Publications of the University of Virginia
Phelps-Stokes Fellowship Papers
Number Four

The Negro in Virginia Politics, 1 865- 1 902

BY
RICHARD L. MORTON, Ph.D.,
Phelps-Stokes Fellow in the University of Virginia, 1917-1918

Charlottesville, Va.
The University of Virginia Press
1919

Cb9y sis l

YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

ACQUIRED BY EXCHANGB

Publications of the University of Virginia
Phelps-Stoh.es Fellowship Papers
Number Four

The Negro in Virginia Politics, 1 865- 1 902

BY
RICHARD L. MORTON, Ph.D.,
Phelps-Stokes Fellow in the University of Virginia, 1917-1918

Charlottesville, Va.
The University of Virginia Press
1919

EDITORIAL NOTE.

The Phelps-Stokes Fellowship for the study of the Negro
was founded at the University of Virginia in 1912 through a
gift from the trustees of the Phelps-Stokes Fund. It is the
duty of the holder of the Fellowship to stimulate and conduct
investigation and to encourage and guide a wider general inter
est among students concerning the character, condition, and
possibilities of the negroes in the Southern States.
With this object in view the successive incumbents have or
ganized classes for study that have been well attended and dil
igent. Special investigations have been carried on by each Fel
low; related topics have been assigned for study by individuals
and groups, and the results presented for class discussion ; and
from time to time men distinguished as thoughtful students of
negro life have been invited to lecture at the University. Sev
eral studies, of which this is Number Four, have been consid
ered of sufficient importance to merit publication. In no case,
however, is the University or the Phelps-Stokes Fellowship
Committee to be considered as passing judgment on the conclu
sions of these papers.

PREFACE.

The seriousness of the race problem in the social and political
life of any one of the United States varies directly with the
percentage of the negro element to its total population. In 1865
forty-two per cent of the population of Virginia was colored.
Negroes were in the majority in forty-three of the one hundred
counties of the State. In 1902 Virginia ranked fifth in the Un
ion in the number of its negroes, and seventh in the percentage
of negroes to its total population. There were 1,192,855 whites
and 660,772 blacks in the State. Negroes, therefore, formed
35.7 per cent of the population. The race problem was rendered
more acute by the fact that the greater part of the negro popula
tion was found in the Tidewater and Piedmont sections. Ne
groes were in the majority in thirty-five of the counties.1
In over one-half of the Northern states, at this time (1902),
negroes did not constitute one per cent of the population. Mass
achusetts, with a population of 2,801,738, had only 31,974 ne
groes, 1.2 per cent of the total population. It ranked twenty-
fifth in the Union in number of negro inhabitants and thirty-
first in the percentage of negroes to its total papulation. Even
these figures did not express the difference in the problems con
fronting the two great sections of the country, for in the North
ern States, illiteracy among the negroes was comparatively small,
while in Virginia over fifty per cent of the male negroes of vot
ing age were illiterate.2
The Northern student of race relations is too far away to
understand the Southerner's problem — even though he may have
a formidable array of facts and figures at his command. The
Southerner, on the other hand, is too close to the negro to form
an entirely unbiased opinion regarding him. Much harm has

1 See map opposite page 147.
2 About 12 per cent of the adult male whites were illiterate. This
percentage was somewhat lower among the whites of the black belt.

6 PREFACE
been done to both races in the South by ignorance of conditions
and by harsh criticisms of the South as a whole when things
have gone wrong in one locality. It should be remembered by
those studying race relations in the South that conditions pre
vailing in Virginia and in Georgia, for example, are entirely dif
ferent in many respects. They are different in degree rather
than in kind. The same may be said of Virginia and any one of
the Northern states where the negro has become a problem, even
in a very limited degree. Race troubles in East St. Louis and in
other Northern cities show this to be a fact. They also show
how truly remarkable is the present harmony between the two
races of the black belts of the South.
Most of the friction between the races in the South since the
War of Secession, has grown out of the work and teachings of
political agitators who have sought to use the untutored negro
to further their selfish aims. Few people realize that the politi
cal and racial troubles of the South did not end with the over
throw of the Reconstruction governments in the seventies, and
that those troubles which followed were a constant reminder of
that evil period in which they had originated. The negro may
well be proud of the progress he has made, with the aid and
encouragement of the white man, in bettering his condition dur
ing the last twenty years. It is the opinion of the author that
this improved condition and the increasing harmony existing be
tween the two races could only have come through the removal
of the negro from sectionalism and politics.
In Virginia, prior to the War of Secession, the political tra
ditions handed down from the days of Washington, Jefferson,
Madison, Marshall, the Randolphs and other statesmen had cast
an aristocratic dignity and noblesse oblige around politics and
politicians that is not readily understood by those not acquainted
with Virginia history prior to the war. This feeling made the
people of the State choose well their political leaders and caused
them to be most conservative in extending the suffrage. Not
until 1850 was white manhood suffrage adopted, and a recognition
of this political conservation prior to Reconstruction is essential
to an understanding of the attitude of Virginians towards the
participation in politics of their former slaves, led by unscrupu
lous adventurers.

PREFACE 7
The political history of Virginia since 1865 is of unusual in
terest. It tells of the struggle of a people, bled by four years of
war and stripped of capital, to adapt their social, economic and
political life to new conditions. Several monographs have been
written which deal more or less with the part that the negro has
played in the politics of this period. Professor J. A. C Chand
ler, in his Representation in Virginia, and History of Suffrage
in Virginia, gives brief accounts of the history of representation
and suffrage in the State since 1865. These studies, however,
deal mainly with the period before 1865. Negroes and Their
Treatment in Virginia from 1865 to 186/ by Professor J. P. Mc-
Connell gives a faithful account of the condition of the colored
people just after their emancipation. Professor H. J. Ecken-
rode's The Political History of Virginia during Reconstruction
and Professor C C. Pearson's The Readjuster Movement in
Virginia are valuable studies of the subjects they discuss.
Although much has already been written about Virginia poli
tics since 1865, the author feels justified in adding to these
works one which gives a connected account of the effect of the
negro on politics and of politics on the negro in Virginia during
the entire iperiod from 1865 to 1902.
The author wishes to thank Professor Richard Heath Dabney
and Miss Estelle Dinwiddie of the University of Virginia for
many helpful suggestions. For the outline map of Virginia, show
ing the county boundaries and the natural divisions of the State,
upon which the charts of this book are based, the author is in
debted to Mr. Morgan P. Robinson.3 He also wishes to acknowl
edge the assistance of Mr. Noland W. Brown of the University
of Virginia in drawing the charts.
Richard L. Morton.
University of Virginia.

8 It was prepared by Mr. Robinson for his Virginia Counties:
Those Resulting from Virginia Legislation, opposite page 134.

CONTENTS. Chapter I.
Introduction  11
Chapter II.
The Beginnings of Negro Suffrage — 1861 to 1867  15
Chapter III.
The Campaign of 1867 — Radicals and Negroes Draw the Color
Line  30
Chapter IV.
The Constitutional Convention of 1867-1868  50
Chapter V.
The Committee of Nine  61
Chapter VI.
The Campaign of 1869 and the Restoration of Virginia  70
Chapter VII.
The Elimination of the Carpetbaggers— 1869 to 1879  81
Chapter VIII.
The Readjuster Movement in Virginia, 1879-1883  98
Chapter IX.
Politics and Race Friction— 1885 to 1900  127
Chapter X.
The Constitutional Convention of 1901-1902 and the New
Constitution  147

Bibliography  163
Appendix 1  167
Appendix II  171
Appendix III  179
Appendix IV  183

CHAPTER I.
Introduction.
The negro has always been either an active or a passive factor
in Virginia politics. Prior to the Revolution the Virginians at
tempted in vain to put an end to the nefarious slave trade, and
they gave as one of the causes for the revolt from their mother
country the enforced continuation of that trade. In 177'8 the
Commonwealth of Virginia went on record as the "first political
community of the civilized modern world" to abolish the traffic.1
The people of Virginia, like those of her sister states of the
North and of the South, accepted slavery with the moral appro
bation of the world. Then came the spirit of freedom and de
mocracy that destroyed the theory of the divine right of kings
in most of Europe and found expression in the writings and
deeds of Virginians in the days of the Revolution and of the
founding of the Republic. The leaders of those days realized
that the doctrines of the Virginia Bill of Rights and of the Dec
laration of Independence were markedly at variance with the
institution of slavery. "I will not, I cannot justify it . ,'' said
Patrick Henry. "I believe the time will come when an oppor
tunity will be afforded to abolish this lamentable evil. Every
thing we can do is to improve it, if it happens in our day; if
not, let us transmit to our descendants, together with our slaves,
a pity for their unhappy lot and an abhorrence of slavery." 2
At this time negro slaves constituted almost fifty per cent of
the total population of the State. They were but shortly re
moved from savagery and were utterly unfit for citizenship in a
democracy. They were a social menace to their owners, and
were beginning to be an economic burden. Thomas Jefferson
pictured the situation truthfully when he said, "We have the wolf

1 J. C. Ballagh, A History of Slavery in Virginia, p. 23, (Johns Hop
kins University Studies.) Hening's Statutes, ix, 471-472.
2 G. Morgan, The True Patrick Henry, p. 246.
11

12 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
by the ears, and it is as dangerous to let go as it is to hold on.
Most Virginians were abolitionists, but not in the later sense
of that word. The General Assembly of 1831-32 gave most of
its time to a brilliant discussion of abolition. There was no more
eloquent arraignment of slavery than that given in the debates
of that session. Finally a bill that would have greatly encour
aged manumission was defeated by one vote in the Senate,
after having passed the House of Delegates. The defeat of any
plan of emancipation was due to the fact that it could not solve
the race question. It would have demoralized the whole system
of labor in the State and would have left the large mass of igno
rant freedmen with no adequate instruction or restraint. The
helplessness of finding a way out of these difficulties, and the
bitter aggressiveness and— from the Southern viewpoint — the
Pharisaic sectionalism of the New England Abolitionists, who
were just beginning their agitations, closed the mouths of the
anti-slavery men in Virginia and induced some to defend openly
the unhappy institution with logic and with Scripture. But the
conservative people of the State were always opposed to slavery
in theory, although they could see no practical manner of ridding
themselves of the institution.
In 1861 Virginians entered the War of Secession in an at
tempt to assert the right of nationality for the Confederate
States, just as their forefathers had done in the days of the Rev
olution to gain American independence.
In 1865 they came out of the war freed from slavery but con
fronted with a tremendous racial and social problem in the great
crowd of freedmen, who were poor, ignorant, unmoral, supersti
tious, easily led astray and utterly unused to the ways of freedom
and self-control. They outnumbered the whites in almost half
of the counties, the local units of government of the State. The
difficulties of the situation were enhanced by the fact that the
State government was no longer in the hands of those who un
derstood conditions and who were most fit to administer it.
Before the radical element of the Republican party gained con-

8 Quoted in B. B. Munford, Virginia's Attitude Towards Slavery and
Secession, p. 73.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 13
trol of the Federal government the conservative leaders of both
parties in the North looked upon negro suffrage as unwise
and dangerous in the South, 4 and not highly desirable in the
North. In 1865 there were only six Northern States which per
mitted negroes to vote: Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire,
Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin.5 In those States there
were discriminations against them, with the probable exception
of Maine. Yet negroes in the Northern States were not an ap
preciable factor in the population and were far more intelligent
than the Southern ex-slaves. In the Federal capital, itself, they
were not allowed to vote. On June 8, 1867, Congress passed a
bill over the President's veto establishing negro suffrage in the
District of Columbia. When the plan was submitted to the vot-

4 Oliver P. Morton in a speech at Richmond, Indiana, in Septem
ber, 1865, said: "I believe that in the case of the four million slaves
just freed from bondage there should be a period of probation and
preparation before they are brought to the exercise of political
power * * * To say that such men, just emerged from slavery,
are qualified for the exercise of political power is the strongest pro-
slavery argument I ever heard. It is to pay the highest compliment
to the institution of slavery." He proposed that the suffrage be
withheld from them until immigration had made a good white ma
jority in the Southern States.
In his valedictory address of January 5, 1866, Governor Andrew,
of Massachusetts, said: "It would be idle to reorganize those States
[the Southern States] by the colored vote. If the popular vote of
the white race is not to be had in favor of the guarantees justly re
quired, then I am in favor of holding on just where we now are. I
am not in favor of a surrender of the present rights of the Union
to a struggle between a white minority, aided by the freedmen on
the one hand, against a majority of the white race on the other. I
would not consent, having rescued these States by arms from se
cession and rebellion, to turn them over to anarchy and chaos.
"I only know that we ought to demand and secure the co-opera
tion of the strongest and ablest minds and the natural leaders of
opinion in the South.''
For the above quotations and for a further consideration of this
subject, see William Henry Trescot, "The Southern Question,"
North American Review, October, 1876 (cxxiii, 249-280).
5 New York (and Tennessee) permitted limited Negro suffrage.
G. T. Stephenson, Race Distinctions in American Law, p. 285.

14 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
ers, it was rejected by a vote of 6,521 to 35 in Washington, and
by a vote of 812 to 1 in Georgetown. But negro suffrage was
introduced, and after four years of trial proved so disastrous
that Congress had to rid the District of the disturbing element
in politics by disfranchising the whole population.
Unlimited negro suffrage had no place in Lincoln's plan of Re
construction, or in the early Congressional plan. It was forced
upon the South by a group of aggressive radicals led by Thad
deus Stevens as a means of their personal aggrandisement and
of executing punishment and revenge upon the Southern States.
Its effects in Virginia are shown in the pages that follow.

