204

AFFAIRS IN SOUTH CAROLINA.

possible for South Carolina ever to regain her civil rights and to be restored to the Union, until she voluntarily abolished slavery by her organic law. Until this was done, she would be kept under military rule and the negroes be protected as freedmen by the whole military force of the United States. While most serious evils were anticipated, it was hoped that the freedmen might be attached to the whites by reason, justice and humane treatment, as strongly as they had been under the old condition. The great and sudden change in their condition would at first produce dissatisfaction, idleness and confusion. This, however, would only be temporary. The negro would soon find out that he must work or perish.

It had long been the reproach of South Carolina that her constitution was less popular and republican in its provisions than that of any other State in the Union. Many believed that to this cause alone might be traced the origin of that discontent and dissatisfaction with the federal government, which, after being nursed for a generation, had ended in secession and rebellion. The basis of representation in the State was founded on no just principle of property or population. Now that slavery was abolished, a reformation in this respect was imperative. In considering the question of abolition, it was proper, in some way, to include the freedmen, who took the place of the white men in the lower part of the State, and, to some extent, in the upper. The inclusion was due the lower country, where the negroes outnumbered the whites; "the Federal basis of representation in Congress counting three-fifths of the negroes would seem

1 The State was divided into two parts, each having its treasurer and some other administrative officers. The southern part was commonly spoken of as "the Lower Country;" the northern, as "the Upper Country."

to be just and right," as it was the compromise agreed on by the framers of the Constitution, and, no doubt, was founded in wisdom.

The question of the suffrage was one of great importance, and must be settled anew. In 1790, the State constitution gave the suffrage to white men of the age of twentyone, who were property holders, or tax payers. In 1810 the property qualification was abolished, as it was thought proper to allow every white man to vote, who served in the militia or on patrol duty, who worked on the roads, or defended his country in time of war. But to extend universal suffrage to the freedmen, in their ignorant and degraded condition, would be little less than madness. "It would be giving to the man of wealth and large landed possession, in the State, a most undue influence in all elections. He would be able to march to the polls, with his two or three hundred freedmen, all his employees, and thus to control elections. The poor white men in the election districts would have no influence, or their influence would be overpowered by one man of large landed estate."

Did not the free States uniformly exclude the negro from voting? If the New York property qualification. for the negro were adopted in South Carolina, very few of its freedmen would ever be able to vote. Even in North Carolina and Tennessee, since the free negroes had been entitled to vote, it was understood "that they seldom saw proper to exercise this franchise." The radical Republican party North were looking with great interest to the

1 In 1865 the Governor of South Carolina was elected by the legislature.

2 For the provisions in the State constitutions on this subject, see my Constitutional History of the American People, 1776-1850, pp. 476-479.

206

BENEFITS FROM ABOLITION.

action of the Southern States on negro suffrage, and while they admitted, that a man in order to vote should have a property qualification, and be able to read and write, yet they contended that there should be no distinction between voters on account of color. They forgot that "ours is a white man's government, and intended for white men only," and that the Supreme Court of the United States had decided that the negro was not an American citizen under the Federal Constitution.1 That each State in the Union possesses the exclusive right to decide for itself who should exercise the right of suffrage was beyond dispute.

The abolition of slavery would give new energy and self-reliance to the people of the State; would stimulate industry and promote economy in all the relations of life. In less than ten years, her people would realize, in the loss of slavery, a blessing in disguise. As she was the first to lead off in the great and most unfortunate secession movement, it now became her duty "to set a bright example of loyalty to the other Southern States, in returning to the Union and cheerfully performing all her obligations to the Federal Government." In returning, she would receive "a restoration of all her civil and political rights as a sovereign State, with general amnesty for the past." The delegates, therefore, should be careful to do all that was necessary to aid the President in carrying out his wise and generous plan of reconstruction. The governor emphasized the fact, remarked to him by many patriots, that the brave men who had imperilled their lives and made every sacrifice in the civil war, had promptly and cheerfully acquiesced in its results; while some of those who had kept out of danger and made no sacrifice, were not inclined to accept the inevitable. The colored 1 Dred Scott vs. Sandford, 19 Howard, p. 293.

troops, said he, whose atrocious conduct had disgraced the service and filled the public mind with most horrible apprehension, had been withdrawn from the interior of the State and were to be placed in garrisons on the coast, where they could do no further mischief. As the white troops were preserving peace and order, it was thought that their presence would "be necessary in order to enforce the relative duties of the freedmen and their employers."

On the first day of the session, John A. Inglis, who was chairman of the committee which had reported the ordinance of secession on the twentieth of December, 1860, introduced an ordinance to abolish slavery. There was some difference of opinion as to the language most appropriate to be used. Ought not the ordinance to declare that abolition was already effected by the proclamations of the President and by the military authorities of the United States? Or as it was an incontrovertible fact that slavery had ceased to exist, ought it not to declare that any attempt by the State to revive it would be impolitic and disastrous? One member wished the ordinance to read that, as the slaves had been emancipated de facto by the Federal authorities, the institution should never be reestablished in the State. At last, by an almost unanimous vote, an ordinance was passed. Recognizing that the slaves had already been emancipated by the action of the United States authorities, it simply abolished slavery.2 Ex-Governor Pickens reported an ordinance to repeal the ordinance of secession, and it was carried almost unanimously.3

1 Journal of the Convention, 11-19.

2 September 19, yeas 98, nays 8; Journal, p. 64. South Caro

lina was the twenty-ninth State to abolish slavery.

3 September 19, Journal, pp. 27 and 181. Yeas 105, nays 3.

208

FEDERAL RELATIONS.

Perhaps no suggestion, made at this time anywhere in the South, more thoroughly illustrated the transformation which had come in the opinions of many of its people than a set of resolutions introduced on the sixteenth of September. A fundamental difference of opinion, so ran these resolutions, had existed in the country for more than three-quarters of a century prior to the war as to the character, powers and policy of the national and State governments. It was neither wise nor politic for the people of the South to continue, any longer, a contest in which they had been twice defeated; once by political majorities and once by the sword.1 The people of South Carolina accepted as the results of the war certain principles which they would sustain faithfully as a national policy. These principles were, that the Union is the first and paramount consideration of the American people; that sovereignty resides in the American people and its authorized representative, within the limits of the constitution of the Federal Government; that the general government shall be confined strictly within the limits of the Constitution, and that the inalienable right of each State to regulate its own affairs in its own way shall be acknowledged. As the war was not strictly in the nature of an insurrection or rebellion, justice and wisdom dictated that the pains and penalties affixed to these crimes by the United States, should not be enforced.2

It was agreed that the governor should appoint a commission to prepare and submit to the legislature, a code for the regulation of the labor and for the protection and government of the colored population. A month later, the commission reported a code, which, for a time, be

1 The election of Lincoln and Hamlin.

3

2 Journal, 41-42. The resolutions were not acted on. 3 Journal, 103.