Report on the Condition of the South / Schurz, Carl, 1829-1906

Project Gutenberg's Report on the Condition of the South, by Carl Schurz

Copyright laws are changing all over the world. Be sure to check the
copyright laws for your country before downloading or redistributing
this or any other Project Gutenberg eBook.

This header should be the first thing seen when viewing this Project
Gutenberg file.  Please do not remove it.  Do not change or edit the
header without written permission.

Please read the "legal small print," and other information about the
eBook and Project Gutenberg at the bottom of this file.  Included is
important information about your specific rights and restrictions in
how the file may be used.  You can also find out about how to make a
donation to Project Gutenberg, and how to get involved.


**Welcome To The World of Free Plain Vanilla Electronic Texts**

**eBooks Readable By Both Humans and By Computers, Since 1971**

*****These eBooks Were Prepared By Thousands of Volunteers!*****


Title: Report on the Condition of the South

Author: Carl Schurz

Release Date: September, 2005 [EBook #8872]
[Yes, we are more than one year ahead of schedule]
[This file was first posted on August 18, 2003]

Edition: 10

Language: English

Character set encoding: ASCII

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CONDITION OF THE SOUTH ***




Produced by Distributed Proofreaders




REPORT ON THE CONDITION OF THE SOUTH

Carl Schurz


First published 1865




39TH CONGRESS,    SENATE.    Ex. Doc.
1st Session.                 No. 2.

MESSAGE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES,

COMMUNICATING,

_In compliance with a resolution of the Senate of the 12th instant,
information in relation to the States of the Union lately in rebellion,
accompanied by a report of Carl Schurz on the States of South Carolina,
Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana; also a report of Lieutenant
General Grant, on the same subject_.

DECEMBER 19, 1865.--Read and ordered to be printed, with the reports of
Carl Schurz and Lieutenant General Grant.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In reply to the resolution adopted by the Senate on the 12th instant, I
have the honor to state, that the rebellion waged by a portion of the
people against the properly constituted authorities of the government
of the United States has been suppressed; that the United States are
in possession of every State in which the insurrection existed; and
that, as far as could be done, the courts of the United States have
been restored, post offices re-established, and steps taken to put
into effective operation the revenue laws of the country.

As the result of the measures instituted by the Executive, with the
view of inducing a resumption of the functions of the States
comprehended in the inquiry of the Senate, the people in North
Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana,
Arkansas, and Tennessee, have reorganized their respective State
governments, and "are yielding obedience to the laws and government of
the United States," with more willingness and greater promptitude than,
under the circumstances, could reasonably have been anticipated. The
proposed amendment to the Constitution, providing for the abolition of
slavery forever within the limits of the country, has been ratified by
each one of those States, with the exception of Mississippi, from which
no official information has yet been received; and in nearly all of
them measures have been adopted or are now pending to confer upon
freedmen rights and privileges which are essential to their comfort,
protection, and security. In Florida and Texas the people are making
commendable progress in restoring their State governments, and no doubt
is entertained that they will at an early period be in a condition to
resume all of their practical relations with the federal government.

In "that portion of the Union lately in rebellion" the aspect of affairs
is more promising than, in view of all the circumstances, could well have
been expected. The people throughout the entire south evince a laudable
desire to renew their allegiance to the government, and to repair the
devastations of war by a prompt and cheerful return to peaceful pursuits.
An abiding faith is entertained that their actions will conform to their
professions, and that, in acknowledging the supremacy of the Constitution
and the laws of the United States, their loyalty will be unreservedly
given to the government, whose leniency they cannot fail to appreciate,
and whose fostering care will soon restore them to a condition of
prosperity. It is true, that in some of the States the demoralizing
effects of war are to be seen in occasional disorders, but these are local
in character, not frequent in occurrence, and are rapidly disappearing as
the authority of civil law is extended and sustained. Perplexing questions
were naturally to be expected from the great and sudden change in the
relations between the two races, but systems are gradually developing
themselves under which the freedman will receive the protection to which
he is justly entitled, and, by means of his labor, make himself a useful
and independent member of the community in which he has his home. From all
the information in my possession, and from that which I have recently
derived from the most reliable authority, I am induced to cherish the
belief that sectional animosity is surely and rapidly merging itself
into a spirit of nationality, and that representation, connected with
a properly adjusted system of taxation, will result in a harmonious
restoration of the relations of the States to the national Union.

The report of Carl Schurz is herewith transmitted, as requested by the
Senate. No reports from the honorable John Covode have been received by
the President. The attention of the Senate is invited to the accompanying
report of Lieutenant General Grant, who recently made a tour of inspection
through several of the States whose inhabitants participated in the
rebellion.

ANDREW JOHNSON

Washington, D.C., _December_ 18, 1865.



REPORT OF CARL SCHURZ ON THE STATES OF SOUTH CAROLINA, GEORGIA, ALABAMA,
MISSISSIPPI, AND LOUISIANA.

Sir: When you did me the honor of selecting me for a mission to the States
lately in rebellion, for the purpose of inquiring into the existing
condition of things, of laying before you whatever information of
importance I might gather, and of suggesting to you such measures as my
observations would lead me to believe advisable, I accepted the trust with
a profound sense of the responsibility connected with the performance of
the task. The views I entertained at the time, I had communicated to you
in frequent letters and conversations. I would not have accepted the
mission, had I not felt that whatever preconceived opinions I might carry
with me to the south, I should be ready to abandon or modify, as my
perception of facts and circumstances might command their abandonment or
modification. You informed me that your "policy of reconstruction" was
merely experimental, and that you would change it if the experiment did
not lead to satisfactory results. To aid you in forming your conclusions
upon this point I understood to be the object of my mission, and this
understanding was in perfect accordance with the written instructions I
received through the Secretary of War.

These instructions confined my mission to the States of South Carolina,
Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and the department of the Gulf. I informed
you, before leaving the north, that I could not well devote more than
three months to the duties imposed upon me, and that space of time proved
sufficient for me to visit all the States above enumerated, except Texas.
I landed at Hilton Head, South Carolina, on July 15, visited Beaufort,
Charleston, Orangeburg, and Columbia, returned to Charleston and Hilton
Head; thence I went to Savannah, traversed the State of Georgia, visiting
Augusta, Atlanta, Macon, Milledgeville, and Columbus; went through
Alabama, by way of Opelika, Montgomery, Selma, and Demopolis, and through
Mississippi, by way of Meridian, Jackson, and Vicksburg; then descended
the Mississippi to New Orleans, touching at Natchez; from New Orleans I
visited Mobile, Alabama, and the Teche country, in Louisiana, and then
spent again some days at Natchez and Vicksburg, on my way to the north.
These are the outlines of my journey.

Before laying the results of my observations before you, it is proper that
I should state the _modus operandi_ by which I obtained information and
formed my conclusions. Wherever I went I sought interviews with persons
who might be presumed to represent the opinions, or to have influence
upon the conduct, of their neighbors; I had thus frequent meetings with
individuals belonging to the different classes of society from the highest
to the lowest; in the cities as well as on the roads and steamboats I had
many opportunities to converse not only with inhabitants of the adjacent
country, but with persons coming from districts which I was not able to
visit; and finally I compared the impressions thus received with the
experience of the military and civil officers of the government stationed
in that country, as well as of other reliable Union men to whom a longer
residence on the spot and a more varied intercourse with the people had
given better facilities of local observation than my circumstances
permitted me to enjoy. When practicable I procured statements of their
views and experience in writing as well as copies of official or private
reports they had received from their subordinates or other persons. It was
not expected of me that I should take formal testimony, and, indeed, such
an operation would have required more time than I was able to devote to
it.

My facilities for obtaining information were not equally extensive in the
different States I visited. As they naturally depended somewhat upon the
time the military had had to occupy and explore the country, as well as
upon the progressive development of things generally, they improved from
day to day as I went on, and were best in the States I visited last. It is
owing to this circumstance that I cannot give as detailed an account of
the condition of things in South Carolina and Georgia as I am able to give
with regard to Louisiana and Mississippi.

Instead of describing the experiences of my journey in chronological
order, which would lead to endless repetitions and a confused mingling
of the different subjects under consideration, I propose to arrange my
observations under different heads according to the subject matter. It
is true, not all that can be said of the people of one State will apply
with equal force to the people of another; but it will be easy to make
the necessary distinctions when in the course of this report they become
of any importance. I beg to be understood when using, for the sake of
brevity, the term "the southern people," as meaning only the people of
the States I have visited.

CONDITION OF THINGS IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE CLOSE OF THE WAR.

In the development of the popular spirit in the south since the close of
the war two well-marked periods can be distinguished. The first commences
with the sudden collapse of the confederacy and the dispersion of its
armies, and the second with the first proclamation indicating the
"reconstruction policy" of the government. Of the first period I can state
the characteristic features only from the accounts I received, partly from
Unionists who were then living in the south, partly from persons that had
participated in the rebellion. When the news of Lee's and Johnston's
surrenders burst upon the southern country the general consternation was
extreme. People held their breath, indulging in the wildest apprehensions
as to what was now to come. Men who had occupied positions under the
confederate government, or were otherwise compromised in the rebellion,
run before the federal columns as they advanced and spread out to occupy
the country, from village to village, from plantation to plantation,
hardly knowing whether they wanted to escape or not. Others remained at
their homes yielding themselves up to their fate. Prominent Unionists told
me that persons who for four years had scorned to recognize them on the
street approached them with smiling faces and both hands extended. Men of
standing in the political world expressed serious doubts as to whether the
rebel States would ever again occupy their position as States in the
Union, or be governed as conquered provinces. The public mind was so
despondent that if readmission at some future time under whatever
conditions had been promised, it would then have been looked upon as a
favor. The most uncompromising rebels prepared for leaving the country.
The masses remained in a state of fearful expectancy.

This applies especially to those parts of the country which were within
immediate reach of our armies or had previously been touched by the war.
Where Union soldiers had never been seen and none were near, people were
at first hardly aware of the magnitude of the catastrophe, and strove to
continue in their old ways of living.

Such was, according to the accounts I received, the character of that
first period. The worst apprehensions were gradually relieved as day after
day went by without bringing the disasters and inflictions which had been
vaguely anticipated, until at last the appearance of the North Carolina
proclamation substituted new hopes for them. The development of this
second period I was called upon to observe on the spot, and it forms the
main subject of this report.

RETURNING LOYALTY.

It is a well-known fact that in the States south of Tennessee and North
Carolina the number of white Unionists who during the war actively aided
the government, or at least openly professed their attachment to the cause
of the Union, was very small. In none of those States were they strong
enough to exercise any decisive influence upon the action of the people,
not even in Louisiana, unless vigorously supported by the power of the
general government. But the white people at large being, under certain
conditions, charged with taking the preliminaries of "reconstruction" into
their hands, the success of the experiment depends upon the spirit and
attitude of those who either attached themselves to the secession cause
from the beginning, or, entertaining originally opposite views, at least
followed its fortunes from the time that their States had declared their
separation from the Union.

The first southern men of this class with whom I came into contact
immediately after my arrival in South Carolina expressed their
sentiments almost literally in the following language: "We acknowledge
ourselves beaten, and we are ready to submit to the results of the war.
The war has practically decided that no State shall secede and that the
slaves are emancipated. We cannot be expected at once to give up our
principles and convictions of right, but we accept facts as they are,
and desire to be reinstated as soon as possible in the enjoyment and
exercise of our political rights." This declaration was repeated to me
hundreds of times in every State I visited, with some variations of
language, according to the different ways of thinking or the frankness
or reserve of the different speakers. Some said nothing of adhering to
their old principles and convictions of right; others still argued
against the constitutionality of coercion and of the emancipation
proclamation; others expressed their determination to become good
citizens, in strong language, and urged with equal emphasis the
necessity of their home institutions being at once left to their own
control; others would go so far as to say they were glad that the war
was ended, and they had never had any confidence in the confederacy;
others protested that they had been opposed to secession until their
States went out, and then yielded to the current of events; some would
give me to understand that they had always been good Union men at heart,
and rejoiced that the war had terminated in favor of the national cause,
but in most cases such a sentiment was expressed only in a whisper;
others again would grumblingly insist upon the restoration of their
"rights," as if they had done no wrong, and indicated plainly that they
would submit only to what they could not resist and as long as they
could not resist it. Such were the definitions of "returning loyalty" I
received from the mouths of a large number of individuals intelligent
enough to appreciate the meaning of the expressions they used. I found a
great many whose manner of speaking showed that they did not understand
the circumstances under which they lived, and had no settled opinions at
all except on matters immediately touching their nearest interests.

