Racial Measures

Several other subjects of economic character were discussed by the Negro Congressmen. During his terms in the Forty-eighth and Forty-ninth Congresses, James E. O'Hara discussed at length the measure on labor arbitration.[91]Shortly thereafter, in the Fifty-first Congress, John M. Langston made informing remarks on the shipping bill.[92]Presenting in support of his position communications from the chambers of commerce of the principal cities of his State urging his support of the pending bill, facts and figures exhibiting recent progressive development of trade in Newport News, and information showing the growing dependence of world trade upon the development of an American merchant marine, he urged the passage of the shipping bill, with legislation to subsidize an American marine that would assist this nation to recover her former position upon the sea. While pointing out causes underlying the decadence of the merchant marine, he enumerated also the conditions which at that time favored its certain development.... He was, therefore, committed to a vigorous prosecution of any constructive plan leading in that direction.

In the Fifty-second Congress, H. P. Cheatham logically discussed the anti-option bill,[93]a measure defining "options" and "futures," imposing special taxes on dealers therein, and requiring such dealers and persons engaged in selling specified products to obtain a license to do so. Speaking in the behalf of the agricultural class of people whom he represented, Cheatham set forth the disastrous economic effects that dealing in "futures" and "options" has always had on the farming class in fixing the price of cotton and other commodities. As a measure contemplating an adjustment of this most portentous evil in the industrial life of the nation, he urged the passage of the bill then under consideration.

In the case of some of the Negro Congressmen measures designed either to promote the welfare of their race or to give publicity to its achievement commanded precedence over all others. Many offered petitions and bills providingespecially for the benefit of Negroes. Benjamin Turner, of Alabama, secured from the Federal Government several thousands of dollars in payment of a claim for damages to his property during the Civil War. In the Fifty-first Congress, Thomas E. Miller submitted two measures in the interest of his race.[94]The first proposed the establishment of a home for indigent freedmen, and the second sought to authorize the erection of a monument in commemoration of the Negro soldiers who fought for the Union in the Civil War.

The World's Columbian Exposition received much consideration during the first session of the Fifty-second Congress. Henry P. Cheatham,[95]a representative from North Carolina, during the course of his remarks on the Negro race urged that Congress make provisions for exhibiting, at that fair, the facts and statistics of the progress that the Negro had made during his thirty years of freedom. He deplored the fact that "politics" had crept into the amendment designed to effect his purpose and urged its acceptance as a matter of encouragement and justice to a numerically significant group of the American people. Cheatham proposed, also, a measure which sought to have printed the historical record of the Negro troops in the wars in which they had participated.

The welfare of the race was often reflected in the remarks of George W. Murray, a Congressman from South Carolina. When, in the Fifty-third Congress, there arose, in connection with the proposal that federal aid be extended to the Atlanta Exposition,[96]the question of the progress of the Negro race, Murray favored such an exposition because, he declared, it would offer opportunity to have registered the facts and statistics of the Negro's achievement since emancipation. As evidence of the inventive genius of his race, he submitted to Congress at this time a list of patentswhich had been granted by the government for the inventions of Negroes. Murray spoke briefly of what the Negroes were doing and thinking and, in conclusion, gave to the effort for federal aid his unqualified endorsement.

Measures proposed by George H. White, a representative from North Carolina to the Fifty-fifth and Fifty-sixth Congresses, tended mainly to promote the social welfare of his race.[97]One of these was a resolution for the consideration of a bill to provide a home for aged and infirm Negroes. His other measures of this sort were bills to pay the wages of the Negro Civil War-time employees withheld by the War Department, to incorporate a "National Colored American Association," and to provide for the exhibit of the educational and industrial progress of the Negro at the Paris Exposition of 1900. Few measures of this type could become law.

Many problems miscellaneous in character interested the Negro Congressmen. Indeed, early in the Forty-second Congress, Josiah T. Walls[98]supported a measure which proposed to appropriate $3,000,000 to aid the centennial celebration and international exhibition of 1876. Sometime later, moreover, he urged the recognition of the belligerent rights of Cuba. In the Forty-fourth Congress, John A. Hyman, of North Carolina, offered a measure to provide relief for the Cherokee Indians, who had returned to the "Nation West"[99]while the measures of his colleague, Jere Haralson[100]of Alabama, comprised such objects as the amendment of the revised statutes of the United States, the relief of the Medical College of Alabama, and the payment of war claims. During his three terms in Congress, John R. Lynch maintained interest in a wide range of subjects.He spoke at length on a bill "to provide and regulate the counting of votes for President and Vice President and the decision in the disputed election of R. B. Hayes.[101]He opposed the bill to repeal the act providing for the pay of Congressmen,[102]but supported a measure to appropriate funds for the establishment of a national board of health.[103]

In the Forty-fifth Congress, R. H. Cain proposed a measure to establish a line of mail and emigrant steam and sailing vessels between certain ports of the United States and Liberia.[104]His colleague, Robert Smalls, was a man of wider interests.[105]Among his various remarks, there must be noted those on the District of Columbia liquor traffic, interstate commerce, and the army reorganization bill. In the latter instance, he attempted to have inserted into the bill an amendment providing for the merging of enlisted men into military units without distinction as to race or color.

In the Senate, B. K. Bruce was afforded opportunity to debate the issues of the day. While most active in offering bills and resolutions, he nevertheless spoke forcefully on several matters of greater than ordinary import. He spoke out fearlessly against the bill restricting Chinese immigration,[106]and while discussing the Indian bill,[107]he took high ground, showing that we had failed in our selfish policy toward the Indian—a policy by which the breeding of hatred and discontent had kept him a fugitive and a vagabond—and emphasized the necessity for the government to do something to civilize the Indian. There must be a change in the Indian policy "if they are to be civilized," said he, "in that the best elements of their natures are to be developedto the exercise of their best functions, so as to produce individual character and social groups characteristic of enlightened people; if this is to be done under our system, its ultimate realization requires an adoption of a political philosophy that shall make the Indians, as individuals and as a tribe, subjects of American law and beneficiaries of American institutions, by making them first American citizens, and clothing them as rapidly as their advancement and location will permit, with the protecting and ennobling prerogatives of such friendship."

In support of his resolution, proposing to admit as a Senator from Louisiana P. B. S. Pinchback, Mr. Bruce spoke out, cogently presenting the facts as he saw them, contending that the gentleman had been regularly elected and that the National Government would, by declaring his election irregular and not expressive of the will of the people, repudiate the very government that it had recognized.[108]Pinchback was not seated, but the records show that his title was as sound as that of scores of senators whose right has never been questioned.

B. K. Bruce had another good claim to statesmanship. During his incumbency in Congress the question of the improvement of the navigation of the Mississippi and the protection of life and property from the periodical inundations of that stream was of much concern to the whole country. As a spokesman for the State of Mississippi and a statesman seeking to provide facilities for interstate and foreign commerce, B. K. Bruce fearlessly advocated that the Federal Government should appropriate funds to undertake this improvement. He repeatedly offered bills and amendments to this end and endeavored to secure the support of the leaders of Congress to pilot these measures through that body. While the results which Senator Bruce obtained were not proportionate to the effort which he made, he paved the way for other promoters of this enterprise, who have been more successful. Subsequent history shows the importance of this national task and demonstratesthe statesmanlike foresight of Senator Bruce in championing its cause.[109]

General remarks by James E. O'Hara comprehended discussion of the bills on oleomargarine and the payment of pensions.[110]Towards the former he was opposed, while in the latter he urged that white persons and Negroes be paid according to the same standard. George H. White sought to amend the bill to provide a government for Hawaii.[111]He gave some attention also to the debate on the civil service law.[112]Concerning it he held that the administration of the law had been subversive of the principles of appointment by merit. Indeed, in his opinion, its failure warranted either a return to the spoils system or the adoption of a new policy, by which there would be established in each department of the government a bureau with the duty of determining the fitness of each applicant for a position in that department.