CHAPTER II.
The Beginnings of Negro Suffrage — 1861 to 1867.
Prior to 1865 Virginia had enjoyed for four years the unique
distinction of having two governments, the regular State gov
ernment that was in the Confederacy and the shadowy revolu
tionary government set up in trans-Alleghany Virginia and rec
ognized by 'President Lincoln as the government of all Virginia.
Although there was unanimity regarding secession in the
counties that are within the present boundaries of Virginia, the
trans-Alleghany counties opposed it and in June 1861 set up a
government known as the "Restored Government of Virginia."
F. H. Pierpont was made governor and in August 1861 the leg
islature met in Wheeling and gave the consent of Virginia to the
formation of the new State of West Virginia from the counties
that had seceded from Virginia. After having given away about
all the territory over which it could really claim jurisdiction, the
Wheeling government found itself in a foreign State. Governor
Pierpont, therefore, changed his capital to Alexandria where his
government represented a minority in a few border counties un
der the shadow of the Federal armies. Here his capital re
mained until the spring of 1865 when it was removed to Rich
mond after its evacuation by the Confederate forces.
In May, 1864, a constitutional convention was called by the
"Restored Government." This convention, representing a con
stituency composed mostly of people from without the State and
people with Northern sympathies, adopted a constitution limit
ing the suffrage to (loyal) white male citizens of the Common
wealth.1 By recognizing this government on May 9, 1865, President
Johnson gave Virginia a government of her own shortly after
the close of the war. Governor Pierpont suddenly found him
self governor in deed as well as in name, and was recognized as

1 Constitution of 1864, Article III.
15

16 PHELPS-STOKES fellowship papers
such by the people of the State. The people of Virginia now de
sired peace and restoration. The questions of state rights and
slavery had been settled in fact, whatever their theories might
have been.
After the struggle for state rights had, with Lincoln's Eman
cipation Proclamation in 1863, "degenerated," as Governor
Letcher expressed it, into a war for the emancipation of slaves, 2
it was evident that the defeat of the Confederate armies meant
the end of slavery.
On June 19, 1865, an extra session of the legislature that had
previously met in Alexandria was called. This legislature passed
some much needed laws regarding freedmen, and also an enabling
act which resulted in the removal of the clauses in the constitu
tion of 1864 disfranchising those who aided the Confederacy.
Just before the adjournment of this Assembly, Speaker Downey
congratulated its members that the State had been delivered
from the hands of the "Abolitionists" (the radical Republicans).
"Virginia," he said, "is now safe. Whatever they may do to
other states, thank God they cannot now saddle negro suffrage
upon us." 3 This utterance, though coming from the foreign and
Union element in Virginia, is not surprising in view of the fact
that the negro was not only denied the suffrage in most of the
Northern States but was even forbidden to enter some of them
with the intention of residing.4 Speaker Downey was but ex-

2 "It is no longer a war for the preservation of the old Union, as
it was originally proclaimed to be, but it has degenerated into a war
for the emancipation of our slaves." House Jowmal and Documents,
1863-64. 3 H. J. Fckenrode,' Political History of Virginia during Reconstruc
tion, p. 30. (Johns Hopkins University Studies, vol. xxii).
' For example, Illinois, in 1853, put on her statute books a law
making it a misdemeanor for a negro to enter the State with the
intention of residing. In 1862, this law was made a part of the State
constitution. In Article XVIII, Section 1, it was enacted that "No
negro or mulatto shall immigrate or settle in this State after the
adoption of the constitution."
"This article of the constitution,'' observed Mr. Munford, "was
submitted to the popular vote separately from the body of the con
stitution, and, though the latter was rejected by over 16,000 major-

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 17
pressing the sentiment of the great body of conservative men of
the North at that time. But the unfortunate personality of Pres
ident Johnson, the necessary but unwise vagrancy laws of the
Southern States and the growing need of the Republican party
for extreme measures to keep itself in power brought the Radi
cals in Congress to the front.
Governor Pierpont, though a staunch Union man, was very
conservative and for that reason soon lost favor with the radi
cals in his party. These men, for the most part scalawags and
carpetbaggers, desired to gain control of the State for their own
purposes by disfranchising most of the whites and giving the
ballot to the ignorant negroes. On June 12, 1865, the Republi
cans of the Radical center, Alexandria, formed a political asso
ciation. They adopted resolutions to the effect that the State
was in danger of coming under the control of secessionists and
that this should be prevented ; and "that the constitution of Vir
ginia should be amended so as to confer the right of suffrage
upon, and restrict it to, loyal male citizens without regard to
color." This "Union Association of Alexandria," as it was
called, also urged the people of the North, and Congress, to re
gard the Pierpont government as merely provisional and to order
an election of members to a state convention in which all loyal
men should vote regardless of their color. According to Mr.
Eckenrode, "This was the first announcement of the advocacy
of negro suffrage by the Republican party in Virginia." 5
The State elections in the fall of 1865 resulted in the amend
ment of the Alexandria constitution of 1864 so as to extend the
franchise to those who had aided the Confederacy, and to allow

ity, the former was made a part of the organic law of Illinois by a
majority of 100,590. This vote was taken in August, 1862, and thus,
barely a month before Mr. Lincoln's first Proclamation of Emanci
pation, the people of his own state, by a vote approaching unanimity,
placed in their constitution this clause preventing free negroes from
coming into their commonwealth."
Munford, Virginia's Attitude Towards Slavery and Secession, pp.
171-172. 5 H. J. Eckenrode, Political History of Virginia during Reconstruc
tion, p. 33.

18 PHELPS-STOKES fellowship papers
them to hold office. As a result, the legislature that met on De
cember 4 — the very day that the Virginia delegates were refused
seats in Congress — was a very representative and conservative
body. John B. Baldwin, of Augusta county, an ex-congressman
of the Confederacy and one of the ablest and best politicians of
the State, was made speaker of the House of Delegates. R. M.
T. Hunter, William Smith and others of like prominence in the
Commonwealth were members of the Assembly. The conserva
tism of this body may be inferred from the fact that out of the
ninety-seven members of the House of Delegates all but one
were old line Whigs.6
There was plenty of work for this legislature to do for a war-
stricken State. It attempted to win back West Virginia, and,
since that was impossible, to effect with that State a reasonable
adjustment of the public debt. On March 2, 1866, the Assembly
passed by a unanimous vote an act to provide for funding the
interest on the public debt. One-third of the debt was consid
ered as West Virginia's share.7 In order to put an end to the
rumors that the Assembly , would repudiate the State debt, this
legislature passed the following joint resolution :
"1. Resolved, That this General Assembly will pass no such acts
of repudiation.
"2. That such legislation would be no less destructive of our future
prosperity than of our credit, our integrity, and our honor."
This resolution of what may be regarded as the last General
Assembly of the ante-bellum regime should be carefully borne in
mind when considering the Readjuster legislation of 1879 to
1885.8 The greatest problem that confronted this legislature when it
met in December, 1865, was the large number of aimless, va
grant freedmen. The State had been the main battle field of a
long war. Many of her young men were dead; her capital was
gone ; her transportation system was crippled ; the whole system

0 Eckenrode, Political History of Virginia during Reconstruction,
p. 41.
7 House Journal, 1865-66, p. 448; Senate Journal, 1865-66, p. 312;
Acts of Assembly, 1865-66, ch. 9, p. 79; Ibid., ch. 35.
8 Acts of Assembly, 1866-67, ch. 73, p. 499.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 19
of labor was demoralized. Although want and poverty were
everywhere and labor was needed as never before, there was in
many localities an abundance of freedmen who understood
freedom to mean exemption from work and the ability to roam
at will and to live by the aid of the Freedmen's Bureau and petty
thieving. Many of them, in order to fully demonstrate their
freedom, left their old homes. Often their wives and children
were left as a further burden on their former masters. They
crowded into the cities. They congregated in some places in the
country, killed the cattle and poultry, and devastated the corn
fields and melon patches. The whites of the State, scattered
through the rural districts with little police protection, if any,
were naturally alarmed at this condition of affairs.9
The reports of the military officers stationed in Virginia show
that this tendency among the negroes was also causing them
grave concern. They advised the negroes to go to work, and
attempted to put an end to vagrancy among them by the use of
their authority. An order of June 1, 1865, of General Gregg,
who was stationed at Lynchburg, reads as follows : "No freed
man can be allowed to live in idleness when he can obtain any
description of work. Should he refuse to work he will be treated
as a vagabond." On the day following the date of this order,
another was issued by General Gregg to the effect that, "Able-
bodied men will be prevented, as far as it is possible to do so,
from deserting the women, children and aged persons ; and where
there is no good cause shown why they left, they will be sent
back." General Duval at Staunton gave notice on June 2, 1865,
"That all negroes now roaming the country will be made at once
to break up their idle pursuits and seek employment." Colonel
Brown, in a report of January 2, 1866, said that "in the neigh
borhood of Norfolk, Fortress Monroe and Yorktown, about
seventy thousand negroes have been collected during the war.
... In other districts, thousands of freedmen were roaming
about without settled employment and without homes. In locali-

' J. P. McConnell, Negroes and Their Treatment in Virginia from
1865 to 1867, p. 45. The newspapers of the period are filled with com
plaints of vagrancy among the negroes.

20 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
ties, least disturbed by the pressure or conflict of armies and
where the average amount of land was under cultivation, the
crops were suffering from want of proper attention." 10
The wages paid the freedmen were very low. The farmers
were without capital and could afford to pay very little. On the
other hand the freedmen showed no disposition to assume any
responsibility for their contracts or their work, and consequently,
their aid could not be depended upon in advance. At the same
time they were encouraged by the carpetbaggers, and sometimes
by the officers of the Freedmen's Bureau, to demand higher
wages than had ever been paid in the State to either whites or
blacks. The need for legislation to prevent vagrancy was very great
and the demand for such legislation was urgent and insistent, es
pecially throughout eastern Virginia. Under these circum
stances it was natural that the legislature should have attempted
to find some relief for the situation. An act was therefore passed
whose stringency was commensurate with the seriousness of the
evil that existed.31
It was provided in this act that all beggars, except those who
were incapable of labor, and all persons in the State who could
not support themselves and their families and yet refused to
work for the "usual and common wages given to other laborers
in the like work in the place where they then were" be classed as
vagrants. Along with these were placed all persons who came
into the State and who had no occupation or visible means of
support and who could not give an account of themselves or their
business. If upon due examination a person was found to be a
vagrant, he was to be hired out for any term not exceeding three
months and the wages used for him or his family. Provision was
made for the punishment of the vagrant should he attempt to
escape from his enforced employment.
There was no distinction of color made in this law. Although
it was intended primarily for the freedmen, the fifth section of

10 The quotations above are found in J. P. McConnell, Negroes
and Their Treatment in Virginia from 1865 to 1867, pp. 48, 49.
11 Acts of Assembly, 1865-66, pp. 91-93.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 21
the second article of the law undoubtedly refers to the political
adventurers who had already begun to swarm into the State in
search of loot. The law resembled those enacted in the New
England states when they were menaced by a large number of
more or less ignorant and vagrant immigrants. It was stringent
only for incorrigibles but was subject to abuse. Although cir
cumstances demanded a stringent law, it was unwise at this time
because it furnished at a critical period in national politics good
material for Radical Republican propaganda. The practical
working of the law was not tested, since it was annulled nine
days after its passage by Major-General Terry on the ground
that it would virtually restore slavery under another guise. It
was, no doubt, on account of the misinterpretation of the va
grancy law that the legislature passed the following resolution
on February 6, 1866:
"Resolved, That involuntary servitude, except for crime, is abol
ished, and ought not to be re-established, and that the negro race
among us be treated with justice, humanity, and good faith, and
every means that the wisdom of the Legislature can devise should
be used to make them useful and intelligent members of society."
That the legislature wished to make it clear that, in their opin
ion, the time was not ripe for precipitating the ignorant freed
men into the electorate without preliminary training is shown by
the further resolution "that earnest thanks are due the President
for the firm stand he has taken against amendments of the con
stitution forced through in the present condition of affairs." 12
That this legislature had no desire to re-enslave the negro is
shown by the act of February 27, 1866, 13 which repealed, for
the most part, the old slave code. Even the laws prohibiting
negroes from owning firearms or other weapons were repealed,
in spite of the prevailing unrest among the negroes and the fear
among many of the whites of negro insurrections.
On January 23, 1866, the condition of affairs in Virginia came
before the Reconstruction Committee in Congress. The great
majority of witnesses were Republicans, mostly radicals, who

Acts of Assembly, 1865-66, p. 449.
Acts of Assembly, 1865-66, pp. 84-85.

22 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
were not even natives of the State, and in some cases their views
were very extreme. For example, one witness, George S. Smith,
when asked what the Virginians, if left to themselves, would do
to the negro, answered, "They would entirely extirpate him
from the face of the earth. They would first commence with
the Union men and then they would take the negroes." 14 This
is an example of what some good people of the North were in
duced to believe by the Radicals. Most extraordinary rumors of
all kinds were afloat. At this time more acts of violence were
committed by members of both races in the State. The State
government had wholly collapsed ; the country was filled with
vagrants, and the whole social as well as economic structure of
the State was rapidly changing. The party in power also made
the mistake of treating the political and racial questions in the
South as a whole, in spite of the fact that conditions varied
greatly in the different States.
The people of Virginia never blamed the negroes for the war
and its evil consequences. In fact the fidelity of the great ma
jority of them to their masters and their masters' families during
the whole period of the war has always been remembered with
appreciation by the white people of the South. The old servants
still depended upon their former masters for advice and aid.
The press and the official reports of the Federal officers stationed
in Virginia indicate an increasing spirit of harmony between the
two races from 1865 to 1867. It was the injection of the ne
groes into politics before they were sufficiently intelligent to as
sume the responsibilities of the franchise, and the radical influ
ence of the Freedmen's Bureau officials, Union Leaguers, North
ern political adventurers of all kinds and Northern school teach
ers that caused the friction that existed between whites and
blacks after 1867.
The year 1866 was full of anxiety to the people of Virginia.
At the end of the previous year, Congress had refused to admit

14 Reports of Reconstruction Committee, Thirty-Ninth Congress
first session, Part 2, Virginia; Reports of the Secretary of War,
Thirty-Ninth Congress, second session. Congressional Globe, 1865-66,
pp. 1407-1411.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 23
their representatives. Lincoln's plan of early conciliation and
restoration, that President Johnson had adopted, was doomed to
failure. From the nature of the witnesses and the testimony
they gave before the Reconstruction Committee in January, 1866,
it was evident that Congress had nothing good in store for Vir
ginia. It was felt that the old South with its traditions had gone,
that the eastern part of the State would probably sink into the
condition of Hayti, and that whatever might be saved from be
ing "Negroized" would only be saved at the price of being "Yan-
keeized" — whatever that word connotated at the time.15
Emboldened by the increased strength of the Radicals in Con
gress, their followers were much encouraged to seek control of
affairs in Virginia. On May 17, 1866, the "Unconditional Un
ion Convention" met in Alexandria. It was the first state-wide
political convention in the State since the war. Its chairman
was John Minor Botts, a man of no mean ability, who had re
mained loyal to the Union during the war and had not thereby
increased his popularity in his native State. A resolution was
adopted by this convention, "That no reorganized State govern
ment of Virginia should be recognized by the government of the
United States which does not exclude from suffrage and holding

15 In a letter to Dr. Moses D. Hoge of August 16, 1865, Dr. R. L
Dabney, one of the leading theologians of the period, writes from
his home in the black belt of Virginia that "people do not enough
allow for the poisonous effects of an oppressive government, which,
with this blight so visible now in society, and church, and the killing
and banishing of the most of our better spirits, I fear that the in
dependence, the honor, the hospitality, the integrity, the everything
which constituted Southern character has gone forever."
In a letter of March 13, 1866, Dr. R. L. Dabney wrote from his
home in Prince Edward County, "It seems to me nearly every per
son of any standing or intelligence I meet with is inclined to emi
gration, and only needs an inviting outlet to determine him." Mat
thew Fontaine Maury, then in Belgium, was much interested in find
ing a suitable Country as a home for those who should leave Vir
ginia. General Jubal A. Early, who was never reconstructed, looked
with especial favor upon New Zealand, because it was "far from
Yankees and negroes."
Thomas Cary Johnson, The Life and Letters of Robert Lewis Dab
ney, pp. 304-307.

