Lincoln's Plan of Reconstruction

345.  McPherson’s Pol. Hist., p. 557.

346.  McPherson’s Pol. Hist., pp. 555–558.

347.  Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America, Vol. III. p. 452.

348.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 12–13.

349.  Ibid., p. 234.

350.  Pierce, Memoir of Charles Sumner, Vol. IV. p. 205.

351.  Ibid., p. 221.

352.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 281–291.

353.  An interesting account of the imprisonment of colored seamen in the ports of South Carolina is given in The Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America, Vol. I. pp. 576–586.

354.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 298–301.

355.  Ibid.

356.  Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 934–937.

357.  Ibid., pp. 937–939.

358.  Appendix to Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 73–75.

359.  Appendix to Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 75–83.

360.  Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 968–969.

361.  Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 969–970.

362.  Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 970–971.

363.  Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 997–1001.

364.  Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 1002.

365.  Ibid.

366.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 505.

367.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 533.

368.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 534–535.

369.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 535–536.

370.  Ibid., p. 536.

371.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 535–537.

372.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 537, 548.

373.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 548–549.

374.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 549–550.

375.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 550.

376.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 550–551.

377.  Ibid., pp. 551–552.

378.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 553–554.

379.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 554–555.

380.  Ibid., pp. 555–556.

381.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 556.

382.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 557–558.

383.  Ibid., p. 558.

384.  Ibid.

385.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 576–582.

386.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 575.

387.  Ibid., pp. 576–582.

388.  Ibid., p. 582.

389.  Ibid., p. 583.

390.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 585.

391.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 591.

392.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 593.

393.  Ibid., p. 594.

394.  Ibid., pp. 594–595.

395.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 595.

396.  The subject of the counting of the electoral votes will be found in the Congressional Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 668–669.

397.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 711.

398.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 711.

399.  Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 1395.

400.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 971–974.

401.  Ibid., p. 903.

402.  Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 1011.

403.  Ibid.

404.  Ibid.

405.  Globe, Part I., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 1061–1064.

406.  While this chapter was in press an interesting letter from Senator Henderson informed the author that the Hon. Samuel Treat, of St. Louis, formerly Judge of the United States Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, is the distinguished jurist referred to in the text.

407.  Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 1065–1070.

408.  Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 1091.

409.  In support of this view the Senator cited Penhallow’s Case, 3 Dallas, p. 94.

410.  Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 1091–1095.

411.  Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 1097.

412.  Ibid.

413.  Ibid., pp. 1095–1098.

414.  Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 1099.

415.  Ibid., pp. 1101–1102.

416.  Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 1101–1102.

417.  Ibid., p. 1102.

418.  Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., pp. 1106–1107.

419.  Ibid., p. 1107.

420.  Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 1111.

421.  Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 1128.

422.  Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 1129.

423.  Ibid.

424.  Globe, Part II., 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 1129.

425.  Globe, 2 Sess. 38th Cong., p. 141 (appendix).

426.  Personal Recollections of Abraham Lincoln, by James R. Gilmore.

427.  Gorham’s Life and Public Services of Edwin M. Stanton, Vol. II. pp. 148–153.

428.  N. and H., Vol. X. pp. 101–102.

429.  N. and H., Vol. X. p. 107.

430.  Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. pp. 644–645.

431.  An interesting account of this entire subject will be found in Nicolay and Hay’s Lincoln, Vol. X. ch. VI.; see also Raymond’s Life of Lincoln, pp. 647–662.

432.  The Lost Cause, pp. 684–685.

433.  Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. pp. 597–598.

434.  Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. pp. 616–617.

435.  Why the Solid South? p. 1.

436.  This recollection has been verified by correspondence with Col. A. K. McClure, the gentleman referred to.—Author.

437.  Ex. Doc. No. 70, H. of R., 1 Sess. 39th Cong., p. 78.

438.  Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 28.

439.  Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 28.

440.  Acts of the State of Tennessee, 1865, p. 33.

441.  Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 779.

442.  Ibid.

443.  This election resulted in the choice of Nathaniel G. Taylor, Horace Maynard, Edmund Cooper, Isaac R. Hawkins, John W. Leftwich, William B. Stokes, William B. Campbell and Dorsey B. Thomas. The last named, however, was affected by the Governor’s recount, and Daniel W. Arnell, who was declared the successful candidate, was admitted to Congress with the other Tennessee Representatives on the 24th of July, 1866. See Why the Solid South? pp. 182–183.

444.  Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 780.

445.  Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 781.

446.  Ibid.

447.  Having been elected United States Senator, Mr. Hahn resigned the governorship on the 4th of March and was succeeded in office by Lieutenant-Governor Wells.

448.  Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 510.

449.  Globe, Part I., 1 Sess. 39th Cong., p. 101.

450.  Three Decades of Federal Legislation, p. 429; also Why the Solid South? p. 397.

451.  Poore’s Charters and Constitutions, Vol. II. p. 1938 et seq.

452.  Letters and State Papers of Lincoln, Vol. II. p. 670.

453.  Letter of Mrs. Anna Pierpont Siviter to the author.

454.  Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 817.

455.  Ibid.

456.  Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 817.

457.  McPherson’s Hand-Book of Politics, 1868, p. 46.

458.  Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 800.

459.  Twenty Years of Congress, Vol. II. pp. 9–11.

460.  Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 800.

461.  McPherson’s Pol. Hand-Book, 1868, pp. 45–46.

462.  Ann. Cycl., 1865, pp. 801–802.

463.  Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 802.

464.  Letcher and Smith were Governors of Virginia during the war.

465.  McPherson’s Pol. Hand-Book, 1868, p. 8.

466.  Twenty Years of Congress, Vol. II. p. 70.

467.  McPherson’s Pol. Hand-Book, 1868, pp. 10–11.

468.  Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 626.