It appears, then, these two general types of legislation, the one proposing local improvements, the other seeking social justice for the Negro race, were preeminent in the measures proposed by the Negro Congressmen. On the other hand, however, most of these measures, regardless of merit, met in general one of three fates: they were either sidetracked in committee, reported adversely, or defeated after debate in open session.

The character of measures proposed by these Congressmen has been the subject of much adverse criticism. Not a few persons have considered as weakness the tendency to propose measures relating to local improvements, and those racial rather than national in character. The records of Congress show, however, that the motives impelling the Negro Congressmen to propose the type of legislation stateddiffered in no wise from those underlying similar actions of other Congressmen. Discussing the service of Congress, Mr. Munro, in hisGovernment of the United States, says: "First among the merits of congressional government as it has existed in the United States for over one hundred and thirty years, is the fidelity with which law-making has reflected the public opinion of the country."[113]Mr. Munro further says that while Congress has not always been immediately responsive to popular sentiment, it has seldom failed to act when there has come to it an "audible mandate" from the whole country.

If, therefore, the Congress as a whole must be somewhat immediately responsive to the expressed public will, what, indeed, is the precise course of action that a representative, as a matter of policy, must pursue? He is regarded, in the first instance, as representing not his State, but rather a particular Congressional district of his State. His tenure of office runs for but two years, at the expiration of which he must submit to his constituents not a record of constructive statesmanship, based upon his fealty to measures of national or international importance, but rather one alleging the skill with which he has protected the peculiar interests of his district. That he has sought to obtain a new customs house, has opposed a tariff for revenue only, has defended the principle of bimetallism, not indeed in relation to the wider demands of the nation, but because of the particular demands of his constituency, are matters of great practical import to him, for upon these depends the approval or the rejection of his record. The Congressman who aspires to longevity of service is apt, therefore, to determine his proposal and defense of measures of legislation largely, if not wholly, by the expressed opinion of those whom he represents. Regarding the Negro Congressmen, therefore, in the light of the practices common to all Congressmen, there can be offered no valid criticism of the character of their legislation. The records of Congressshow that these functionaries were, as a matter of policy, interested in their constituents, and that they promoted legislation for general advancement for the reason that the circumstances of the people whom they represented warranted legislation of that sort.

For the tendency of some of the Negro Congressmen to propose legislative measures which were racial in character, two reasons are conspicuously obvious. In the first place, these men regarded themselves the official spokesmen of their race. The power conferred upon them they believed to be evidence of the expectation and confidence of the Negroes in them to secure for the race civil rights, economic opportunity and political preferment. They found, moreover, that legislation granting to Negroes their civil rights failed often to protect them in the exercise of those rights. For such protection, then, these Congressmen had often to contend. These personal, ever present, inherent duties permitted these Congressmen neither time nor energy for the preparation of legislative measures of other types.

Another reason for restricting their efforts to local measures or those peculiar to their race was the rule of politics that all honor for the formulation of national measures must attach to the seasoned veterans in Congress. This custom has become so well established as to be traditional. It could not have been expected that the Negro members, then, should take the lead in Congressional legislation. They faithfully cooperated with the leaders of Congress and generally voted for measures considered productive of the greatest good of the country.

Why did the Negro Congressmen fail to have their measures enacted into law? The path of a bill is fraught with difficulties. The well-known journey through the committee, through both houses of Congress, to the conference and to the President, but few bills complete. Many bills of the Negro Congressmen died of this natural cause. Others because of lack of merit were reported adversely from committee;still others reported favorably could not withstand the Congressional debate. A few that survived the whole ordeal became laws.

There were two preeminent causes for the failure of some of these bills. The Negro membership in any Congress, in the first place always an exceedingly small minority, was never a determining factor in the passage of a measure proposed by one of this particular group. Secondly, the objects of the suspicion of their party colleagues,[114]and regarded by them as an experiment in the legislative program of the nation, these men were not generally able to secure for their measures sufficient white Republican votes. Considered from this point of view, the failure of these measures is in no wise an evidence of the lack of ability and statesmanship.

Of them, James G. Blaine, a Republican leader of fifty years ago, has spoken in a most praiseworthy manner. Conceding the right of the Negroes to sit in Congress and attesting the success of their activities there, he asserted that "they were as a rule studious, earnest, ambitious men, whose public conduct—as illustrated by Mr. Revels and Mr. Bruce in the Senate, and by Mr. Rapier, Mr. Lynch and Mr. Rainey in the House—would be honorable to any race."[115]