24 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
office, at least for a term of years, all persons who have volun
tarily given moral or material support to rebellion against the
United States, and which does not, with such disfranchisement,
provide for the immediate enfranchisement of all Union men
without distinction of color." It declared that since the Virginia
legislature was made up largely of rebels, it was an illegal body
and that its laws, therefore, should be considered illegal and void.
The convention furthermore had circulated through the State a
petition, addressed to the Senate and House of Representatives
of the United States, asking that the Pierpont government be
overthrown and that reconstruction of Virginia be made along
those lines afterwards adopted by Congress and known as the
Congressional plan of Reconstruction. This plan would require
the appointment of a provisional governor. Therefore, "They
[the signers of this petition] further request," continued the pe
tition, "that the Hon. John C. Underwood, the faithful patriot
and distinguished jurist, who has always adhered to the gov
ernment with a fidelity which *no flattery could seduce, no bribery
corrupt, nor fears intimidate, be selected as said provisional
Governor." 16
John C. Underwood was a native of New York who had lived
in Clarke county, Virginia, for a few years prior to the War of
Secession and who had become so unpopular there on account of
his radicalism that he soon found it more agreeable at the North.
He was a man of little education or natural ability and was ut
terly unscrupulous. He returned to Virginia in the wake of the
Federal armies and had already made himself obnoxious by ad
vocating the disfranchisement of all but "loyal" whites, by his
activity in confiscating the property of Virginians who had aided
the Confederacy, and by urging the negroes to be active in pol
itics. Besides the adverse testimony before the Reconstruction Com
mittee there was other material for Radical propaganda against
Virginia in 1866. In the spring of that year, Judge Thomas, of
Alexandria, rendered a decision adverse to the Civil Rights law
when he held that the laws of Virginia forbade negroes to testify

10 Appleton's Annual American Cyclopaedia, 1866, "Virginia."

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 25
in cases where only whites were concerned, and that a Federal
law could not prescribe qualifications for witnesses in a State.
A more serious case was that of Dr. Watson, of Rockbridge
county, who was brought to trial that fall for the murder of a
negro and was acquitted. Whereupon he was ordered by Gen
eral Schofield to appear before a military tribunal, but was par
doned by President Johnson before trial. Although such cases
were exceptional; they were used with much effect in creating
an unfavorable impression of conditions in Virginia at the North.
On September 2, a convention was called at Philadelphia to
bring together the Republicans at the North and the Unionists
at the South. The topic that was most discussed was unre
stricted suffrage. Of the Virginia delegation, John Minor Botts
opposed unrestricted suffrage, and James W. Hunnicutt, who
was destined to become one of the leading Radicals of the State,
advocated manhood suffrage, except to "rebels." 17 During the
last days of its session, the convention, by a small vote, declared
itself in favor of manhood suffrage. As Mr. Eckenrode points
out, 18 it was not until after this convention that manhood suf
frage was accepted by the Republican party.
When on December 2, of this unhappy year, the legislature
met in its second session, Governor Pierpont wisely advised
moderation in all laws regarding freedmen and Federal relations,
and advised the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment. But
public sentiment in the State was very strong against the amend
ment and the legislature could not conscientiously ratify it while
there was hope of its being defeated. Besides, Virginia consid
ered it most illogical and unlawful to be treated as a conquered

" Rev. James W. Hunnicutt was a native of South Carolina and
had resided in Alexandria for a number of years as the editor of a
religious paper. During the war he followed the line of least re
sistance and did not oppose the Confederacy. But during Re
construction he became one of the most violent and dangerous of
the Radical demagogues, and through a newspaper, the New Nation,
which he published in Richmond during that period, he exerted a
very great influence over his party.
18 Eckenrode, Political History of Virginia during Reconstruction,
p. 49.

26 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP papers
province and at the same time be forced to aid in ratifying an
unwelcome amendment as one of the States of the Union. Con
sequently it rejected the amendment on January 9, 1867. 19
On March 3, 1867, the legislature adjourned. But before it
closed its doors, it requested the Governor to call an extra ses
sion at once to meet the emergency that would arise out of legis
lation pending in Congress. Governor Pierpont complied with
the request and, in his message at the beginning of the new ses
sion, laid before the Assembly the Reconstruction Act of March
2 with the advice that a convention be called to make a constitu
tion to meet the conditions therein imposed. The legislature
realizing that the Radicals now had control of Congress, decided
to act upon the Governor's advice. A bill providing for the call
ing of a constitutional convention was introduced in the Senate
on March 9, and a committee was sent to Washington to learn
the wishes of Congressional leaders in this matter. They re
turned with the assurance of these men that the proposed bill
was satisfactory and that a convention called according to its
provisions would be considered legal by them under the Recon
struction act of March 2.20
The Richmond Whig had, at an early date, begun to urge the
people of the State to accept the inevitable. Now the Richmond
Dispatch urged the people to support the action of the Senate
and "to come out and take part in the political measures of the
day, and, gracefully submitting to necessity, thus save themselves
and their State from the most dreadful fate that ever came upon
a nation, namely, the giving up, through inaction, their govern
ment and their fates to the colored voters and the followers of
Hunnicutt." There were many advocates of inaction in politics
at first, but this changed as Reconstruction progressed.
The bill for calling a constitutional convention was passed by

10 General Schofield attributes the action of the Assembly in re
jecting the Fourteenth Amendment to influence from Washington,
perhaps to that of President Johnson. General Schofield advised its
adoption in order that more radical legislation might be thereby
avoided. General John M. Schofield, Porty-Six Years in the Army.
20 The Richmond Dispatch, March 11, 1867.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 27
a large majority in the Senate. But the act of Congress of March
23 made a vote on the bill of no use in the House. In the mean
while, however, the Reconstruction Act of March 2 was being
put into execution. Virginia now became Military District Num
ber 1, and Lieutenant-General John M. Schofield, who had been
in charge of the Federal troops of the Potomac Division, was
put in command. He assumed control of the District on March
13, 1867. Reconstruction had come.
Virginia was most fortunate in having General Schofield at
this time. He was conservative, wise and just; and it was due
to his moral courage and good sense that Virginia was spared
the reign of terror that existed in most of the Southern States
during the Reconstruction period. His policy was to gain the
confidence and support of the people of the State and to inter
fere as little as possible with the civil authorities.21
The Reconstruction Acts of March 2 and March 23 gave to
the freedmen the right to vote for delegates to a constitutional
convention to frame a constitution according to the wishes of
Congress. The negroes had, however, already made their first
attempt to vote on March 5, 1867, at Alexandria, where they had
been influenced by the Northern settlers in their midst. The
mayor of the town and the local judge asked the advice of the
President of the United States and of the Attorney General as
to the right of these people to participate in the municipal elec
tion. As no definite answers were given to the inquiry, negro
votes were not counted in. In this election there were cast 1,400
negro votes (counted by a Radical agent), 1,000 white Conser
vative votes, and 72 white Radical votes.22 This action on the
part- of the election officials brought forth much harsh criticism
in the North. Similar troubles elsewhere in Virginia were pre
vented by an order from General Schofield of April 2, which for
bade any local election until after registration under the Recon-

21 John M. Schofield, Forty-Six Years in the Army, p. 399. Ch. xxi
deals with Reconstruction in Virginia.
22 H. J. Eckenrode, Political History of Virginia during Reconstruc
tion, p. 66.

28 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
struction Acts had been completed. In the meanwhile vacancies
were filled by the Commanding General.23
Immediately after the Reconstruction Act of Congress of
March 23 was published, the Commanding General appointed a
board of army officers to select suitable ipersons as registering
officers throughout the State. In selecting these officers of reg
istration, preference was given : first, to officers of the army and
of the Freedmen's Bureau on duty in the State ; second, to per
sons who had been honorably discharged from the army after
having seen service ; and third, to loyal citizens of the locality in
which they were to serve. In fact, the greater part of them were
chosen from the first class.
The outlook in Congress was becoming more and more dis
couraging to the Southern people. On March 19, 1867, Thad
deus Stevens introduced his bill for confiscating the property of
"rebels." In a speech advocating this measure as a punishment
of the people of the South he said, "The punishment of traitors
has been wholly ignored by a treacherous Executive and by a
sluggish Congress. I wish to make an issue before the Ameri
can people, and see whether they will sanction the perfect im
punity of a murderous belligerent ... To this issue I desire to
devote the small remnant of my life." It was in the hands of
this man and his followers that the fate of the country seemed
to rest in March, 1867. In view of such leadership in Con
gress and of such legislation as had already been enacted, it is
not surprising that a feeling of uncertainty, gloom and dread
should have settled down over the people of Virginia.24

23 Annual Cyclopaedia, 1867, p. 758.
w The description of the conditions that prevailed at the time in
Virginia, given in the two extracts below from letters in the Rich
mond Dispatch of March 21, 1867, are typical of those found in many
letters and other contemporaneous accounts.
The first letter, dated March 19, 1867, is from Halifax county.
"The country," said the writer, "wears now a gloomy aspect, and
the farmers are depressed. Before the war many farmers worked
a large number of negroes. But it is now the rarest thing to find
a half-dozen negroes working together. * * * Politically, the
people want rest and peace. They have been in war and storm long
enough. They feel they have" no power of resistance, and hence de-

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 29
Prior to September, 1866, negro suffrage was not favorably
considered except by a few extreme Radicals. But as the Re
publican party came under the control of the Radical element,
which was destined to bring so much discredit upon the party
not only at the South but at the North, negro suffrage was
adopted by that iparty to bolster up its declining strength. The
negro was most unfortunate in the time of his induction into pol
itics, March 1867. And he was still more unfortunate in his
sponsors on that occasion. It would be hard to imagine less de
sirable political teachers and leaders for the freedmen than such
men as the carpetbagger Underwood and the scalawag Hunni
cutt. Yet these men, whose radicalism was fast bringing them
into prominence in 1865 and 1866, absolutely dominated the ne
gro voters and, through them, Virginia politics in the campaign
of 1867.

sire to heal the breach between the South and the Federal Govern
ment with the least possible delay. True, you sometimes meet with
individuals who council entire inactivity; but these are the excep
tions to the general rule. Submit to any requirements of the con
quering party — for it is a necessity — is well nigh the unanimous
voice of this region of the country."
The second is a private letter to the Baltimore Sun, which says
that it was written by one of the most eminent citizens of Accomac
county and adds that "there is much reason to believe it too true."
"I regret," he said, "that there is nothing pleasant to communicate;
general gloom and despondency hang over our entire section, and a
fearful looking for what is to come. The prospect is less promis
ing to me than at any previous period. We might nerve ourselves
to meet the most stringent of political measures if there was a cer
tainty of its being final. But it seems a disposition to accede to the
demands of the dominant party leads to more oppressive demands.
"A want of confidence, a perfect stupor, and an indisposition to
attempt anything, or to form any plans for the future, is the inevita
ble consequence of the position of matters. God only knows what
is to become of us."
The above "letter explains in part the amazing inactivity that ex
isted in some sections of the South among the whites during the
first part of Reconstruction.
See also T. C. Johnson, Life and Letters of Robert Lewis Dabney,
pp. 301-303. Similar accounts are numerous.

CHAPTER III.
The Campaign of 1867 — Radicals and Negroes Draw the
Color Line.
Registration under the Reconstruction Acts took place in the
summer of 1867. Those who had held any state or Federal of
fice and afterwards supported the -Confederacy were disqualified
from holding office and from voting. The following were classed
as state officials : "Governor, Lieutenant-Governor, Secretary of
State, Auditor of Public Accounts, Second Auditor, Registrar
of the Land Office, State Treasurer, Attorney-General, Sheriff,
Sergeant of a city or town, Commissioner of the Revenue, County
Surveyors, Constables, Overseers of the Poor, Commissioners
of the Board of Public Works, Judges of the Supreme Court,
Judge of the Court of Hustings, Justices of the County Courts,
Mayor, Recorder, and Aldermen of a city or town corporation,
Escheators, Inspectors of tobacco, flour, etc., Clerks of the Su
preme Court, District, Circuit, and County Courts, and of the
Court of Hustings, and Attorneys for the Commonwealth." 1
The Commanding General of the District estimated that 70,000
of the whites were disfranchised in this way. Although this es
timate is "more ingenious than convincing," as Professor Dun
ning puts it, it is certain that thousands of the leading men —
all who had had experience in administration — were disfran
chised. The number of registrants totaled 225,933, of which 120,101
were white and 105,832, or 47 per cent were colored. The col
ored voters formed a majority in only half of the counties. But
since these were the most papulous counties of the State, they
were at an immense advantage when it came to representation.
There were 90,555 registrants in the white section, the northern
and western part of the State, and 125,895 in the black section
to the south and east. By a strict apportionment on the basis

1 Act of Congress of July 19 amending that of June 3.
30

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 31
used, one representative to 2,061 constituents, there would have
been 44 representatives from the white counties and 61 from the
colored counties — in spite of the fact that in the State as a whole
the majority of the whites was 14,269. The actual apportion
ment gave the districts under the white control 47 representa
tives to the convention, and those under colored control 58. 2
When the colored population was enfranchised in the spring
of 1867, the Republican party was already organized and in the
field. There was no other party in Virginia. Furthermore, that
party had two highly developed organizations to bring the ne
groes into line, the Freedmen's Bureau and the Union League.
The Freedmen's Bureau was established in Virginia on June 15,
1865. The State was divided into eight districts, each under an
assistant quartermaster. These in turn were divided into sub-
districts under the command of military officers. This organi
zation not only protected and cared for the freedmen but also
impressed upon their minds the debt which they owed the Re
publican party. The political strength of this institution was
great. But more powerful as a political factor was the Union
League. It was organized in Virginia late in 1866. Its secrecy
and the mysterious solemnity of its ritual made a strong emo
tional appeal to the colored people. They were taught in the
ritual that their only friends were the Union Republicans, and
that their chief enemies were their former masters who were not
of the Republican party.3 They were also encouraged to assert
their newly acquired rights in season and out of season.4
As soon as the People of Virginia had recovered from the
stupefaction into which they had been thrown by the Reconstruc
tion Acts, they began at once to attempt to win the colored vote
from the control of the Radicals. But the futility of their ef
forts is plainly shown by the returns of the fall elections.
There was also a futile attempt made by the conservative col-

2 Report of the Secretary of War; 40th Congress, second session,
vol. ii, p. 294.
3 Walter L. Fleming, Documentary History of Reconstruction.
1 The numerous secret organizations among the Negroes that now
exist throughout the State may have had their origin in part from
the Union League.