Upon the ground of these declarations, and other evidence gathered in the
course of my observations, I may group the southern people into four
classes, each of which exercises an influence upon the development of
things in that section:

1. Those who, although having yielded submission to the national
government only when obliged to do so, have a clear perception of the
irreversible changes produced by the war, and honestly endeavor to
accommodate themselves to the new order of things. Many of them are not
free from traditional prejudice but open to conviction, and may be
expected to act in good faith whatever they do. This class is composed, in
its majority, of persons of mature age--planters, merchants, and
professional men; some of them are active in the reconstruction movement,
but boldness and energy are, with a few individual exceptions, not among
their distinguishing qualities.

2. Those whose principal object is to have the States without delay
restored to their position and influence in the Union and the people of
the States to the absolute control of their home concerns. They are ready,
in order to attain that object, to make any ostensible concession that
will not prevent them from arranging things to suit their taste as soon as
that object is attained. This class comprises a considerable number,
probably a large majority, of the professional politicians who are
extremely active in the reconstruction movement. They are loud in their
praise of the President's reconstruction policy, and clamorous for the
withdrawal of the federal troops and the abolition of the Freedmen's
Bureau.

3. The incorrigibles, who still indulge in the swagger which was so
customary before and during the war, and still hope for a time when the
southern confederacy will achieve its independence. This class consists
mostly of young men, and comprises the loiterers of the towns and the
idlers of the country. They persecute Union men and negroes whenever they
can do so with impunity, insist clamorously upon their "rights," and are
extremely impatient of the presence of the federal soldiers. A good many
of them have taken the oaths of allegiance and amnesty, and associated
themselves with the second class in their political operations. This
element is by no means unimportant; it is strong in numbers, deals in
brave talk, addresses itself directly and incessantly to the passions and
prejudices of the masses, and commands the admiration of the women.

4. The multitude of people who have no definite ideas about the
circumstances under which they live and about the course they have to
follow; whose intellects are weak, but whose prejudices and impulses are
strong, and who are apt to be carried along by those who know how to
appeal to the latter.

Much depends upon the relative strength and influence of these classes.
In the course of this report you will find statements of facts which may
furnish a basis for an estimate. But whatever their differences may be,
on one point they are agreed: further resistance to the power of the
national government is useless, and submission to its authority a matter
of necessity. It is true, the right of secession in theory is still
believed in by most of those who formerly believed in it; some are still
entertaining a vague hope of seeing it realized at some future time, but
all give it up as a practical impossibility for the present. All
movements in favor of separation from the Union have, therefore, been
practically abandoned, and resistance to our military forces, on that
score, has ceased. The demonstrations of hostility to the troops and
other agents of the government, which are still occurring in some
localities, and of which I shall speak hereafter, spring from another
class of motives. This kind of loyalty, however, which is produced by the
irresistible pressure of force, and consists merely in the non-commission
of acts of rebellion, is of a negative character, and might, as such,
hardly be considered independent of circumstances and contingencies.

OATH-TAKING.

A demonstration of "returning loyalty" of a more positive character is the
taking of the oaths of allegiance and amnesty prescribed by the general
government. At first the number of persons who availed themselves of the
opportunities offered for abjuring their adhesion to the cause of the
rebellion was not very large, but it increased considerably when the
obtaining of a pardon and the right of voting were made dependent upon
the previous performance of that act. Persons falling under any of the
exceptions of the amnesty proclamation made haste to avert the impending
danger; and politicians used every means of persuasion to induce people to
swell the number of voters by clearing themselves of all disabilities. The
great argument that this was necessary to the end of reconstructing their
State governments, and of regaining the control of their home affairs and
their influence in the Union, was copiously enlarged upon in the letters
and speeches of prominent individuals, which are before the country and
need no further comment. In some cases the taking of the oath was publicly
recommended in newspapers and addresses with sneering remarks, and I have
listened to many private conversations in which it was treated with
contempt and ridicule. While it was not generally looked upon in the
State I visited as a very serious matter, except as to the benefits and
privileges it confers, I have no doubt that a great many persons took it
fully conscious of the obligations it imposes, and honestly intending to
fulfil them.

The aggregate number of those who thus had qualified themselves for voting
previous to the election for the State conventions was not as large as
might have been expected. The vote obtained at these elections was
generally reported as very light--in some localities surprisingly so. It
would, perhaps, be worth while for the government to order up reports
about the number of oaths administered by the officers authorized to do
so, previous to the elections for the State conventions; such reports
would serve to indicate how large a proportion of the people participated
in the reconstruction movement at that time, and to what extent the masses
were represented in the conventions.

Of those who have not yet taken the oath of allegiance, most belong to the
class of indifferent people who "do not care one way or the other." There
are still some individuals who find the oath to be a confession of defeat
and a declaration of submission too humiliating and too repugnant to their
feelings. It is to be expected that the former will gradually overcome
their apathy, and the latter their sensitiveness, and that, at a not
remote day, all will have qualified themselves, in point of form, to
resume the right of citizenship. On the whole, it may be said that the
value of the oaths taken in the southern States is neither above nor below
the value of the political oaths taken in other countries. A historical
examination of the subject of political oaths will lead to the conclusion
that they can be very serviceable in certain emergencies and for certain
objects, but that they have never insured the stability of a government,
and never improved the morals of a people.

FEELING TOWARDS THE SOLDIERS AND THE PEOPLE OF THE NORTH.

A more substantial evidence of "returning loyalty" would be a favorable
change of feeling with regard to the government's friends and agents, and
the people of the loyal States generally. I mentioned above that all
organized attacks upon our military forces stationed in the south have
ceased; but there are still localities where it is unsafe for a man
wearing the federal uniform or known as an officer of the government to be
abroad outside of the immediate reach of our garrisons. The shooting of
single soldiers and government couriers was not unfrequently reported
while I was in the south, and even as late as the middle of September,
Major Miller, assistant adjutant general of the commissioner of the
Freedmen's Bureau in Alabama, while on an inspecting tour in the southern
counties of that State, found it difficult to prevent a collision between
the menacing populace and his escort. His wagon-master was brutally
murdered while remaining but a short distance behind the command. The
murders of agents of the Freedmen's Bureau have been noticed in the public
papers. These, and similar occurrences, however, may be looked upon as
isolated cases, and ought to be charged, perhaps, only to the account of
the lawless persons who committed them.

But no instance has come to my notice in which the people of a city or a
rural district cordially fraternized with the army. Here and there the
soldiers were welcomed as protectors against apprehended dangers; but
general exhibitions of cordiality on the part of the population I have not
heard of. There are, indeed, honorable individual exceptions to this rule.
Many persons, mostly belonging to the first of the four classes above
enumerated, are honestly striving to soften down the bitter feelings and
traditional antipathies of their neighbors; others, who are acting more
upon motives of policy than inclination, maintain pleasant relations with
the officers of the government. But, upon the whole, the soldier of the
Union is still looked upon as a stranger, an intruder--as the "Yankee,"
"the enemy." It would be superfluous to enumerate instances of insult
offered to our soldiers, and even to officers high in command; the
existence and intensity of this aversion is too well known to those who
have served or are now serving in the south to require proof. In this
matter the exceptions were, when I was there, not numerous enough to
affect the rule. In the documents accompanying this report you will find
allusions confirming this statement. I would invite special attention to
the letter of General Kirby Smith, (accompanying document No. 9.)

This feeling of aversion and resentment with regard to our soldiers may,
perhaps, be called natural. The animosities inflamed by a four years' war,
and its distressing incidents, cannot be easily overcome. But they extend
beyond the limits of the army, to the people of the north. I have read in
southern papers bitter complaints about the unfriendly spirit exhibited by
the northern people--complaints not unfrequently flavored with an
admixture of vigorous vituperation. But, as far as my experience goes, the
"unfriendly spirit" exhibited in the north is all mildness and affection
compared with the popular temper which in the south vents itself in a
variety of ways and on all possible occasions. No observing northern man
can come into contact with the different classes composing southern
society without noticing it. He may be received in social circles with
great politeness, even with apparent cordiality; but soon he will become
aware that, although he may be esteemed as a man, he is detested as a
"Yankee," and, as the conversation becomes a little more confidential and
throws off ordinary restraint, he is not unfrequently told so; the word
"Yankee" still signifies to them those traits of character which the
southern press has been so long in the habit of attributing to the
northern people; and whenever they look around them upon the traces of the
war, they see in them, not the consequences of their own folly, but the
evidences of "Yankee wickedness." In making these general statements, I
beg to be understood as always excluding the individual exceptions above
mentioned.

It is by no means surprising that prejudices and resentments, which for
years were so assiduously cultivated and so violently inflamed, should not
have been turned into affection by a defeat; nor are they likely to
disappear as long as the southern people continue to brood over their
losses and misfortunes. They will gradually subside when those who
entertain them cut resolutely loose from the past and embark in a career
of new activity on a common field with those whom they have so long
considered their enemies. Of this I shall say more in another part of this
report. But while we are certainly inclined to put upon such things the
most charitable construction, it remains nevertheless true, that as long
as these feelings exist in their present strength, they will hinder the
growth of that reliable kind of loyalty which springs from the heart and
clings to the country in good and evil fortune.

SITUATION OF UNIONISTS.

It would have been a promising indication of returning loyalty if the old,
consistent, uncompromising Unionists of the south, and those northern men
who during the war settled down there to contribute to the prosperity of
the country with their capital and enterprise, had received that measure
of consideration to which their identification with the new order of
things entitled them. It would seem natural that the victory of the
national cause should have given those who during the struggle had
remained the firm friends of the Union, a higher standing in society and
an enlarged political influence. This appears to have been the case during
that "first period" of anxious uncertainty when known Unionists were
looked up to as men whose protection and favor might be of high value. At
least it appears to have been so in some individual instances. But the
close of that "first period" changed the aspect of things.