Alrutheus A. Taylor

FOOTNOTES:[1]Jefferson F. Long was born in Crawford County, Georgia, March 3, 1836. Some time thereafter he moved to Macon, Bibb County, where, under the direction of his owner, he learned the tailor's trade. Prior to his election to the third session of the Forty-first Congress, Mr. Long conducted, in Macon, a thriving business as a merchant tailor. His patronage, which consisted largely of that of whites, was much decreased after his term in Congress, due no doubt to their resentment of his activities in politics. Mr. Long was a good speaker, a Christian gentleman, and a man of many fine qualities. Upon his death in Macon, February 4, 1900, his loss was mourned alike by whites and Negroes.—Chaplain T. G. Stewart,Fifty Years in the Gospel Ministry, p. 129.Letter from Mrs. A. L. Rucker, Atlanta, Ga., daughter of Mr. Long. October, 1921.[2]Robert C. DeLarge was born at Aiken, South Carolina, March 15, 1842. He received only a limited education and chose to pursue the occupation of farming. He entered politics in 1868, held several local and State offices, was elected to the Forty-second Congress, and on February 15, 1874, became a trial justice at Charleston.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 497.[3]Joseph H. Rainey was born of slave parents at Georgetown, S. C., June 21, 1832. He received a limited education. After following the trade of a barber, he was compelled, in 1862, to work on Confederate fortifications. From this work he escaped, going to the West Indies, where he remained till the end of the war. Upon his return to the United States, he entered politics. He served in the 42nd, 43rd, 44th, and 45th Congresses, and died at Georgetown, S. C., August 1, 1887.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 757.[4]Alonzo J. Ransier was born at Charleston, South Carolina, January 3, 1836. He received a limited education, entered politics, and held various offices. In 1868, he was a presidential elector, casting a vote for Grant and Colfax, while four years later he was a delegate to the Republican National Convention. He served as a member of the 42nd Congress and died at Charleston, S. C., August 17, 1882.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 759.[5]Robert Smalls was born a slave at Beaufort, South Carolina, April 5, 1839. Debarred by statute from attending school, he availed himself of such limited educational advantages as he could secure. In 1851, he moved to Charleston, worked as a rigger, and thereafter led a seafaring life. In 1861, he became connected with thePlanter, a steamer plying in the Charleston Harbor as a transport, which he took over the Charleston bar in 1862 and delivered with his services to the commander of the United States blockading squadron. He was appointed a pilot in the Quartermaster's Department of the United States Navy, and remained in the service till 1866, and meanwhile rose to the rank of Captain. In 1868 he entered politics and was later elected to the 44th, 45th, 47th, 48th, and 49th Congresses. In the State militia of South Carolina, he held successively the commands of lieutenant-colonel, brigadier-general, and major-general, the latter terminating with the reorganization of the militia in 1877. Mr. Smalls was a delegate to several National Republican Conventions. His last public office was that of collector of the port of Beaufort.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 803.[6]John R. Lynch of Natchez, Mississippi, was born in Concordia Parish, Louisiana, September 10, 1847. He attended evening school at Natchez for a few months, and by private study acquired a good English education. He engaged in the business of photography at Natchez until 1869, when Governor Ames appointed him a justice of the peace. Mr. Lynch served in the 43rd, 44th, and 47th Congresses, and was elected to the 45th Congress, but was counted out. Later he served as Fourth Auditor of Treasury Department under President Harrison, and as a paymaster in the Volunteer Army during the Spanish-American War.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 662.[7]Blanche K. Bruce of Floreyville, Mississippi, was born in Prince Edward County, Virginia, March 1, 1841. A man of limited education, he became, in 1869, a planter in Mississippi. Later he became a member of the Mississippi levee board, served in several local offices, and finally was elected, in 1875, to the United States Senate where he served till 1881. Mr. Bruce died at Washington, D. C., March 17, 1898.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 420.[8]Jore Haralson was born a slave in Muscogee County, Georgia, April 1, 1846. He was emancipated in 1865, after which he acquired through self-instruction a fair education. After moving to Alabama, he entered into the politics of that State. Mr. Haralson was elected to the 44th Congress, but failed of re-election to the 45th.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 557.[9]Benjamin Sterling Turner was born a slave at Halifax, North Carolina, March 17, 1825. In 1830, he moved to Alabama, where by clandestine study he obtained a fair education. He became a prosperous merchant, was elected to several local offices, and to the 42nd Congress. He was defeated for the 43rd.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 849.[10]John Adams Hyman was born a slave in Warren, North Carolina, July 23, 1840. He was sold and sent to Alabama, where he was emancipated in 1865. Returning to North Carolina, Mr. Hyman engaged in farming and acquired a rudimentary education. Entering politics in 1868, he was later elected to the 44th Congress. In June, 1877, he was appointed collector of internal revenue for the 2nd district of North Carolina.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 614.[11]Charles E. Nash was a native of Opelousas, Louisiana. He was educated at New Orleans, later following the trade of bricklayer. In 1863, Mr. Nash served as a private in the Eighty-third Regiment United States Chasseurs d'Afrique. He was later promoted to sergeant-major and lost a leg in the storming of Fort Blakeley. He was elected to the 44th Congress, but defeated for the 45th.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 713.[12]Josiah T. Walls was born at Winchester, Virginia, December 30, 1842. He received a limited education, became a farmer, and in 1868 entered politics. Mr. Walls received a certificate of election as a representative from Florida to the 42nd Congress, but his seat was successfully contested by Silas Niblack. He was admitted, however, to the 43rd and 44th Congresses.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 864.[13]Richard H. Cain was born in Greenbrier County, Virginia, April 12, 1825. In 1831, he moved with his father to Gallipolis, Ohio. Of limited education prior to his marriage, and having entered the ministry at an early age, he found it to his advantage, at the age of 35 years, to undertake formal study at a recognized school of learning. Following a career as clergyman, missionary, and politician, he was elected to the 43rd Congress and re-elected to the 45th. After his retirement from Congress, Mr. Cain, was elected the fourteenth bishop of the African Methodist Episcopal Church. He died in Washington, January 18, 1887. —Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 434.[14]Hiram B. Revels was born at Fayetteville, North Carolina, September 1, 1822. Being unable to obtain an education in his own State, he moved to Indiana and there began study for the ministry. At the outbreak of the Civil War, Mr. Revels assisted in the organization of the first two Negro regiments in Maryland. Having made a record for service among his people in the central States, he went to Mississippi and there became interested in managing the freedmen's affairs. He was elected to several local offices and in 1870 was elected to fill an unexpired term in the United States Senate. After his retirement from Congress, Mr. Revels served as president of Alcorn University at Rodney, Mississippi, and later as pastor of the African Methodist Episcopal Church at Richmond, Indiana. He died January 16, 1901, at Abeerden, Mississippi.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 763.[15]Henry Plummer Cheatham of Henderson, North Carolina, was born at Granville, North Carolina, December 27, 1857. After acquiring a good education, he entered the teaching profession. Later he became interested in politics and was elected to the 51st and 52nd Congresses. His last public office was that of Recorder of Deeds of the District of Columbia.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 450.[16]George Washington Murray was born of slave parents, September 22, 1853, near Rembert, Sumter County, South Carolina. At the age of eleven years, he found himself free, bereft of parents, completely dependent upon his own resources. His early life, therefore, was one of great trials and sacrifices. Possessed, however, of a determination to live and learn, young Murray availed himself of every opportunity to improve his meagre stock of knowledge. So well did he succeed that his first day in school was spent as teacher rather than student. In later life, he acquired a good education, entered into the service of the public schools of his county and was finally elected to the 53rd Congress. Mr. Murray was elected also to the 54th, but secured his seat only after a successful contest with a leading Democrat of his State.—Biographical Congressional Directory, pp. 711-712.[17]John Mercer Langston was born in Louisa County, Virginia, December 14, 1829. He distinguished himself as an educator and won many honors in his field. Mr. Langston served also in many civic and political offices prior to his election to the 51st Congress. Due to the contest he was forced to make for his seat, Mr. Langston served actually a very short time in Congress. He died in Washington, D. C., November 15, 1897.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 643.[18]Robert Brown Elliott was born in Boston, Massachusetts, August 11, 1842. He was educated in England, and upon his return to the United States entered into the politics of the State of South Carolina. Mr. Elliott was elected to the 42nd Congress and resigned before the term had expired; he was re-elected to the 43rd Congress and again resigned, this time to accept the office of sheriff.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 517.[19]James T. Rapier was born at Florence, Alabama, in 1840. He was sent to Canada to be educated, and while there was given the opportunity to recite before the late King Edward VII, then Prince of Wales, who was at that time visiting the United States and Canada. Prior to his election to Congress, Mr. Rapier held several local offices in Alabama and also aspired to become Secretary-of-State. In this contest he was defeated by one Nicholas Davis, a white man. Mr. Rapier was a partisan in the split in the Republican Party in his State, aligning himself with one Spencer, a Republican leader of that date. Losing in this contest, he lost also his ability to win votes and so was defeated in his attempt to seek re-election to the 44th Congress. Soon thereafter, Mr. Rapier gave his attention to farming and was highly successful as a cotton planter.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 760, and a statement of Thomas Walker, a local officer in Alabama during the reconstruction period.