This was, in a political sense, his last will and testament. No other
communication from him to his countrymen was more fraught with wisdom
and patriotism. It received the prompt endorsement of William Lloyd
Garrison, who defended it when attacked by Professor Newman, of London
University.[76] Garrison held not only that Lincoln had no right to
interfere with the voting laws of the states, but that it would be bad
policy to do so; for if negro suffrage were imposed upon the South
against the will of the people, then, "as soon as the State was
organized and left to manage its own affairs, the white population, with
their superior intelligence, wealth, and power, would unquestionably
alter the franchise in accordance with their prejudices and exclude
those thus summarily brought to the polls."
Garrison saw further than Sumner, but nobody at the North then imagined
the tremendous consequences that were to follow the upsetting of
Lincoln's plan. If Trumbull's resolution had passed, it would have
served as a precedent for all the seceding states, in which case most of
the misery of the next fifteen years in the South, including the
carpet-bag governments and the Ku-Klux-Klan, would have been avoided.
President Johnson at first had been rather more radical than the
majority of his party as to the measure of punishment to be visited upon
the leaders of the rebellion. He had several times talked about "making
treason odious," and had said that traitors should take back seats in
the work of Reconstruction, and had used language which implied that
some of the more prominent Confederates ought to be tried and executed
for treason. He had a sharp difference with General Grant as to the
inclusion of General Lee in that category, Grant insisting that no
officer or soldier who had observed the terms of capitulation at
Appomattox could be rightfully molested.[77]
But this feeling of animosity on Johnson's part gradually passed away.
In an authorized interview with George L. Stearns, October 3, 1865, on
the subject of Reconstruction, and again in an interview with Frederick
Douglass and others, February 7, 1866, on the suffrage question, he said
nothing about making treason odious, but declared himself opposed to
unrestricted negro suffrage because he believed it would lead to a war
of races--a war between the non-slaveholding class (the poor whites) and
the negroes. The former hated and despised the latter, and this feeling
he thought would be intensified if the suffrage were granted to the
negroes.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account