It struck me soon after my arrival in the south that the known
Unionists--I mean those who during the war had been to a certain extent
identified with the national cause--were not in communion with the leading
social and political circles; and the further my observations extended the
clearer it became to me that their existence in the south was of a rather
precarious nature. Already in Charleston my attention was called to the
current talk among the people, that, when they had the control of things
once more in their own hands and were no longer restrained by the presence
of "Yankee" soldiers, men of Dr. Mackey's stamp would not be permitted to
live there. At first I did not attach much importance to such reports; but
as I proceeded through the country, I heard the same thing so frequently
repeated, at so many different places, and by so many different persons,
that I could no longer look upon the apprehensions expressed to me by
Unionists as entirely groundless. I found the same opinion entertained by
most of our military commanders. Even Governor Sharkey, in the course of a
conversation I had with him in the presence of Major General Osterhaus,
admitted that, if our troops were then withdrawn, the lives of northern
men in Mississippi would not be safe. To show that such anticipations were
not extravagant, I would refer to the letter addressed to me by General
Osterhaus. (Accompanying document No. 10.) He states that he was compelled
to withdraw the garrison from Attala county, Mississippi, the regiment to
which that garrison belonged being mustered out, and that when the troops
had been taken away, four murders occurred, two of white Union men, and
two of negroes. (He informed me subsequently that the perpetrators were in
custody.) He goes on to say: "There is no doubt whatever that the state of
affairs would be intolerable for all Union men, all recent immigrants from
the north, and all negroes, the moment the protection of the United States
troops were withdrawn." General Osterhaus informed me of another murder of
a Union man by a gang of lawless persons, in Jackson, about the end of
June. General Slocum, in his order prohibiting the organization of the
State militia in Mississippi, speaks of the "outrages committed against
northern men, government couriers, and negroes." (Accompanying document
No. 12.) He communicated to me an official report from Lieutenant Colonel
Yorke, commanding at Port Gibson, to General Davidson, pointing in the
same direction. General Canby stated to me that he was obliged to disband
and prohibit certain patrol organizations in Louisiana because they
indulged in the gratification of private vengeance. Lieutenant Hickney,
assistant commissioner of the Freedmen's Bureau, at Shreveport, Louisiana,
in a report addressed to Assistant Commissioner Conway, says: "The life of
a northern man who is true to his country and the spirit and genius of its
institutions, and frankly enunciates his principles, is not secure where
there is not a military force to protect him." (Accompanying document No.
32.) Mr. William King, a citizen of Georgia, well known in that State,
stated to me in conversation: "There are a great many bad characters in
the country, who would make it for some time unsafe for known Union people
and northerners who may settle down here to live in this country without
the protection of the military." The affair of Scottsborough, in the
military district of northern Alabama, where a sheriff arrested and
attempted to bring to trial for murder Union soldiers who had served
against the guerillas in that part of the country, an attempt which was
frustrated only by the prompt interference of the district commander, has
become generally known through the newspapers. (Accompanying document No.
19.) It is not improbable that many cases similar to those above mentioned
have occurred in other parts of the south without coming to the notice of
the authorities.

It is true these are mere isolated cases, for which it would be wrong to
hold anybody responsible who was not connected with them; but it is also
true that the apprehensions so widely spread among the Unionists and
northern men were based upon the spirit exhibited by the people among whom
they lived. I found a good many thinking of removing themselves and their
families to the northern States, and if our troops should be soon
withdrawn the exodus will probably become quite extensive unless things
meanwhile change for the better.

ASPECT OF THE POLITICAL FIELD.

The status of this class of Unionists in the political field corresponds
with what I have said above. In this respect I have observed practical
results more closely in Mississippi than in any other State. I had already
left South Carolina and Georgia when the elections for the State
conventions took place. Of Alabama, I saw only Mobile after the election.
In Louisiana, a convention, a legislature, and a State government had
already been elected, during and under the influence of the war, and I
left before the nominating party conventions were held; but I was in
Mississippi immediately after the adjournment of the State convention, and
while the canvass preparatory to the election of the legislature and of
the State and county officers was going on. Events have since sufficiently
developed themselves in the other States to permit us to judge how far
Mississippi can be regarded as a representative of the rest. Besides, I
found the general spirit animating the people to be essentially the same
in all the States above mentioned.

The election for the State convention in Mississippi was, according to the
accounts I have received, not preceded by a very vigorous and searching
canvass of the views and principles of the candidates. As I stated before,
the vote was very far from being full, and in most cases the members were
elected not upon strictly defined party issues, but upon their individual
merits as to character, intelligence, and standing in society. Only in a
few places the contest between rival candidates was somewhat animated. It
was probably the same in Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina.

The Mississippi convention was, in its majority, composed of men belonging
to the first two of the four classes above mentioned. There were several
Union men in it of the inoffensive, compromising kind--men who had been
opposed to secession in the beginning, and had abstained from taking a
prominent part in the rebellion unless obliged to do so, but who had, at
least, readily acquiesced in what was going on. But there was, as far as I
have been able to ascertain, only one man there who, like the Unionists of
East Tennessee, had offered active resistance to the rebel authorities.
This was Mr. Crawford, of Jones county; he was elected by the poor people
of that region, his old followers, as their acknowledged leader, and his
may justly be looked upon as an exceptional case. How he looked upon his
situation appears from a speech he delivered in that convention, and
especially from the amended version of it placed into my hands by a
trustworthy gentleman of my acquaintance who had listened to its delivery.
(Accompanying document No. 13.) But several instances have come to my
knowledge, in which Union men of a sterner cast than those described as
acquiescing compromisers were defeated in the election, and, aside from
Mr. Crawford's case, none in which they succeeded.

The impulses by which voters were actuated in making their choice appeared
more clearly in the canvass for State officers, Congressmen, and members
of the legislature, when the antecedents and political views of candidates
were more closely scrutinized and a warmer contest took place. The
population of those places in the south which have been longest in the
possession of our armies is generally the most accommodating as to the
new order of things; at least the better elements are there in greater
relative strength. A Union meeting at Vicksburg may, therefore, be
produced as a not unfavorable exponent of Mississippi Unionism. Among the
documents attached to this report you will find three speeches delivered
before such a meeting--one by Mr. Richard Cooper, candidate for the
attorney generalship of the State; one by Hon. Sylvanus Evans, candidate
for Congress; and one by Colonel Partridge, candidate for a seat in the
legislature. (Accompanying document No. 14.) The speakers represented
themselves as Union men, and I have learned nothing about them that would
cast suspicion upon the sincerity of their declarations as far as they go;
but all there qualified their Unionism by the same important statement.
Mr. Cooper: "In 1850 I opposed an attempt to break up the United States
government, and in 1860 I did the same. I travelled in Alabama and
Mississippi to oppose the measure. (Applause.) But after the State did
secede, I did all in my power to sustain it." (Heavy applause.) Mr. Evans:
"In 1861 I was a delegate from Lauderdale county to the State convention,
then and in 1860 being opposed to the act of secession, and fought against
it with all my powers. But when the State had seceded, I went with it as a
matter of duty, and I sustained it until the day of the surrender with all
my body and heart and mind." (Great applause.) Colonel Partridge: "He was
a Union man before the war and a soldier in the war. He had performed his
duty as a private and an officer on the battle-field and on the staff."

These speeches, fair specimens of a majority of those delivered by the
better class of politicians before the better class of audiences, furnish
an indication of the kind of Unionism which, by candidates, is considered
palatable to the people of that region. And candidates are generally good
judges as to what style of argument is best calculated to captivate the
popular mind. In some isolated localities there may be some chance of
success for a candidate who, proclaiming himself a Union man, is not able
to add, "but after the State had seceded I did all in my power to sustain
it," although such localities are certainly scarce and difficult to find.

It is not so difficult to find places in which a different style of
argument is considered most serviceable. Your attention is respectfully
invited to a card addressed to the voters of the sixth judicial district
of Mississippi by Mr. John T. Hogan, candidate for the office of district
attorney. (Accompanying document No. 15.) When, at the commencement of the
war, Kentucky resolved to remain in the Union, Mr. Hogan, so he informs
the constituency, was a citizen of Kentucky; because Kentucky refused to
leave the Union Mr. Hogan left Kentucky. He went to Mississippi, joined
the rebel army, and was wounded in battle; and because he left his native
State to fight against the Union, "therefore," Mr. Hogan tells his
Mississippian constituency, "he cannot feel that he is an alien in their
midst, and, with something of confidence in the result, appeals to them
for their suffrages." Such is Mr. Hogan's estimate of the loyalty of the
sixth judicial district of Mississippi.

A candidate relying for success upon nothing but his identification with
the rebellion might be considered as an extreme case. But, in fact, Mr.
Hogan only speaks out bluntly what other candidates wrap up in lengthy
qualifications. It is needless to accumulate specimens. I am sure no
Mississippian will deny that if a candidate there based his claims upon
the ground of his having left Mississippi when the State seceded, in order
to fight for the Union, his pretensions would be treated as a piece of
impudence. I feel warranted in saying that Unionism absolutely untinctured
by any connexion with, or at least acquiescence in the rebellion, would
have but little chance of political preferment anywhere, unless favored by
very extraordinary circumstances; while men who, during the war, followed
the example of the Union leaders of East Tennessee, would in most places
have to depend upon the protection of our military forces for safety,
while nowhere within the range of my observation would they, under present
circumstances, be considered eligible to any position of trust, honor, or
influence, unless it be in the county of Jones, as long as the bayonets of
the United States are still there.

The tendency of which in the preceding remarks I have endeavored to
indicate the character and direction, appeared to prevail in all the
States that came under my observation with equal force, some isolated
localities excepted. None of the provisional governments adopted the
policy followed by the late "military government" of Tennessee: to select
in every locality the most reliable and most capable Union men for the
purpose of placing into their hands the positions of official influence.
Those who had held the local offices before and during the rebellion were
generally reappointed, and hardly any discrimination made. If such
wholesale re-appointments were the only thing that could be done in a
hurry, it may be asked whether the hurry was necessary. Even in Louisiana,
where a State government was organized during the war and under the
influence of the sentiments which radiated from the camps and headquarters
of the Union army, and where there is a Union element far stronger than in
any other of the States I visited, even there, men who have aided the
rebellion by word and act are crowding into places of trust and power.
Governor Wells, when he was elected lieutenant governor of Louisiana, was
looked upon and voted for as a thorough Unionist; but hardly had he the
patronage of the State government in his hands, when he was carried along
by the seemingly irresistible current. Even members of the "Conservative
Union party," and friends of Governor Wells, expressed their
dissatisfaction with the remarkable "liberality" with which he placed men
into official positions who had hardly returned from the rebel army, or
some other place where they had taken refuge to avoid living under the
flag of the United States. The apprehension was natural that such elements
would soon obtain a power and influence which the governor would not be
able to control even if he wished. Taking these things into consideration,
the re-nomination of Governor Wells for the governorship can certainly not
be called a victory of that Union sentiment to which he owed his first
election. While I was in New Orleans an occurrence took place which may be
quoted as an illustration of the sweep of what I might call the
_reactionary movement_. When General Shepley was military governor of
Louisiana, under General Butler's regime, a school board was appointed for
the purpose of reorganizing the public schools of New Orleans. A corps of
loyal teachers was appointed, and the education of the children was
conducted with a view to make them loyal citizens. The national airs were
frequently sung in the schools, and other exercises introduced, calculated
to impregnate the youthful minds of the pupils with affection for their
country. It appears that this feature of the public schools was
distasteful to that class of people with whose feelings they did not
accord.

Mr. H. Kennedy, acting mayor of New Orleans, early in September last,
disbanded the school board which so far had conducted the educational
affairs of the city, and appointed a new one. The composition of this new
school board was such as to induce General Canby to suspend its functions
until he could inquire into the loyalty of its members. The report of the
officer intrusted with the investigation is among the documents annexed
hereto. (Accompanying document No. 16.) It shows that a large majority of
the members had sympathized with the rebellion, and aided the confederate
government in a variety of ways. But as no evidence was elicited proving
the members legally incapable of holding office, General Canby considered
himself obliged to remove the prohibition, and the new school board
entered upon its functions.

Without offering any comment of my own, I annex an editorial taken from
the "New Orleans Times," of September 12, evidently written in defence of
the measure. (Accompanying document No. 17.) Its real substance, stripped
of all circumlocutions, can be expressed in a few words: "The schools of
New Orleans have been institutions so intensely and demonstratively loyal
as to become unpopular with those of our fellow-citizens to whom such
demonstrations are distasteful, and they must be brought back under
'popular control' so as to make them cease to be obnoxious in that
particular." It was generally understood, when the new school board was
appointed, that a Mr. Rodgers was to be made superintendent of public
schools. In Major Lowell's report to General Canby (Accompanying document
No. 16) this Mr. Rodgers figures as follows: "Mr. Rodgers, the candidate
for the position of superintendent of public schools, held the same office
at the commencement of the war. His conduct at that time was imbued with
extreme bitterness and hate towards the United States, and, in his
capacity as superintendent, he introduced the 'Bonnie Blue Flag' and other
rebel songs into the exercises of the schools under his charge. In
histories and other books where the initials 'U.S.' occurred he had the
same erased, and 'C.S.' substituted. He used all means in his power to
imbue the minds of the youth intrusted to his care with hate and malignity
towards the Union. He has just returned from the late confederacy, where
he has resided during the war. At the time he left the city to join the
army he left his property in the care of one Finley, who claims to be a
British subject, but held the position of sergeant in a confederate
regiment of militia." No sooner was the above-mentioned prohibition by
General Canby removed when Mr. Rodgers was actually appointed, and he now
presides over the educational interests of New Orleans. There is something
like system in such proceedings.

