Author Topic: THE RECONSTRUCTION ISSUE  (Read 1516 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline williamlayton

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15415
THE RECONSTRUCTION ISSUE
« on: January 08, 2005, 03:21:28 AM »
The question is, and I will not respond to any thoughts, how do you think reconstruction should have been handled, if any different.
What do you see as the main concern about how it was done.
Blessings
TEXAS, by GOD

Offline Shorty

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1098
THE RECONSTRUCTION ISSUE
« Reply #1 on: January 09, 2005, 09:53:18 AM »
So where's El Confederado?  He'd probably say that there WAS no "reconstuction"!  :)
Frankly, I don't know much about it, except that Federal troops occupied areas, supposedly until civil authorities and institutions could be established.  I know that that meant freed slaves and carpetbaggers began getting the upper hand, politically and economically, where they were numerous.  This state of affairs kinda created a back-lash from the old set.  Once the occupiers left, (wasn't it only a couple of years?) along come the KKK to put things "right".   :shock:
Of course, that's over-simplified, but just like Iraq today, one just can't reorder a culture overnight.

Offline El Confederado

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 171
THE RECONSTRUCTION ISSUE
« Reply #2 on: January 10, 2005, 03:38:52 PM »
First, I think I will think on this a bit before I get into trouble, however, I must state that Forrest and his boys started the KKKK in 1866  during reconstruction, not after.
Lt. J.M. Rodriguez II
Captain- K Company-- 37th Texas Cavalry C.S.A.
 Lt---2nd  Louisiana  Zouave Cavalry
( Coppens Zouaves Trans-Mississippi)
Lt.---1st Battalion of Louisiana Zouaves
WoNA historian
Un-Reconstructed Confederate

Offline El Confederado

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 171
THE RECONSTRUCTION ISSUE
« Reply #3 on: January 12, 2005, 12:38:19 PM »
BTT
Lt. J.M. Rodriguez II
Captain- K Company-- 37th Texas Cavalry C.S.A.
 Lt---2nd  Louisiana  Zouave Cavalry
( Coppens Zouaves Trans-Mississippi)
Lt.---1st Battalion of Louisiana Zouaves
WoNA historian
Un-Reconstructed Confederate

Offline nohorse

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 109
THE RECONSTRUCTION ISSUE
« Reply #4 on: January 13, 2005, 02:17:19 AM »
You realize that the question you pose could be answered by writing a book, so let's start here:

The death of President Lincoln turned out to be the probably greatest misfortune to the South. Initially most of the governors from the seceded States attempted to convene their legislatures and take steps for their restoration to the Union. They did this believing that the American principle of government would be respected and that their prompt proceedings would be favored as the constitutional plan of restoration. They also did this also believing it absolutely necessary to preserve civil government, and to show by legislative enactment complete submission by repealing their ordinances of secession.

However, after the collapse of the Confederacy martial law was imposed on the South. General Wilson, of the United States army in Georgia set the example others would follow.  When the Georgia legislature met he stated: "Neither the legislature nor any other political body will be permitted to assemble under the call of the rebel State authorities." The spirit of this order was then carried out in every former Confederate state. The existing civil governments were ignored everywhere, and military rule was inaugurated.  The only recognized government was that of the local military officers, their appointees and those under their direct supervision. After military law was established in North Carolina the legislature authorized the governor to proclaim martial law in every county and to arrest and try all accused persons by court-martial rather than judicial law.  The State militias in every former Confederate state were composed mainly of freed slaves that were used to enforce the biased laws enacted by state legislatures that often times were even more radical than Congress and the military.  Thus approximately 4,000,000 slaves were suddenly enfranchised, with no education or preliminary training, to fit them for their great responsibility. Not knowing what to expect many prominent Southerners and former military officers fled to foreign nations.

As mentioned, under martial law many regular Army officers were appointed to state offices and the governors of Texas and Alabama were actually removed from office.  All judges held their places by sufferance. State Superior court judges were summarily ousted from the bench. The same was true of county officers, and mayors and aldermen of cities. Citizens were arrested, and the only authority given was that of the soldiers who made the arrests. Citizens were confined under false and malicious charges urged by irresponsible parties. Two thousand Federal arrests were made in Louisiana alone. And, when the people of a State voiced their opinion not to comply with these severe conditions new acts of legislation were passed, imposing still more stringent conditions.

In the instances of Alabama and Arkansas the US Congress adopted a state constitution without the consent of the people and the states refused to ratify them. Alabama public offices were held by corrupt political appointees and illiterate slaves. The same rule was followed in the county and local offices in every State and municipality.  