469.  This ordinance was ratified by a vote of 20,506 to 2,002; Poore’s Charters and Constitutions, Vol. II. p. 1419n; also Three Decades of Federal Legislation, p. 385.

470.  Ratified by 19,039 to 3,970 votes. Poore’s Charters and Constitutions, Vol. II. p. 1419n.

471.  McPherson’s Pol. Hand-Book, 1868, p. 19.

472.  Harper’s New Monthly Magazine, Vol. XXXII., p. 127.

473.  Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 628.

474.  McClure’s Magazine, Dec., 1899, p. 174.

475.  The Provisional appointments were made in the following order: June 13, 1865, William L. Sharkey, Mississippi; June 17, James Johnson, Georgia, and Andrew J. Hamilton, Texas; June 21, Lewis E. Parsons, Alabama; June 30, Benjamin F. Perry, South Carolina; July 13, William Marvin, Florida.

476.  Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 580.

477.  Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 581.

478.  Ann. Cycl., 1865, p. 583.

479.  Constitution of the United States, by Francis N. Thorpe, p. 49.

480.  See Why The Solid South? pp. 9–10, for an ingenious explanation of the unanimity and promptness with which the Presidential policy of reconstruction was accepted by the South.

481.  Laws of Mississippi, pp. 86–88.

482.  Ibid., pp. 89–90.

483.  Laws of Mississippi, 1865, pp. 82–86.

484.  Ibid., p. 231.

485.  Laws of Mississippi, 1865, pp. 165–167.

486.  Laws of Mississippi, 1865, pp. 90–93.

487.  Laws of Mississippi, 1865, pp. 199–200.

488.  Ibid., pp. 210–211.

489.  Ibid., p. 240.

490.  Ann. Cycl., 1866, p. 132.

491.  Ann. Cycl., 1863, pp. 780–781.

492.  Gorham’s Life of Stanton, Vol. II. p. 255.

493.  McPherson’s Pol. Hand-Book, 1868, p. 25.

494.  President Johnson and Reconstruction, pp. 33–34.

495.  In this connection his repudiation of the Sherman-Johnston agreement will occur to the reader.

496.  Strait’s Roster of Regimental Surgeons and Assistant Surgeons, p. 314. This estimate includes all the troops furnished by the new State of West Virginia.

497.  The author believes himself fortunate in being able to place before his readers a letter from the pen of Hon. J. B. Henderson, the only surviving Senator who participated in the debates summarized in chapter X., and, so far as the writer is informed, the only living member who served in the United States Senate during that eventful period. Coming, as it does, from one who supported many of Mr. Lincoln’s most cherished measures, the letter will be welcomed as a valuable historical document. It contrasts forcibly the Presidential plan with the theory of Senator Sumner, and though written on August 21, 1901, more than a generation after the occurrence of the principal events discussed in this book, it is characterized by the clearness and the energy of expression which marked even the unpremeditated addresses of the Senator’s Congressional career. On the subject of reunion he writes as follows:

“Time, in my judgment, has stamped its approval on Mr. Lincoln’s views touching the questions of reconstruction during the Civil War. He was always calm and judicial. He was philosophical in periods of the most intense excitement. He never lost his head, but under all circumstances preserved his temper and his judgment. He was not the buffoon described by his enemies. On the contrary, he was a wise statesman, a learned lawyer, and a conscientious patriot; and, better than all, an honest man.

“The infirmity in Mr. Sumner’s theories of reconstruction came from the great exuberance of his learning. He ransacked history, ancient and modern, for precedents growing out of civil wars. But these precedents all antedated the American Constitution. They grew out of monarchical systems of government, and had no relation to the republican forms created by our Constitution. Under our system there can be no suicide of a State. Individual citizens by rebellion and disloyalty may forfeit their political rights, but the State as an entity commits no treason and forfeits no rights to existence. Under our Constitution the State cannot die. It is the duty of the Federal Government to see that it does not die—that it shall never cease to exist. If the State be invaded from without, the duty of the General Government is to protect and defend it. If domestic violence threatens the subversion of the local government, the nation’s duty is to intervene and uphold the hands of those who maintain the laws. The trustee of an express trust cannot excuse himself to a minority of the beneficiaries because the majority repudiate his agency.

“‘The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican form of government.’ No State government is republican in form that does not acknowledge the supremacy of the Federal Constitution. This is the essential test of republicanism. No State can enter the Union without conforming its Constitution to this supreme organic law. And whenever by force or violence, a majority of its citizens undertake to withdraw the State from its obedience to Federal law and to repudiate the sovereignty of the Federal Government, it at once becomes the duty of Congress to act.

“This duty of Congress is not to destroy the State or to declare it a suicide, and proceed to administer on its effects. On the contrary, the duty clearly is to preserve the State, to restore it to its old republican forms. Its duty is not to territorialize the State and proceed to govern it as a conquered colony. The duty is not one of demolition, but one of restoration. It is not to make a Constitution, but to guarantee that the old Constitution or one equally republican in form, and made by the loyal citizens of the State, shall be upheld and sustained.

“If a majority of the people of a State conspire to subvert its republican forms, that majority may be, and should be, put down by the Federal power, while the minority, however few, sustaining republican forms may be constitutionally installed as the political power of the State.

“These, as I understand, were the views of Mr. Lincoln; and they were not the views of Mr. Sumner, as enunciated in his resolutions of 1862 and advocated by him in his subsequent career in the Senate.

“A departure from these views gave us the carpet-bag governments of the Southern States, and brought upon us divers other evils in our ideas and theories of government, whose effects are yet visible.”

498.  N. & H., Vol. X., p. 145.

499.  The West Virginia Representatives took their seats Dec. 7, 1863.