Similar occurrences, such as the filling with rebel officers of
professorships in the Military Institute of Louisiana, where formerly
General Sherman held a position, have already become known to the country,
and it is unnecessary to go into further details. Many cases of this
description are not of much importance in themselves, but serve as
significant indications of the tendency of things in the south.

It is easily understood that, under such circumstances, Unionists of the
consistent, uncompromising kind do not play an enviable part. It is a sad
fact that the victory of the national arms has, to a great extent,
resulted in something like a political ostracism of the most loyal men in
that part of the country. More than once have I heard some of them
complain of having been taunted by late rebels with their ill fortune; and
it is, indeed, melancholy for them to reflect that, if they had yielded to
the current of public sentiment in the rebel States instead of resisting
it, their present situation and prospects would be much more pleasing. Nor
is such a reflection calculated to encourage them, or others, to follow a
similar course if similar emergencies should again arise.

WHAT HAS BEEN ACCOMPLISHED.

While the generosity and toleration shown by the government to the people
lately in rebellion has not met with a corresponding generosity shown by
those people to the government's friends, it has brought forth some
results which, if properly developed, will become of value. It has
facilitated the re-establishment of the forms of civil government, and led
many of those who had been active in the rebellion to take part in the act
of bringing back the States to their constitutional relations; and if
nothing else were necessary than the mere putting in operation of the mere
machinery of government in point of form, and not also the acceptance of
the results of the war and their development in point of spirit, these
results, although as yet incomplete, might be called a satisfactory
advance in the right direction. There is, at present, no danger of another
insurrection against the authority of the United States on a large scale,
and the people are willing to reconstruct their State governments, and to
send their senators and representatives to Congress.

But as to the moral value of these results, we must not indulge in any
delusions. There are two principal points to which I beg to call your
attention. In the first place, the rapid return to power and influence of
so many of those who but recently were engaged in a bitter war against the
Union, has had one effect which was certainly not originally contemplated
by the government. Treason does, under existing circumstances, not appear
odious in the south. The people are not impressed with any sense of its
criminality. And, secondly, there is, as yet, among the southern people an
_utter absence of national feeling_. I made it a business, while in the
south, to watch the symptoms of "returning loyalty" as they appeared not
only in private conversation, but in the public press and in the speeches
delivered and the resolutions passed at Union meetings. Hardly ever was
there an expression of hearty attachment to the great republic, or an
appeal to the impulses of patriotism; but whenever submission to the
national authority was declared and advocated, it was almost uniformly
placed upon two principal grounds: That, under present circumstances, the
southern people could "do no better;" and then that submission was the
only means by which they could rid themselves of the federal soldiers and
obtain once more control of their own affairs. Some of the speakers may
have been inspired by higher motives, but upon these two arguments they
had principally to rely whenever they wanted to make an impression upon
the popular mind. If any exception is to be made to this rule it is
Louisiana, in whose metropolis a different spirit was cultivated for some
time; but even there, the return in mass of those who followed the
fortunes of the confederate flag during the war does not appear to have a
favorable influence upon the growth of that sentiment. (See Gen. Canby's
letter, accompanying document No. 8.) While admitting that, at present, we
have perhaps no right to expect anything better than this
submission--loyalty which springs from necessity and calculation--I do not
consider it safe for the government to base expectations upon it, which
the manner in which it manifests itself does not justify.

The reorganization of civil government is relieving the military, to a
great extent, of its police duties and judicial functions; but at the time
I left the south it was still very far from showing a satisfactory
efficiency in the maintenance of order and security.--In many districts
robbing and plundering was going on with perfect impunity; the roads were
infested by bands of highwaymen; numerous assaults occurred, and several
stage lines were considered unsafe. The statements of Major General Woods,
Brigadier General Kilby Smith and Colonel Gilchrist, (accompanying
documents Nos. 11, 9 and 18,) give a terrible picture of the state of
things in the localities they refer to. It is stated that civil officers
are either unwilling or unable to enforce the laws; that one man does not
dare to testify against another for fear of being murdered, and that the
better elements of society are kept down by lawless characters under a
system of terrorism. From my own observation I know that these things are
not confined to the districts mentioned in the documents above referred
to. Both the governors of Alabama and Mississippi complained of it in
official proclamations. Cotton, horse and cattle stealing was going on in
all the States I visited on an extensive scale. Such a state of
demoralization would call for extraordinary measures in any country, and
it is difficult to conceive how, in the face of the inefficiency of the
civil authorities, the removal of the troops can be thought of.

In speaking above of the improbability of an insurrectionary movement on a
large scale, I did not mean to say that I considered resistance in detail
to the execution of the laws of Congress and the measures of the
government impossible. Of all subjects connected with the negro question I
shall speak in another part of this report. But there is another matter
claiming the attention and foresight of the government. It is well known
that the levying of taxes for the payment of the interest on our national
debt is, and will continue to be, very unpopular in the south. It is true,
no striking demonstrations have as yet been made of any decided
unwillingness on the part of the people to contribute to the discharge of
our national obligations. But most of the conversations I had with
southerners upon this subject led me to apprehend that they, politicians
and people, are rather inclined to ask money of the government as
compensation for their emancipated slaves, for the rebuilding of the
levees on the Mississippi, and various kinds of damage done by our armies
for military purposes, than, as the current expression is, to "help paying
the expenses of the whipping they have received." In fact, there are
abundant indications in newspaper articles, public speeches, and
electioneering documents of candidates, which render it eminently probable
that on the claim of compensation for their emancipated slaves the
southern States, as soon as readmitted to representation in Congress, will
be almost a unit. In the Mississippi convention the idea was broached by
Mr. Potter, in an elaborate speech, to have the late slave States relieved
from taxation "for years to come," in consideration of "debt due them" for
the emancipated slaves; and this plea I have frequently heard advocated in
private conversations. I need not go into details as to the efforts made
in some of the southern States in favor of the assumption by those States
of their debts contracted during the rebellion. It may be assumed with
certainty that those who want to have the southern people, poor as they
are, taxed for the payment of rebel debts, do not mean to have them taxed
for the purpose of meeting our national obligations. But whatever devices
may be resorted to, present indications justify the apprehension that the
enforcement of our revenue laws will meet with a refractory spirit, and
may require sterner measures than the mere sending of revenue officers
into that part of the country.

I have annexed to this report numerous letters addressed to me by
gentlemen whose views on the loyalty of the southern people and kindred
topics, formed as they are upon an extended observation and long
experience, are entitled to consideration. (Letter of General Gillmore,
accompanying document No. 1; letter of Dr. Mackey, No. 2; letter of Mr.
Sawyer, No. 3; letter of General Hatch, No. 4; letter of Mr. Pilsbury, No.
5; statement of General Steedman, No. 6; letter of General Croxton, No. 7;
letter of General Canby, No. 8; letter of General Kirby Smith, No. 9, &c.)
In these papers a variety of opinions is expressed, some to a certain
extent sanguine, others based upon a less favorable experience. I offer
them to you, without exception, as they came to me. Many of the gentlemen
who wrote them have never been in any way connected with party politics,
and their utterances may be looked upon as coming from unbiassed and
impartial observers.

THE NEGRO QUESTION--FIRST ASPECTS.

The principal cause of that want of national spirit which has existed in
the south so long, and at last gave birth to the rebellion, was, that the
southern people cherished, cultivated, idolized their peculiar interests
and institutions in preference to those which they had in common with the
rest of the American people. Hence the importance of the negro question as
an integral part of the question of union in general, and the question of
reconstruction in particular.

When the war came to a close, the labor system of the south was already
much disturbed. During the progress of military operations large numbers
of slaves had left their masters and followed the columns of our armies;
others had taken refuge in our camps; many thousands had enlisted in the
service of the national government. Extensive settlements of negroes had
been formed along the seaboard and the banks of the Mississippi, under the
supervision of army officers and treasury agents, and the government was
feeding the colored refugees, who could not be advantageously employed, in
the so-called contraband camps. Many slaves had also been removed by their
masters, as our armies penetrated the country, either to Texas or to the
interior of Georgia and Alabama. Thus a considerable portion of the
laboring force had been withdrawn from its former employments. But a
majority of the slaves remained on the plantations to which they belonged,
especially in those parts of the country which were not touched by the
war, and where, consequently, the emancipation proclamation was not
enforced by the military power. Although not ignorant of the stake they
had in the result of the contest, the patient bondmen waited quietly for
the development of things. But as soon as the struggle was finally
decided, and our forces were scattered about in detachments to occupy the
country, the so far unmoved masses began to stir. The report went among
them that their liberation was no longer a mere contingency, but a fixed
fact. Large numbers of colored people left the plantations; many flocked
to our military posts and camps to obtain the certainty of their freedom,
and others walked away merely for the purpose of leaving the places on
which they had been held in slavery, and because they could now go with
impunity. Still others, and their number was by no means inconsiderable,
remained with their former masters and continued their work on the field,
but under new and as yet unsettled conditions, and under the agitating
influence of a feeling of restlessness. In some localities, however, where
our troops had not yet penetrated and where no military post was within
reach, planters endeavored and partially succeeded in maintaining between
themselves and the negroes the relation of master and slave, partly by
concealing from them the great changes that had taken place, and partly by
terrorizing them into submission to their behests. But aside from these
exceptions, the country found itself thrown into that confusion which is
naturally inseparable from a change so great and so sudden. The white
people were afraid of the negroes, and the negroes did not trust the white
people; the military power of the national government stood there, and was
looked up to, as the protector of both.

Upon this power devolved the task to bring order into that chaos. But the
order to be introduced was a new order, of which neither the late masters
nor the late slaves had an adequate conception. All the elements of
society being afloat, the difficulties were immense. The military officers
and agents of the Freedmen's Bureau, to whom the negroes applied for
advice and guidance, either procured them such employment as could be
found, or persuaded them to return to their plantations and to continue in
the cultivation of the crops, promising them that their liberty, rights,
and interests should be protected. Upon the planters they urged the
necessity of making fair and equitable contracts with the freedmen,
admonishing them to treat their laborers as free men ought to be treated.
These efforts met with such success as the difficulties surrounding the
problem permitted to expect. Large numbers of negroes went back to the
fields, according to the advice they had received, but considerable
accumulations still remained in and around the towns and along the
seaboard, where there was no adequate amount of profitable employment for
them. The making and approving of contracts progressed as rapidly as the
small number of officers engaged in that line of duty made it possible,
but not rapidly in proportion to the vast amount of work to be
accomplished. The business experience of many of the officers was but
limited; here and there experiments were tried which had to be given up.
In numerous cases contracts were made and then broken, either by the
employers or the laborers, and the officers in charge were overwhelmed
with complaints from both sides. While many planters wanted to have the
laborers who had left them back on their plantations, others drove those
that had remained away, and thus increased the number of the unemployed.
Moreover, the great change had burst upon the country in the midst of the
agricultural labor season when the crops that were in the ground required
steady work to make them produce a satisfactory yield, and the
interruption of labor, which could not but be very extensive, caused
considerable damage. In one word, the efforts made could not prevent or
remedy, in so short a time, the serious disorders which are always
connected with a period of precipitous transition, and which, although
natural, are exceedingly embarrassing to those who have to deal with them.

The solution of the social problem in the south, if left to the free
action of the southern people, will depend upon two things: 1, upon the
ideas entertained by the whites, the "ruling class," of the problem, and
the manner in which they act upon their ideas; and 2, upon the capacity
and conduct of the colored people.