32 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
ored leaders to win their people from the control of their un
scrupulous leaders and to find some basis of compromise with
the native white conservatives. The State owes much to the self
control, wisdom and moderation of many such colored men who,
though too much in the minority to accomplish much, did what
they could to narrow the breach that was rapidly separating the
two races. As early as April 15, 1867, a committee of colored
men in Richmond invited several prominent white men to give
their political views. The meeting was held at the theatre and
was addressed by William H. McFarland, Marmaduke Johnson
and Raleigh T. Daniel — who was introduced by the chairman of
the colored committee, Solon Johnson.5 Three days later, a
great mass meeting assembled in the Court House Square in
Petersburg. It was called by a number of the most influential
white citizens of the town and had as its presiding officer Robert
Mcllwaine. A correspondent of the Richmond Dispatch thus
described the meeting: "The crowd was immense, and the
whites and blacks mixed up indiscriminately, and the best dis
position was manifested by all present." A series of resolutions
was unanimously adopted advocating equal school advantages
for the white and colored, and equal legal and political rights to
both races. The negroes were invited to attend the political
meetings of the whites and to participate in their deliberations.
Although the people of Virginia did not accept the Petersburg
platform as their political creed, it was a long step forward in
the compromise movement among the Conservatives of the two
races. The Richmond Dispatch even went so far as to predict
that these resolutions would probably be adopted as the platform
of Conservatives throughout the State.6 They were adopted by
several local Conservative conventions. In Charlottesville, on
April 24, 1867, a meeting was called at the Delevan Hospital by
a large number of colored men, who invited speakers of both
races "to interchange political opinions." Speeches were made
by William F. Gordon and Col. T. J. Randolph, who represented
the whites, and by Fairfax Taylor and Rev. Nicholas Richmond,

5 The Richmond Dispatch, April 15, April 16, 1867.
0 The Richmond Dispatch, April 19 and 20, 1867.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 33
who represented the blacks. Harmony prevailed at the meeting
with the exception of the speech by Fairfax Taylor, who was
reported as bitter and insulting to the whites. In conclusion Mr.
Gordon read the Petersburg resolutions of April 18, to which
all seemed to subscribe heartily.7 Influential negroes of Cape
Charles, Amelia and other counties called similar meetings.8
This movement seems, however, to have had little success in win
ning over the rank and file of the negroes to the Conservatives.
In the meanwhile a new and much more important movement,
the "co-operation" movement, was inaugurated. The purpose of
this movement was to bring about co-operation between the Con
servatives and the Republicans in such a way as to form a new
Republican organization that would be less extreme than that led
by Hunnicutt. It had the support of the moderate element of
the Republican party both within and without the State, and was
supported by many of the most influential Conservatives of Vir
ginia. The resolutions adopted at a meeting in Albemarle county
in behalf of co-operation show the aims of the co-operators. It
was resolved, "That having consented in good faith to the re
construction of the Southern States under the Sherman-Shella-
barger Bill, we consider ourselves bound in honor to the uncon
ditional maintenance of the Union of these States, and that we
regard the welfare of Virginia and of the other Southern States
as requiring that our people should co-operate with the party
that will give us protection for life and property, and believing
that the Republican party of the United States alone has the
power to give us protection, we desire to co-operate with them." 9
' The respectability of the movement is shown by the names of
those connected with it. Among those appointed on the com
mittee of resolutions at the Albemarle meeting were Col. John
J. Bocock, William T. Early, W. F. Gordon, W. H. SouthaU, J.
R. Barksdale, Col. R. T. W. Duke, Dr. A. G. Dabney and Dr.
W. C. N. Randolph.10 There were similar co-operation con-

The Richmond Dispatch, April 24, 1867.
The Richmond Dispatch, April 25, 1867.
The Richmond Enquirer, July 2, 1867.
The Richmond Whig, July 3, 1867.

34 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
ventions in a number of other counties of the State, and by the
end of July, 1867, co-operation had gained considerable impor
tance.11 Throughout the whole campaign of 1867 the extreme radical
ism of the Radical Republicans in Virginia gave much concern
to moderate Republicans everywhere. The New York Tribune
of April 12, 1867, 12 made this comment on the subject : "Far
be it from us to advise a campaign of bitterness. We do not pro
pose to influence the negro by exciting in his mind a hatred of
his former masters. Nor should we advise any organization
antagonistic to those masters. Agitators like Mr. Hunnicutt, of
Virginia, may mean well, but their zeal is bitter and offensive.
To organize a campaign on the Hunnicutt plan is to abandon any
hope of a permanent Union party in the South. We cannot af
ford to array the white against the black, or the black against
the white."
In April, Senator Wilson, of Massachusetts, came to Virginia
in order to deliver his party from the Hunnicutt element, and to
form a respectable Republican party around the old Union men
and former Whigs.13 He did not succeed, however, in disturb
ing the Hunnicutt organization. In fact he was too conservative
for the Radicals and too radical for the Conservatives. He also
seemed to have had an exaggerated idea of the number of men
in Virginia who had been true to the Union during the war, and
was not as careful as he might have been in his utterances be
fore and during his visit to the State. He had the support of
John Minor Botts, who had attempted at an early date to or
ganize a conservative Republican party in Virginia.
After registration had begun in March, 1867, the freedmen
became more and more engrossed in politics. The Union League
and the Radical agitators, of whom there were not a few from
the North at this time, had the negroes completely under their
control. According to General Allen, its Grand Deputy in Vir-

11 H. J. Eckenrode, Political History of Virginia during Reconstruc
tion, p. 75.
" Quoted in the Richmond Dispatch, April 15, 1867.
1B The Richmond Dispatch, April 22, 1867; The Richmond Enquirer,
April 23, 1867.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 35
ginia, the Union League was "a system of night school in which
they (the negroes) were instructed in the privileges of citizen
ship and the duties they owed to the party which had made them
free and given them exercise of suffrage." 14 Largely as a re
sult of this political excitement among the freedmen, labor be
came increasingly more unsatisfactory.15
On March 20, 1867, the Republican State Central Committee
called a State convention to meet in the African Church in Rich
mond on April 17. About half of the counties (49) were rep
resented. Of the two hundred and ten delegates present at this
convention only fifty were white. The assembly was entirely
under the control of Hunnicutt, who boasted in a bitter speech
to the delegates that "The rebels have forfeited all their rights,
and we will see that they never get them back." 16 The negro
delegates took an active part in the discussions and made some
very inflammatory speeches. They even surpassed their white
leaders in advocating extreme measures against the native
whites. They advocated confiscation almost unanimously. On
the second day of its session the convention resolved itself into
a great mass-convention of negro and white Radicals in the Cap
itol Square. There was considerable disorder at both meetings
of the convention. There were numerous calls for the confisca
tion of "rebel" lands, cheers for Thaddeus Stevens, condemna
tions of President Johnson and of the "rebel aristocracy," and
disputes between the delegates. A few of the cooler heads
among the freedmen counseled moderation. Fields Cook, of
Richmond, reminded his people that the whites still had a ma
jority in the State and that harmony would be wisest. Several
other colored speakers gave the same advice, but none of them
were heeded by the crowd of excited negroes. Similar local
Radical conventions were held in the State at a number of
places, 17 with the same disquieting results.

u H. J. Eckenrode, Political History of Virginia during Reconstruc
tion, p. 61.
15 The Richmond Enquirer, April 18, 1863; Richmond Dispatch, July
8, 1867.
16 The Richmond Dispatch, April 18, 1867.
17 Appleton's Annual Cyclopaedia, 1867, p. 759.

36 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
The effect of all this radical propaganda upon the ignorant
freedmen is clearly seen in the riots and general restlessness
among them during the spring and summer of 1867, especially
in the latter part of April and during May.
Near the end of April, four negroes insisted upon their right
to ride upon a street car in Richmond and were taken off by the
police.18 A riot was narrowly averted. The city recorder ruled
that the car company could make such regulations as it chose
concerning those who should ride on its cars. But the president
of the company decided to remove the restrictions from the col
ored people.
On Tuesday, May 6, 1867, the United States Circuit Court
convened in Richmond. Judge John C. Underwood presided.
It was an interesting event and well calculated to produce uneas
iness among the white people of the State. In the first place
the Judge, Underwood, was one of the most bitter and unscrupu
lous carpetbaggers in Virginia politics. And in the second place
negroes served on jury for the first time in the history of the
State.19 This event was unfortunate, especially at this time, as
it produced in the minds of the untutored freedmen an exag
gerated estimate of their own importance in political affairs, and
increased the friction already existing between the races at this
time. Nor was Judge Underwood's fiery charge to the grand
jury of such a nature as to promote harmony between the dif
ferent elements in the State.20

18 The Richmond Dispatch, April 25, 1867.
" There were six colored grand jurors, George Seaton, Cornelius
Liggon Harris, George Simms, Fields Cook, John Oliver and Dula-
ney Beckley. The Richmond Dispatch, May 7, 1867; the Richmond
Enquirer, May 7, 1867.
20 This charge was in part as follows: "Gentlemen of the Grand
Jury, — The circumstances surrounding us demand devout thanksgiv
ing to Almighty God that we, the friends and representatives of the
Government of the United States, who last year were threatened
with destruction and hunted by assassins in this city for attempting
to execute the laws of our country, can now meet in conscious se
curity under the wings of the starry banner which our patriotic
Congress has raised for our protection; and we are permitted to

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 37
On Friday, May 10, fourteen white and twelve colored men
were summoned as petty jurors of the Circuit Court.21 It was
before a mixed jury chosen from among these men that the no-

meet in this building of everlasting granite, so emblematic of the
power and strength of our Government, standing alone and un
harmed amid the general conflagration that swept as with a besom
of destruction all around it.
"And what solemn associations are suggested by reflecting that
in the very rooms we now occupy dwelt the fiery soul of treason,
rebellion and civil war, and hence issued that fell spirit which starved,
by wholesale, prisoners for the crime of defending the flag of our
common country, assassinated colored soldiers for their noble and
trusting labors in behalf of a Government that had as yet only prom
ised them protection, burned towns and cities with a barbarity un
known to Christian countries, scattered yellow fever and small pox
among the poor and helpless, and finally, struck down one of earth's
noblest martyrs to freedom and humanity.
"Another subject of thanksgiving is presented in the very consti
tution of your body, furnishing ocular evidence that the age of caste
and class cruelty is departed, and a new era of justice and equality,
breaking through the clouds of persecution and prejudice, is now
dawning over us. And strangest of all, that this city of Richmond
should be the spot of earth to furnish this gracious manifestation.
Richmond, the beautiful and abandoned seat of the rebellion, look
ing as comely and specious as a goodly apple on a gilded sepulchre,
where bloody treason flourished its whips of scorpions; Richmond,
where the slave trade so long held high carnival; where the press
has found the lowest depth of profligacy; where licentiousness has
ruled until probably a majority of births were illegitimate, or with
out the forms of law; * * * But we are reminded that 'where
sin aboundeth grace may much more abound.' And in the light of
recent changes, may we not hope a material and moral future for
this city of Richmond in strong contrast with its awful and atheistic
past, and in harmony with the salubrity of its climate, the poetic
beauty of its scenery and the magnitude of its water power. * * *
I am truly gratified to find so many gentlemen of public and private
worth upon the present jury." The Richmond Dispatch, May 7, 1867;
the Richmond Enquirer, May 7, 1867.
21 The colored men summoned were as follows: Joseph Cox, J.
B. Miller, Edward Fox, Lewis Lindsay, Albert Brooks, Andrew Lil-
ley, Lewis Carter, Landrum Boyd, Fred Smith, Dr. Walter Snead,
John Freeman and Thomas Lucas.

38 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
torious Judge Underwood summoned Jefferson Davis to appear,
after his two years' confinement at Fortress Monroe.22
On the same day that Judge Underwood summoned his men
for the petty jury, a mob of negroes attacked several policemen
and rescued one of their number who had been taken into cus
tody for disorderly conduct. Several policemen were badly in
jured and a number of others were in danger from a shower of
stones thrown at them by the mob. The spirit of the mob was
shown by a remark of one of its number who said, "We got
Judge Underwood here now; we gwine to do what we please.
He'll protect us." They were having the difficulty of newly
emancipated peoples in not being able to distinguish between
liberty and license. Having been freed from one kind of re
straint, they were loth to recognize any restraint. After the
mob had refused to obey the Mayor's order to disperse, General
Schofield appeared and requested them to go to their homes.
When they refused to go, he had a regiment of soldiers disperse
the mob.
On the next day, May 11, a negro mob attempted to take from
the police a negro who had been arrested for- being drunk and
disorderly. The officers were stoned and fired upon. Federal
troops were again called out to rescue the police, and order was
finally secured by General Schofield by stationing soldiers
throughout the city.
It is not without its signfiicance that on the day of the last
attack on the police one Zedekiah K. Hayward, a prominent
agitator from New England, 23 was arrested, with the approba
tion of General Schofield, charged with inciting the negroes to
"acts of violence, insurrection and war." 24 After having urged
the freedmen to assert their rights of equality in all things and

22 The Richmond Dispatch, May 13, 1867.
23 Hayward was a native of New Hampshire. After leaving Dart
mouth College in disgrace, he went to live in Massachusetts. He
afterwards left Massachusetts and after wandering about for a time
turned up in Richmond as a philanthropist. The Washington Na
tional Intelligencer, cited in the Richmond Dispatch, May 20, 1867.
24 The Richmond Dispatch, May 13, 1867; the Richmond Enquirer,
of the same date.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 39
to "have high carnival" as soon as their white allies had left the
State, he added, "It is useless for me to advise you what to do,
for great masses generally do what they have a mind to." 25
Throughout the summer months of 1867 the political excite
ment in Virginia increased. Botts, Pierpont and other conserva
tive Republicans refused to recognize the authority of the Re
publican convention of April 17, on the ground that it was not
representative of the party of the State. A call was therefore
made for a new convention to meet on July 4, 1867, in Charlottes
ville to organize the Republican party of the State.26 This call
was signed by over three hundred men, many of whom were na
tive Virginians of prominence, for the most part former Whigs.
The movement was entirely independent of the Hunnicutt fac
tion and therefore threatened to disrupt the Republican party
in Virginia.
At this juncture the Republican leaders in Congress called
upon the Union League clubs in several of the Northern cities
to bring about harmony between the two factions of the party in
Virginia. As a result, the leaders of both factions met with the
mediators from the North in the Governor's home in Richmond
on June 16, 1867. 27 The Hunnicutt faction made it plain that it
would not participate in the Charlottesville convention. As a
compromise it was decided to have another convention at Rich
mond. It was to meet on August 1, and a party platform was to
be made to take the place of that of April 17. Since Richmond

28 To add to the general confusion all the negro coopers of Rich
mond struck for higher wages during this week.
Gerritt Smith and Horace Greely, who were visiting Richmond
at this time, made speeches to the negroes urging them to desist
from idleness and drunkenness. The Richmond Dispatch, May 14,
1867, Ibid., May 16, 1867. For an account of the riots mentioned
above see the Richmond Dispatch and the Richmond Enquirer of May
11, 13, 14, 15, 16.
28 The Richmond Enquirer, May 21, 1867.
27 Among those present were, Governor Pierpont, John M. Botts,
Judge Underwood, J. W. Hunnicutt, John Hawxhurst, L H. Chan
dler, Senator Wilson, of Massachusetts, John Jay, of New York and
other prominent politicians. H. J. Eckenrode, Political History of
Virginia during Reconstruction, p. 73.

