Reconstruction

by Brooks D. Simpson

  There has, however, been this longing on the part of the colored man, as I have said. But it will never be satisfied, in my opinion, because the Almighty has given him what he cannot get rid of—a black skin. Did you ever see one who believed in black angels? Did you ever hear of one who wanted a black doll-baby? You have not the power to make him white, and he never will be satisfied short of that. That is the trouble about the whole matter. His condition cannot be altered, and the best thing we can do is what we propose to do in our State—educate him, and take care of him, and do the best we can with him. My cradle was rocked by a colored woman; I was nursed in her arms, and she has had from that day to this not only my respect but my affection. You do not like the colored man half as well as I do.

  But now, as I have said, what are you going to do in legislating for him? What are you going to give him? You are going to violate the Constitution and legislate for the States. You are going to pass a law of Congress to regulate hotels. Now, what will you effect by it? A colored man goes to a hotel and asks the hotel-keeper if he can accommodate him. He does not think he can. “Why can’t you?” “I am not in the habit of telling people my business.” What is a suit worth based on that? You cannot get even a colored jury to try and convict a man on that evidence. He would get nothing. How are you going to establish whether the man was refused the accommodation on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude, religion, or anything else? How are you going to get at that? If a man keeps his mouth shut you cannot make him open it, and the law is inoperative.

  Well, a colored man goes into a railroad car and one of the officers of the road says, “You cannot go into that car; it is a ladies’ car.” He rejects him because he is not a lady. Are you going to have the case brought up in the United States court, trying to prove that he is a lady? You might have a “rocky” time if you tried to prove that. Well, again, he wants to have his goods hauled, and the man owning the team says that he cannot haul them; and instantly the gentleman from Massachusetts asks you to bring that man into a United States court and have the case heard there. We had at one time a United States judge in the State of Virginia who might have made a decision of that kind; but that judge has gone, thank God, to his eternal account, and we have not an unjust judge in our borders. There may be some in the State of my friend from Mississippi, [Mr. LAMAR.]

  Mr. LAMAR. I will say that the judge of the Federal court in the State of Mississippi is a man who has administered harsh and ungracious laws in a spirit of benignity and justice.

  Mr. WHITEHEAD. Well, that is a good man, neither a ruffian, a horse-thief, nor an assassin.

  Mr. LAMAR. No, sir.

  Mr. WHITEHEAD. I am glad to hear of that coming from the State of Mississippi.

  Now, the reason upon cross-examination by the manager of this bill why it should be passed was what I will presently state. He has said it—and I call upon every honest man on the other side of the House to listen to it—he has said that colored men, under the laws as now existing, have been made citizens and clothed with the rights of citizens, and have all the rights at common law and all the rights this bill proposes to give them, and are entitled to recover for any damage they may receive under the common law. Then why pass this bill; cui bono ? Why pass this bill if he has these rights in the State courts and can recover for all the damages he may have received from his exclusion from theaters or hotels or cars? Why pass this law? Why pass this law against which the people have, as he says, some prejudice? Why pass this law which, as the people decided last fall, they did not want? Why pass this law which the men most interested in tell you will do harm? Why pass this law which the republicans in my State opposed last fall? Why pass a law which your own party tell you will do no good? Some of you gentlemen on the other side of the House were called upon to give an account of your stewardship last fall, and you will not be here in the next Congress to do it; but some of you will be here. Let those of you who will be here get ready to give an account of your stewardship, for the people will require it at your hands. They will want to know why you created this trouble and disturbance. I tell you that the people of the North, when they see clearly, and they are beginning to see clearly, that the administration, the passage of laws like this, is shaking the foundations not only of the rights of the States, but the integrity of the Government and the prosperity of the people, will rebuke you for your course. You have been told here from your own side of the House of the decrease in the industries of the country in some places, the falling off in the sale of those articles that you sold to us and by which you made money; you have been told of the destruction of your trade in New Orleans; and it is all the result of your own work and your own legislation, your own folly.