OPTIONS OF THE WHITES.

That the result of the free labor experiment made under circumstances so
extremely unfavorable should at once be a perfect success, no reasonable
person would expect. Nevertheless, a large majority of the southern men
with whom I came into contact announced their opinions with so positive an
assurance as to produce the impression that their minds were fully made
up. In at least nineteen cases of twenty the reply I received to my
inquiry about their views on the new system was uniformly this: "You
cannot make the negro work, without physical compulsion." I heard this
hundreds of times, heard it wherever I went, heard it in nearly the same
words from so many different persons, that at last I came to the
conclusion that this is the prevailing sentiment among the southern
people. There are exceptions to this rule, but, as far as my information
extends, far from enough to affect the rule. In the accompanying documents
you will find an abundance of proof in support of this statement. There is
hardly a paper relative to the negro question annexed to this report which
does not, in some direct or indirect way, corroborate it.

Unfortunately the disorders necessarily growing out of the transition
state continually furnished food for argument. I found but few people who
were willing to make due allowance for the adverse influence of
exceptional circumstances. By a large majority of those I came in contact
with, and they mostly belonged to the more intelligent class, every
irregularity that occurred was directly charged against the system of free
labor. If negroes walked away from the plantations, it was conclusive
proof of the incorrigible instability of the negro, and the
impracticability of free negro labor. If some individual negroes violated
the terms of their contract, it proved unanswerably that no negro had, or
ever would have, a just conception of the binding force of a contract, and
that this system of free negro labor was bound to be a failure. If some
negroes shirked, or did not perform their task with sufficient alacrity,
it was produced as irrefutable evidence to show that physical compulsion
was actually indispensable to make the negro work. If negroes, idlers or
refugees crawling about the towns, applied to the authorities for
subsistence, it was quoted as incontestably establishing the point that
the negro was too improvident to take care of himself, and must
necessarily be consigned to the care of a master. I heard a Georgia
planter argue most seriously that one of his negroes had shown himself
certainly unfit for freedom because he impudently refused to submit to a
whipping. I frequently went into an argument with those putting forth such
general assertions, quoting instances in which negro laborers were working
faithfully, and to the entire satisfaction of their employers, as the
employers themselves had informed me. In a majority of cases the reply was
that we northern people did not understand the negro, but that they (the
southerners) did; that as to the particular instances I quoted I was
probably mistaken; that I had not closely investigated the cases, or had
been deceived by my informants; that they _knew_ the negro would not work
without compulsion, and that nobody could make them believe he would.
Arguments like these naturally finished such discussions. It frequently
struck me that persons who conversed about every other subject calmly and
sensibly would lose their temper as soon as the negro question was
touched.

EFFECTS OF SUCH OPINIONS, AND GENERAL TREATMENT OF THE NEGRO.

A belief, conviction, or prejudice, or whatever you may call it, so widely
spread and apparently so deeply rooted as this, that the negro will not
work without physical compulsion, is certainly calculated to have a very
serious influence upon the conduct of the people entertaining it. It
naturally produced a desire to preserve slavery in its original form as
much and as long as possible--and you may, perhaps, remember the admission
made by one of the provisional governors, over two months after the close
of the war, that the people of his State still indulged in a lingering
hope slavery might yet be preserved--or to introduce into the new system
that element of physical compulsion which would make the negro work.
Efforts were, indeed, made to hold the negro in his old state of
subjection, especially in such localities where our military forces had
not yet penetrated, or where the country was not garrisoned in detail.
Here and there planters succeeded for a limited period to keep their
former slaves in ignorance, or at least doubt, about their new rights; but
the main agency employed for that purpose was force and intimidation. In
many instances negroes who walked away from the plantations, or were found
upon the roads, were shot or otherwise severely punished, which was
calculated to produce the impression among those remaining with their
masters that an attempt to escape from slavery would result in certain
destruction. A large proportion of the many acts of violence committed is
undoubtedly attributable to this motive. The documents attached to this
report abound in testimony to this effect. For the sake of illustration I
will give some instances:

Brigadier General Fessenden reported to Major General Gillmore from
Winnsboro, South Carolina, July 19, as follows: "The spirit of the people,
especially in those districts not subject to the salutary influence of
General Sherman's army, is that of concealed and, in some instances, of
open hostility, though there are some who strive with honorable good faith
to promote a thorough reconciliation between the government and their
people. A spirit of bitterness and persecution manifests itself towards
the negroes. They are shot and abused outside the immediate protection of
our forces _by men who announce their determination to take the law into
their own hands, in defiance of our authority_. To protect the negro and
punish these still rebellious individuals it will be necessary to have
this country pretty thickly settled with soldiers." I received similar
verbal reports from other parts of South Carolina. To show the hopes still
indulged in by some, I may mention that one of the sub-district
commanders, as he himself informed me, knew planters within the limits of
his command who had made contracts with their former slaves _avowedly_ for
the object of keeping them together on their plantations, so that they
might have them near at hand, and thus more easily reduce them to their
former condition, when, after the restoration of the civil power, the
"unconstitutional emancipation proclamation" would be set aside.

Cases in which negroes were kept on the plantations, either by ruse or
violence, were frequent enough in South Carolina and Georgia to call forth
from General Saxton a circular threatening planters who persisted in this
practice with loss of their property, and from Major General Steedman,
commander of the department of Georgia, an order bearing upon the same
subject. At Atlanta, Georgia, I had an opportunity to examine some cases
of the nature above described myself. While I was there, 9th and 10th of
August, several negroes came into town with bullet and buckshot wounds in
their bodies. From their statements, which, however, were only
corroborating information previously received, it appeared that the
reckless and restless characters of that region had combined to keep the
negroes where they belonged. Several freedmen were shot in the attempt to
escape, others succeeded in eluding the vigilance of their persecutors;
large numbers, terrified by what they saw and heard, quietly remained
under the restraint imposed upon them, waiting for better opportunities.
The commander of the sub-district and post informed me that bands of
guerillas were prowling about within a few miles of the city, making it
dangerous for soldiers and freedmen to show themselves outside of the
immediate reach of the garrison, and that but a few days previous to my
arrival a small squad of men he had sent out to serve an order upon a
planter, concerning the treatment of freedmen, had been driven back by an
armed band of over twenty men, headed by an individual in the uniform of a
rebel officer.

As our troops in Georgia were at that time mostly concentrated at a number
of central points, and not scattered over the State in small detachments,
but little information was obtained of what was going on in the interior
of the country. A similar system was followed in Alabama, but enough has
become known to indicate the condition of things in localities not
immediately under the eye of the military. In that State the efforts made
to hold the negro in a state of subjection appear to have been of a
particularly atrocious nature. Rumors to that effect which reached me at
Montgomery induced me to make inquiries at the post hospital. The records
of that institution showed a number of rather startling cases which had
occurred immediately after the close of the war, and some of a more recent
date; all of which proved that negroes leaving the plantations, and found
on the roads, were exposed to the savagest treatment. An extract from the
records of the hospital is appended, (accompanying document No. 20;) also
a statement signed by the provost marshal at Selma, Alabama, Major J.P.
Houston, (accompanying document No. 21.) He says: "There have come to my
notice officially twelve cases, in which I am morally certain the trials
have not been had yet, that negroes were killed by whites. In a majority
of cases the provocation consisted in the negroes' trying to come to town
or to return to the plantation after having been sent away. The cases
above enumerated, I am convinced, are but a small part of those that have
actually been perpetrated." In a report to General Swayne, assistant
commissioner of the Freedmen's Bureau, in Alabama, communicated to me by
the general, Captain Poillon, agent of the bureau at Mobile, says of the
condition of things in the southwestern part of the State, July 29: "There
are regular patrols posted on the rivers, who board some of the boats;
after the boats leave they hang, shoot, or drown the victims they may find
on them, and all those found on the roads or coming down the rivers are
almost invariably murdered. The bewildered and terrified freedmen know not
what to do--to leave is death; to remain is to suffer the increased burden
imposed upon them by the cruel taskmaster, whose only interest is their
labor, wrung from them by every device an inhuman ingenuity can devise;
hence the lash and murder is resorted to to intimidate those whom fear of
an awful death alone cause to remain, while patrols, negro dogs and spies,
disguised as Yankees, keep constant guard over these unfortunate people."
In a letter addressed to myself, September 9, Captain Poillon says:
"Organized patrols, with negro hounds, keep guard over the thoroughfares;
bands of lawless robbers traverse the country, and the unfortunate who
attempts to escape, or he who returns for his wife or child, is waylaid or
pursued with hounds, and shot or hung." (Accompanying document No. 22.)

In Mississippi I received information of a similar character. I would
respectfully invite your attention to two letters--one by Colonel Hayne,
1st Texas cavalry, and one by Colonel Brinkerhoff--giving interesting
descriptions of the condition of the freedmen, and the spirit of the
whites shortly after the close of the war. (Accompanying documents Nos. 23
and 24.) Lieutenant Colonel P.J. Yorke, post commander at port Gibson,
Mississippi, reported to General Davidson, on August 26, that a "county
patrol" had been organized by citizens of his sub-district, which, for
reasons given, he had been obliged to disband; one of these reasons was,
in his own language, that: "The company was formed out of what they called
picked men, _i.e._, those only who had been actually engaged in the war,
and were known as strong disunionists. The negroes in the sections of
country these men controlled were kept in the most abject slavery, and
treated in every way contrary to the requirements of General Orders No.
129, from the War Department." (Accompanying document No. 25.) As late as
September 29, Captain J.H. Weber, agent of the Freedmen's Bureau, reported
to Colonel Thomas, assistant commissioner of the bureau, in the State of
Mississippi, as follows: "In many cases negroes who left their homes
during the war, and have been within our military lines, and having
provided homes here for their families, going back to get their wives and
children, have been driven off, and told that they could not have them. In
several cases guards have been sent to aid people in getting their
families; in many others it has been impracticable, as the distance was
too great. In portions of the northern part of this district the colored
people are kept in slavery still. The white people tell them that they
were free during the war, but the war is now over, and they must go to
work again as before. The reports from sub-commissioners nearest that
locality show that the blacks are in a much worse state than ever before,
the able-bodied being kept at work under the lash, and the young and
infirm driven off to care for themselves. As to protection from the civil
authorities, there is no such thing outside of this city." (Accompanying
document No. 26.)

The conviction, however, that slavery in the old form cannot be maintained
has forced itself upon the minds of many of those who ardently desired its
preservation. But while the necessity of a new system was recognized as
far as the right of property in the individual negro is concerned, many
attempts were made to introduce into that new system the element of
physical compulsion, which, as above stated, is so generally considered
indispensable. This was done by simply adhering, as to the treatment of
the laborers, as much as possible to the traditions of the old system,
even where the relations between employers and laborers had been fixed by
contract. The practice of corporal punishment was still continued to a
great extent, although, perhaps, not in so regular a manner as it was
practiced in times gone by. It is hardly necessary to quote any
documentary evidence on this point; the papers appended to this report are
full of testimony corroborating the statement. The habit is so inveterate
with a great many persons as to render, on the least provocation, the
impulse to whip a negro almost irresistible. It will continue to be so
until the southern people will have learned, so as never to forget it,
that a black man has rights which a white man is bound to respect.

