A. Some of them had white, some had black; they had all sorts of colors.1 Q. Did you know any of them? A. Yes sir, I knew some of them . . . three or four [names follow]. Q. Tell us what they did when they came to your house; give us a history of the transaction. A. They came and got me first and tied my hands behind me, and asked where was my other brother. ... I said, "Gentlemen, what are you going to do with me? He said, "Never mind, I will tell you what when I am through with you." They said we never voted right. Mr. Alfred Harrison tried his best to get us not to go to the election, but we would go to the election, and we voted.... They carried me off into the woods, about a mile from the house, while they killed my brother. I kept questioning them: "What are you going to do with me? I have not done anything at all." They said, "Never mind, we will tell you what we will do after we carry you off." They had 1 The costume of the Ku-Klux riders is described as follows: "A long gown with loose flowing sleeves, with a hood in which the apertures for the eyes, nose and mouth are trimmed with some red material. . . . In some instances they have disguised their horses so that even they should not be recognized. . . . It is a large loose gown covering the whole person quite closely, buttoned close around and reaching from the head clear down to the floor, covering the feet and dragging on the ground. It is made of bleached linen, starched and ironed, and in the night, by moonlight, it glitters and rattles" (Statement of Joseph Holden of North Carolina, quoted by Fleming, Documentary History of Reconstruction, Vol. II, p. 364). “A trick of frequent perpetration in the country was for a horseman, spectral and ghostly looking, to stop before the cabin of some negro needing a wholesome impression and call for a bucket of water. If a dipper or gourd was brought, it was declined, and the bucket full of water demanded. As if consumed by raging thirst the horseman grasped it and pressed it to his lips. He held it there till every drop of the water was poured into a gum or oiled sack concealed beneath the Ku-Klux robe. Then the empty bucket was returned to the amazed negro with the remark: 'That's good. It's the first drink of water I've had since I was killed at Shiloh.' Then a few words of counsel as to future behavior made an impression not likely to be disregarded" (Lester and Wilson, The Ku-Klux Klan, pp. 98-99). killed a man last year over there. They carried me right through to his grave, and told me they were going to kill me. . . . They had their pistols at my face on both sides; they were all around me. I stopped talking and would not say anything. They all got into a huddle, just like a swarm of bees. . . . After they pulled their disguises off their faces, they came there and told me that I was to be whipped. I thought it was all right, and that it would be better to be whipped than to be killed like my brother. In my brother's back I counted some hundred and odd shots, bullets and buckshot holes. . . Q. Did they whip you over your clothes? A. No, sir!... They took off every rag of clothes I had, and laid me down on the ground, and some stood on my head and some on my feet. I can't tell how many men whipped me at once. They went out and got great big long brushes, as big as these chair-posts, and they whipped them all into frassels. There are welts on me now... I tried to run, and some threw rocks at me, and some said "Shoot him "; but they did not. Q. Did they get after you again? A. Yes, sir; in July. . . . Q. What did they do? A. They did n't catch me then. They came and searched my house. They had dogs to search around, but they did n't catch me. Q. What kind of dogs? A. What they call "nigger-hounds"; such as they had in the old slavery times; Dudley had the dogs. Q. Do they keep such dogs in your county now? A. Yes, sir; just on purpose for that business. . . Q. Are there many Ku-Klux up there? A. O yes, sir; you could see a hundred and fifty any time before I came away from there. ... Q. Have any of those people been arrested or punished for killing your brother or whipping you? A. No, sir; I have been here since July, and I have been around mighty near to every one of these offices, and I could not do anything. . . . Mr. Harrison, the man who killed my brother, he said it was no use to have anything done but to have him buried. 103. The liberal Re- of 1872 Q. What did you go to him for? A. I did not know what to do. I was just like a rabbit when the dogs are after him; I had to do anything I could to try to save my life. THE AFTERMATH OF THE WAR Toward the end of Grant's first term a group of "progressive" Republicans, disgusted with the official corruption, the harsh measures applied to the South, the military autocracy, and the burdensome protective-tariff policy which characterized the administration at Washington, started "an independent movement that seemed to presage a new era in American politics."1 The call to arms was sent out by a state convention, assembled at Jefferson City, Missouri, January 24, 1872: Resolved, That we, the Liberal Republicans of Missouri, faithful now, as we were in the dark days of civil war, to the principles of true republicanism, by no act or word will endanger rightful sovereignty of the Union, emancipation,2 equality of civil rights, or enfranchisement. To these established facts, now embedded in the Constitution, we claim the loyalty of all good citizens. 