[20]James E. O'Hara of Enfield, North Carolina, was born in New York City, February 26, 1844. He acquired a liberal education, read law, and entered into the politics of the State of North Carolina. After holding several local offices, he was elected to the 46th, 48th, and 49th Congresses, but was counted out in the former.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 722.[21]Thomas E. Miller was born in Beaufort County, South Carolina, at Ferrybeeville, June 17, 1849. After acquiring a good education, he entered politics. Mr. Miller held many local and State offices, and was nominated by his party, in 1878, for the office of Lieutenant-Governor of the State. Due, however, to riotous actions of the Democratic party throughout the elections that year, the ticket was withdrawn. Mr. Miller was seated in the 51st Congress after a contested election with Col. William Elliott. In 1896, he was elected president of the State Colored College at Orangeburg, South Carolina.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 695.[22]George Henry White of Tarboro, North Carolina, was born at Rosindale, North Carolina, December 18, 1852. He acquired a good education, practiced law, and entered politics. After serving in several local and State offices, Mr. White was elected to the 55th and re-elected to the 56th Congress.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 877.[23]Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 643.[24]Ibid., p. 614.[25]Ibid., p. 722.[26]Ibid., p. 450.[27]Ibid., p. 877.[28]Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 434.[29]Ibid., p. 497.[30]Ibid., p. 517.[31]Ibid., p. 757.[32]Ibid., p. 759.[33]Ibid., p. 803.[34]Ibid., p. 695.[35]Ibid., pp. 711-712.[36]Letter from Mrs. A. L. Rucker, Atlanta, Ga., daughter of J. F. Long, Oct., 1921.[37]Statement of Thomas Walker, Washington, D. C., a local officer in Alabama, during the Reconstruction Period.[38]Statement made by Thomas Walker.[39]Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 577.[40]Ibid., p. 763.[41]Ibid., p. 420.[42]Ibid., p. 662.[43]Ibid., p. 713.[44]C. G. Woodson,Fifty Years of Negro Citizenship,Journal of Negro History, Vol. VI, p. 11.[45]Congressional Globe, 41st Congress, 3rd Session, p. 881.[46]"In regard to the State of Mississippi," continued Senator Revels, "I have this to say: The Republican Party now dominating there pledged itself to universal amnesty. That was in their platform; these speakers pledged themselves to it and the legislature redeemed that pledge, unanimously adopting a resolution asking Congress to remove the political disabilities of all the citizens of Mississippi, which resolution they placed in my hands, and made it my duty to present here, and which I have presented."Now I can say more, I believe, for the State of Mississippi, than I can say for any other of the lately insurrectionary States. I do not know of one State that is altogether as well reconstructed as Mississippi is. We have reports of a great many other States of lawlessness and violence, and from parts of States we have well-authenticated reports of this effect; but while this is the case, do you hear one report of any more lawlessness in evidence in the State of Mississippi? No! The people now I believe are getting along as quietly, pleasantly, harmoniously, prosperously as the people are in any of the formerly free States. I think this is the case, I do not think my statement exaggerates anything at all. Now, sir, I hope that I am understood. I am in favor of amnesty in Mississippi. We pledged ourselves to it. The State is for it."—Congressional Globe, 41st Congress, 2nd Session, p. 3520.[47]Ibid., 42nd Congress, 1st Session, p. 393.[48]Congressional Globe, 42nd Congress, 2nd Session, p. 103.[49]Ibid., 42nd Congress, 1st Session, pp. 102-103.[50]Ibid., 102-103.[51]Congressional Globe, 41st Congress, 2nd Session, p. 1287.[52]Congressional Record, 43rd Congress, 1st Session, pp. 407-410.[53]Congressional Record, 43rd Congress, 1st Session, pp. 407-410.[54]Congressional Globe, 42nd Congress, 2nd Session, p. 3383.[55]Congressional Record, 43rd Congress, 1st Session, pp. 1311-1314.[56]Ibid., p. 407.[57]Congressional Record, pp. 4782-4786.[58]Ibid., pp. 565-567.[59]Ibid., p. 64.[60]Ibid., p. 64.[61]Congressional Record, 48th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 297.[62]Ibid., 51st Congress, 2nd Session, p. 1216.[63]Congressional Record, 56th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 1634.[64]Congressional Globe, 42nd Congress, 2nd Session, p. 813; App., p. 15.[65]Congressional Globe, pp. 808-810.[66]Ibid., 42nd Congress, 1st Session, p. 3655; 3rd Session, p. 220.Congressional Record, 43rd Congress, 1st Session, pp. 87, 88.[67]Congressional Record, 45th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 1646; 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 2714, 3602.[68]At a later date, Langston, in the Fifty-first Congress, introduced a measure for the establishment of normal and industrial schools for Negroes. These numerous measures were referred invariably to the Committee on Education and Labor, from which they were usually reported adversely to the House.—Congressional Record, 51st Congress, 2nd Session, p. 1650.[69]In placing the responsibility with both parties, DeLarge said: "Mr. Speaker, when the governor of my State the other day called in council the leading men of the State, to consider the condition of affairs there and to advise what measures would be best for the protection of the people, whom did he call together? The major portion of the men whom he convened were men resting under political disabilities imposed by the Fourteenth Amendment. In good faith, I ask the gentlemen on this side of the House, and gentlemen on the other side of the House, whether it is reasonable to expect that those men should be interested, in any shape or form, in using their influence and best endeavor for the preservation of the public peace when they have nothing to look for politically in the future? You say that they should have the moral and material interest of their State at heart, though even always denied a participation in its honors. You may insist that the true patriot seeks no personal ends in acts of patriotism. All this is true, but, Mr. Speaker, men are but men everywhere, and you ought not to expect of those whom you daily call by opprobrious epithets, whom you daily remind of their political sins, whom you persistently exclude from places of the smallest trust in the government you have created, to be very earnest to cooperate with you in the work of establishing and fortifying the government set up in hostility to the whole tone of their prejudices, their connections, and their sympathies. What ought to be is one thing; what in the weakness and fallibility of human nature will be is quite another thing. The statesman regards the actual and acts upon it; the desirable, the possible, and even the probable furnishes but poor basis for political action."—Congressional Globe, 42nd Congress, 1st Session, App., pp. 230-231.[70]Ibid., 42nd Congress, 1st Session, p. 376.[71]Congressional Globe, 42nd Congress, 3rd Session, p. 4039.[72]Congressional Globe, 42nd Congress, 3rd Session, App., p. 475.[73]Congressional Record, 43rd Congress, 1st Session, p. 1121; 44th Congress, 1st Session, p. 206; 47th Congress, 1st Session, p. 3946.[74]Ibid., 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 3825-3826; 3781-3784; 5540-5543.[75]Congressional Record, pp. 3667, 3668, 3669.[76]Ibid., 44th Congress, 2nd Session, App., pp. 123-136.[77]Ibid., 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 2100-2105.[78]Miller pointed out the inherent weaknesses of the South, the insecurity of investment, violation of the right of property and of contract, the jeopardy of life, and over-assessment of taxes on property held by Northern Whites—as constituting the causes underlying the failure of investors to direct their monies to Southern enterprises. He discussed the amenability of the Negro to civilizing influences and the economic progress that the race had made since its emancipation from slavery. Miller asserted, moreover, that though these remarks might effect the loss of his seat in the next Congress, he conceived it his duty to his party and to his race to defend his people against the dastardly attack of one who pretended to be its friend.Congressional Record, 51st Congress, 2nd Session, p. 2691.[79]Ibid., pp. 1479-1482; 1524.[80]Ibid., 53rd Congress, 1st Session, pp. 2158-2161.[81]Ibid., 54th Congress, 1st Session, p. 1868; 2nd Session, p. 320.[82]Congressional Globe, 42nd Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 393, 2439, 2447, 2452.[83]Ibid., 42nd Congress, 1st Session, pp. 198, 178, 3793; 3rd Session, p. 220; 43rd Congress, 1st Session, pp. 87, 88.[84]Ibid., 43rd Congress, 1st Session, pp. 85, 320, 1333.[85]Congressional Globe, 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 321, 1203; 47th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 4551, 6146.[86]Ibid., 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 442, 3754, 4857; 45th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 2706; 47th Congress, 1st Session, p. 6432; 49th Congress, 1st Session, p. 1218.[87]Ibid., 49th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 437, 1404, 3748, 4980, 4982, 5069.[88]Congressional Globe, 42nd Congress, 1st Session, p. 3570.[89]Congressional Record, 47th Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 2312, 2660, 2870-2871.[90]Congressional Record, 55th Congress, 1st Session, p. 550.[91]Ibid., 49th Congress, 1st Session, p. 3049.[92]Congressional Record, 51st Congress, 2nd Session, p. 3490.[93]Ibid., 52nd Congress, 1st Session, App., p. 508.[94]Congressional Record, 51st Congress, 1st Session, pp. 10,707, 10,708.[95]Ibid., 52nd Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 4695, 5974.[96]Ibid., 53rd Congress, 2nd Session, p. 8382.[97]Congressional Record, 56th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 166, 372, 594, 791; 2nd Session, p. 188; 55th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 3153.[98]Ibid., 43rd Congress, 1st Session, App., p. 250; pp. 27, 206.Congressional Globe, 42nd Congress, 1st Session, pp. 198, 178.[99]Congressional Record, 44th Congress, 1st Session, p. 3340.[100]Ibid., 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 771, 2714, 2791.[101]Congressional Record, 44th Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 1025-1026.[102]Congressional Record, 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 118, 119.[103]Ibid., 47th Congress, 1st Session, p. 6898.[104]Ibid., 45th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 1646.[105]Ibid., 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 3457, 3467, 3468; 48th Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 316, 2057; 49th Congress, 1st Session, p. 1919.[106]Ibid., 45th Congress, 3rd Session, p. 1914.[107]Ibid., 46th Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 2195-2196.[108]Congressional Record, 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 1444, 1445.[109]Congressional Record, 45th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 245, 1750; 3rd Session, 1314, 1316, 2309.[110]Ibid., 53rd Congress, 2nd Session, p. 2399; 1st Session, pp. 1392, 1396.[111]Ibid., 56th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 3814.[112]Ibid., 55th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 541.[113]Munro,The Government of the United States, p. 297.[114]A Letter from John E. Bruce, Brooklyn, N. N., a man active during the Reconstruction. June 6, 1921.[115]James G. Blaine,Twenty Years of Congress, 1861-1881, Vol. II, p. 515.