Here I will insert some remarks on the general treatment of the blacks as
a class, from the whites as a class. It is not on the plantations and at
the hands of the planters themselves that the negroes have to suffer the
greatest hardships. Not only the former slaveholders, but the
non-slaveholding whites, who, even previous to the war, seemed to be more
ardent in their pro-slavery feelings than the planters themselves, are
possessed by a singularly bitter and vindictive feeling against the
colored race since the negro has ceased to be property. The pecuniary
value which the individual negro formerly represented having disappeared,
the maiming and killing of colored men seems to be looked upon by many as
one of those venial offences which must be forgiven to the outraged
feelings of a wronged and robbed people. Besides, the services rendered by
the negro to the national cause during the war, which make him an object
of special interest to the loyal people, make him an object of particular
vindictiveness to those whose hearts were set upon the success of the
rebellion. The number of murders and assaults perpetrated upon negroes is
very great; we can form only an approximative estimate of what is going on
in those parts of the south which are not closely garrisoned, and from
which no regular reports are received, by what occurs under the very eyes
of our military authorities. As to my personal experience, I will only
mention that during my two days sojourn at Atlanta, one negro was stabbed
with fatal effect on the street, and three were poisoned, one of whom
died. While I was at Montgomery, one negro was cut across the throat
evidently with intent to kill, and another was shot, but both escaped with
their lives. Several papers attached to this report give an account of the
number of capital cases that occurred at certain places during a certain
period of time. It is a sad fact that the perpetration of those acts is
not confined to that class of people which might be called the rabble.
Several "gentlemen of standing" have been tried before military
commissions for such offences.

These statements are naturally not intended to apply to all the
individuals composing the southern people. There are certainly many
planters who, before the rebellion, treated their slaves with kindness,
and who now continue to treat them as free laborers in the same manner.
There are now undoubtedly many plantations in the south on which the
relations between employers and employees are based upon mutual good will.
There are certainly many people there who entertain the best wishes for
the welfare of the negro race, and who not only never participated in any
acts of violence, but who heartily disapprove them. I have no doubt, a
large majority can, _as to actual participation_--not, however, as to the
bitter spirit--I offer a good plea of not guilty. But however large or
small a number of people may be guilty of complicity in such acts of
persecution, those who are opposed to them have certainly not shown
themselves strong enough to restrain those who perpetrate or favor them.
So far, the _spirit of persecution_ has shown itself so strong as to make
the protection of the freedman by the military arm of the government in
many localities necessary--in almost all, desirable. It must not be
forgotten that in a community a majority of whose members is peaceably
disposed, but not willing or not able to enforce peace and order, a
comparatively small number of bold and lawless men can determine the
character of the whole. The rebellion itself, in some of the southern
States, furnished a striking illustration of this truth.

GENERAL IDEAS AND SCHEMES OF WHITES CONCERNING THE FREEDMEN.

Some of the planters with whom I had occasion to converse expressed their
determination to adopt the course which best accords with the spirit of
free labor, to make the negro work by offering him fair inducements, to
stimulate his ambition, and to extend to him those means of intellectual
and moral improvement which are best calculated to make him an
intelligent, reliable and efficient free laborer and a good and useful
citizen. Those who expressed such ideas were almost invariably professed
Union men, and far above the average in point of mental ability and
culture. I found a very few instances of original secessionists also
manifesting a willingness to give the free-labor experiment a fair trial.
I can represent the sentiments of this small class in no better way than
by quoting the language used by an Alabama judge in a conversation with
me. "I am one of the most thoroughly whipped men in the south," said he;
"I am a genuine old secessionist, and I believe now, as I always did, we
had the constitutional right to secede. But the war has settled that
matter, and it is all over now. As to this thing of free negro labor, I do
not believe in it, but I will give it a fair trial. I have a plantation
and am going to make contracts with my hands, and then I want a real
Yankee to run the machine for me; not one of your New Yorkers or
Pennsylvanians, but the genuine article from Massachusetts or Vermont--one
who can not only farm, but sing psalms and pray, and teach school--a real
abolitionist, who believes in the thing just as I don't believe in it. If
he does not succeed, I shall consider it proof conclusive that you are
wrong and I am right."

I regret to say that views and intentions so reasonable I found confined
to a small minority. Aside from the assumption that the negro will not
work without physical compulsion, there appears to be another popular
notion prevalent in the south, which stands as no less serious an obstacle
in the way of a successful solution of the problem. It is that the negro
exists for the special object of raising cotton, rice and sugar _for the
whites_, and that it is illegitimate for him to indulge, like other
people, in the pursuit of his own happiness in his own way. Although it is
admitted that he has ceased to be the property of a master, it is not
admitted that he has a right to become his own master. As Colonel Thomas,
assistant commissioner of the Freedmen's Bureau in Mississippi, in a
letter addressed to me, very pungently expresses it: "The whites esteem
the blacks their property by natural right, and, however much they may
admit that the relations of masters and slaves have been destroyed by the
war and by the President's emancipation proclamation, they still have an
ingrained feeling that the blacks at large belong to the whites at large,
and whenever opportunity serves, they treat the colored people just as
their profit, caprice or passion may dictate." (Accompanying document No.
27.) An ingrained feeling like this is apt to bring forth that sort of
class legislation which produces laws to govern one class with no other
view than to benefit another. This tendency can be distinctly traced in
the various schemes for regulating labor which here and there see the
light.

Immediately after the emancipation of the slaves, when the general
confusion was most perplexing, the prevalent desire among the whites
seemed to be, if they could not retain their negroes as slaves, to get rid
of them entirely. Wild speculations were indulged in, how to remove the
colored population at once and to import white laborers to fill its place;
how to obtain a sufficient supply of coolies, &c., &c. Even at the present
moment the removal of the freedmen is strongly advocated by those who have
the traditional horror of a free negro, and in some sections, especially
where the soil is more adapted to the cultivation of cereals than the
raising of the staples, planters appear to be inclined to drive the
negroes away, at least from their plantations. I was informed by a
prominent South Carolinian in July, that the planters in certain
localities in the northwestern part of his State had been on the point of
doing so, but better counsel had been made to prevail upon them; and
Colonel Robinson, 97th United States Colored Infantry, who had been sent
out to several counties in southern Alabama to administer the amnesty
oath, reported a general disposition among the planters of that region to
"set the colored people who had cultivated their crops during the summer,
adrift as soon as the crops would be secured, and not to permit the negro
to remain upon any footing of equality with the white man in that
country." (Accompanying document No. 28.) The disposition to drive away
all the negroes from the plantations was undoubtedly confined to a few
districts; and as far as the scheme of wholesale deportation is concerned,
practical men became aware, that if they wanted to have any labor done, it
would have been bad policy to move away the laborers they now have before
others were there to fill their places. All these devices promising at
best only distant relief, and free negro labor being the only thing in
immediate prospect, many ingenious heads set about to solve the problem,
how to make free labor compulsory by permanent regulations.

Shortly after the close of the war some South Carolina planters tried to
solve this problem by introducing into the contracts provisions leaving
only a small share of the crops to the freedmen, subject to all sorts of
constructive charges, and then binding them to work off the indebtedness
they might incur. It being to a great extent in the power of the employer
to keep the laborer in debt to him, the employer might thus obtain a
permanent hold upon the person of the laborer. It was something like the
system of peonage existing in Mexico. When these contracts were submitted
to the military authorities for ratification, General Hatch, commanding at
Charleston, at once issued an order prohibiting such arrangements. I had
an opportunity to examine one of these contracts, and found it drawn up
with much care, and evidently with a knowledge of the full bearings of the
provisions so inserted.

Appended to this report is a memorandum of a conversation I had with Mr.
W. King, of Georgia, a gentleman of good political sentiments and
undoubtedly benevolent intentions. He recommends a kind of guardianship to
be exercised by the employer over the freedman. He is a fair
representative, not of the completely unprejudiced, but of the more
liberal-minded class of planters, and his sayings show in what direction
even those who are not actuated by any spirit of bitterness against the
negro, seek a way out of their perplexities. (Accompanying document No.
29.)

I annex also two documents submitted to Mr. Benjamin F. Flanders, special
treasury agent at New Orleans, who then had the management of freedmen's
affairs in Louisiana, in November and December, 1864. They are not of a
recent date, but may be taken as true representations of the ideas and
sentiments entertained by large numbers to-day. The first (accompanying
document No. 30) contains "suggestions on the wants of planters before
embarking their capital in the cultivation of staple crops," and was
submitted by a committee to a meeting of planters at New Orleans, November
21, 1864. It speaks for itself. The others (accompanying document No. 31)
is a letter addressed to Mr. Flanders by Mr. T. Gibson, a Louisiana
planter, who is well known in New Orleans as professing much affection for
the negro. It commences with the assertion that he "has no prejudices to
overcome, and would do the black all the good in his power," and winds up
with a postscript strongly insisting upon the necessity of corporal
punishment, the "great desideratum in obtaining labor from free blacks
being _its enforcement_."

MUNICIPAL REGULATIONS.

The motives and spirit bringing forth such ideas found a still clearer
expression in some attempted municipal regulations. In no State within the
range of my observation had, at the time of my visit, so much progress
been made in the reorganization of local government as in Louisiana. In
most of the parishes the parish authorities had exercised their functions
for some time; in others the organization was less complete. Governor
Wells informed me that he had filled the parish offices with men
recommended to him by the people of the parishes, and it is fair to assume
that in most cases the appointees represented the views and sentiments of
the ruling class. Some of the local authorities so appointed furnished us
an indication of the principles upon which they thought it best to
regulate free labor within their jurisdiction.

Mr. W.B. Stickney, agent of the Freedmen's Bureau at Shreveport,
Louisiana, reported to the assistant commissioner of the bureau in
Louisiana as follows: "August 1.--The following is a literal copy of a
document brought to this office by a colored man, which is conclusive
evidence that there are those who still claim the negro as their property:

"'This boy Calvin has permit to hire to whom he pleases, but I shall hold
him as my property until set free by Congress. July 7, 1865. (Signed.)
E.V. TULLY.'"

The spirit of the above also made its appearance in another form, in the
action of the police board of the parish of Bossier, which was an attempt
to revive at once the old slave laws, and to prevent the freedmen from
obtaining employment (away) from their former masters. The gist of the
enactment alluded to is contained in the paragraph directing the officers
on patrol duty "to arrest and take up all idle and vagrant persons running
at large without employment and carry them before the proper authorities,
to be dealt with as the law directs." A regulation like this certainly
would make it difficult for freedmen to leave their former masters for the
purpose of seeking employment elsewhere. The matter was submitted to
Brevet Major General Hawkins, commanding western district of Louisiana,
who issued an order prohibiting the parish police forces from arresting
freedmen unless for positive offence against the law.

Clearer and more significant was the ordnance passed by the police board
of the town of Opelousas, Louisiana. (Accompanying document No. 34.) It
deserves careful perusal. Among a number of regulations applying
exclusively to the negro, and depriving him of all liberty of locomotion,
the following striking provisions are found:

Section 3. No negro or freedman shall be permitted to rent or keep a house
within the limits of the town _under any circumstances_, and any one thus
offending shall be ejected and _compelled to find an employer_ or leave
the town within twenty-four hours. The lessor or furnisher of the house
leased or kept as above shall pay a fine of ten dollars for each offence.

Section 4. No negro or freedman shall reside within the limits of the town
of Opelousas _who is not in the regular service of some white person or
former owner_.

Section 8. No freedman shall sell, barter or exchange, any articles of
merchandise or traffic within the limits of Opelousas without permission
in writing from his employer, or the mayor, or president of the board.

This ordinance was at first approved by a lieutenant colonel of the United
States forces having local command there, and it is worthy of note that
thereupon the infection spread at once, and similar ordinances were
entertained by the police boards of the town of Franklin and of the parish
of St. Landry. (Accompanying document No. 35). The parish ordinance of St.
Landry differs from the town ordinances of Opelousas and Franklin in
several points, and wherever there is any difference, it is in the
direction of greater severity. It imposes heavier fines and penalties
throughout, and provides, in addition, for a system of corporal
punishment. It is also ordained "that the aforesaid penalties shall be
_summarily enforced_, and that it shall be the duty of the _captain or
chief of patrol_ to see that the aforesaid ordinances are promptly
executed." While the town ordinances provide that a negro who does not
find an employer shall be compelled to leave the town, the parish or
county ordinance knows nothing of letting the negro go, but simply
_compels_ him to find an employer. Finally, it is ordained "that it shall
be the duty of every _citizen_ to act as a police officer for the
detection of offences and the apprehension of offenders, who shall be
immediately handed over to the proper captain or chief of patrol."