  Well, as I said, the gentleman who controls this bill gives you one reason for its passage, and only one. He says that in the Southern States murder, assassination, and robbery prevail. I say here now that I have heard that statement a hundred times, and whenever an exception has been made taking out any State from that category, it has been done upon the call of somebody denying the statement. The statement is continually made broadly that within the Southern States murder, assassination, robbery, and every evil thing is going on. It is said that a negro cannot get justice in the courts in a Southern State if he brings suit before the circuit court there. In other words, he says that the circuit judges in the Southern States will forswear themselves, and having sworn to try cases according to the law, will try them according to the color of the man who is the suitor.

  Now, sir, just here I, coming from one Southern State, undertake to say that whenever that statement is made it is deliberately untrue. There is not a circuit judge in the southern States who is not in every respect the equal, morally, mentally, physically, of the gentleman from Massachusetts, and they are all better looking than he is, every one of them. I appeal to you gentlemen on the other side because I know many of you personally. Are you going to stand by these wholesale charges against the southern judiciary without exception; are you going to say that the circuit judge of my district in Virginia would forswear himself? Sir, I have known him to do what you would not do in favor of a poor black man. A colored man had been brought before him for trial for an assault on another colored man, and excitement and white prejudice (if you choose) was against him; and I heard the judge refuse to imprison him till he paid the fine which strict law would have justified; and he said he would give him a chance to work and pay it. I heard a judge charge a jury that if any of them had any prejudice against a man merely on account of his color, he should not serve on that jury. Our judges have watched against any possible prejudice of jurors, and in their dealings with colored suitors and criminals have leaned to the side of mercy.

  Now, I say that this wholesale charge that the judiciary of any State of the South is corrupt, that our judges will forswear themselves about this matter of color, is a slander on that people and proved so every day by you yourselves. Who are we here, the Representatives of the people of the different Southern States? Who is the gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. LAMAR] but a Representative of the people of Mississippi? There are men in his district in every respect as good as he is; there are men in all our districts as good as we are, men as correct in every respect. We are but the Representatives of people who are just like us. Now, I will just set up one of these gentlemen, and you on your side may set up the gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. BUTLER,] and then look at them both. Does the gentleman from Mississippi look like a robber? Do I look like an assassin? Is there anything in the appearance of any of these gentlemen representing the States where, it is said, murder is so rife, where there are assassins, thieves, and robbers—does anybody here look like a thief or a robber?

  Now, what is the meaning of all this? What is the meaning of the assertion that the minority are robbers and assassins? The minority! Who are the minority in my State? They are all republicans. We have a majority of democrats down there. How is it in the State of my fri
end from North Carolina, [Mr. VANCE?] There is a mighty big majority down there on our side. Is it the minority in North Carolina and Virginia that are the robbers and assassins and horse-thieves? I do not think so. They are very good people in their way, though they do not know quite so much as they might know. Some of them cannot read or write, but they can make their mark. Some of them do not know much about constitutional law, but they are very good people and get along very well.

  I take it there are some other things that people are to be judged by. I take it that this House will—and if you do not the people will—judge honestly and correctly in this matter, and say whether we here are the representatives of murderers, assassins, horse-thieves, and robbers. God Almighty made us all, and he made us very much alike. We show very much on the outside what we are inside, and I am willing to come up to a showing. I am willing to take myself as an example, and be set up on the one side, and have the gentleman from Massachusetts, who made this charge, set up on the other, and then let you judge between us. Did Dickens, that magnificent pen painter, when he drew the picture of Quilp, intend to present the picture of a saint or gentleman; or when he drew the picture of Uriah Heep rubbing his hands so smoothly and sleekly intend to draw the picture of a bold, brave man or of a hypocrite? I am willing to be judged by being looked squarely in the eye by any man on the other side, side by side with the man who has made this charge. Let any man look in the eye of each and then judge between us.