[1]Jefferson F. Long was born in Crawford County, Georgia, March 3, 1836. Some time thereafter he moved to Macon, Bibb County, where, under the direction of his owner, he learned the tailor's trade. Prior to his election to the third session of the Forty-first Congress, Mr. Long conducted, in Macon, a thriving business as a merchant tailor. His patronage, which consisted largely of that of whites, was much decreased after his term in Congress, due no doubt to their resentment of his activities in politics. Mr. Long was a good speaker, a Christian gentleman, and a man of many fine qualities. Upon his death in Macon, February 4, 1900, his loss was mourned alike by whites and Negroes.—Chaplain T. G. Stewart,Fifty Years in the Gospel Ministry, p. 129.Letter from Mrs. A. L. Rucker, Atlanta, Ga., daughter of Mr. Long. October, 1921.

Letter from Mrs. A. L. Rucker, Atlanta, Ga., daughter of Mr. Long. October, 1921.

[2]Robert C. DeLarge was born at Aiken, South Carolina, March 15, 1842. He received only a limited education and chose to pursue the occupation of farming. He entered politics in 1868, held several local and State offices, was elected to the Forty-second Congress, and on February 15, 1874, became a trial justice at Charleston.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 497.

[3]Joseph H. Rainey was born of slave parents at Georgetown, S. C., June 21, 1832. He received a limited education. After following the trade of a barber, he was compelled, in 1862, to work on Confederate fortifications. From this work he escaped, going to the West Indies, where he remained till the end of the war. Upon his return to the United States, he entered politics. He served in the 42nd, 43rd, 44th, and 45th Congresses, and died at Georgetown, S. C., August 1, 1887.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 757.

[4]Alonzo J. Ransier was born at Charleston, South Carolina, January 3, 1836. He received a limited education, entered politics, and held various offices. In 1868, he was a presidential elector, casting a vote for Grant and Colfax, while four years later he was a delegate to the Republican National Convention. He served as a member of the 42nd Congress and died at Charleston, S. C., August 17, 1882.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 759.

[5]Robert Smalls was born a slave at Beaufort, South Carolina, April 5, 1839. Debarred by statute from attending school, he availed himself of such limited educational advantages as he could secure. In 1851, he moved to Charleston, worked as a rigger, and thereafter led a seafaring life. In 1861, he became connected with thePlanter, a steamer plying in the Charleston Harbor as a transport, which he took over the Charleston bar in 1862 and delivered with his services to the commander of the United States blockading squadron. He was appointed a pilot in the Quartermaster's Department of the United States Navy, and remained in the service till 1866, and meanwhile rose to the rank of Captain. In 1868 he entered politics and was later elected to the 44th, 45th, 47th, 48th, and 49th Congresses. In the State militia of South Carolina, he held successively the commands of lieutenant-colonel, brigadier-general, and major-general, the latter terminating with the reorganization of the militia in 1877. Mr. Smalls was a delegate to several National Republican Conventions. His last public office was that of collector of the port of Beaufort.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 803.

[6]John R. Lynch of Natchez, Mississippi, was born in Concordia Parish, Louisiana, September 10, 1847. He attended evening school at Natchez for a few months, and by private study acquired a good English education. He engaged in the business of photography at Natchez until 1869, when Governor Ames appointed him a justice of the peace. Mr. Lynch served in the 43rd, 44th, and 47th Congresses, and was elected to the 45th Congress, but was counted out. Later he served as Fourth Auditor of Treasury Department under President Harrison, and as a paymaster in the Volunteer Army during the Spanish-American War.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 662.

[7]Blanche K. Bruce of Floreyville, Mississippi, was born in Prince Edward County, Virginia, March 1, 1841. A man of limited education, he became, in 1869, a planter in Mississippi. Later he became a member of the Mississippi levee board, served in several local offices, and finally was elected, in 1875, to the United States Senate where he served till 1881. Mr. Bruce died at Washington, D. C., March 17, 1898.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 420.

[8]Jore Haralson was born a slave in Muscogee County, Georgia, April 1, 1846. He was emancipated in 1865, after which he acquired through self-instruction a fair education. After moving to Alabama, he entered into the politics of that State. Mr. Haralson was elected to the 44th Congress, but failed of re-election to the 45th.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 557.

[9]Benjamin Sterling Turner was born a slave at Halifax, North Carolina, March 17, 1825. In 1830, he moved to Alabama, where by clandestine study he obtained a fair education. He became a prosperous merchant, was elected to several local offices, and to the 42nd Congress. He was defeated for the 43rd.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 849.

[10]John Adams Hyman was born a slave in Warren, North Carolina, July 23, 1840. He was sold and sent to Alabama, where he was emancipated in 1865. Returning to North Carolina, Mr. Hyman engaged in farming and acquired a rudimentary education. Entering politics in 1868, he was later elected to the 44th Congress. In June, 1877, he was appointed collector of internal revenue for the 2nd district of North Carolina.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 614.

[11]Charles E. Nash was a native of Opelousas, Louisiana. He was educated at New Orleans, later following the trade of bricklayer. In 1863, Mr. Nash served as a private in the Eighty-third Regiment United States Chasseurs d'Afrique. He was later promoted to sergeant-major and lost a leg in the storming of Fort Blakeley. He was elected to the 44th Congress, but defeated for the 45th.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 713.

[12]Josiah T. Walls was born at Winchester, Virginia, December 30, 1842. He received a limited education, became a farmer, and in 1868 entered politics. Mr. Walls received a certificate of election as a representative from Florida to the 42nd Congress, but his seat was successfully contested by Silas Niblack. He was admitted, however, to the 43rd and 44th Congresses.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 864.