It is true, an "organization of free labor" upon this plan would not be
exactly the re-establishment of slavery in its old form, but as for the
practical working of the system with regard to the welfare of the
freedman, the difference would only be for the worse. The negro is not
only not permitted to be idle, but he is positively prohibited from
working or carrying on a business for himself; he is _compelled_ to be in
the "regular service" of a white man, and if he has no employer he is
_compelled_ to find one. It requires only a simple understanding among the
employers, and the negro is just as much bound to his employer "for better
and for worse" as he was when slavery existed in the old form. If he
should attempt to leave his employer on account of non-payment of wages or
bad treatment he is _compelled_ to find another one; and if no other will
take him he will be _compelled_ to return to him from whom he wanted to
escape. The employers, under such circumstances, are naturally at liberty
to arrange the matter of compensation according to their tastes, for the
negro will be compelled to be in the regular service of an employer,
whether he receives wages or not. The negro may be permitted by his
employer "to hire his own time," for in the spirit and intent of the
ordinance his time never properly belongs to him. But even the old system
of slavery was more liberal in this respect, for such "permission to hire
his own time" "shall never extend over seven days at any one time." (Sec.
4.) The sections providing for the "_summary_" enforcement of the
penalties and placing their infliction into the hands of the "chief of
patrol"--which, by the way, throws some light upon the objects for which
the militia is to be reorganized--place the freedmen under a sort of
permanent martial law, while the provision investing every white man with
the power and authority of a police officer as against every black man
subjects them to the control even of those individuals who in other
communities are thought hardly fit to control themselves. On the whole,
this piece of legislation is a striking embodiment of the idea that
although the former owner has lost his individual right of property in the
former slave, "the blacks at large belong to the whites at large."

Such was the "organization of free labor" ordained by officials appointed
by Governor Wells, and these ordinances were passed while both the
emancipation proclamation and a provision in the new constitution of
Louisiana abolishing slavery in that State forever were recognized as
being in full force. It is needless to say that as soon as these
proceedings came to the knowledge of the Freedmen's Bureau and the
department commander they were promptly overruled. But Governor Wells did
not remove the police boards that had thus attempted to revive slavery in
a new form.

The opposition to the negro's controlling his own labor, carrying on
business independently on his own account--in one word, working for his
own benefit--showed itself in a variety of ways. Here and there municipal
regulations were gotten up heavily taxing or otherwise impeding those
trades and employments in which colored people are most likely to engage.
As an illustration, I annex an ordinance passed by the common council of
Vicksburg, (accompanying document No. 36,) together with a letter from
Colonel Thomas, in which he says: "You will see by the city ordinance that
a drayman, or hackman, must file a bond of five hundred dollars, in
addition to paying for his license. The mayor requires that the bondsmen
must be freeholders. The laws of this State do not, and never did, allow a
negro to own land or hold property; the white citizens refuse to sign any
bonds for the freedmen. The white citizens and authorities say that it is
for their interest to drive out all independent negro labor; that the
freedmen must hire to white men if they want to do this kind of work." I
found several instances of a similar character in the course of my
observations, of which I neglected to procure the documentary evidence.

It may be said that these are mere isolated cases; and so they are. But
they are the local outcroppings of a spirit which I found to prevail
everywhere. If there is any difference, it is in the degree of its
intensity and the impatience or boldness with which it manifests itself.
Of the agencies which so far restrained it from venturing more general
demonstrations I shall speak in another part of this report.

EDUCATION OF THE FREEDMEN.

It would seem that all those who sincerely desire to make the freedman a
freeman in the true sense of the word, must also be in favor of so
educating him as to make him clearly understand and appreciate the
position he is to occupy in life, with all its rights and corresponding
duties, and to impart to him all the knowledge necessary for enabling him
to become an intelligent co-operator in the general movements of society.
As popular education is the true ground upon which the efficiency and the
successes of free-labor society grow, no man who rejects the former can be
accounted a consistent friend of the latter. It is also evident that the
education of the negro, to become general and effective after the full
restoration of local government in the south, must be protected and
promoted as an integral part of the educational systems of the States.

I made it a special point in most of the conversations I had with southern
men to inquire into their views with regard to this subject. I found,
indeed, some gentlemen of thought and liberal ideas who readily
acknowledged the necessity of providing for the education of the colored
people, and who declared themselves willing to co-operate to that end to
the extent of their influence. Some planters thought of establishing
schools on their estates, and others would have been glad to see measures
taken to that effect by the people of the neighborhoods in which they
lived. But whenever I asked the question whether it might be hoped that
the legislatures of their States or their county authorities would make
provisions for negro education, I never received an affirmative, and only
in two or three instances feebly encouraging answers. At last I was forced
to the conclusion that, aside from a small number of honorable exceptions,
the popular prejudice is almost as bitterly set against the negro's having
the advantage of education as it was when the negro was a slave. There may
be an improvement in that respect, but it would prove only how universal
the prejudice was in former days. Hundreds of times I heard the old
assertion repeated, that "learning will spoil the nigger for work," and
that "negro education will be the ruin of the south." Another most
singular notion still holds a potent sway over the minds of the masses--it
is, that the elevation of the blacks will be the degradation of the
whites. They do not understand yet that the continual contact with an
ignorant and degraded population must necessarily lower the mental and
moral tone of the other classes of society. This they might have learned
from actual experience, as we in the north have been taught, also by
actual experience, that the education of the lower orders is the only
reliable basis of the civilization as well as of the prosperity of a
people.

The consequence of the prejudice prevailing in the southern States is that
colored schools can be established and carried on with safety only under
the protection of our military forces, and that where the latter are
withdrawn the former have to go with them. There may be a few localities
forming exceptions, but their number is certainly very small. I annex a
few papers bearing upon this subject. One is a letter addressed to me by
Chaplain Joseph Warren, superintendent of education under the Freedmen's
Bureau in Mississippi. (Accompanying document No. 37.) The long and
extensive experience of the writer gives the views he expresses more than
ordinary weight. After describing the general spirit of opposition to the
education of the negroes exhibited in Mississippi, and enumerating the
reasons assigned for it, he says: "In view of these things I have no doubt
but that, if our protection be withdrawn, negro education will be hindered
in every possible way, including obstructions by fraud and violence. I
have not the smallest expectation that, with the State authorities in full
power, a northern citizen would be protected in the exercise of his
constitutional right to teach and preach to the colored people, and shall
look for a renewal of the fearful scenes in which northerners were
whipped, tarred and feathered, warned off, and murdered, before the war."
The letter gives many details in support of this conclusion, and is in
every respect worth perusing.

In the letter of General Kirby Smith (Accompanying document No. 9) occurs
the following statement referring to the condition of things in Mobile,
Alabama: "Threats were made to destroy all school-houses in which colored
children were taught, and in two instances they were fired. The same
threats were made against all churches in which colored people assembled
to worship, and one of them burned. Continued threats of assassination
were made against the colored preachers, and one of them is now under
special guard by order of Major General Woods."

While I was in Louisiana General Canby received a petition, signed by a
number of prominent citizens of New Orleans, praying him "to annul Order
No. 38, which authorizes a board of officers to levy a tax on the
taxpayers of the parish of Orleans to defray the expense of educating the
freedmen." The reasons given for making this request are as follows: "Most
of those who have lost their slaves by the rebellion, and whose lands are
in the course of confiscation, being thus deprived of the means of raising
corn for their hungry children, have not anything left wherewith to pay
such a tax. The order in question, they consider, violates that sacred
principle which requires taxation to be equal throughout the United
States. _If the freedmen are to be educated at public expense, let it be
done from the treasury of the United States_." (Accompanying document No.
38.) Many of the signers of this petition, who wanted to be relieved of
the school tax on the ground of poverty, were counted among the wealthy
men of New Orleans, and they forgot to state that the free colored element
of Louisiana, which represents a capital of at least thirteen millions and
pays a not inconsiderable proportion of the taxes, contributes at the same
time for the support of the schools for whites, from which their children
are excluded. I would also invite attention to some statements concerning
this matter contained in the memorandum of my conversation with Mr. King,
of Georgia. (Accompanying document No. 29.)

While travelling in the south I found in the newspapers an account of an
interview between General Howard and some gentlemen from Mississippi, in
which a Dr. Murdoch, from Columbus, Mississippi, figured somewhat
conspicuously. He was reported to have described public sentiment in
Mississippi as quite loyal, and especially in favor of giving the colored
race a good education. I inquired at the Freedmen's Bureau whether
anything was known there of a feeling so favorable to negro education
among Dr. Murdoch's neighbors. The information I received is contained in
a letter from the assistant commissioner, Colonel Thomas. (Accompanying
document No. 39.) It appears that the feeling of Dr. Murdoch's neighbors
at Columbus was not only not in favor of negro education, but that,
according to the report of the agent of the Freedmen's Bureau at that
place, "the citizens of the town are so prejudiced against the negroes
that they are opposed to all efforts being made for their education or
elevation;" that "the people will not give rooms or allow the children of
their hired freedmen to attend the schools," and that the citizens of the
place have written a letter to the officers, saying "that they would
respectfully ask that no freedmen's schools be established under the
auspices of the bureau, as it would tend to disturb the present labor
system, and take from the fields labor that is so necessary to restore the
wealth of the State." It seems Dr. Murdoch's neighbors do not form an
exception to the general rule. In this connexion I may add that several
instances have come to my notice of statements about the condition of
things in the late rebel States, being set afloat by southerners visiting
the north, which would not bear close investigation. The reason, probably,
is that gentlemen are attributing their own good intentions to the rest of
their people with too great a liberality.

Having thus given my experience and impressions with regard to the spirit
actuating the southern people concerning the freedman and the free-labor
problem, and before inquiring into their prospective action, I beg leave
to submit a few remarks on the conduct of the negro.

THE FREEDMAN.

The first southern men with whom I came into contact after my arrival at
Charleston designated the general conduct of the emancipated slaves as
surprisingly good. Some went even so far as to call it admirable. The
connexion in which they used these laudatory terms was this: A great many
colored people while in slavery had undoubtedly suffered much hardship
and submitted to great wrongs, partly inseparably connected with
the condition of servitude, and partly aggravated by the individual
wilfulness and cruelty of their masters and overseers. They were suddenly
set free; and not only that: their masters but a short time ago almost
omnipotent on their domains, found themselves, after their defeat in the
war, all at once face to face with their former slaves as a conquered and
powerless class. Never was the temptation to indulge in acts of vengeance
for wrongs suffered more strongly presented than to the colored people of
the south; but no instance of such individual revenge was then on record,
nor have I since heard of any case of violence that could be traced
to such motives. The transition of the southern negro from slavery to
freedom was untarnished by any deeds of blood, and the apprehension so
extensively entertained and so pathetically declaimed upon by many, that
the sudden and general emancipation of the slaves would at once result in
"all the horrors of St. Domingo," proved utterly groundless. This was the
first impression I received after my arrival in the south, and I received
it from the mouths of late slaveholders. Nor do I think the praise was
unjustly bestowed. In this respect the emancipated slaves of the south
can challenge comparison with any race long held in servitude and
suddenly set free. As to the dangers of the future, I shall speak of them
in another connexion.

But at that point the unqualified praise stopped and the complaints began:
the negroes would not work; they left their plantations and went wandering
from place to place, stealing by the way; they preferred a life of
idleness and vagrancy to that of honest and industrious labor; they either
did not show any willingness to enter into contracts, or, if they did,
showed a stronger disposition to break them than to keep them; they were
becoming insubordinate and insolent to their former owners; they indulged
in extravagant ideas about their rights and relied upon the government to
support them without work; in one word, they had no conception of the
rights freedom gave, and of the obligations freedom imposed upon them.
These complaints I heard repeated with endless variations wherever I went.
Nor were they made without some show of reason. I will review them one
after another.

