Page images
PDF
EPUB

folded sheet. 'And see, Todie, here's a little home-made photo. Well, as I'm alive, if it ain't little Rosie herself and a baby!'

He snatched the picture from her, and pored over it with blind eyes, while Mrs. Curring read aloud the prim little missive, the sender of which, it appeared, had taken her pen in hand to say that she was enjoying excellent health; also that her husband was well; and that she hoped her old Uncle Todie was in good health, and would he remember her, please, very respect

fully, to Mrs. Curring. There was little else in the letter, saving only the important announcement of the arrival, eight weeks since, of the first baby, 'which at present writing weighs 122 lbs.'

But when Mrs. Curring went out into the furnace-room an hour later to see whatever had become of poor Todie, she found him on the bench against the wall, with the letter in one hand, and the photograph in the other, still face to face, blindly, with the riddle of human things.

A DIARY OF THE RECONSTRUCTION PERIOD1

BY GIDEON WELLES

VI. THE USURPATIONS OF CONGRESS

Wednesday, December 12, 1866. Negro suffrage in the District is the radical hobby of the moment and is the great object of some of the leaders throughout the union. At the last session the Senate did not act upon the bill for fear of the popular verdict at the fall elections. Having dodged the issue then, they now come here under Sumner's lead and say that the people have declared for it.

There is not a senator who votes for this bill who does not know that it is an abuse and wrong. Most of the Negroes of this District are wholly unfit to be electors. With some exceptions they are ignorant, vicious and degraded, without patriotic or intelligent ideas or moral instincts. There are among them worthy, intelligent, industrious

men, capable of voting understandingly and who would not discredit the trust, but they are exceptional cases. As a community they are too debased and ignorant. Yet fanatics and demagogues will crowd a bill through Congress to give them suffrage, and probably by a vote which the veto could not overcome. Nevertheless, I am confident the President will do his duty in that regard. It is pitiable to see how little sense of right, real independence, and what limited comprehension are possessed by our legislators. They are the tame victims and participators of villainous conspirators.

Monday, December 24, 1866. Most of the members of Congress have gone home or abroad on excur

1 Copyright, 1910, by EDGAR T. WELLES.

sions free of expense, a popular way of travelling recently introduced by free passes and passages. It is a weak and factious Congress, the most so of any I have ever known. There is less statesmanship, less principle, less honest legislation than usual. There is fanaticism, demagogism, recklessness. The radicals, who constitute more than three fourths, are managed and controlled by leaders who have no more regard for the constitution than for an old almanac, and the remaining fourth are mostly party men, not patriots. There are but few who have a right comprehension of the organic law and our governmental system. There are a few good, conscientious men, but no great and marked mind looms up in either house. It seems to be taken for granted that Congress is omnipotent and without limitation of power. A proposition, introduced by Thad Stevens, for reducing the old State of North Carolina to a territory, was quietly received as proper and matter-ofcourse legislation. By what authority or by what process this is to be brought about is not stated nor asked. To break down the states, to take all power from the executive, to cripple the judiciary and reconstruct the Supreme Court, are among the principal objects of the radical leaders at this time. Four fifths of the members are small party men, creatures of corner groceries, without any knowledge of the science of government or of our constitutions. With them all, the great, overpowering purpose and aim are office and patronage. Most of their legislation relates to office, and their highest conception of legislative duty has in view place and how to get it.

The talk and labor of reconstruction is the engine by which they hold power, yet not a man among that great number of elected radicals appears to know or be able to define what he means by

reconstruction. The states were for a time, while the rebellion was going on, antagonistic. Those in rebellion were out of their proper relation to the government. But the rebellion has been suppressed. War has ceased, and those of our countrymen who were in arms are, and have been for eighteen months, pursuing their peaceful avocations. Each state has its executive, its legislative, and its judicial departments, and the whole machinery of government is in full operation; the state and municipal laws are in force; everything in each of the states is as perfect and complete as it was ten years ago before the rebellion, saving and excepting their right to representation in Congress, which is denied them by the radicals who want to reconstruct and govern them. There is nothing to reconstruct. If Congress will forbear longer to obstruct, the country will move on quietly and prosperously.