[13]Richard H. Cain was born in Greenbrier County, Virginia, April 12, 1825. In 1831, he moved with his father to Gallipolis, Ohio. Of limited education prior to his marriage, and having entered the ministry at an early age, he found it to his advantage, at the age of 35 years, to undertake formal study at a recognized school of learning. Following a career as clergyman, missionary, and politician, he was elected to the 43rd Congress and re-elected to the 45th. After his retirement from Congress, Mr. Cain, was elected the fourteenth bishop of the African Methodist Episcopal Church. He died in Washington, January 18, 1887. —Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 434.

[14]Hiram B. Revels was born at Fayetteville, North Carolina, September 1, 1822. Being unable to obtain an education in his own State, he moved to Indiana and there began study for the ministry. At the outbreak of the Civil War, Mr. Revels assisted in the organization of the first two Negro regiments in Maryland. Having made a record for service among his people in the central States, he went to Mississippi and there became interested in managing the freedmen's affairs. He was elected to several local offices and in 1870 was elected to fill an unexpired term in the United States Senate. After his retirement from Congress, Mr. Revels served as president of Alcorn University at Rodney, Mississippi, and later as pastor of the African Methodist Episcopal Church at Richmond, Indiana. He died January 16, 1901, at Abeerden, Mississippi.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 763.

[15]Henry Plummer Cheatham of Henderson, North Carolina, was born at Granville, North Carolina, December 27, 1857. After acquiring a good education, he entered the teaching profession. Later he became interested in politics and was elected to the 51st and 52nd Congresses. His last public office was that of Recorder of Deeds of the District of Columbia.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 450.

[16]George Washington Murray was born of slave parents, September 22, 1853, near Rembert, Sumter County, South Carolina. At the age of eleven years, he found himself free, bereft of parents, completely dependent upon his own resources. His early life, therefore, was one of great trials and sacrifices. Possessed, however, of a determination to live and learn, young Murray availed himself of every opportunity to improve his meagre stock of knowledge. So well did he succeed that his first day in school was spent as teacher rather than student. In later life, he acquired a good education, entered into the service of the public schools of his county and was finally elected to the 53rd Congress. Mr. Murray was elected also to the 54th, but secured his seat only after a successful contest with a leading Democrat of his State.—Biographical Congressional Directory, pp. 711-712.

[17]John Mercer Langston was born in Louisa County, Virginia, December 14, 1829. He distinguished himself as an educator and won many honors in his field. Mr. Langston served also in many civic and political offices prior to his election to the 51st Congress. Due to the contest he was forced to make for his seat, Mr. Langston served actually a very short time in Congress. He died in Washington, D. C., November 15, 1897.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 643.

[18]Robert Brown Elliott was born in Boston, Massachusetts, August 11, 1842. He was educated in England, and upon his return to the United States entered into the politics of the State of South Carolina. Mr. Elliott was elected to the 42nd Congress and resigned before the term had expired; he was re-elected to the 43rd Congress and again resigned, this time to accept the office of sheriff.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 517.

[19]James T. Rapier was born at Florence, Alabama, in 1840. He was sent to Canada to be educated, and while there was given the opportunity to recite before the late King Edward VII, then Prince of Wales, who was at that time visiting the United States and Canada. Prior to his election to Congress, Mr. Rapier held several local offices in Alabama and also aspired to become Secretary-of-State. In this contest he was defeated by one Nicholas Davis, a white man. Mr. Rapier was a partisan in the split in the Republican Party in his State, aligning himself with one Spencer, a Republican leader of that date. Losing in this contest, he lost also his ability to win votes and so was defeated in his attempt to seek re-election to the 44th Congress. Soon thereafter, Mr. Rapier gave his attention to farming and was highly successful as a cotton planter.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 760, and a statement of Thomas Walker, a local officer in Alabama during the reconstruction period.

[20]James E. O'Hara of Enfield, North Carolina, was born in New York City, February 26, 1844. He acquired a liberal education, read law, and entered into the politics of the State of North Carolina. After holding several local offices, he was elected to the 46th, 48th, and 49th Congresses, but was counted out in the former.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 722.

[21]Thomas E. Miller was born in Beaufort County, South Carolina, at Ferrybeeville, June 17, 1849. After acquiring a good education, he entered politics. Mr. Miller held many local and State offices, and was nominated by his party, in 1878, for the office of Lieutenant-Governor of the State. Due, however, to riotous actions of the Democratic party throughout the elections that year, the ticket was withdrawn. Mr. Miller was seated in the 51st Congress after a contested election with Col. William Elliott. In 1896, he was elected president of the State Colored College at Orangeburg, South Carolina.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 695.

[22]George Henry White of Tarboro, North Carolina, was born at Rosindale, North Carolina, December 18, 1852. He acquired a good education, practiced law, and entered politics. After serving in several local and State offices, Mr. White was elected to the 55th and re-elected to the 56th Congress.—Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 877.

[23]Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 643.

[24]Ibid., p. 614.

[25]Ibid., p. 722.

[26]Ibid., p. 450.

[27]Ibid., p. 877.

[28]Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 434.

[29]Ibid., p. 497.

[30]Ibid., p. 517.

[31]Ibid., p. 757.

[32]Ibid., p. 759.

[33]Ibid., p. 803.

[34]Ibid., p. 695.

[35]Ibid., pp. 711-712.

[36]Letter from Mrs. A. L. Rucker, Atlanta, Ga., daughter of J. F. Long, Oct., 1921.

[37]Statement of Thomas Walker, Washington, D. C., a local officer in Alabama, during the Reconstruction Period.

[38]Statement made by Thomas Walker.

[39]Biographical Congressional Directory, p. 577.

[40]Ibid., p. 763.

[41]Ibid., p. 420.

[42]Ibid., p. 662.

[43]Ibid., p. 713.

[44]C. G. Woodson,Fifty Years of Negro Citizenship,Journal of Negro History, Vol. VI, p. 11.

[45]Congressional Globe, 41st Congress, 3rd Session, p. 881.

[46]"In regard to the State of Mississippi," continued Senator Revels, "I have this to say: The Republican Party now dominating there pledged itself to universal amnesty. That was in their platform; these speakers pledged themselves to it and the legislature redeemed that pledge, unanimously adopting a resolution asking Congress to remove the political disabilities of all the citizens of Mississippi, which resolution they placed in my hands, and made it my duty to present here, and which I have presented."Now I can say more, I believe, for the State of Mississippi, than I can say for any other of the lately insurrectionary States. I do not know of one State that is altogether as well reconstructed as Mississippi is. We have reports of a great many other States of lawlessness and violence, and from parts of States we have well-authenticated reports of this effect; but while this is the case, do you hear one report of any more lawlessness in evidence in the State of Mississippi? No! The people now I believe are getting along as quietly, pleasantly, harmoniously, prosperously as the people are in any of the formerly free States. I think this is the case, I do not think my statement exaggerates anything at all. Now, sir, I hope that I am understood. I am in favor of amnesty in Mississippi. We pledged ourselves to it. The State is for it."—Congressional Globe, 41st Congress, 2nd Session, p. 3520.

