The Negro and the elective franchise. A series of papers and a sermon — John Stuart Mill — John Shaqi
The Negro and the elective franchise. A series of papers and a sermon
John Stuart Mill · en
_To these Southern men, we can make but one reply. Unmistakably our
courage is the issue._ But before considering how best to treat their
sinister challenge, let us answer to the Republican party the question:
What does justice to the Negro demand? Our reply is simple,—the
fulfillment of the promise, which was treasured up in the hearts of four
million men as they passed through the doors of slavery into the light
of freedom;—the promise, which they have left to their children as their
one priceless inheritance: "The guarantee by Congress of equal suffrage
to all loyal men at the South was demanded by every consideration of
public safety, of gratitude and of justice, and must be maintained"—this
was the promise of the Republican party in 1868. The freedman appeals to
the creator of his political rights, as Tennyson to the Creator of his
being:—
Thou wilt not leave us in the dust;
Thou madest man, he _knows_ not why;
He thinks he was not made to die;
And Thou hast made him,—Thou art just.
Is it then fair to leave to us the vindication of the Reconstruction
policy against men of the South, the North and even influential members
of the party’s own councils? Must we meet the charge that the Republican
party was moved by revenge and folly, and prove that there was no other
way to secure the foundation of freedom, which hundreds of thousands had
died to win? Were those terrible years of death a mere night over the
gaming table, with two haggard players, ’breaking even’ at dawn? Is it
left to us to rescue from their own sons the fame of the heroes of the
war against slavery and restore the honorable inscriptions recorded on
their tombs? When men talk of ’the greatest error of Reconstruction,’
has the murder of Lincoln no claim to the place? Does not John Wilkes
Booth better merit derisive canonizing than "Saint" John Brown? If it
was irony for the "Reconstruction" legislatures to impose heavy taxes
upon a people who had just emerged from a ruinous war and by bonded
indebtedness extend the obligation to future generations, was it not
also irony to punish and re-enslave by vagrancy laws the men who without
an acre or a dollar were now _called_ free?