The Difficulty in Reconstructing Mississippi


(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)

uaskme

Sergeant Major
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Messages
1,813
#28
Well, I think people are missing what the true Objective to Reconstruction was. During Reconstruction, the South is going to try and reconcile with Negro Labor, with mixed results. They will import Chinese. After several years experimenting with the Chinese, it is a Failure. The North also experiments with Chinese Labor, building the RR etc. In 1870 the Republicans will Confirm the word WHITE in our Immigration Laws. Both Sections are going to come to the conclusion that it is a bad idea to rely on another degraded colored race to labor and populate the U.S. 1882 the Republicans will exclude Asians. 1883 the Republicans will blow up the Civil War Civil Rights Acts. So, during this period the South makes the determination to rely on White, European Immigrants for its labor. They became Yankee. This is what the Yankee wanted them to do for Decades leading up to the Civil War. Give up their Negroes. So, the South was finally Reconstructed. Just like the Yankee, they would rely on White, Europeans.
 
Last edited:

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
10,730
#29
Wow, that many in one Southern state” :unsure:
Thanks for your response.
No, it is not a lot: but it is more than the previous 76 years, and a first step, no matter how small. Some would have us believe that such an enormous change should have been achieved instantaneously, that the result should have been perfection and that anything less than perfection was a failure.
Participating in the political process does not guarantee any particular outcome other than general acceptance of the result. It does not guarantee that one's candidate will win; it does not guarantee that a winning candidate will be of the same race or sex as the voter.
Some may belittle this monumental achievement. I suggest that we ought to celebrate it!
 

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
10,730
#30
Does anyone know how many black Senators and House members were chosen by state legislatures or elected by the people in the whole of the North and West during the same period? :unsure:
Thanks for your response.
An interesting question, but not one within the scope of this topic, which is limited to Reconstruction in Mississippi. If you are sincerely interested, start a new thread addressing race and politics elsewhere in the U. S. during the period.
 

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
10,730
#31
***Posted as Moderator***
The topic of this thread is "the difficulty in reconstructing Mississippi".
Please limit posts to discussing that topic.
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
8,620
Location
District of Columbia
#32
Reconstruction was a disaster as shown in history when ideas were thrown against the wall to see what stuck. No one and I mean no one came out of this mess with honor and the blacks were cheated by all parties.

Edited.
Regards
David
In his recent book Reconstruction: A Concise History, Allen C. Guelzo talked about the achievements of the Reconstruction era (p11-12):

• Reconstruction restored a federal Union, for which the North had been fighting from the start, and corrected the centrifugal forces of the American federal Union they have brought on the war in the first place.

• Reconstruction followed the route of generosity—it created no conquered provinces, no mass executions for treason. As Walt Whitman wrote, almost in self congratulation, Reconstruction “has been paralleled nowhere in the world—in any other country on the globe the whole batch of the Confederate leaders would have had their heads cut off.” Ironically, most of the violence that pockmarked reconstruction was inflicted on the victors, not the vanquished.

• The freedpeople made only modest economic gains in moving out of the shadow of slavery into freedom and self ownership. But there were still beachheads for black Southerners all across the South in terms of property ownership and embourgeoisiement, which would form the soil out of which the civil rights movement would flourish 80 years later.

• In the same fashion, reconstruction established, beyond a doubt, the legal a quality of all Americans under the banner of citizenship. Much of that equality was compromised by racial prejudice, vigilante violence, and the twisting of law. But it was not extinguished, and the reconstruction era amendments to the constitution (the 13th, 14th, and 15th) have together formed the last on which injustice, racial prejudice, and inequality have been repeatedly hammered down.​
My primary quibble with the above is that Guelzo notes that "The freedpeople made only modest economic gains in moving out of the shadow of slavery into freedom and self ownership."

Moving "out of the shadow of slavery into freedom and self ownership" was itself a major, life changing event for the freed people. It was seen as profound and even divine, despite the absence of major economic and political gains. Guelzo's language minimizes the importance of gaining freedom, IMO. Many people forget that immediately after the war, southern whites sought to place the freedmen back into a state of virtual slavery. Reconstruction eliminated that possibility.