  I call upon the gentlemen who have been serving with me in this House for a year past to say whether I have ever used a harsh word here against any section. I have not used an epithet toward a single gentleman in this House. I have made no charges against the people of any section, either in regard to their moral character or their behavior. I stand here, and I have the right to stand here, as a Representative from the State of Virginia, and repel and hurl back into the face of the gentleman from Massachusetts the charge that our judges are not as good as are any other judges; that they are not as honest or as high-toned as are other judges in his or any other State or court.

  Then if our judges are honest, the colored man can get justice in the Southern States, and according to the gentleman’s own argument there is no necessity for passing this law. So I think. Then what is the matter? Why pass this law? Why crack the party whip here? Why are caucuses held to arrange the means of getting this bill through the House against the resistance of some republican members who do not see much good in this thing? Why is this? I will tell you why.

  We are expected to raise a row down South about it. That is one of the whys about it. These people in Louisiana are not half as smart as they ought to be. You cannot get a bayonet into the State of Virginia unless you send it there on your own hook. I tell you we are not going to kick up any row about the civil-rights bill. That will give a pretense for your military interference.

  Let me tell you what we will do. About the time the “forty acres and a mule” notion got going through the South, a sergeant who was quartered down there said to a man who had a pretty big plantation, “What are you going to do about it when they divide up your land? There is going to be a big row down here. I heard one man say that he was going to sit down by his spring and shoot the children as they came for water. What are you going to do about it? Are you going to make a fuss about it?” The answer was, “Not in the least.” “Well,” said he, “suppose they divide up your nine or ten hundred acres and leave you only forty acres; what are you going to do?” “Why” the planter replied, “I am going to stay quietly on those forty acres, proceed with my business, and buy back the rest; I expect it will all be deeded back in a year. If the negro is smarter and more active than I am, he can have what he can make.”

  We are not going to have any bayonets down our way; you may as well understand that. I know that this bill is intended to stir up bad blood, to mix the two races in the schools, so that the children may first get to fighting and then the parents, and then instantly there will be a call for bayonets. But you will be mistaken in your expectation. You expect that some tavern-keeper, perhaps, may get angry and kick some fellow out, that then a fight will follow, and then will come the bayonet.

  But, sir, we have tried that thing. We are a little smarter now than we were in 1861, when certain men wanted to take Washington City with gate-hinges and did not. But I will tell you what you will do. You will carry out what you are already doing. Slavery was no bone of contention in the Revolution. When George Washington left Virginia and the boys made a bee-line for Boston, there was then no row between Massachusetts men and Virginians about slavery. They thought alike on that subject. After awhile Massachusetts changed her opinion; and then by degrees she went on, until finally, against all precedent, she determined to set free all the negroes that we had and take glory to herself for having set at liberty a great mass of people. But to whom did they belong? Not to her; they did not cost her one cent. She took our money when she set them free, and then consoled her conscience by saying that it was a punishment upon us for having gone into the war. What was the cause of that war? The continual picking at that subject of slavery—a continual irritation of sections with that question—a continual interfering with other people’s business, disturbing the country time and again, until an irritated people broke loose and said, as Abraham said to Lot, “Now, let us divide right here; if the land up there suits you, you go there; and if the land down here suits us, we will stay here.” Did you do like Lot? Did you divide the land in that way? No; you said, “You shall not go out of this partnership; come right back.” We did not come straight back, but after considerable trouble and noise we did come back. We came back very much like the prodigal son in some respects, but not in others. We did not come back very repentant for anything we had done; we did not hang upon anybody’s neck; but we came back mighty near starved and hardly filled with the “husks that the swine did eat.” We did not have much when we got back. Since we came back we have been trying to raise something; we have been trying to see whether we cannot get to be tolerably comfortable; but you have turned right around and commenced that same picking, and not having the slave to pick at, you pick at the free negro. You have started this thing; and whether gentlemen here personally believe it or not, it is in somebody’s mind to keep up this disturbance, to keep up this difficulty, until it ends in somebody’s political benefit—in somebody gaining political power. You persisted in irritating Louisiana until it broke out and you capture it. You are irritating Mississippi, by seizing a sheriff with the United States Army, so that Mississippi may break out. You are irritating Alabama until she may break out, and you may grab her. South Carolina has been irritated until you have captured her soul and body and lands and tenements. I suppose you will keep on stirring up North Carolina. My friend here [Mr. VANCE] is a good-natured man, and it will take a great deal to stir him up. Stir up North Carolina, stir up Virginia, stir up Tennessee and Kentucky, and Maryland and Missouri; arouse bad blood; get the people enraged with each other; possibly there may be some outbreak, and thus the republican party may be saved.