Thursday, December 27, 1866.

A number of the members of Congress, all I believe radicals, have gone South. They have free tickets from the War Department, and travel without expense to themselves. If some saucy fellow, with one fifth of the malignity and hate of these members, should insult or show impudence to the visitors, it would be a god-send [to them] and furnish them with reasons abundant to outlaw the whole Southern people.

Friday, January 4, 1867.

At the Cabinet to-day the President read his veto message on the bill reorganizing the District of Columbia which excluded those who had given comfort to the rebels but allowing Negroes to vote. I was not aware until to-day that the bill had been sent him. When I last conversed with him, about a week since, he said he had not received it.

[blocks in formation]

Seward gave it his approval and made quite a random general speech without much point. Said he had always advocated Negro suffrage and voted for it in New York. Here and in the states where there was a large preponderating Negro population it was different, if they were not in a majority they were a large minority. That eventually universal suffrage was to prevail, he had no doubt. All governments were coming to it. There are today representatives in service in Egypt elected, etc., but he approved the message.

[ocr errors]

McCulloch approved the message because he was opposed to giving this privilege to the Negro. That was the sentiment of his state, as well as of himself, and he had always voted in conformity to it.

Stanbery occupied much the same position. Had as a member of the Ohio legislature voted against Negro suffrage. Should do the same to-day if there, and behind that on the naked question there were at least one hundred thousand majority against it in that state.

Stanton took from his portfolio a brief and carefully prepared written statement, to the effect that he had examined the bill and could perceive no constitutional objections to any of its provisions; he therefore hoped the President would give it his approval.

I read from some rough notes that

the bill proposed to do something more for the blacks than to raise them to an equality with the whites,-it proposed to elevate them above a certain class of whites of admitted intelligence and character who, heretofore, were entitled to and had exercised suffrage.

If suffrage is claimed for the blacks on the ground that they are rightfully entitled to it as citizens of the United States, then to deprive the white citizens of that right which they now enjoy is to inflict a punishment upon them and subject them to a forfeiture, and it is proposed to do this without due form of law, that is, without trial and conviction, they, by an ex-postfacto law, are to be condemned. The constitution would thus be violated in two of its most important provisions, deemed essential to the preservation of liberty, and the act, if sanctioned, will stand as a precedent for any similar violation hereafter, etc.

On the other points I agreed with the gentlemen that Congress ought to pass no such law until the states had at least gone as far, that the people of the District (the white people) ought to be heard. I expected that Stanton would have met me defiantly, but he said not a word.

Browning was opposed to the bill for the reasons stated in the veto, and so was Randall.

After all had expressed themselves, Attorney-General Stanbery enquired how long the veto could be delayed. The President said until Monday. Stanbery remarked that would not be sufficient for his purpose. He had reason to believe that the Supreme Court would give its opinion on the test-oath question on Monday, which he thought would embrace the point which I had raised. He had not turned his mind to the constitutional question, but believed the objection well taken.

Stanton still said nothing; I thought,

however, that he was of Stanbery's say, whether he would make that point

opinion.

General Grant, who was present by invitation, was very emphatic against the bill, not because it disfranchised rebels, for he said he rather liked that, but he thought it very contemptible business for members of Congress whose states excluded the Negroes, to give them suffrage in this District.

I agreed with him, but remarked there were other and stronger reasons also, which, in a difference between the President and Congress, should not be overlooked. McCulloch said he doubted if it would be politic to bring forward the constitutional objection at this time, for the radicals would seize hold of it and insist that we were in sympathy with the rebels.

Randall was also decisive against it. The message was just right; he would add nothing nor take anything away. I stated that I had no controversy in regard to the message, but that if there was a constitutional point against a bill which was to be vetoed, that point ought, in my opinion, never to be omitted.

Not being satisfied that the President should omit the constitutional point in his veto message, I called on him this evening for further conversation. Stanbery was with him. The President produced a file of letters of Forney, Clerk of the Senate, written while he was paying court to the President, strongly urging him to take the position he has pursued, praising and complimenting him. Yet this fellow is now attacking, abusing, and misrepresenting the President summarily in his 'two papers, both daily.'