- Alan
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
8,620
Location
District of Columbia
#33
49753017_2028953007151947_1942000425305636864_o.jpg?_nc_cat=108&_nc_ht=scontent-iad3-1.jpg


Reconstruction's success were short lived, but there were some.

As noted here, in January 1870, "the first Legislature in Radical Reconstruction met in Mississippi. Nearly a third of the 106 state representatives and nearly a sixth of senators were African American. At least 226 black Mississippians held public office during Reconstruction. The Legislature ushered in free public schools and had no property requirements to vote."

- Alan
 
Last edited:

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
18,862
Location
Laurinburg NC
#34
View attachment 258146

Reconstruction's success were short lived, but there were some.

As noted here, in January 1870, the first Legislature in Radical Reconstruction met in Mississippi. Nearly a third of the 106 state representatives and nearly a sixth of senators were African American. At least 226 black Mississippians held public office during Reconstruction. The Legislature ushered in free public schools and had no property requirements to vote.

- Alan
There were seven black legislators in the Mississippi House of Representatives as late as 1890.

“John F. Harris, a black Southerner originally from Virginia, was in 1890 a Republican legislator from Washington County in the Mississippi House of Representatives. Prior to the war, he had been a slave, during the war a confederate soldier, and after the war a servant of the people of Mississippi and Confederate heritage. According to the journal of their House of Representatives Harris voted in favor of the erection of a Confederate monument on the capitol square in Jackson, Mississippi (S.B. NO. 25). Not only is that fact itself remarkable in the light of modern perceptions of race relations in the South, it is even more so remarkable, indeed indelible, when one considers the circumstances surrounding his vote.”

http://confederateblog.com/2011/02/black-is-gray-ms-rep-john-f-harris/

See also pages 166-167 in Francis W. Springer's War for What.
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
8,620
Location
District of Columbia
#35
From here:

John Roy Lynch, congressman, soldier, and author was born in Concordia Parish, Louisiana on September 10, 1847 to Patrick Lynch, an Irish immigrant and Catherine White, a slave. Lynch’s father died soon after his birth. Lynch and his mother were then traded to a plantation in Natchez, Mississippi. During the Civil War, Lynch became free when he fled the plantation and to serve as a cook for the 49th Illinois Volunteer Regiment.​
During Reconstruction, Lynch joined the Republican Party in Mississippi. After working as assistant secretary for the Republican State Convention, Lynch became the Justice of the Peace in Natchez. In November 1869, at the age of 22, Lynch was elected to the Mississippi House of Representatives. Three years later, in 1872 he was named Speaker of the House.​
image.png
Later in 1872, Lynch ran for a seat in the United States House of Representatives. He was elected, winning more than fifty percent of the popular vote. In Congress Lynch, was known primarily for his support of a civil rights measure that eventually became the Civil Rights Act of 1875. During his congressional campaign in 1874, Lynch voiced concern for white Democrats' attacks on black Republicans in Mississippi, a prelude to the bloody Mississippi gubernatorial campaign of 1875 where hundreds of black and white Republicans were killed. Despite those violent tactics which reduced the Republican vote in the state, Lynch managed to be re-elected to Congress in 1874 and 1876. During his third term, however, he was increasingly isolated from the state's other political leaders, virtually all of whom were white Democrats.​
Despite intense opposition from Democrats, Lynch was reelected in 1880. Because the Democrats disputed the election, he fought for over a year (half his term) before Congress finally seated him. During his remaining year in Congress, he continued to support civil rights legislation. Lynch was defeated for re-election in 1882 by Natchez judge Henry S. Van Eaton, a Democrat. He ran unsuccessfully for Congress again in 1884 and 1886.​
In 1914, his book, The Facts of Reconstruction was published. Wikipedia says

He is best known for his book, The Facts of Reconstruction (1913). It is available online at the Gutenberg Project. In it, he argued against the prevailing view of the Dunning School, conservative white historians who downplayed African-American contributions and the achievements of the Reconstruction era. Lynch emphasized how significant was the ratification of the 14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitution, which granted full citizenship to all persons without restriction of race or color, and suffrage to minority males.​

This is from the preface to the book, written by Lynch:

The author of this book is one of the few remaining links in the chain by which the present generation is connected with the reconstruction period, — the most important and eventful period in our country's history.​
What is herein recorded is based upon the author's own knowledge, contact and experience. Very much, of course, has been written and published about reconstruction, but most of it is superficial and unreliable; and, besides, nearly all of it has been written in such a style and tone as to make the alleged facts related harmonize with what was believed to be demanded by public sentiment.​
The author of this work has endeavored to present facts as they were and are, rather than as he would like to have them, and to set them down without the slightest regard to their effect upon the public mind, except so far as that mind may be influenced by the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. In his efforts along these lines he has endeavored to give expression to his ideas, opinions and convictions in language that is moderate and devoid of bitterness, and entirely free from race prejudice, sectional animosity, or partisan bias.​
...Was the enfranchisement of the black men at the South by act of Congress a grave mistake?​
Were the reconstructed State Governments that were organized as a result thereof a disappointment and a failure?​
Was the Fifteenth Amendment to the Federal Constitution premature and unwise?​
An affirmative answer to the above questions will be found in nearly everything that has been written about Reconstruction during the last quarter of a Century. The main purpose of this work is to present the other side; but, in doing so, the author indulges the hope that those who may read these chapters will find that no extravagant and exaggerated statements have been made, and that there has been no effort to conceal, excuse, or justify any act that was questionable or wrong.​
It will be seen that the primary object the author has sought to accomplish, is to bring to public notice those things that were Commendable and meritorious, to prevent the publication of which seems to have been the primary purpose of nearly all who have thus far written upon that important subject.​

- Alan
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
8,620
Location
District of Columbia
#36
There were seven black legislators in the Mississippi House of Representatives as late as 1890.

“John F. Harris, a black Southerner originally from Virginia, was in 1890 a Republican legislator from Washington County in the Mississippi House of Representatives. Prior to the war, he had been a slave, during the war a confederate soldier, and after the war a servant of the people of Mississippi and Confederate heritage. According to the journal of their House of Representatives Harris voted in favor of the erection of a Confederate monument on the capitol square in Jackson, Mississippi (S.B. NO. 25). Not only is that fact itself remarkable in the light of modern perceptions of race relations in the South, it is even more so remarkable, indeed indelible, when one considers the circumstances surrounding his vote.”

http://confederateblog.com/2011/02/black-is-gray-ms-rep-john-f-harris/

See also pages 166-167 in Francis W. Springer's War for What.
I recall this from previous threads. I was wondering:

1) How many white legislators advocated for monuments to black Union soldiers from Mississippi? If I recall, MS was 4th among all states in providing black soldiers to the Union army.

2) How many black legislators were in favor of this? The above quote says that his advocacy was "remarkable." is that because no other black legislator took his position, and so, Harris was an outlier?

- Alan
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
18,862
Location
Laurinburg NC
#37
I recall this from previous threads. I was wondering:

1) How many white legislators advocated for monuments to black Union soldiers from Mississippi? If I recall, MS was 4th among all states in providing black soldiers to the Union army.

2) How many black legislators were in favor of this? The above quote says that his advocacy was "remarkable." is that because no other black legislator took his position, and so, Harris was an outlier?

- Alan
There were seven blacks in the Mississippi House of Representatives at that time, approval was unanimous after Harris's speech. There was no mention of a black Union soldier monument and I doubt that there was since they were the enemy during the war.
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
8,620
Location
District of Columbia
#38
There was no mention of a black Union soldier monument and I doubt that there was since they were the enemy during the war.
Just have to make this point, but black soldiers were not the enemy to African Americans. The majority of people living in MS when the war began were of African descent. For the majority of people living in MS during the war Union men were liberators, and black Union soldiers were freedom fighters.

It is a matter of politics that a minority of the people took control of the government, and the minority saw the Union as the enemy. But we need to qualify that this was a minority sentiment.

- Alan
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
18,862
Location
Laurinburg NC
#39
Just have to make this point, but black soldiers were not the enemy to African Americans. The majority of people living in MS when the war began were of African descent. For the majority of people living in MS during the war Union men were liberators, and black Union soldiers were freedom fighters.

It is a matter of politics that a minority of the people took control of the government, and the minority saw the Union as the enemy. But we need to qualify that this was a minority sentiment.

- Alan
I understand that, but the fact is neither black or white former unionists were in the majority in the Mississippi legislature in 1890
 



(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
Top