$.5.

Copyright, 1895,

BY EBEN GREENOUGH SCOTT.

All rights reserved.

The Riverside Press, Cambridge, Mass., U. S. A.
Electrotyped and Printed by H. O. Houghton and Company.

PREFACE.

THE term "reconstruction," in American politics, applies more aptly to the revolted states than it does to the federal Union; for the mutilated form of the Union was restored by the mere ascendancy of the northern arms, but it was not until after this had occurred that the eleven states were reconstructed. The period during which the process of renewal was taking place is called, in popular speech, the Reconstruction Period, and it refers, somewhat indefinitely, to the time occupied by the single term of President Johnson and the succeeding two terms of President Grant, the presidential terms during which the ancient governments of the subdued states were finally subverted, and new ones were erected in their places.

I intend to write the political history of the period of reconstruction, but, preliminary to doing so, I have set forth in this book certain things necessary to be known before taking up the subject and pursuing it in the sequence of time. It is a notable thing that, from the very beginning of the Civil War, the federal government never evinced a doubt of ultimate success, and it is significant that, even in moments of

disaster which seemed irretrievable, it was occupied with the question, "What is to be done with the revolted states when the fortune of war shall have put their fate in our hands?"

At first, the notion prevailed that the seceded states would retake their places in the Union merely, and that, this done, "the Union as it was" would be restored. It was not long, however, before the slavery question made itself felt by transmuting restoration into reconstruction, and the distractions of the times. were augmented by the conflicting opinions on this subject which divided the people and gained head in Congress. Nothing could be implied from the Constitution but restoration; yet restoration involved the continuance of slavery, and this was out of the question with the people, who were now demanding that no settlement should be made without the elimination of that which was certain to produce a recurrence of the intolerable evil under which they were laboring. President and Congress, accordingly, changed front, and the proclamations of one and the debates and legislation of the other showed how determinedly the North was bent upon a new order of things.

Though the object sought was manifest, and the demand for change was peremptory, the means by which this change was to be effected and this object was to be attained were not clear. The Constitution gave no help to a procedure which was foreign to the system of which it was the expression. The contra

2

PREFACE.

riety among the people betrayed itself on the floor of Congress in the dissension of factions. The President took one view of the relations of a state to the Union, a faction of the Republicans took another, while the Democrats, reduced to a party of mere protest, still clung unavailingly to the doctrine of restoration. There was much groping, much fault-finding, and much contention, but uppermost, out of the confusion, rose at length that which became known as the Presidential Plan of Reconstruction. This plan was actually in progress in several of the regained states when, by the assassination of President Lincoln, its furtherance devolved upon President Johnson. This plan had been prescribed by proclamation of the President.

It is to bring the genesis of "reconstruction" before the reader that this volume has been written. It is not a history of the contentions of parties and factions, but it is a presentation of the conception illustrated by the proclamations of the President, and by the debates (particularly those of the Senate) upon these proclamations, and upon matters which touched vitally the constitutional relations of the states to the federal Union: it shows, consequently, the great change of opinion and of sentiment which the people of the United States were then undergoing, and which at length found expression in three amendments of the Constitution.

In a written constitution, the people of the United States have a standard whereby to determine their constitutional character; for no matter how contrary the modes of construing this instrument, the written words remain. The Constitution, therefore, preserves the character of a landmark by which the fidelity or infidelity of the people to their ancient character can be judged. When the storm has cleared away, it reveals indubitably how far they have been swept from their moorings. It is absolutely essential to a people, the security. of whose liberties is coincident with the preservation of their constitutional character, to ascertain if they have suffered this character to become impaired. Such an opportunity as that presented by the subsidence of the agitation which accompanied the most stormy days through which the United States have ever passed has not occurred before to the Americans, and the reader cannot close this painful chapter of our history without the question rising to his lips, Have we preserved the ancient character handed down to us along with the Constitution, or have we wandered from the faith of our fathers?

WASHINGTON, D. C., March, 1895.