"Views of an Old Abolitionist" **** *** *** **** Source: The North American
Review, March 1879, pages: 257-260 (emphasis
added).
Wendell Phillips
In
the following excerpt from The North American Review,
Wendell Phillips argues that Reconstruction was not a
failure. He argues that if the Radical Republicans' plan to
give the Freedmen land had been acted upon, the Freedmen
would have been successfully launched as productive
citizens. Asterisks [***] indicate edits of the
original document by Michael O'Malley.
Negro
suffrage has not been a failure. Only the merest surface
judgment would so consider it. Though his voting has been
crippled and curtailed throughout a large part of the South
during half the time he has been entitled to vote, the negro
has given the best evidence of his fitness for suffrage by
valuing it at its full worth. Every investigation of
Southern fraud has shown him less purchasable than the white
man. He has wielded his vote with as much honor and
honesty--to claim the very least--as any class of Southern
whites; even of those intellectually his superiors. For nine
fearful years he has clung to the Republican party (which at
least promised to protect him) as no white class, North or
South, would have done. Want and starvation he has manfully
defied, and asserted his rights till shot down in their very
exercise.
The
South owes to negro labor and to legislation under negro
rule all the prosperity she now enjoys--prosperity secured
in spite of white ignorance and hate. The negro is today
less ignorant, superstitious, and helpless than the same
class of Southern white men; yes, than a class of whites
supposed to be immeasurably his superiors.
The
South would not have disfranchised the negro if his suffrage
had been a failure. Its success is what she fears and hates.
When lawless and violent men attack any element of law and
civilization, and can only succeed by destroying it, does
not that very assault prove the value and efficiency of that
obstacle to their lawless purpose?
If
negro suffrage has been in any particular or respect a
failure, it has not been the negro's fault, nor in
consequence of any want or lack in him. If it has failed to
secure all the good it might have produced, this has been
because of cowardice, selfishness, and want of statesmanship
on the part of the Government of the United States.
Negro
suffrage has not, therefore, been a failure, even in any
trivial degree, from any lack of courage, intelligence, or
honesty on his part. And let it be remembered how early the
Ku-klux assaulted him; how incessant have been the attacks
upon him all these years; how brave and unquailing has been
his resistance. Let it be kept in mind also that, meanwhile,
one half of the journals of these forty States have been
against him; and seven-tenths of the Federal officers and
the whole organized power of the white South. All this while
the negro has accumulated property, risen in position,
advanced marvelously in education, outrunning the white man
in this race. He has proved himself equal to any post he has
gained. On the floor of Congress the Southern white has more
than once quailed before negro logic, sarcasm, and power of
retort.
Treason
should have been punished by confiscating its landed
property.... Land should have been divided among the
negroes, forty acres to each family, and tools--poor pay for
the unpaid toil of six generations on that very soil. Mere
emancipation without any compensation to the victim was
pitiful atonement for ages of wrong. Planted on his own
land, sure of bread--instead of being merely a
wages-slave--the negro's suffrage would have been a very
different experiment.
Arguments for Confiscation
History 122