40 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
had succeeded Alexandria as the Radical center of the State,
Hunnicutt had won a decided victory over the more conservative
faction of the party. With the freedmen. to back him it would
be easy to control a convention in Richmond.
The co-operation movement rapidly gained strength during
July and August. The co-operators accepted negro suffrage but
hoped to gain the leadership over them and thus avoid the dan
gers of Radical Reconstruction. But the white and colored Rad
icals in speeches throughout the State were advocating extreme
social and political equality. Some went even further. One of
the most prominent negro Radicals of Virginia, Lewis Lindsay,
in a bitter speech at Charlottesville in July, 1867, stated that the
negroes intended to elect a part of the legislature, the members
of Congress and the Governor of the State; and that appoint
ments should always be equally made between the two races.28
The freedmen had become more radical than their white teach
ers. The possibility of the more conservative faction of the Re
publican party gaining their support no longer existed, if it ever
did exist. Co-operation was doomed.
On the day before the meeting of the Republican convention
of August 1, 1867, the conservative faction of the delegates met
and approved of a platform, presented by John Minor Botts,
which condemned secession as a crime, advocated the enfran
chisement of all Confederates but their leaders and the punish
ment of the latter.
The Republican convention met on August 1, 1867, at the Afri
can Church in Richmond. It was a great event for the freedmen
of the city. By ten o'clock they had left the tobacco factories
and the streets, and were crowded around the church. At eleven
o'clock the doors were opened and the negroes crowded in.
Many county delegates, both white and colored, were excluded
from the building. The only whites that were admitted were the
fifty Radical delegates who had attended the April convention.
The convention was called to assemble at twelve o'clock. In the
meanwhile Hunnicutt harangued the crowd. He expressed his
disapproval of the conservative Republicans and co-operators in

Charlottesville Chronicle, July 2, 1867.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 41
no uncertain terms, and warned his followers against the "rebels"
who were "seeking admission into the council of the Republican
party." "Now," he said, "we tell the strangers that if they want
to come with us they will have to swallow a bitter pill. They
must swallow the Constitutional Amendment, the Civil Rights
Bill, the Sherman- Shellabarger- Wilson Bill, the Supplementary
Bills, every Reconstruction Act, the Iron-clad Oath, the 17th of
April platform, Wardwell, Hunnicutt, and the nigger ; yes, the
nigger — his head, his feet, his hide, his hair, his tallow, his bones,
and his suet ! Nay, his body and soul ! Yes, all these they must
swallow, and then, perhaps, they can be called Republicans." 29
The main duty of the convention, he said, was to endorse the
platform of the April convention. This was promptly done.
Those who could find no place in the African Church assembled
in "mass convention" in the Capitol Square. John Hawxhurst,
a Radical, was made chairman. A motion to invite John Minor
Botts to address the convention was voted down almost unani
mously. The conservative Republicans were again ignored and
the April platform was adopted.30
At eight o'clock that night there was a meeting in the hall of
the House of Delegates of members of the convention and oth
ers who were dissatisfied with the action of the double "mass
convention" of the African Church and the Capitol Square.
Fields Cook, a colored politician with conservative leanings, was
in the chair. They decided not to form an independent organi
zation but to do their best to promote harmony in the Republi
can ranks. Hunnicutt and his followers held a meeting at the
same time in Republican Hall.31
On its second and last day the convention met in the west end
of Capitol Square. Much radical talk was indulged in, and
Hunnicutt in a characteristic speech advocated the disfranchise
ment of all "rebels." The meetings of the convention were very

20 The Richmond Dispatch, August 2, 1867; also Richmond Enquirer
of the same date.
This is a type of Hunnicutt's speeches and of the Radical speeches
of that time.
80 The Richmond Dispatch, August 2, 1867.
" The Richmond Dispatch, August 2, 1867.

42 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
disorderly on both days. As a rule the Radical conventions,
which were chiefly made up of freedmen, were disorderly. The
freedmen and their leaders had not acquitted themselves well in
the eyes of the country, and had done the cause of universal
suffrage no good. Furthermore the Republican conventions of
April 17 and of August 1 increased the freedmen's love for the
outward forms of politics, gave them a high opinion of their
own importance in political affairs, made them more independ
ent of their former leaders and made them more extreme in
their radicalism. In some places they now refused to admit
whites to the Union League and even formed armed organiza
tions.32 The tumultuous convention of August 1, 1867 marks the
turning point in the political history of the negro in Virginia.
Although the attempt to bring the colored vote under the influ
ence of the conservative whites through fair means was not
abandoned until several years later, the color line became hence
forth sharply drawn in politics with the negroes supporting the
least reputable factions, in the respective campaigns. The rep
utable whites who wished to co-operate with them were ignored
and insulted. Negro suffrage had come to mean carpetbagism
and radicalism. That negro suffrage had come to stay was ac
cepted by all. The whites were anxious to compromise in such
a way as not to draw the color line. Had the negroes been
content with the suffrage and conservative white leadership, in
stead of allying themselves with carpetbaggers and scalawags,
advocating confiscation and disfranchisement for the whites,
and seeking office before they were fitted for responsibilities of
that kind, much bitterness and disillusionment in politics might
have been spared them. But under the circumstances it was
natural that they should have acted as they did. They had just
been freed from slavery and were eager to enter into all the
privileges of their new estate. Politics, with its excitement, its
conventions and speech-making, was very fascinating to these

W. L. Fleming, Documentary History of Reconstruction, No. 3,
p. 4; Richmond Enquirer, September 6, 1867; H. J. Eckenrode, Po
litical History of Virginia during Reconstruction, p. 79.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 43
childlike people. The franchise was given them as a kind of
panacea for all their troubles. High hopes and ambitions im
possible of attainment were held out to them by more or less
unscrupulous demagogues. Furthermore, the Radical leaders
represented the party that had been most instrumental in free
ing them from slavery at the cost of much blood and treasure,
and who were then in complete control of the Federal govern
ment. Then there were the Freedmen's Bureau and the Union
League. During August, September, and October, nominations were
made throughout the State for delegates to the constitutional
convention which would meet in December, if the act calling it
were not defeated at the polls. Political excitement continued.
Many freedmen abandoned themselves to the attendance upon
political meetings, and labor was harder than ever to obtain.
The Conservatives had no organized party in the State and not
a few were apathetic towards politics. Many of their most in
fluential men had been disfranchised by the "test oath" require
ment of the act of Congress of July 9, 1867. The Radicals, on
the other hand, were well organized and aggressive.33 Of the
Radicals nominated for the convention, about a third were ne
groes. Most of the conservative Republican candidates were
defeated. In Richmond, for example, the names of Governor
Pierpont, Franklin Stearnes and other prominent Republicans
who did not follow Hunnicutt were not considered, and the
great Republican mass-convention nominated instead the white
Radicals, James Morissey (from Ireland), Judge Underwood
(from New York), and James W. Hunnicutt (from South Car
olina), and the colored Radicals, James Cox and Lewis Lind
say.34 When the conservative Republicans attempted to hold

83 The words "Republican" and "Radical" were used synonymously
during this period. The Radical party in the State was made up
of most of the negroes, Northern adventurers (the carpetbaggers)
and a few native whites (the scalawags). The Conservatives did not
really form a party in the strict sense of the word until later. They
were the great mass of white people and a few conservative negroes.
M The Richmond Enquirer, October 15, 1867.

44 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
a meeting to consider the nomination of a special ticket, a mob
of freedmen prevented them. The conservative Republicans
were too few to have any influence in the campaign.
The election to decide whether there should be a constitutional
convention and to elect delegates to the convention (should
there be one) took place during October 18 to 21, 1867. Gen
eral Schofield and his subordinate officers tried conscientiously,
it seems, to have fair elections. However, the Commanding
General was justly criticized for reopening the polls another
day in some of the black wards in Richmond in order to give
the freedmen a longer time in which to vote. This resulted in
changing the outcome of the election in one precinct.35
The returns of the election of 1867 are very interesting in
showing the thoroughness of the organization of the negroes
under Radical leaders, and the unmistakable race line between
Radicals and Conservatives. Of the 120,101 white registrants,
44,017 did not vote. Of the 105,832 colored registrants, only
12,687 did not vote. Only 14, 835 of the 76,084 white regis
trants that voted were for a constitutional convention ; and out
of 92,507 blacks that voted, all but 638 were for a convention.36
The large negro vote polled indicates the efficiency of the Radi
cal machinery. The colored voters were not only marshalled to
the polls but were also instructed how to vote. Their leaders
and secret societies saw to it that those who desired to vote for
Conservative delegates were prevented by threats, ostracism or

35 Documents of the Constitutional Convention of Virginia, 1867-1868.
30 Hundreds of the best white men of the State voted for the con
vention. The Richmond Dispatch was of the opinion that until two
weeks before the election a majority of the whites in the State in
tended to vote for a convention. A number of the most conservative
and representative papers in the State had expressed themselves in
favor of calling a convention. Among these were, the Lynchburg
News, the Norfolk Journal and Daybook, the Richmond Whig, the
Richmond Dispatch and several papers of the Southwest. See the
Richmond Dispatch, October 30, 1867. For the returns of the elec
tion, see Documents of the Constitutional Convention of Virginia, 1867,
Document No. 5, pp. 51, 53 (the number of registrants by race and
county is also shown in this document).

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS

45

open violence.37 While there was a very decided color line in
the vote on calling the convention — especially on the side of the
blacks — there was an almost absolute color line between Con
servatives and Radicals in the choice of delegates. The north
ern and western counties, those having a minority of negroes,
elected native white Conservatives ; and the more populous cen
tral and eastern counties, where negroes were in the majority,
elected white and colored Radicals. A contest was now in
progress between the white race and the black race. In Rich
mond, now the headquarters of the white Radicals, there were
registered 5,382 whites and 6,284 blacks. The vote on the
candidates for the convention was as follows :38
FOR CONSERVATIVE CANDIDATES.

White vote Colored vote

Johnson  4,772
Sturdivant  4,767
Taylor  4,785
Evans  4,760
Sands  4,788

25
21 262123

FOR RADICAL CANDIDATES.

White vote Colored vote
Hunnicutt  48 5,168
Underwood . :  48 5,169
Morissey  48 5,169
Lindsay (colored)  48 5,169
Cox (colored)  48 5,169
Edgar Allen, one of the most prominent Radicals, was elected
from Prince Edward county entirely by negroes, with the ex-

" Documents of the Constitutional Convention of Virginia, 1867,
Document No. 1, pp. 22-23; the Richmond Dispatch, December 12,
1867. 88 Tfie Richmond Dispatch, October 30, 1867.

46 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
ception of one white vote.39 These are but fair examples of
what took place throughout the black belt.
Of the 105 delegates elected to the convention, 35 were Con
servatives, 65 were Radicals, and the remaining 5 were doubt
ful. This overwhelming victory of the Radicals greatly in
creased their confidence and dismayed the whites. Bitterness
increased. Finally the Radical leader, Hunnicutt, was arrested
by the civil authorities in November on the charge of attempt
ing to stir up insurrection among the negroes by an incendiary
speech that he had delivered during the fall campaign.40 He
was released, however, on bail by the military authorities until
after the adjournment of the constitutional convention. Al
though the Conservatives had laid the blame of the attitude of
the negroes in politics upon such white Radical leaders as Hun
nicutt, they now began to attribute to the negroes a fair share
of the blame for the unhappy situation. Race relations became
more unsatisfactory.
As a result of the campaign of 1867 the Conservative party
was formed. Prior to December, 1867, the Republican, or Rad
ical party was the only organized political party in the State
since the War of Secession. It was not until the white people
of Virginia had seen the negroes marshalled in a body against
them by their Radical leaders that they determined to organize
a Conservative, or white man's party to protect themselves
against the rule of demagogues and their horde of ignorant fol
lowers.41 The leaders of the old Democratic and Whig parties
of former days issued a call for a State convention of men of
conservative views to meet in Richmond on December 11, 1867.
There were eight hundred delegates present at this convention,

80 Speech by Edgar Allen quoted in Richmond Whig, April 21,
1868. 40 He had said, "You colored people have no property. The white
race has houses and lands. Some of you are old and feeble and
cannot carry the musket, but you can apply the torch to the dwell
ings of your enemies. There are none too young — the boy of ten
and the girl of twelve can apply the torch." Appleton s Annual Cyclo
paedia, 1867, p. 763.
41 The Richmond Dispatch, December 12, 1867.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 47
representing all parts of the State. The convention also repre
sented the finest type of Virginia citizens. Among those pres
ent were, Alexander H. H. Stuart, president of the convention,
R. M. T. Hunter, J. R. Branch, William Kemper, Marmaduke
Johnson and Raleigh T. Daniel.42
In his inaugural address Mr. Stuart expressed the views and
aims of those present, in fact of the white people of Virginia,
when he said, "At the close of the war, we were assured that
upon the repeal of the ordinance of secession, the repudiation
of the Confederate debt and the emancipation of the slaves, we
would be restored to our rights in the Union; but instead of
these promises being fulfilled, a policy has been inaugurated
placing the Southern States under the control of our inferior
race. We have met to appeal to the North not to permit the
infliction of this disgrace upon us. Our rights may be wrested
from us, but we will never submit to the rule of an alien and
inferior race. We prefer the rule of the bayonet . . . We de
sire further to perfect our organization so that all who desire
that this shall continue to be a white man's government may be
able to act in concert and by a vigorous and united effort save
ourselves from ruin and disgrace." 43
This address contained the main features of the set of resolu
tions adopted by the convention. It was resolved: (1) That
slavery had been abolished, and that it was "not the purpose or
desire of the people of Virginia to reduce or subject again to
slavery the people emancipated;'' (2) that the State should
be restored to Federal relations with the United States
government and that the people of Virginia would not vio
late or impair her obligations to the Federal Government but
would "perform them in good faith;" (3) that the people of the
State were entitled to all the rights and privileges guaranteed
to them by the constitution of the United States; (4) that "to
subject the white people of these States to the absolute su-

42 The Richmond Enquirer, and the Richmond Whig, December 12,
1867; the Richmond Dispatch, December 12, and 13, 1867 (list of del
egates in Dispatch, December 12).
48 The Richmond Enquirer, December 12, 1867.