The legislature of Alabama sat nearly an entire year without enacting any legislation. As soon as it got down to business, it increased state aid to railroads by authorizing endorsements to the extent of $16,000 per mile. Bribery and corruption were rampant. Only one railroad was completed. Five others had track laid but only for a few miles and then abandoned. Fraudulent bonds were issued and bond brokers and railroad schemers conspired to rob the State of many millions of dollars. The legislature also authorized cities, towns, and counties to issue bonds to railroad builders, and many were fleeced, as these same organizations were controlled by the same element elected in the same way as was the legislature.  Alabama became insolvent, and Governor Lewis, Republican, said to the legislature that he could not sell for money any of the State bonds. The State debt had grown to the enormous sum of $25,500,000, not including county and city debts.


In North Carolina the treasury was also robbed and the school funds were stolen to pay per diems. The educational investments in securities were sold out at nearly one third their value to the Republican treasurer for himself and his associates.  In less than four months, this legislature authorized a State debt of over $25,000,000 in bonds, in addition to $16,000,000 for various minor schemes. The entire debt imposed by reconstruction on North Carolina exceeded $38,000,000. Yet not a mile of railroad was built, although $14,000,000 in bonds were actually issued for this. Not a child, white or black, was educated for two years; not a public building erected, no State improvements were made anywhere.

As another example at the end of the war the average cost of running the South Carolina legislature was approximately $20,000. For the six years following the average annual expense increased to $320,000 [these are 1860’s dollars]. Total legislative expenses for the six year period exceeded $2,000,000.  The total public debt for South Carolina at the beginning of reconstruction was less than $1,000,000. By 1872 it had escalated to $17,500,000.  South Carolina was unable to pay off these debts until the late 1970’s. The treasury of South Carolina was so thoroughly gutted there was nothing left to steal. Governor Chamberlain, a Republican, said that when he entered on his duties as governor, "two hundred trial justices were holding office by executive appointment, who could neither read nor write the English language."  

In Florida, property decreased in value 45 per cent during eight years of reconstruction, from 1867 to 1875.

In Mississippi, 6,400,000 acres of land were forfeited to the State in payment of excessive taxation, and large amounts were collected as taxes and squandered.

In Louisiana, New Orleans city property decreased in value $58,104,864 in eight years. County property decreased more than one-half, or from $99,266,839 to $47,141,690. One hundred and forty millions of dollars were squandered with nothing to show for it; State debt increased more than $40,000,000; city property depreciated 40 per cent, county property 50 per cent.

Two-thirds of the wealth of the Southern people had been swept away, and the South was  bankrupt. In addition the states were also compelled to repudiate all debts contracted for carrying on the war. In the approximate ten years of reconstruction legislation and government, conducted under carpet-baggers, an additional debt of $300,000,000 was added to the burdens of the people of the South.

For five years after the war, in West Virginia, Mississippi and many other states, including border states, an ex-Confederate was not a citizen, could not hold office, could not practice law, could not sit as a juror, could not teach school, could not sue in the courts, could not make a defense for charges brought during his absence, could not be administrator or executor.

The Union Leagues were instituted by northern whites to impose their will on freed slaves.  The leagues taught that the white men of the South were enemies of the freed slaves, and it excited them to commit acts of disorder and create interference in every way with the whites. The poor illiterate ex-slaves could not withstand the strong will of the whites from the North, who were controlling them, against all advice and friendly appeal from Southern whites. Friction, conflict, disorder between whites and blacks were incited to prolong the important and lucrative offices held by the carpetbaggers. It was the stock in trade of the Republicans in the South to keep up the vindictive and hostile legislation of Congress, and it is needless to say that members of the league had the ear of Congress. Regretfully this resulted in the rise of the Klan and racial misunderstandings that exist to this very day.


Tell me, where would you start making changes?
GG-father: 6th Ala Inf
GG-uncles: 6th Ala Inf; 19th Tn; Wirt Adam's Cav.

Offline IntrepidWizard

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1130
THE RECONSTRUCTION ISSUE
« Reply #5 on: January 13, 2005, 03:31:35 AM »
Cudos horse----excellent
Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force! Like fire, it is
a dangerous servant and a fearful master. -- George Washington

Offline New Hampshire

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 996
THE RECONSTRUCTION ISSUE
« Reply #6 on: January 13, 2005, 11:55:30 AM »
I think reconstruction took a turn for the worse the minute Lincoln died.  Harsh punishments were placed upon the South by the Norhter Republican victors.  The south was essentially treated like Cinderella.  They got beat and they got beat bad, which is ironic as it all happened almost opposite of what Lincoln would have wanted.  But the wealthy northern industrialists couldnt have the South rise again.........heaven forbid it cut into their new (at least new then) unadultered industrial superiority.
Brian M.
NRA Life Member
Member Londonderry Fish and Game Club
Member North American Fishing Club
Member North American Hunting Club
Member New Hampshire Historical Society
Member International Blackpowder Hunting Association

