness of the Negro population. In many districts and even in some counties there were not enough Negro children to form a school. In 1871, reports[40] were received from 109 of the 115 counties of the State. Thirty-nine of the 109 counties did not report a single school district with the required number of Negro children to establish a school. The other seventy counties reported 395 school districts having twenty or more Negro children of school age. The same counties also reported 158 schools for these children. In their annual letters for 1872 twenty-one county superintendents called attention to the fact that the Negro population was so distributed over the counties that it was impossible to provide schools for them according to the law. Three of these superintendents asked that the law might be so amended as to provide for Negro children in the sparsely settled districts, and one superintendent advocated[41] that in districts in which there were too few Negro children to form separate schools, they should be admitted to the white schools.

That same year the State Superintendent reported[42] that in several cases in which no schools were provided because of the small number of pupils, that their parents had asked why their children could not enter the white schools since there was no direct law prohibiting it. The next year[43] the Negro children in several districts did enter the white schools with the tacit consent of the white population. When the State Superintendent was asked whether or not they could be ejected[44] he replied that there was no law to that effect. At this time the enactment of a civil rights bill was being agitated in the State. This bill[45] provided that the public schools of the State should be open to all children regardless of color. When the civil rights bill was defeated in 1874, there was passed another bill which aimed to relieve the situation in the sparsely settled districts.

In 1869 the legislature had passed a law[46] permitting two or more districts, each of which had less than fifteen Negro population but which when taken together had more than that number, to establish a union school for those children. This law on account of its lack of force did not accomplish much good. In 1874 the law[47] was amended in such a way as to make it obligatory for two or more districts, each of which had too few Negro children, to form a school to unite to form a union school. It was also ordered that all taxable property in a township in which a Negro school was situated should be taxed for its support.

In 1875 each district supported its own school[48] for white children, while the whole township in which a Negro school was situated was taxed for its support. No district in the State could be compelled by the law to maintain a school for its white children, but if there were more than fifteen Negro children in the district, the law compelled the local authorities to establish a school for them. If they failed to do so, the law directed the State Superintendent to establish and to levy taxes for the support of Negro schools in such communities. In those districts in which there were too few Negro children to form a separate school, union schools were to be established. The last mentioned law, however, was passed too late to have much effect upon the period under discussion. School officials who refused to perform the duties of their office could be fined[49] not less than fifty nor more than five hundred dollars.

In the larger centers of the State where there was a large Negro population the necessity of establishing schools[50] for the Negroes seems to have been better realized. Thirty-nine out of seventy-three towns and villages incorporated under the special Act for Towns and Villages, reported[51] a sufficient population for a Negro school. There were 19,879 white and 3,609 Negro pupils enrolled in the public schools of these thirty-nine towns and villages. The length of the school term was the same in the white and the Negro schools in a number of cases; but the average length was lower in the Negro schools than in the white schools. The average length of the white school was thirty-four weeks and the average length of the Negro school term was twenty-eight weeks. The average expense a pupil in these schools was 8.1 cents a day for each white pupil and 7.8 cents a day for each Negro pupil. The average attendance in the Negro schools was below that in the white schools. The average attendance of the white schools was 61.89 per cent and that of the Negro schools was 51.86 per cent of the enrollment.