48 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
premacy, in their local governments and in their representation
in the Senate and the House of Representatives, of the black
race just emerged from personal servitude— is abhorrent to the
civilization of mankind, and involves us and the people of the
Northern States in the consequences of surrendering one-third
of the Senate and one-quarter of the House of Representatives,
which are to legislate over us, to the domination of an organized
class of emancipated slaves, who are without any of the train
ing, habits, or traditions of self-government;" (5) that "this
convention, for the people of Virginia, doth declare that they
disclaim all hostility to the black population ; that they sincerely
desire to see them advance in intelligence and material pros
perity, and are willing to extend to them a liberal and generous
protection. But that while, in the opinion of this convention,
any constitution of Virginia ought to make all men equal before
the law, and should protect the liberty and property of all, yet
this convention doth distinctly declare that the governments of
the States and of the Union were formed by white men to be
subject to their control; and that suffrage should be so regu
lated by the States as to continue the Federal and State systems
under the control and direction of the white race;" and (6) that
the people of Virginia would co-operate with all men regardless
of party in restoring the constitutional union of the States and
the continuance of the government under the control of the
white race.44
It is obvious from these resolutions and from the party or
ganization effected at this time that lines of party and of race
had become definitely fixed for the first time by the whites of
Virginia since the war, and that a new and aggressive white
man's party, the Conservative party, was ready to oppose the
Radical (Republican), or black man's party. Attempts to com
promise, for the time at least, were at an end.
After, the passage of the Reconstruction Acts in March 1867,
the white people of the State accepted negro suffrage as inevita
ble, whatever they may have thought of its wisdom at that time.
They were anxious for peace and would have accepted the new

44 Current newspapers; Annual Cyclopaedia, 1867, p. 763.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 49
conditions of defeat without opposition had the Radicals in Con
gress and in the State not continued to persecute them. The
State was placed under military rule; its leading men, all those
who had had any experience in administration, were disfran
chised and disqualified from holding office; its people were
threatened with new punishments and humiliations; and to the
uncertainty and dread caused by the action of Congress was
added the agitation among the negroes by unscrupulous out
siders. In spite of these discouragements the whites attempted
to win the confidence and leadership of the negroes and to co
operate with the best element in the Republican party in bring
ing the State back into the Union upon a firm, conservative ba
sis. But the Republican party, which was for the most part rad
ical in Virginia, was the victorious party in the Union which held
the reins of government. By means of the Freedmen's Bureau
and the Union League it gained complete control over the freed
men from the beginning, and increased its hold upon them by
vague promises of land and -of office. The Radical program
consisted not only of extending all civil and political rights to
all freedmen, but also of excluding all but a few whites (Radi
cals) from the franchise and from office. The purpose of the
Radicals was made clear in the speeches of their leaders, Hun
nicutt, Underwood and others, and in the conduct of these men
in the Republican conventions of April 17 and August 1, 1867.
Compromise and co-operation were no longer possible. Car
petbaggers, scalawags and negroes had drawn the color line in
politics. The whites now organized the Conservative party to
meet the new situation.

CHAPTER IV.
The Constitutional Convention of 1867-1868.
In accordance with the order of the Commanding General of
the District the convention assembled in the hall of the House
of Delegates of the capitol on December 3, 1867. The election
of October resulted in the choice of the most heterogeneous and
remarkable assortment of lawmakers that ever assembled in the
Commonwealth. There were native Virginians, white and col
ored, and men from beyond her borders; there was a delegate,
a Northerner, who had commanded a company of negro troops
in the Federal army against the people of the State; there was
a deserter from the Confederate army; there were adventurers;
there were ex-slaves; there were educated men, and ignorant
men who could speak the English language only in dialect. A
contemporaneous account of the personnel of the convention,
given in the Richmond Dispatch of April 20, 1868, is as fol
lows :
"The Convention consisted of one hundred and five members, of
whom some thirty-five were Conservatives, some sixty-five were
Radicals, and the remainder doubtful. The Radicals were composed
of twenty-five negroes, fourteen native-born white Virginians, thir
teen New Yorkers, one Pennsylvanian, one member from Ohio, one
from Maine, one from Vermont, one from Connecticut, one from
South Carolina, one from Maryland, one from the District of Co
lumbia, two from England, one from Ireland, one from Scotland,
one from Nova Scotia, and one from Canada. Of the fourteen white
Virginians belonging to this party, some had voted for secession,
others had been in the Confederate service, others were old men
whose sons had been in the Confederate army; hardly one had a
Union record. A large proportion of the Northerners and foreign
ers had drifted here in some non-combatant capacity."!

1 For the names of the carpetbagger delegates see the Richmond
Enquirer, April 11, 1868. The following negro delegates were elected
to the convention:
William H. Andrews, Isle of Wight, Surry; James D. Barrett,
Fluvanna; Dr. Thomas Bayne, Norfolk city; James W. D. Bland,
50

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 51
The officers of the convention were equally as miscellaneous a
group. The convention had as its chairman John C. Underwood
of New York, and has been known in history, therefore, as the
"Underwood Convention," and the constitution that it made, as
the "Underwood Constitution;" its secretary and sergeant-at-
arms were from Maryland; the stenographer, an Irishman, was
lately from Maryland ; the assistant clerk was from New Jersey ;
the chaplain was from Illinois ; the two doorkeepers were negroes ;
the boy pages, with one exception, were negroes or sons of
Northern men or foreigners; and the clerks of the twenty stand
ing committees, with two or three exceptions, were Northern men
or negroes.2
The most prominent of the white Radicals were John C. Un
derwood, Judge Edward Snead, John Hawxhurst, Edgar Allen,
Charles H. Porter and David B. White. The leading negro Rad
icals were Thomas Bayne, Lewis Lindsay and William A.
Hodges. Several negro delegates took active part in most of the
debates. Dr. Bayne of Norfolk was particularly garrulous.
The Conservatives were led by John L. Marye, Jr., and Eus-

Prince Edward; William Breedlove, Middlesex, Essex; John Brown,
Southampton; David Canada, Halifax; James B. Carter, Chesterfield,
Powhatan; Joseph Cox, Richmond city; William A. Hodges, Prin
cess Anne; Joseph R. Holmes, Charlotte, Halifax; Peter K. Jones,
Greenesville, Sussex; Samuel F. Kelso, Campbell; Lewis Lindsay,
Richmond city; Peter G. Morgan, Petersburg city; William S. Mose-
ley, Goochland; Frank Moss, Buckingham; Edward Nelson, Char
lotte; Daniel M. Norton, James City, York; John Robinson, Cum
berland; James T. S. Taylor, Albemarle; George Teamoh, Norfolk
(county), Portsmouth city; Burwell Toler, Hanover, Henrico; John
Watson, Mecklenburg; F. W. Poor, Orange.
Thomas Bayne, a dentist, was a runaway slave from the South
who had been a resident of Boston for a number of years; Hodges
was born in Virginia, but had been living in New York; Poor was
from New York. In many cases a county had both white and col
ored delegates.
Of the thirty-five white Conservatives, one refused to serve, one
was excluded from the convention by the Radicals, and one was ex
pelled by them.
2 The Richmond Dispatch, April 20, 1868.

52 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
tace Gibson. Most of them were new men in the political af
fairs of the State. There was no lack of ability among them,
however. Although hopelessly in the minority, they served as a
check upon the majority, and they were ready to investigate and
to expose any false or dishonest move on the part of the Radicals.
Whenever there was a division among the Radicals on account
of the extreme measures of the negroes and their white allies,
they were enabled to aid the less extreme faction in defeating
much obnoxious legislation. Their superior education and mental
ability gave them an advantage in debate over their opponents
far in excess of their numerical strength.
The first few weeks were occupied in organization and in gen
eral political discussions, for the most part outside of the prov
ince of the convention. For instance much time was spent in
discussing the Reconstruction policy of Congress. There was a
long debate over resolutions introduced in the convention ex
pressing approval of the action of Congress in impeaching Pres
ident Johnson. There were other debates equally futile.
It was not until January that the committees began to make
their reports and work on the constitution began. When the
first section of the preamble was brought up for discussion on
January 6, 1868, James W. D. Bland (colored) moved that in
place of the word "men" in the clause, "That all men are by
nature equally free and independent," as reported from the com
mittee, be substituted the words "mankind, irrespective of race
or color." The motion was defeated through the influence of
Thomas Bayne (also colored) who had pledged himself to his
constituents that he would "endeavor to aid in making a consti
tution that should not have the word black or the word white
in it." 3 But when the debates over mixed schools were in prog
ress, Bayne proposed an amendment to the committee's plan so
as to place whites and blacks in the same schools. The amend
ment failed to get the support of enough Radicals to be adopted,
in spite of the efforts on the part of the negro delegates, and the
threats of Bayne, Lindsay, Hodges and others that if it were

* Debates of the Constitutional Convention of Virginia, 1867 p 251.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 53
not supported by the white Radicals the negroes would with
draw from the Republican party.4
The question that overshadowed all others in the debates of
the convention was that of suffrage. It was the subject of de
bate throughout the session. The first long debate on the sub
ject was occasioned by the consideration of that section of the
bill of rights which affirmed, "That all elections ought to be free ;
and that all men, bearing sufficient evidence of permanent com
mon interest with, and attachment to, the community, have the
right of suffrage." John Hawxhurst moved that this be amended
by the substitution, "That all elections ought to be free ; and that
all men (not disqualified by crime, insanity or idiocy) have the
inherent right of suffrage." 5 The doctrine of the inherent right
to vote and to enjoy other political privileges was warmly upheld
by the negroes and some of. the white Radicals, but it was re-

4 The negroes threatened more than once to desert their white
allies. On one of these occasions, Bayne, who had made the threat,
was answered by one of the leading white Radicals in part as fol
lows: "He [Bayne] makes no recognition of any white men, but wants
a party, so far as his remarks can be understood, to be composed
entirely of colored men, in order, as I suppose, as he thinks, that he
might be the leader and head of them. I do not say that he would,
but he might. It is for us to show that there shall be no division
between these two classes of the Republican party. It must be
clearly known that loyalty must be the only distinction; and I say
here frankly, that the white loyal men of Virginia cannot get along
twenty-four hours without the colored men of Virginia; and, I say,
on the other hand, that the colored men of Virginia cannot get along
without the white loyal men of Virginia, and I ask if there is any
one who has the hardihood to deny it. We are all in the same boat
together. * * *
"And so shall the colored people and the loyal white men of Vir
ginia say, in one chorus, 'Sink or swim, live or die, survive or per
ish, we are together, one and indivisible and inseparable, for the
procuring and perpetuation of civil and political rights to all men,
of whatever shade or color of skin.' " Debates, p. 545.
5 Documents of the Constitutional Convention of Virginia, 1867, No.
XV, pp. 107-109.

54 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
pudiated by the Conservatives and moderate Radicals. Hawx-
hurst's motion was defeated by a vote of 47 to 82.6
On January 14, General B. F. Butler of Massachusetts spoke
before the convention, upon the invitation of the Radicals. After
explaining to the convention, in the most paternal fashion, just
how a constitution should be made, he advised the enfranchise
ment of all freedmen and the disfranchisement not only of those
Confederates who had held civil or military positions but also of
those who had been prominent in business affairs before and dur
ing the war, such as directors of corporations, presidents of
banks, etc. He advocated an educational test for the franchise
like that which existed in Massachusetts, not that those who
could qualify in this manner would be more capable of using
rightly the ballot, but that such a test would encourage the young
men of the State to learn to read and write. But he hastened to
add that he did not think that it would be wise to apply such a
test at that time or for a number of years. "I would not apply it
to a man who has the right to vote at the present time, to save my
right hand," he said.7
Two days later, Judge Underwood, in one of his characteristic
speeches which was very insulting to the Conservatives, moved
that all negroes and women be admitted to the suffrage. His
followers did not approve of woman suffrage, however, and the
motion was defeated. In the course of the debate John L. Marye
said that the Radicals, instead of teaching the colored people
lessons of thrift, honesty and dignity, were encouraging them to
entertain vain hopes in politics and were deluding them into
thinking that they could "live without labor and thrive without
effort." «
Finally provision was made for enfranchising all negroes and
the attention of the Radicals was centered on the various meas
ures introduced for disfranchising the whites, who had been

0 Journal of the Convention, p. 102.
7 Debates of the Convention, p. 435.
8 Debates, p. 458; the Richmond Dispatch, January 17, 1868; the
Richmond Enquirer, January 17, 1868.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 55
guilty of "complicity with rebellion." 9 As the session drew to a
close the Radicals grew more insistent upon the disfranchise
ment of the whites of the State, and the debates became, accord
ingly, more stormy. The majority report of the Committee on
the Elective Franchise and Qualifications for Office 10 was the
chief subject of debate during March and April. The article, as
reported by the committee and afterwards adopted by the con
vention, disqualified from holding office and from jury service
practically every white man in the State, and disfranchised sev
eral thousand of the most capable white men. The article was
so amended in the convention as to carry the disfranchisement
even further than the committee had recommended. At the same
time negroes were given the right to vote without qualification.
Hunnicutt, fearing that the constitution would be rejected by the
electorate as then constituted, advocated the disfranchisement of
thirty thousand more whites than had already been provided for
in the constitution.11 More drastic measures were prevented by
the alliance of some of the most conservative Radicals, who were
guided by General Schofield and conservative Republicans at the
North, with the Conservative delegates. There was also a con
sciousness in the minds of the more extreme Radicals that after
all, the whites were a majority in the State and that it would be
wiser to be prudent.
The convention came to a close on April 17, 1868. Its ad
journment was made necessary by the refusal of General Scho
field to approve any bill providing for the payment of the ex
penses of the convention after April 6. During its closing hours
the constitution was adopted as a whole by a vote of 51 to 36.
A few Radicals, one of them colored, voted with the Conserva
tives against its adoption.
By the clauses of the constitution disfranchising all ex-officers

9 See for example Documents of the Convention, No. XXVII.
10 This standing committee was composed of seven Radicals, two
of whom (Bland and Moseley) were colored, and four Conservatives,
one of whom was removed from the committee after his appoint
ment. James W. Hunnicutt was its chairman.
u The Richmond Enquirer, March 4, 1868.