"Now I can say more, I believe, for the State of Mississippi, than I can say for any other of the lately insurrectionary States. I do not know of one State that is altogether as well reconstructed as Mississippi is. We have reports of a great many other States of lawlessness and violence, and from parts of States we have well-authenticated reports of this effect; but while this is the case, do you hear one report of any more lawlessness in evidence in the State of Mississippi? No! The people now I believe are getting along as quietly, pleasantly, harmoniously, prosperously as the people are in any of the formerly free States. I think this is the case, I do not think my statement exaggerates anything at all. Now, sir, I hope that I am understood. I am in favor of amnesty in Mississippi. We pledged ourselves to it. The State is for it."—Congressional Globe, 41st Congress, 2nd Session, p. 3520.

[47]Ibid., 42nd Congress, 1st Session, p. 393.

[48]Congressional Globe, 42nd Congress, 2nd Session, p. 103.

[49]Ibid., 42nd Congress, 1st Session, pp. 102-103.

[50]Ibid., 102-103.

[51]Congressional Globe, 41st Congress, 2nd Session, p. 1287.

[52]Congressional Record, 43rd Congress, 1st Session, pp. 407-410.

[53]Congressional Record, 43rd Congress, 1st Session, pp. 407-410.

[54]Congressional Globe, 42nd Congress, 2nd Session, p. 3383.

[55]Congressional Record, 43rd Congress, 1st Session, pp. 1311-1314.

[56]Ibid., p. 407.

[57]Congressional Record, pp. 4782-4786.

[58]Ibid., pp. 565-567.

[59]Ibid., p. 64.

[60]Ibid., p. 64.

[61]Congressional Record, 48th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 297.

[62]Ibid., 51st Congress, 2nd Session, p. 1216.

[63]Congressional Record, 56th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 1634.

[64]Congressional Globe, 42nd Congress, 2nd Session, p. 813; App., p. 15.

[65]Congressional Globe, pp. 808-810.

[66]Ibid., 42nd Congress, 1st Session, p. 3655; 3rd Session, p. 220.Congressional Record, 43rd Congress, 1st Session, pp. 87, 88.

[67]Congressional Record, 45th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 1646; 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 2714, 3602.

[68]At a later date, Langston, in the Fifty-first Congress, introduced a measure for the establishment of normal and industrial schools for Negroes. These numerous measures were referred invariably to the Committee on Education and Labor, from which they were usually reported adversely to the House.—Congressional Record, 51st Congress, 2nd Session, p. 1650.

[69]In placing the responsibility with both parties, DeLarge said: "Mr. Speaker, when the governor of my State the other day called in council the leading men of the State, to consider the condition of affairs there and to advise what measures would be best for the protection of the people, whom did he call together? The major portion of the men whom he convened were men resting under political disabilities imposed by the Fourteenth Amendment. In good faith, I ask the gentlemen on this side of the House, and gentlemen on the other side of the House, whether it is reasonable to expect that those men should be interested, in any shape or form, in using their influence and best endeavor for the preservation of the public peace when they have nothing to look for politically in the future? You say that they should have the moral and material interest of their State at heart, though even always denied a participation in its honors. You may insist that the true patriot seeks no personal ends in acts of patriotism. All this is true, but, Mr. Speaker, men are but men everywhere, and you ought not to expect of those whom you daily call by opprobrious epithets, whom you daily remind of their political sins, whom you persistently exclude from places of the smallest trust in the government you have created, to be very earnest to cooperate with you in the work of establishing and fortifying the government set up in hostility to the whole tone of their prejudices, their connections, and their sympathies. What ought to be is one thing; what in the weakness and fallibility of human nature will be is quite another thing. The statesman regards the actual and acts upon it; the desirable, the possible, and even the probable furnishes but poor basis for political action."—Congressional Globe, 42nd Congress, 1st Session, App., pp. 230-231.

[70]Ibid., 42nd Congress, 1st Session, p. 376.

[71]Congressional Globe, 42nd Congress, 3rd Session, p. 4039.

[72]Congressional Globe, 42nd Congress, 3rd Session, App., p. 475.

[73]Congressional Record, 43rd Congress, 1st Session, p. 1121; 44th Congress, 1st Session, p. 206; 47th Congress, 1st Session, p. 3946.

[74]Ibid., 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 3825-3826; 3781-3784; 5540-5543.

[75]Congressional Record, pp. 3667, 3668, 3669.

[76]Ibid., 44th Congress, 2nd Session, App., pp. 123-136.

[77]Ibid., 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 2100-2105.

[78]Miller pointed out the inherent weaknesses of the South, the insecurity of investment, violation of the right of property and of contract, the jeopardy of life, and over-assessment of taxes on property held by Northern Whites—as constituting the causes underlying the failure of investors to direct their monies to Southern enterprises. He discussed the amenability of the Negro to civilizing influences and the economic progress that the race had made since its emancipation from slavery. Miller asserted, moreover, that though these remarks might effect the loss of his seat in the next Congress, he conceived it his duty to his party and to his race to defend his people against the dastardly attack of one who pretended to be its friend.Congressional Record, 51st Congress, 2nd Session, p. 2691.

[79]Ibid., pp. 1479-1482; 1524.

[80]Ibid., 53rd Congress, 1st Session, pp. 2158-2161.

[81]Ibid., 54th Congress, 1st Session, p. 1868; 2nd Session, p. 320.

[82]Congressional Globe, 42nd Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 393, 2439, 2447, 2452.

[83]Ibid., 42nd Congress, 1st Session, pp. 198, 178, 3793; 3rd Session, p. 220; 43rd Congress, 1st Session, pp. 87, 88.

[84]Ibid., 43rd Congress, 1st Session, pp. 85, 320, 1333.

[85]Congressional Globe, 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 321, 1203; 47th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 4551, 6146.

[86]Ibid., 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 442, 3754, 4857; 45th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 2706; 47th Congress, 1st Session, p. 6432; 49th Congress, 1st Session, p. 1218.

[87]Ibid., 49th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 437, 1404, 3748, 4980, 4982, 5069.

[88]Congressional Globe, 42nd Congress, 1st Session, p. 3570.

[89]Congressional Record, 47th Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 2312, 2660, 2870-2871.

[90]Congressional Record, 55th Congress, 1st Session, p. 550.

[91]Ibid., 49th Congress, 1st Session, p. 3049.

[92]Congressional Record, 51st Congress, 2nd Session, p. 3490.

[93]Ibid., 52nd Congress, 1st Session, App., p. 508.

[94]Congressional Record, 51st Congress, 1st Session, pp. 10,707, 10,708.

[95]Ibid., 52nd Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 4695, 5974.

[96]Ibid., 53rd Congress, 2nd Session, p. 8382.

[97]Congressional Record, 56th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 166, 372, 594, 791; 2nd Session, p. 188; 55th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 3153.

[98]Ibid., 43rd Congress, 1st Session, App., p. 250; pp. 27, 206.Congressional Globe, 42nd Congress, 1st Session, pp. 198, 178.

[99]Congressional Record, 44th Congress, 1st Session, p. 3340.

[100]Ibid., 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 771, 2714, 2791.

[101]Congressional Record, 44th Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 1025-1026.

[102]Congressional Record, 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 118, 119.

[103]Ibid., 47th Congress, 1st Session, p. 6898.

[104]Ibid., 45th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 1646.

[105]Ibid., 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 3457, 3467, 3468; 48th Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 316, 2057; 49th Congress, 1st Session, p. 1919.

[106]Ibid., 45th Congress, 3rd Session, p. 1914.

[107]Ibid., 46th Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 2195-2196.

[108]Congressional Record, 44th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 1444, 1445.

[109]Congressional Record, 45th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 245, 1750; 3rd Session, 1314, 1316, 2309.

[110]Ibid., 53rd Congress, 2nd Session, p. 2399; 1st Session, pp. 1392, 1396.