Offline williamlayton

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15415
THE RECONSTRUCTION ISSUE
« Reply #7 on: January 14, 2005, 01:31:38 AM »
NOHORSE-
Very good research and excellent comments, as usual.
I said that I would not comment on thoughts, I have some, but want to see other views before I say anything.
So far, I have not seen any that have an opinion on the changes.
It is interesting that the entire process of reconstruction was given to individuals without any Federal oversight or guidelines. I am intrigued by this thought alone. Now I am sure there was a semblance of guidelines and supervision but none that were sufficient for the scope and seriousness of the situation. Lack of thinking and appreciation for the seriousness of the situation is what I mean.
Blessings
TEXAS, by GOD

Offline nohorse

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 109
THE RECONSTRUCTION ISSUE
« Reply #8 on: January 14, 2005, 01:43:38 AM »
New Hampshire:  Agreed on Lincoln. For all of his flaws and tyrannical or radical views and policies even the South agreed that “the death of Mr. Lincoln himself, which was regarded as the greatest calamity that could have happened to the people of the South” [Confederate Military History, Volume 12].

President Lincoln’s plan started when he issued his amnesty proclamation in December, 1863, offering a pardon to all who were in arms if they would lay them down and take an oath of allegiance.

He also said he would recognize a State government as a loyal government, provided as many as one-tenth of the number who voted in 1860 would organize a State government and comply with certain conditions. This would have laid the guidelines for an orderly transition which we all know did not occur undet the later Johnson and Congressional Plans.

As we have discussed before, Lincoln believed "that the States were never out of the Union; that the people of these States, when they returned to their allegiance, had the power of reconstruction in their own hands,". These views were also included in his proclamation of 1863,and referred to in his message of December 21, 1863: "Being a qualified voter by the election laws of the State, existing immediately before the so-called act of secession and excluding all other, shall re-establish a State government." He believed in the people; to the extent that the people in the seceded States, notwithstanding the war, should and must be trusted. There can be no doubt as to Mr. Lincoln's intention in reconstructing the Southern States, and time has demonstrated that his statesmanship was correct, and that his principles were based on the proper theory of the organization of the government.

It was indeed a great loss to the South and the nation that he should be assassinated at the close of the war.  Obviously there are different phases and views of the man and although there is great disagreement on his management of the war - there is general agreement that he would have been the best to oversee reconstruction.  His theory of a 'perpetual' nation was much better suited for this phase of the conflict. Considering this perspective of reconstruction, Lincoln may have been 'ahead of his time' in these regards and initially misunderstood by many because of this.
GG-father: 6th Ala Inf
GG-uncles: 6th Ala Inf; 19th Tn; Wirt Adam's Cav.

Offline williamlayton

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15415
THE RECONSTRUCTION ISSUE
« Reply #9 on: January 15, 2005, 01:02:05 AM »
Well, we have given this a chance to simmer down so I will say what I was thinking when I posted originally.
Part of the thought actually was a "what if" thought. What if the war had just happened and reconstruction was happening today. Boys the South woulda been the winner and The money woulda come down here instead of going to the carpetbaggers.
ON THE SERIOUS SIDE
If I could change things, and this is the rub in my thinking, I would have considered more oversight or Federal guidelines. It is almost inconceivable, to me at least, that the atrocities that happened were allowed. Shows me something about human nature, not just Northern human nature, that is very scary. I can see some, if not more, of this greed in man today.
It was the pure greed of it all that rubs me.

Blessings
TEXAS, by GOD

Offline JBMauser

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 391
THE RECONSTRUCTION ISSUE
« Reply #10 on: January 15, 2005, 03:17:45 AM »
williamlayton, It was not pure greed.  It was vengence and anger that fueled the greed and other actions.  The conflict tore everyones life to shreds.  The world as everyone knew it a few years before was gone and it was the other guys fault.  The loss of life touched every man, every family.   In the history of man, no army on either side saw loss, death and destruction on such a scale.  To say that the Union military was jaded would be an understatement.  Human nature is what it is and the fragile flame of compassion would have a tough time surviving a tornado.  Lincoln would have done much better for the South because he knew it was nessessary to bring the entire county to health.  I think it is an error to Try and view what happened through today's culture without adding in the hate, pain and blame.   Modern world analogy - did you know that one in 4 Chineese alive today has perosnal knowledge/memory of one of their family members being murdered by the Japannese?  Do you think that has any affect on policy and such in the pacific rim?  Does this tell you why we defend Japan and we don't let them set out their alone? Revenge was/is more powerful than greed.  In my humble opinion.  JB

Offline williamlayton

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15415
THE RECONSTRUCTION ISSUE
« Reply #11 on: January 16, 2005, 05:36:52 AM »
Revenge--that is a reasonable  thought, I am not sure that I can agree that it was most powerful force behind the greed of those who took advantage. Will have to think on that awhile.
Blessings
TEXAS, by GOD