The President heard my suggestions in regard to the constitutional objection; agreed with me; admitted, as I urged, the importance of it and of his concurrence with the court, but did not say, nor did I ask or expect him to

VOL. 106- NO. 1

in his message. I am inclined to think he will not. The question of expediency raised by McCulloch and Randall, and the point not having been original with himself, as all are aware, have their influence. Yet he hesitates. This is his great infirmity. The President has firmness but is greatly wanting in prompt decision. He is unwilling to take a step, but when it is once taken he does not recede.

Saturday, January 5, 1867.

Gave the President the passage quoted from Jefferson. It is in the first volume of Jefferson's work, - his autobiography, page 49. It is quoted by De Tocqueville. I again advised that the constitutional objection should be presented in his message.

McCulloch tells me that General Grant urged upon them to adopt the amendment. Said the North was in favor; that they had decided for it in the late election; that if not adopted the government would impose harder

terms.

What nonsense! What business has Congress to impose terms upon states? General Grant, not very enlightened, has been led astray, I trust unwittingly on his part, by Stanton and Washburne.1

Monday, January 7, 1867.

The veto went in to-day. But a party vote over-rode it, as was expected. The message was courteous in terms and the argument and reason very well, though not as strong and exhaustive as could have been wished; sufficiently so, however, to have satisfied all who are not partisans or fanatics. No calm, considerate and true statesman, or legislator, can believe it correct to impose this bill upon the District against the unanimous voice of the people. 1 E. B. Washburne, from Grant's district in Illinois.

The ignorant, vicious, stupid Negroes who have flocked hither cannot vote intelligently; are unfit to be jurymen. The states and constitutions from which these came would oppose it within their own jurisdictions.

In the House of Representatives, fanaticism, prompted by partisanship, ran wild. The reckless leaders were jubilant, — the timid followers were abject and obedient. Ashley introduced a resolution to impeach the President, or to authorize enquiry, and by an almost straight party vote it was adopted, and referred to the judiciary committee under the previous question. It will never result, even under party drill, in an impeachment and conviction, but it is disreputable and demoralizing that a packed party majority should so belittle the government and free institutions as to entertain such a resolution from such a source. But Ashley has not done it without consulting others.

Tuesday, January 8, 1867.

The President brought forward the question of issuing a proclamation for more extended amnesty-referred to referred to Mr. Lincoln's successive proclamations, beginning with that of September, 1862, and showing consistency and uniformity of proceedings and views.

Stanton stated that he had this morning received a copy of the act which had just passed the legislature of North Carolina, granting amnesty and oblivion; said that all our officers and soldiers were liable to be harassed and arrested through the Southern states for trespass and injury; thought it would be well there should be reciprocal amnesty. The suggestions struck all favorably and will, I think, receive consideration and action.

Another matter the President remarked he wished to bring forward was that, in view of what was taking

place around us, especially on the subject of dismantling states, throwing them into a territorial condition and annulling their present organization and government, he considered it important he should know the opinions and views of each member of the Cabinet. If we are united, that fact would carry weight with it, here and before the country; if we are not united, there is weakness.

I had observed through the whole sitting that the President was absorbed and prepared for an energetic movement, and from what he had said to me on Saturday, I anticipated what his purpose was. But he had been slow and procrastinating, and until he broached the subject I had not, after previous experience, much faith that we should reach it to-day. When he commenced, however, his countenance indicated firm and fixed resolution. He was pale and calm, but no one could mistake that he was determined in his purpose.

I doubt if any one but myself was aware of what was passing in his mind. Perhaps McCulloch may have thought of it, for I told him on Saturday evening of my interview. He said he had repeatedly spoken to the President, and had similar intimations, but he too had little confidence.

Seward was evidently taken by surprise. Said he had avoided expressing himself on these questions; did not think it judicious to anticipate them; that storms were never so furious as they threatened; but as the subject had been brought up, he would say that never, under any circumstances, could he be brought to admit that a sovereign state had been destroyed, or could be reduced to a territorial condition.

McCulloch was equally decided, that the states could not be converted into territories.

Browning, who sat next to him, began to express his views, a discourtesy

« PreviousContinue »