_Unwillingness to work_.--That there are among the negroes a good many
constitutionally lazy individuals is certainly true. The propensity to
idleness seems to be rather strongly developed in the south generally,
without being confined to any particular race. It is also true that the
alacrity negroes put into their work depends in a majority of cases upon
certain combinations of circumstances. It is asserted that the negroes
have a prejudice against working in the cultivation of cotton, rice, and
sugar. Although this prejudice, probably arising from the fact that the
cotton, rice, and sugar fields remind the former slave of the worst
experiences of his past life, exists to some extent, it has not made the
freedmen now on the plantations unwilling to cultivate such crops as the
planters may have seen fit to raise. A few cases of refusal may have
occurred. But there is another fact of which I have become satisfied in
the course of my observations, and which is of great significance: while
most of the old slaveholders complain of the laziness and instability of
their negro laborers, the northern men engaged in planting, with whom I
have come into contact, almost uniformly speak of their negro laborers
with satisfaction, and these northern men almost exclusively devote
themselves to the cultivation of cotton. A good many southern planters, in
view of the fact, expressed to me their intention to engage northern men
for the management of their plantations. This circumstance would seem to
prove that under certain conditions the negro may be expected to work
well. There are two reasons by which it may be explained: first, that a
northern man knows from actual experience what free labor is, and
understands its management, which the late slaveholder, still clinging to
the traditions of the old system, does not; and then, that the negro has
more confidence in a northern man than in his former master. When a
northern man discovers among his laboring force an individual that does
not do his duty, his first impulse is to discharge him, and he acts
accordingly. When a late slaveholder discovers such an individual among
his laborers, his first impulse is to whip him, and he is very apt to suit
the act to the impulse. Ill treatment is a doubtful encouragement for free
laborers, and it proves more apt to drive those that are still at work
away than to make the plantation attractive to others. But if the reasons
above stated are sufficient to explain why the negroes work better for
northern than for southern men, it will follow that a general improvement
will take place as soon as the latter fulfil the same conditions--that is,
as soon as southern men learn what free labor is and how to manage it in
accordance with its principles, and as soon as they succeed in gaining the
confidence of the colored people.

In the reports of officers of the Freedmen's Bureau, among the documents
annexed to this, you will find frequent repetitions of the statement that
the negro generally works well where he is decently treated and well
compensated. Nor do the officers of the Freedmen's Bureau alone think and
say so. Southern men, who were experimenting in the right direction,
expressed to me their opinion to the same effect. Some of them told me
that the negroes on their plantations worked "as well as ever," or even
"far better than they had expected." It is true the number of planters who
made that admission was small, but it nearly corresponded with the number
of those who, according to their own statements, gave free negro labor a
perfectly fair trial, while all those who prefaced everything they said
with the assertion that "the negro will not work without physical
compulsion," could find no end to their complaints. There are undoubtedly
negroes who will not do well under the best circumstances, just as there
are others who will do well under the worst.

In another part of this report I have already set forth the exceptional
difficulties weighing upon the free-labor experiment in the south during
this period of transition. The sudden leap from slavery to freedom is an
exciting event in a man's life, and somewhat calculated to disturb his
equanimity for a moment. People are on such occasions disposed to indulge
themselves a little. It would have shown much more wisdom in the negroes
if all of them had quietly gone to work again the next day. But it is not
reasonable to expect the negroes to possess more wisdom than other races
would exhibit under the same circumstances. Besides, the willingness to
work depends, with whites as well as blacks, somewhat upon the nature of
the inducements held out, and the unsatisfactory regulation of the matter
of wages has certainly something to do with the instability of negro labor
which is complained of. Northern men engaged in planting almost uniformly
pay wages in money, while southern planters, almost uniformly, have
contracted with their laborers for a share in the crop. In many instances
the shares are allotted between employers and laborers with great
fairness; but in others the share promised to the laborers is so small as
to leave them in the end very little or nothing. Moreover, the crops in
the south looked generally very unpromising from the beginning, which
naturally reduced the value falling to the lot of the laborer. I have
heard a good many freedmen complain that, taking all things into
consideration, they really did not know what they were working for except
food, which in many instances was bad and scanty; and such complaints were
frequently well founded. In a large number of cases the planters were not
to blame for this; they had no available pecuniary means, and in many
localities found it difficult to procure provisions. But these unfavorable
circumstances, combined with the want of confidence in northern men, were
well calculated to have an influence upon the conduct of the negro as a
laborer.

I have heard it said that money is no inducement which will make a negro
work. It is certain that many of them, immediately after emancipation, had
but a crude conception of the value of money and the uses it can be put
to. It may, however, be stated as the general rule, that whenever they are
at liberty to choose between wages in money and a share in the crop, they
will choose the former and work better. Many cases of negroes engaged in
little industrial pursuits came to my notice, in which they showed
considerable aptness not only for gaining money, but also for saving and
judiciously employing it. Some were even surprisingly successful. I
visited some of the plantations divided up among freedmen and cultivated
by them independently without the supervision of white men. In some
instances I found very good crops and indications of general thrift and
good management; in others the corn and cotton crops were in a neglected
and unpromising state. The excuse made was in most cases that they had
obtained possession of the ground too late in the season, and that, until
the regular crops could be harvested, they were obliged to devote much of
their time to the raising and sale of vegetables, watermelons, &c., for
the purpose of making a living in the meantime.

On the whole I feel warranted in making the following statement: Many
freedmen--not single individuals, but whole "plantation gangs"--are
working well; others do not. The difference in their efficiency coincides
in a great measure with a certain difference in the conditions under which
they live. The conclusion lies near, that if the conditions under which
they work well become general, their efficiency as free laborers will
become general also, aside from individual exceptions. Certain it is, that
by far the larger portion of the work done in the south is done by
freedmen.

_Vagrancy_.--Large numbers of colored people left the plantations as soon
as they became aware that they could do so with impunity. That they could
so leave their former masters was for them the first test of the reality
of their freedom. A great many flocked to the military posts and towns to
obtain from the "Yankees" reliable information as to their new rights.
Others were afraid lest by staying on the plantations where they had been
held as slaves they might again endanger their freedom. Still others went
to the cities, thinking that there the sweets of liberty could best be
enjoyed. In some places they crowded together in large numbers, causing
serious inconvenience. But a great many, probably a very large majority,
remained on the plantations and made contracts with their former masters.
The military authorities, and especially the agents of the Freedmen's
Bureau, succeeded by continued exertions in returning most of those who
were adrift to the plantations, or in finding other employment for them.
After the first rush was over the number of vagrants grew visibly less.

It may be said that where the Freedmen's Bureau is best organized
there is least vagrancy among the negroes. Here and there they show
considerable restlessness, partly owing to local, partly to general
causes. Among the former, bad treatment is probably the most
prominent; among the latter, a feeling of distrust, uneasiness,
anxiety about their future, which arises from their present unsettled
condition. It is true, some are going from place to place because they
are fond of it. The statistics of the Freedmen's Bureau show that the
whole number of colored people supported by the government since the
close of the war was remarkably small and continually decreasing.
This seems to show that the southern negro, when thrown out of his
accustomed employment, possesses considerable ability to support
himself. It is possible, however, that in consequence of short crops,
the destitution of the country, and other disturbing influences, there
may be more restlessness among the negroes next winter than there
is at present. Where the results of this year's labor were very
unsatisfactory, there will be a floating about of the population when
the contracts of this year expire. It is to be expected, however, that
the Freedmen's Bureau will be able to remedy evils of that kind. Other
emancipatory movements, for instance the abolition of serfdom in
Russia, have resulted in little or no vagrancy; but it must not be
forgotten that the emancipated serfs were speedily endowed with the
ownership of land, which gave them a permanent moral and material
interest in the soil upon which they lived. A similar measure would do
more to stop negro vagrancy in the south than the severest penal laws.
In every country the number of vagrants stands in proportion to the
number of people who have no permanent local interests, unless
augmented by exceptional cases, such as war or famine.

_Contracts_.--Freedmen frequently show great disinclination to make
contracts with their former masters. They are afraid lest in signing a
paper they sign away their freedom, and in this respect they are
distrustful of most southern men. It generally requires personal
assurances from a United States officer to make them feel safe. But the
advice of such an officer is almost uniformly followed. In this manner an
immense number of contracts has been made, and it is daily increasing. A
northern man has no difficulty in making contracts, and but little in
enforcing them. The complaints of southern men that the contracts are not
well observed by the freedmen are in many instances well founded. The same
can be said of the complaints of freedmen with regard to the planters. The
negro, fresh from slavery, has naturally but a crude idea of the binding
force of a written agreement, and it is galling to many of the planters to
stand in such relations as a contract establishes to those who formerly
were their slaves. I was, however, informed by officers of the Freedmen's
Bureau, and by planters also, that things were improving in that respect.
Contracts will be more readily entered into and more strictly kept as soon
as the intimate relations between labor and compensation are better
understood and appreciated on both sides.

_Insolence and insubordination_.--The new spirit which emancipation has
awakened in the colored people has undoubtedly developed itself in some
individuals, especially young men, to an offensive degree. Hence cases of
insolence on the part of freedmen occur. But such occurrences are
comparatively rare. On the whole, the conduct of the colored people is far
more submissive than anybody had a right to expect. The acts of violence
perpetrated by freedmen against white persons do not stand in any
proportion to those committed by whites against negroes. Every such
occurrence is sure to be noticed in the southern papers and we have heard
of but very few.

When Southern people speak of the insolence of the negro, they generally
mean something which persons who never lived under the system of slavery
are not apt to appreciate. It is but very rarely what would be called
insolence among equals. But, as an old planter said to me, "our people
cannot realize yet that the negro is free." A negro is called insolent
whenever his conduct varies in any manner from what a southern man was
accustomed to when slavery existed.

The complaints made about the insubordination of the negro laborers on
plantations have to be taken with the same allowance. There have been, no
doubt, many cases in which freedmen showed a refractory spirit, where
orders were disobeyed, and instructions disregarded. There have been some
instances of positive resistance. But when inquiring into particulars, I
found not unfrequently that the employer had adhered too strictly to his
old way of doing things. I hardly heard any such complaints from Northern
men. I have heard planters complain very earnestly of the insubordinate
spirit of their colored laborers because they remonstrated against the
practice of corporeal punishment. This was looked upon as a symptom of an
impending insurrection. A great many things are regarded in the old slave
States as acts of insubordination on the part of the laborer which, in the
free States, would be taken as perfectly natural and harmless. The fact
is, a good many planters are at present more nervously jealous of their
authority than before, while the freedmen are not always inclined to
forget that they are free men.

_Extravagant notions_.--In many localities I found an impression
prevailing among the negroes that some great change was going to take
place about Christmas. Feeling uneasy in their present condition, they
indulged in the expectation that government intended to make some further
provision for their future welfare, especially by ordering distributions
of land among them. To counteract this expectation, which had a tendency
to interfere seriously with the making of contracts for the next season,
it was considered necessary to send military officers, and especially
agents of the Freedmen's Bureau, among them, who, by administering sound
advice and spreading correct information, would induce them to suit their
conduct to their actual circumstances. While in the south I heard of many
instances in which this measure had the desired effect, and it is to be
expected that the effect was uniformly good wherever judicious officers
were so employed.

Impressions like the above are very apt to spread among the negroes, for
the reason that they ardently desire to become freeholders. In the
independent possession of landed property they see the consummation of
their deliverance. However mistaken their notions may be in other
respects, it must be admitted that this instinct is correct.

_Relations between the two races_.--There are whites in the south who
profess great kindness for the negro. Many of them are, no doubt, sincere
in what they say. But as to the feelings of the masses, it is hardly
necessary to add anything to what I have already stated. I have heard it
asserted that the negroes also cherish feel