56 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
of both State and local governments, requiring the test oath as a
qualification for office, and excluding those thus disfranchised
and disqualified from jury service, the destiny of the State was
left in the hands of the densely ignorant freedmen who were
without experience in government and utterly lacking in the tra
ditions of political morality, a people who by their very nature
and training had been an easy prey to unscrupulous dema
gogues.12 On the day of its adjournment General Schofield appeared be
fore the convention and made an earnest plea for the reconsid
eration of Article III of the constitution, that referring to the
franchise and to office holding.18 He said :
"I deem the question of the oath of office of so vital importance,
that I believe it to be my duty to give my views on the subject. It
has been necessary for me, during the past year, to select register
ing officers as well as persons to fill the various civil offices in the
State. "I have been able to find in some counties only one, in others
two, and others three persons of either race able to read and write
who could take the test oath. Most of the local offices give very
small compensation, such that even a laboring man could not afford
to go to another part of the State for the purpose of accepting them.
I have no hesitation in saying that it will be practically impossible
to administer the government under your constitution and with that
provision, and that the retention of that provision will be fatal to
the constitution, and probably fatal to, those who are responsible for
the existence of that objectionable feature. I say this, lest some
of you may be deceived as to the wishes of the people of the coun
try at large, or those whom you regard as your friends in Congress.
They will not and cannot sustain you in going so far beyond what
is either authorized or required by the acts of Congress. "14
After his departure General Schofield was bitterly attacked by
Bayne, Lindsay and others for his advice, and no heed was taken
of his counsel.

12 For clauses of the constitution referring to the elective fran
chise and qualifications for office, see Appendix No. I. Special at
tention is called to Sections 1, 3, 6 and 7* of Article III.
18 The privilege of the floor was extended to the Commanding
General and to his staff at the beginning of the session. Journal,
p. 32.
14 The Richmond Whig, April 18, 1868.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 57
In a letter to General Grant, written the next day — April 18,
1868 — General Schofield describes the work of the convention
and expresses the belief that no satisfactory Union party can be
organized upon the basis of the present Radical party and its
constitution in the Statet and advises that the constitution be al
lowed to "fall and die where it is — not to submit it to the people
at all;" that a provisional government be organized; and that,
after the government could be organized upon a loyal basis, an-
. other convention be called to draw up a constitution "fit to be
ratified by the people of the State and approved by Congress and
the country at large." It is his opinion that the negroes and their
associates would insist upon the unqualified indorsement of the
constitution, and this, he says, "the respectable whites will not
give." General Schofield also expresses his fear that the "late
Convention will be reproduced in the legislature, a large majority
being either worthless radicals, white and black, or bitter op
ponents of reconstruction upon the Congressional plan. The
danger is that we will have on our hands, not only one big ele
phant in the constitution, but a host of little ones in the shape
of officers-elect who are not fit to be installed — a prospect not
very encouraging, at least." 15
If the Republican Federal officer in command of the District
was so completely discouraged and disgusted with the progress
of Reconstruction in Virginia under the Congressional plan, one
need scarcely marvel that the respectable white population of
the State were opponents of the system of Reconstruction that
threatened the very existence of their civilization.

13 In an extract from this letter, General Schofield shows the spirit
and purpose of the Radicals of the convention as follows:
"The same baneful influence that secured the election of a ma
jority of ignorant blacks, and equally ignorant or unprincipled
whites, to the Convention, has proved sufficient to hold them firmly
to their original purpose. They could only hope to obtain office by
disqualifying everybody in the State who is capable of discharging
official duties, and all else to them was of comparatively slight im
portance. Even the question whether their constitution will be rati
fied or rejected, they treat with indifference. Congress, they say,
will make it all right anyway." John M. Schofield, Forty-Six Years
in the Army, p. 400.

58 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
During the final debate on the constitution several of the most
able and far seeing Radicals opposed its adoption. Most prom
inent of these were Judge Snead, Dr. Eastham and Edgar Allen.
They warned the Radicals, especially the colored delegates, that
extreme measures against the white people of the State would
only mean a reaction that would be disastrous to those that em
ployed them.16
By excluding the only element in the State competent to fill the
offices, the proposed constitution secured the State and local of-.
fices for the Radicals. But this was not all. It purposed to in
crease further the power of the Radicals by doubling the number
of offices, by decentralizing the State government and by having
the local officers chosen by popular vote. In this way the forty-
three black counties, the most populous counties of the State,

16 The following extract from one of these speeches by Edgar Al
len, who was born in England, had been for many years a resident
of the North, and owed his seat in the convention to the negroes of
Prince Edward county, shows how outside influence was brought
to bear on the convention throughout its session and the fruitless-
ness of that influence in affecting the legislation of the convention:
"Ignoring the plan set down for our guidance, a majority of the
members of the convention have drafted a clause which never can
and never will be indorsed by the vote of any man who has the least
feeling of regard for the honor of his native State; a clause which
not only fixes the degradation of those men who bravely fought for
what they believed to be their birthright, but which also seals the
doom of every colored man in this Commonwealth. I warn you —
I mean you colored men * * * that if the constitution now
about to be submitted to you should ever chance to be adopted, the
only boon you secure to yourselves is to have the power for a few
short years of rewarding men who are only ambitious to receive
your gifts; and the only legacy you will leave to your children will
be the hatred of every white man among whom they live. Again
and again, I warn you. Don't be misled by a set of men who, in
stead of working for your good, have endeavored to frame a con
stitution for Virginia which will simply make her a great rendez
vous for adventurous foreigners, to come here and live upon the
fat of the land, with no other attachment to you or your State than
the love of office and per diem." The Richmond Whig, April 21,
1868. For a similar speech by Judge Snead, see the Richmond En
quirer, April 17, 1868.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 59
would be under the control of negro office holders and their car
petbag allies. The legislature would have been a repetition of
the convention. These numerous officers were to be elected un
der a township system which was copied from that of New Eng
land and which was entirely unsuited to the sparsely settled
counties of Virginia. The number of officers in each county was
increased from about twenty to not less than forty-eight — all
elected by (popular vote. Most of the principal State officers
were to be elected by the legislature, which in turn, as General
Schofield suggested, might greatly resemble the convention. The
election, tenure of office and salary of judges were placed in the
hands of the legislature.17
A sufficiently convincing illustration of what would have taken
place had this constitution been adopted in its entirety is found
in a report of November 21, 1869, of General Stoneman (who
had succeeded General Schofield as Commanding General of
District Number 1) to the Adjutant General.18 As the result of
the Act of Congress of February 8, 1869, requiring a more
stringent oath of those elected to office, there were many va
cancies in State and local offices, which were at that time filled
by the Commanding General. According to General Stoneman's
report, of the 5,446 offices in the State, 2,613 were then vacant.
Of the officers already appointed many had not accepted, and

17 Although these were the most objectionable features of the
constitution, there were many others that were not welcomed by
the people. The new system of government was more expensive
and cumbersome than the former one. The provision for a system
of public free schools before 1876 to take the place of free schools
for the poor under the "literary fund" system, though it proved to
be a blessing, was a great financial burden at that time and was not
cordially received by many. Voting by ballot which was introduced
in the place of the old viva voce method was considered a cowardly
and unmanly way of voting, and the secrecy which it encouraged
was thought to be conducive of fraud.
18 General Schofield was given a place in the President's Cabinet.
His successor, General Stoneman, was an able and conscientious
officer. But on account of the increased stringency of his orders
from Washington he was forced to be more severe in his adminis
tration than his predecessor had been.

60 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
many others would be unable to take the oath of office. Few
native white Virginians could take the oath because, as General
Stoneman said, nearly every one gave "aid, countenance, counsel,
or encouragement to persons engaged in armed hostility" to the
Federal government, "and once having engaged in war, prob
ably no portion of the Southern people, old and young, male and
female, were more earnest in its prosecution." A test oath there
fore, such as that required by the Underwood Constitution,
would have excluded practically the whole white population from
holding office. After describing the impossibiity of securing of
ficers under the oath imposed by Congress, similar to that im
posed by the Underwood Constitution, General Stoneman ended
his report with this striking comment upon the political outlook
for Virginia under the proposed constitution :
"The offices in the state have not been filled by competent per
sons; they certainly cannot be filled when the restrictions of any
one party are to be observed and complied with, as will be the case
upon the adoption of the proposed constitution, under which it is
desired by some that the people of Virginia shall be forced to live,
and to the requirements of which they are expected to consent."19
The Underwood Convention of 1867-1868 and the constitu
tion which it advocated, taught the people of the North what
Radicalism meant in Virginia, and made certain the victory for
the Conservatives in the compaign of 1869, which brought Vir
ginia back into the Union, free from Radical-negro rule.

The Richmond Enquirer, April 8, 1869.

CHAPTER V.
The Committee of Nine.
The story of the contest in 1868 and 1869 between the Con
servatives and the Radicals over the adoption of the Underwood
Constitution is one of continual changes in the political attitude
of both parties. The Conservatives became through necessity
more liberal; and the conservative Republicans became more
conservative and finally became allies of the Conservative party.
The Radicals clung to the Underwood Constitution with all of
its objectionable clauses in spite of the willingness of the Con
servatives to compromise. When defeated in the fall of 1869
they urged Congress to continue military rule in the State and
to inaugurate a government by Radicals alone. As a result of
these political alignments the Conservative white party became
larger, and the Radical, smaller and blacker. Furthermore the
name "Republican," by which the Radical party continued to call
itself, became more and more disliked in Virginia politics.
During the summer and fall of 1868 there seemed to be but
two alternatives for the people of Virginia, the Underwood Con
stitution, which meant disfranchisement of the whites and negro
rule, and the continuance of military rule, which is degrading to
a people who are accustomed to govern themselves.
An election to decide whether the constitution was to be
adopted, and to elect officers under the same, was ordered by the
convention to be held on June 2, 1868. But General Schofield
issued an order on April 24 to the effect that, since Congress had
not made an appropriation to defray the expenses of an election,
he had no authority to have carried into effect the ordinance of
the convention which provided for an election on June 2. And
since he thought that the constitution with the disfranchising
clauses would be most harmful to the State, he refused to draw
on the State treasury for the purpose, as he had a right to do.1

1 John M. Schofield, Forty-Six Years in the Army, p. 402.
61

62 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
He also advised Congress to have the disfranchising and test
oath clauses voted on separately. Wells and other extreme
Radicals appeared before the Reconstruction committee in Con
gress to plead for an appropriation for holding the election be
fore enough whites would have political disabilities removed
from them to defeat the Radical aims. But the constitution con
tinued to rest peacefully in the pidgeonhole of the Commanding
General's desk, and Virginia remained unreconstructed under
military government until 1870.
In spite of General Schofield's order of April suspending the
time of the election indefinitely, the two parties, which had be
gun to plan their campaigns soon after the adjournment of the
convention in April, held conventions during the first two weeks
of May 1868 and nominated candidates for the principal offices
in the State in case there should be an election at some time dur
ing the year. The Radicals nominated for governor an extreme
and unscrupulous carpetbagger, H. H. Wells.2 The Conserva
tives nominated R. E. Withers.3
Wells had been appointed temporary governor of Virginia by
the Commanding General on April 4, 1868. It was believed by
the Conservatives that Governor Pierpont was removed because
he was not radical enough to suit the Republicans of the State.
The real cause of the change seems to have been the desire on
the part of the Republican managers to bring forward a leader
who was sufficiently extreme to get the support of the negroes
and other Radicals but who was superior in ability and respec
tability to Hawxhurst and Hunnicutt, who had announced their
candidacy for the office of governor before the adjournment of
the constitutional convention and were actively canvassing the
negro voters. Wells would also receive prestige from his new

3 Wells was a native of New York who had been for many years
a resident of Michigan. He came to Virginia early in the War of
Secession as provost-marshal of Alexandria.
The Conservatives nominated James A. Walker for lieutenant-
governor and John L. Marye, Jr., for attorney-general. The Radi
cals nominated J. H. Clements for lieutenant-governor and G. W.
Booker for attorney-general.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 63
office which would make the way easy for his nomination on the
Republican ticket in the next election for governor.4
During the remainder of the- year after the convention had ad
journed, the campaign was conducted vigorously by both parties.
The Radicals became more confident of victory and the Conser
vatives, more determined to defeat the constitution and to elect
a Conservative governor. At this time the people of the South
believed that the intelligent people of the North would not tol
erate universal negro suffrage in the South.5 Even the an
nouncement by the Republican party, in the summer of 1868, of
its platform with universal negro suffrage as its cardinal doc
trine did not make them lose hope of somehow escaping negro
suffrage. Public opinion had been somewhat inclined towards
negro suffrage as a compromise measure, but it had changed
during the year of negro domination in politics that had just
been experienced. This campaign increased the hostility to uni
versal negro suffrage. When therefore the elections in the fall
of 1868 showed the people that Reconstruction could only come
by the sacrifice of feeling and conviction through the acceptance

4 A. H. H. Stuart, The Restoration of Virginia, pp. 49-50.
5 What the people of the State thought of the sentiment of the
Northern states on this question is seen from an address of the Con
servative members of the Constitutional Convention of 1867. The
following is an extract from this address:
"Every Northern state which has voted on the subject since the
close of the War has rejected negro suffrage. Ohio, on a direct
issue, no later than last fall, did so by a majority exceeding
50,000. Kansas, Minnesota and Connecticut had previously done
the same thing. The late Constitutional Convention of New York
deliberately recoiled from deciding the question. And Michigan,
hitherto so overwhelmingly Republican, has just voted down her
new constitution by a majority of 30,000, because it admitted ne
groes to the polls. The census shows that there were only 35,000
negroes in Ohio in 1860. There could have been only 7,000 negro
voters in the state, had they been enfranchised. In Michigan there
are only about 500 male negroes twenty-one years of age. The white
voters number more than 165,000. And yet this State, where a Re
publican governor was elected in 1866 by a majority of 29,038, re
fused by some 30,000 majority to let 500 negroes vote." The Rich
mond Whig, April 20, 1868; the Richmond Enquirer, same date.