  But, sir, no such thing will happen; there will be no outbreak—at least not down our way. If that is your hope, you are lost; if that is your hope, you may as well begin now to pick up stakes and leave Washington now. You will save a month’s board by the operation. We do not intend to break the peace. But I will tell you what we do intend to do; I give it seriously as prophecy, and you may as well heed it now. If you think we are going to stand this thing quietly and tamely, you are very much mistaken. If you think we are going to be irritated in this way without doing anything, then you have hold of the wrong men. But we do not intend to shoot anybody. We are not ruffians—either “border ruffians” or any other sort; and we do not mean to steal anything; we want that expressly understood; that is not in our line. We do not intend to steal plate, or jewelry, or horses, or anything else. That is not our way of doing business. We do not expect to steal anything, either, from the Constitut
ion. We are going to comply with the law. You ought to have found that out already. After the war we were under military rule until 1868; we had military governors and military judges and military everything else. A man almost had to get a pass to go to his own spring for water. Yet we stood that; and we elected a so-called republican governor—one Gilbert C. Walker—reconstructed ourselves, and by the by he will be here in Congress after the 4th of March—six feet three inches of good Virginia conservatism.

  You had all this session to improve the currency for the benefit of our broken people, and you would not do it. I do not know whether it was for that reason or not, but from what has occurred I begin to suspect that it was. You attempted to put the bill through by main force, breaking down rules which were established for your protection in old times. You have changed the rules for the purpose of forcing this thing down our throats. Perhaps you wish to make somebody mad. You will not make me mad at least. I am in the finest humor I have been in since I have been a member upon this floor. I do not intend to get mad; I have not the least idea of getting mad. But there is no doubt you have been intending to force this down our throats for the purpose of raising bad blood between the sections. It will raise what will result in your discomfiture. It may result in our selling our last pound of tobacco and cotton abroad even if we do not get three-fourths of the price for it. O, ho! says the gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. WILLIAMS.] You did not say O, ho! when it occurred before. It resulted in the establishment of a gold basis down in Texas, where they still have gold and do not need any paper. They do not want paper when they have gold down there yet. We can do the same thing in Virginia. General Washington shipped his tobacco to and bought his goods in England. We can do the same thing again. I do not suppose we can be whipped because we do not buy of you. I do not suppose we are to be accused of sedition or of armed rebellion against the Government because we will not buy goods in Philadelphia, New York, or Boston, or anywhere else. You are driving us to that. We do not want to do it. We told you we were ruined, that we had nothing when we came out of the war except our naked land and sometimes only the chimneys left of the houses which our fathers lived in. Still we were willing to shake hands across the bloody chasm and do the best we could if you would only give us a fair chance. You promised, but you broke your word. You told us to go back and we should be taken care of and have a fair chance; that we should have a chance to recruit; that we should have a chance to live again in peace; that after slavery was gone we should be no more disturbed. But that promise has not been kept. That old saint, Thad. Stevens, began to stir up bad blood. The balance of the Christian statesmen have been stirring it up ever since. They have all been attempting to make bad blood between the two sections and destroy any chance we had. They have attempted to prevent the shaking of hands across the bloody chasm of the men upon both sides who upon many battlefields won glorious renown for the American name.