[111]Ibid., 56th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 3814.

[112]Ibid., 55th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 541.

[113]Munro,The Government of the United States, p. 297.

[114]A Letter from John E. Bruce, Brooklyn, N. N., a man active during the Reconstruction. June 6, 1921.

[115]James G. Blaine,Twenty Years of Congress, 1861-1881, Vol. II, p. 515.

In speaking of the beginning of Negro churches in the United States, those of the Baptist faith must not be forgotten. Nor must we err in thinking that the first churches of this faith were planted in the North. It is true that there were Negro Baptists in Providence, Rhode Island, as early as 1774,[1]and doubtless much earlier, but they had no church of their own. Indeed, there is absolutely no trace of Negro Baptist churches in the North prior to the nineteenth century. The oldest Negro Baptist churches, north of Mason and Dixon's Line, are the Independent or First African Baptist Church, of Boston, Massachusetts, planted in 1805; the Abysinnian, of New York City, established in 1808; and the First African, of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, organized in 1809.[2]

Negro Baptist churches, unlike other Negro churches, had their beginning in the South, and at a somewhat earlier date. The first church of Negro Baptists, so far as authentic and trustworthy writings of the eighteenth century establish, was constituted at Silver Bluff,[3]on Mr. Galphin's[4]estate, a year or two before the Revolutionary War. It continued to worship there, in comparative peace, until the latter part of 1778, when the vicissitudes of war drove the church into exile[5]—but only to multiply itself elsewhere.[6]The work at Silver Bluff began anew with the cessation of hostilities, moreover, and was more prosperous than ever in 1791.[7]

Silver Bluff was situated on the South Carolina side of the Savannah River, in Aiken County, just twelve miles from Augusta, Georgia.[8]All there was of it, in September, 1775, seems to have been embraced in what William Tennett, of Revolutionary fame, styled "Mr. Galphin's Settlement."[9]Nevertheless, as it lay in the tract of the Revolutionary forces, and was for a time a center of supplies to the Indians, who had their habitation in that quarter, livingin treaty relations with the colonists, Ramsey, Carroll, Drayton,[10]and others, give it a place on the map of South Carolina. Indeed, so identified was Silver Bluff with the Galphins, their interests and their influence, that by 1785 it was known far and near as Galphinton. Fort Galphin was there. Bartram, who visited it in 1776, says that Silver Bluff was "a very celebrated place," and describes it as "a beautiful villa," while the picture which Jones, in his history of South Carolina, gives of Silver Bluff, is animating, to say the least.[11]

David George, who was one of the constituent members, and the first regular pastor of the Silver Bluff Church, is our authority in regard to the early history of this flock. We make the following extracts from letters of his, published in London, England, in connection with other foreign correspondence, during the period from 1790 to 1793:

Brother Palmer,[12]who was pastor at some distance from SilverBluff, came and preached to a large congregation at a mill of Mr. Galphin's; he was a very powerful preacher.... Brother Palmer came again and wished us to beg Master to let him preach to us; and he came frequently.... There were eight of us now, who had found the great blessing and mercy from the Lord, and my wife was one of them, and Brother Jesse Galphin.... Brother Palmer appointed Saturday evening to hear what the Lord had done for us, and next day, he baptized us in the mill stream.... Brother Palmer formed us into a church, and gave us the Lord's Supper at Silver Bluff.... Then I began to exhort in the Church, and learned to sing hymns.... Afterwards the church advised with Brother Palmer about my speaking to them, and keeping them together.... So I was appointed to the office of an elder, and received instruction from Brother Palmer how to conduct myself. I proceeded in this way till the American War was coming on, when the Ministers were not allowed to come amongst us, lest they should furnish us with too much knowledge.... I continued preaching at Silver Bluff, till the church, constituted with eight, increased to thirty or more, and 'till the British came to the city of Savannah and took it.[13]

The first clear conception of time, which we get from these extracts, in regard to the origin of the Silver Bluff Church, is where David George speaks of being left in sole charge, as Liele and Palmer might no longer visit Silver Bluff, lest in so doing, they should impart to the slaves of the settlement a knowledge, which, in the then prevailing conditions, would result in their personal freedom, and, consequently, in great financial loss to their masters. This undoubtedly was not later than November, 1775, when the Earl of Dunmore issued on American soil a proclamationof emancipation, in which the black slaves and the white indentured bondmen were alike promised freedom, provided they espoused the cause of England, in its struggle with the colonists. How well these slaves understood and appreciated the proffered boon, may be inferred from a letter which was written by Stephen Bull to Col. Henry Laurens, President of the Council of Safety, Charleston, South Carolina, March 14, 1776. In that letter he says: "It is better for the public, and the owners, if the deserted Negroes who are on Tybee Island be shot, if they cannot be taken."[14]By this means, as he informs us, he hoped to "deter other Negroes from deserting" their masters. According to Bull's representation, the Negroes along the Savannah River were abandoning their masters, and now going to the British in scores and hundreds, to the detriment of their owners, and the menace of the cause of American independence.

Now George Liele, although not a runaway slave, appears to have had some liking for the Tybee River, as a place of abode, and it is probable that when he could no longer visit Silver Bluff, and was not in camp with Henry Sharp (who had not only given him his freedom, but also taken up arms against the Revolutionists), he reported to Tybee Island to preach to the refugees there assembled. At any rate, when Liele appears in Savannah, Georgia, as a preacher of the Gospel, his biographer declares that "He came up to the city of Savannah from Tybee River."[15]

The next hint which we get from the statements of David George, in regard to the time when the Silver Bluff Church was planted, is where he says that George Liele preached at Silver Bluff both before and after the organization of the church. Happily, Liele himself refers to SilverBluff as a place where he used to preach. Liele also informs us that he became a Christian about two years before the American Revolution, but did not immediately connect himself with a church; that when he did join, he became a member of Matthew Moore's church, in Burke County, Georgia; that he was a member of this church about four years; that his membership terminated with the evacuation of Savannah; that he preached at Yamacraw and Brumpton Land about three years; and that he went to Jamaica, in the West Indies, in the year of 1782.

Let us consider carefully these facts, with reference to time. The three years, which preceded 1782, were 1781, 1780, 1779. This brings us to the evacuation of Savannah by the Americans, within two days, as the British captured the city December 29, 1778. The four years which preceded 1779 were 1778, 1777, 1776, 1775. We understand from George Liele's statements concerning himself, therefore, that he became a member of Matthew Moore's church at the close of the year 1774, or the beginning of 1775, but was converted at the end of the year 1773, and let a whole year, or nearly so, pass before becoming a church-member.

It is probable that George Liele did not wait to be received into the fellowship of a church before going from plantation to plantation to tell his fellow slaves of the blessing of salvation which he had experienced. He may have thus declared the love of Christ, at Silver Bluff, as early as 1773, as Burke County, Georgia, in which he lived, is in part practically adjacent to Aiken County, South Carolina, in which was Silver Bluff. Accordingly, we are warranted in concluding that the Negro Baptist Church at Silver Bluff was constituted not earlier than 1773, nor later than 1775.

In making these deductions, we bear in mind that the year 1777 has been designated as the time of Liele's conversion, 1778 as the time when he united with Matthew Moore's church, and four years later, or 1782, as the time when his membership in that church ceased. In explanation of this view its advocates insist that the three years inwhich Liele preached at Brumpton Land and Yamacraw are included in the four years during which he was a member of Matthew Moore's church. According to this claim, the Silver Bluff Church could not have been planted earlier than 1777 nor later than 1778.

Back to Index Next