3 Resolved, That a true and lasting peace can come only from such proposed reconciliation as enfranchisement has wrought in this State, nor can those governments be pure or just in which 5 1 J. F. Rhodes, History of the United States, Vol. VI, p. 417. 3 By the Fourteenth Amendment, Sect. I. 4 By the Fifteenth Amendment. 5 Missouri, by a combination of liberal Republicans and Democrats, had just revised the harsh Constitution of 1865, which disfranchised "rebel sympathizers." "The State [Missouri] had not seceded, but tens of thousands of her people had joined the rebel ranks. To prevent them from sharing in the government while fighting to overthrow it, these allies of the Rebellion had by an amendment to the State Constitution been disqualified from exercising the right of citizenship.” — James G. Blaine, Twenty Years of Congress, Vol. II, p. 517. . the tax-payers have no active part. We therefore demand, with equal suffrage for all, complete amnesty for all, that the intelligent and experienced of every State may be welcomed to active service for the common welfare. Resolved, That no form of taxation is just or wise which puts needless burdens upon the people. We demand a genuine reform of the tariff, so that those duties shall be removed, which in addition to the revenue yielded to the Treasury, involve increase in the price of domestic products, and a consequent tax for the benefit of favored interests. Resolved, That the shameless abuse of government patronage for the control of conventions and elections, whether in the interests of an individual, a faction, or a party, with the consequent corruption and demoralization of political life, demands a thorough and genuine reform of public service. Those who would suppress investigation forget that they owe a higher duty to the country than to any party. . . Resolved, That local self-government with impartial suffrage, will guard the rights of all citizens more securely than any centralized authority. It is time to stop the growing encroachment of executive power, the use of coercion or bribery to ratify a treaty, the packing of a Supreme Court to relieve rich corporations, the seating of members of Congress not elected by the people, the resort to unconstitutional laws to cure Ku-Klux disorders.1 . . . We demand for the individual the largest liberty consistent with public order, for the State, self-government, and for the nation, return to the methods of peace, and the constitutional limitations of power. Resolved, That true Republicanism makes it not the less our duty to expose corruption, denounce usurpation of power, and work for reforms necessary to the public welfare. The times demand an uprising of honest citizens to sweep from power the men who prostitute the name of an honored party to selfish interests. We therefore invite all Republicans, who desire the 1 The student may find what acts of President Grant's first administration are referred to in this paragraph by consulting J. F. Rhodes, History of the United States since 1850, Vol. VI, pp. 267 ff., 313 ff., 347 ff. reforms herein set forth, to meet in national mass convention at the city of Cincinnati, on the first Wednesday of May next at 12 m., there to take such action as our conviction of duty and the public exigency may require. Of the convention that met at Cincinnati, May 1, 1872, in response to the above call, the correspondent of the Nation (May 9) wrote: "I doubt whether a more respectable, honest, intellectual, public-spirited, body of men ever got together for a similar purpose." The "leader and master-mind" of the movement was Carl Schurz, a German refugee of 1848, who won great distinction in his adopted land as general in the Civil War, United States senator from Missouri, and Secretary of the Interior in President Hayes's cabinet. Schurz was elected chairman of the convention, and delivered an opening address "unique in the annals of political assemblies." "1 Nobody can survey this vast and enthusiastic assembly, gathered from all parts of the Republic, without an emotion of astonishment and hope astonishment considering the spontaneity of the impulse which has brought it together, and hope considering the great purpose for which it has met. The Republic may well congratulate itself upon the fact that such a meeting was possible. Look at the circumstances from which it has sprung. We saw the American people just issued from a great and successful struggle, and in the full pride of their National strength, threatened with new evils and dangers of an insidious nature, and the masses of the population apparently not aware of them. We saw jobbery and corruption, stimulated to unusual audacity by the opportunities of a protracted civil war, invading the public service of the Government . . . and we saw a public opinion most deplorably lenient in its judgment of 1 Bancroft and Dunning, "The Political Career of Carl Schurz,” appendix to the Autobiography of Schurz, Vol. III, p. 343. For a polite denunciation of Schurz by a political opponent, see Blaine, Twenty Years of Congress, Vol. II, pp. 438-440. |