64 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
of universal negro suffrage with its dangers to their lives, prop
erty and civilization, the outlook for the future seemed most
gloomy. The apparent hopelessness of the situation and the dis
couragement of the people threatened to cause entire inactivity
in politics among the Conservatives. It was felt that Congress
was determined to degrade them and that there was no use to
struggle against the inevitable. What was in store for them was
no longer an uncertainty since negro suffrage had already been
tested. On December 8, 1868, the bill approving the Underwood Con
stitution was passed in the House of Representatives with little
notice or comment on the part of the members of the House and
with no protest from the people of Virginia. Alexander H. H.
Stuart of Staunton, Virginia, who had been a close observer of
affairs in the State and in Congress, had urged one of the organ
ized political committees in Richmond to formulate a protest to
Congress against the approval of the Underwood Constitution.
But it did not consider such action within its jurisdiction.
Fortunately for Virginia, Congress took its recess soon after
the House of Representatives had approved the constitution.
Time was thus gained to aid Mr. Stuart in. the carrying out of a
scheme which he had already set on foot to rid the constitution
of its most objectionable features — the test oath, disfranchise
ment and county organization clauses — while accepting as a mat
ter of necessity universal negro suffrage. This scheme was first
brought before the people in an article over the signature "Se-
nex," which appeared in the Richmond Whig and in the Rich
mond Dispatch on Christmas Day, 1868. By Mr. Stuart's per
mission his authorship of the article was made known at the
same time. He pointed out that there would be military rule
should the constitution be rejected at the polls, and that a still
greater calamity would befall the State should the constitution
be accepted in its entirety. Negro suffrage was now inevitable
since public sentiment at the North, as shown by the recent elec
tions and by the tone of the press, had changed in this respect.
He showed that it had become the conviction of a majority of
the people of that section that negro suffrage was the legitimate,
if not the necssary consequence of emancipation ; and that these

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 65
people had the power to enforce their convictions. It would be
better, he counseled, to accept negro suffrage in return for a re
vision of the Underwood Constitution. He advised the execu
tive committee of the Conservative party to call two men of
"approved wisdom and integrity" from each Congressional dis
trict of the State to meet and draw up for the consideration of
Congress a new constitution which would embody "the universal
suffrage and universal amnesty proposition in its broadest terms,
and negro eligibility [to office] to boot!"
So unprepared were the people of Virginia for accepting uni
versal negro suffrage, especially after the campaign that had
just been waged on that issue, that one of the leading Richmond
papers refused to publish Mr. Stuart's article, and those that did
publish it did so only on condition that they assume no respon
sibility for it whatever. Even Colonel John B. Baldwin, who was
one of the active and useful advocates of the "New Movement,"
as the plan was called, hesitated in joining Mr. Stuart at first
because he thought that public opinion was not prepared to en
tertain so bold a proposition.6

8 On January 2, 1869, Colonel Baldwin wrote to Mr. Stuart, who
had just returned from Richmond where he had gone in behalf of
this movement, a letter in which he said:
"I apprehend from all I can learn from Bell, Trout and Echols,
that you found rather a slim showing of sympathy in Richmond,
and I shall not be surprised if you find the movement entirely ta
booed before many days.
"Our people seem to be in pretty much the same condition they
were just before the fall of the Confederacy. Everybody looked for
it and believed it was coming, and yet if any one dared utter his
thoughts he was set upon and cuffed without mercy.
"Our people now do not seem to be prepared to discuss, or even
to consider any plan of dealing with the awful danger which threat
ens them, and I very much fear they will be caught as the people
of old were by the deluge." A. H. H. Stuart, The Restoration of Vir
ginia, p. 30. The movement was opposed in the beginning by some
of the leading politicians of the State. Among these were Henry
A. Wise (Richmond Enquirer, January 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 1869), Mar
maduke Johnson (Enquirer, January 13)^ Raleigh T. Daniel (En
quirer, February 2, 1869) and War-Governor Fletcher (Enquirer,
February 17, 1869).
—5

66 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
Mr. Stuart's article was widely and earnestly discussed. It
had much influence upon public opinion and prepared the way
for the events that later transpired. The "New Movement"
rapidly gained ground as the people began reluctantly to admit
that what had been said in the "Senex" article was true.
Through the influence of Mr. Stuart a number of leading men
from all parts of the State met in Richmond on December 31,
1869 to formulate more definite plans for making the movement
a success. A committee of nine men was chosen to go to Wash
ington in order to acquaint Congress with the true state of af
fairs in Virginia and to save the State from the evils that im
pended. Mr. Stuart was made chairman. The other members
were : John B. Baldwin, of Augusta County ; John L. Marye, Jr.,
of Fredericksburg; James F. Johnson, of Bedford County; W.
T. Sutherland, of Danville; Wyndham Robertson, of Washing
ton County; W. L. Owen, of Halifax County; James Neeson,
of Richmond, and J. F. Slaughter, of Lynchburg. The New
Movement was exceedingly fortunate in having as its founder
and guiding spirit Alexander H. H. Stuart. He had served his
state as a member of each branch of the General Assembly, as
a representative in Congress, as presidential elector, and as Sec
retary of the Interior under President Fillmore. He had been a
Whig and a strong Union man before the War.7 His mental
and moral worth was well known and respected, and the success
of his scheme was largely due to the high regard in which he was
held. At the time that the Committee of Nine was appointed, resolu
tions were adopted setting forth the aims of those present at the
meeting, and requesting the people of Virginia to appoint dele
gates to a popular convention to be held in Richmond on Feb
ruary 10, 1869, for the purpose of considering the report of the
Committee of Nine and to adopt such measures as would be nec
essary to aid them. The views and purpose of the meeting as

7 He was later rector of the University of Virginia for a number
of years, a trustee of the Peabody Fund and president of the Vir
ginia Historical Society.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 67
set forth in the resolutions were the same in substance as those
expressed in the "Senex" letter.8
On January 8, 1869, the Committee of Nine met in Washing
ton. Colonel Baldwin was the chief spokesman of the Commit
tee before the Reconstruction and Judiciary committees of Con
gress. He had been active in Virginia politics and was moderate,
pleasing in address and very forceful in debate. Mr. Stuart se
cured the services of his friend, Horace Greely, thereby enlist
ing the powerful influence of the New York Tribune in bringing
the true state of affairs in Virginia before the people of the
North. In this way he rendered much aid to the Committee of
Nine.9 There were two other delegations present at the meetings of
the committees in Congress having charge of Reconstruction.
One of them represented the conservative faction of the Repub
lican party, and the other, the radical faction. The former dele
gation, which was composed of Franklin Stearnes, L. H. Chand
ler, Edgar Allen and others, were there simply as a committee of
observation to prevent any action prejudicial to their faction in
Virginia. The latter delegation, which was more numerous, was
led by Governor Wells and was composed of both white and col-

8 They were set forth in the resolutions as follows: "While the
convictions of the undersigned and, as they believe, of the people of
Virginia, generally remain unchanged, that the freedmen of the
Southern States in their present uneducated condition are not pre
pared for the intelligent exercise of the elective franchise and the
performance of other duties connected with public affairs, and are
therefore, at this time, unsafe depositories of political power; yet,
in view of the verdict of public opinion in favor of their being al
lowed to exercise the right of suffrage as expressed in the recent
elections, the undersigned are prepared to surrender their opposi
tion to its incorporation into their fundamental law as an offering
on the altar of peace, and in the hope that union and harmony may
be restored on the basis of universal suffrage and universal am
nesty." A. H. H. Stuart, Restoration of Virginia, p. 28.
8 Among the most influential newspapers of the North that gave
their support to the Committee of Nine were the New York Times,
the Boston Advertiser and the Chicago Tribune. A. H. H. Stuart,
Restoration of Virginia, p. 47.

68 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
ored men. They had come to defeat, if possible, the plans of the
Committee of Nine.
Governor Wells testified before the Reconstruction Committee
that enfranchisement of the whites would not be safe at that
time; that it would put an end to the Republican party in Vir
ginia and destroy the last hope of the Loyalists in the State; and
that material development could only come through Republican,
or Radical, control. He stated furthermore that public opinion
in Virginia would not support the Committee of Nine. He was
answered by members of the other two delegations from Vir
ginia. Mr. Stearnes said that since the defeat of the Democratic
party in the elections of the previous fall, the people of Virginia
were ready to comply with the Reconstruction Acts; that a ma
jority of the property holders would support the Committee of
Nine; and that if Virginia were restored under the proposed
constitution, without the disfranchising, test oath and county
organization clauses, prosperity would revive and "justice would
be impartially administered and all classes completely protected."
He condemned the Underwood Constitution and felt confident
that it would be defeated by an honest vote of the people, which
would "leave the State without a civil government, and subject
to all the whims and caprices of military rule." He was there
fore in favor of the program of the Committee of Nine.10 After
a conference with the Judiciary Committee in the Senate, the
Committee of Nine was requested to present in writing their
grievances and the amendments to the Underwood Constitution
that they desired.11 The report was written by Mr. Baldwin.
The conservative Republicans, finding themselves in accord
with the Committee of Nine, had become their ally. One of
those who was invited to Washington by the Committee was
Gilbert C. Walker, a New Yorker, who had come to reside in
Norfolk, Virginia. The aid that he rendered the Committee in
Washington won for him the esteem of the most influential con
servatives of both parties and paved the way for his election a
few months later as governor of the State.

Stuart, Restoration in Virginia, pp. 37, 38.
Ibid., pp. 39-44.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 69
Remembering his promise to the Committee of Nine, General
Grant, in his first message to Congress on April 7, 1869, advised
that an election be held in Virginia and suggested that such parts
of the constitution as might be thought expedient be submitted
separately to the voters.12 Three days later Congress responded
to the President's message by authorizing him to submit the Un
derwood Constitution to the voters of Virginia for their ap
proval or rejection at such a time and in such a manner as he
should see fit. The State officers provided for under the con
stitution were to be elected at the same time. Accordingly, on
May 14, 1869, the President named July 6 of that year as the
date for the election. Sections 1 and 7 of Article 111, those,
relating to the test oath and disfranchisement, were to be voted
on separately.13 It was a great disappointment to the Conserva
tives that the county organization clause was not included among
those to be submitted to .a separate vote. General Grant had
expressed his unqualified disapproval of this feature of the con
stitution to the Committee of Nine, because it would put the
governments in about half the counties of the State under the
control of the negroes and their unscrupulous white leaders. On
this point, however, the President had yielded to the opposition
of his cabinet, which feared that a change in this respect would
destroy the public school system which was closely associated in
the constitution with the county organization.
The way was now clear for the decisive struggle between the
Conservatives and the Radical-Republicans for which both sides
had already been preparing.

12 Ibid., pp. 53, 54.
18 Code of Virginia, 1873, p. 26.

CHAPTER VI.
The Campaign of 1869 and the Restoration of Virginia.
While it appeared that the New Movement had divided the
Conservatives into two factions during the early part of 1869,
a serious division had occurred in the ranks of their opponents.
This schism was due in great part to the unfortunate personality
and ultra-radicalism of the Radical candidate for governor, H.
H. Wells. His political record was not above reproach and he
had made some very powerful enemies in his party. His sudden
elevation to the highest office in the State and to the leadership
of the Republican party, which went with that position, had
brought upon him the jealousy and dislike of such men as Hun
nicutt and Hawxhurst, who were openly aspiring to that pre
eminence themselves. He had, through his dishonesty, incurred
the enmity of General William Mahone, the leading railroad man
of the State, a man of doubtful party leanings and of
great influence as a politician. He had alienated the more
moderate members of his party by his extreme views and
by some rather questionable political acts.1 He had been among
the first of the Republicans to advocate the universal enfran
chisement of the negroes and the disfranchisement of the whites.
As early as June, 1865, Wells had accused the white people of
Virginia of perjury and had advocated very extreme measures
against them.2 In 1868 he urged the Reconstruction Committee

1 Richmond Enquirer, March 11, 1869.
2 His views are stated in a letter of June 21, 1865, to S. Ferguson
Beach, president of the Virginia Union Association. This letter was
widely used as a political document at the time. After stating that
"loyal" men, both white and colored, were not receiving sufficient
protection and that a remedy was necessary, he said, "And what is
that remedy? It is, in my judgment, to establish a military pro
visional government, to locate a sufficient military force to preserve
peace, command respect, and secure order, in other words, to vin
dicate the supremacy of the law. Then disfranchise those who are not
70

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 71
in Congress to disfranchise 25,000 Virginians who had not been
disfranchised by the Reconstruction Acts, in order to make se
cure the political position of his party. In 1868 he had also ad
vocated the Underwood Constitution without reservation. And
in 1869 he again appeared before the Reconstruction Committee
and opposed the submission of the objectionable clauses of the
constitution to a separate vote because it would mean the defeat
of the Radical party in the State. In spite of all this, in May,
1869, Wells declared himself in favor of the omission of the of
fensive clauses in the Underwood Constitution.3 This move
was taken by him after it was evident that his former position
was making him unpopular with the best men in the Republican
party. But he did not advocate in his public speeches the defeat
of the clauses, and his followers, both white and colored, con
tinued to support the constitution as a whole. It was generally
believed, and with good reason, that he was secretly working
with his followers as he had done openly in the past.4
The unpopularity of Governor Wells had made such discord
in the Republican ranks that the state executive committee of the
party decided to set aside all the nominations of 1868 and to call
a new convention to put other candidates in the field. The con
vention met at Petersburg March 9 and 10. It was one of the
most turbulent of the many disorderly Radical conventions of the
period. The insurgents, who composed the more moderate wing of
the Republican party, desired the nomination of James H. Clem
ents for governor. The negroes, who made up the rank and file
of the opposing wing, supported the candidacy of Wells almost
unanimously. The contest between the two factions over the
election of a chairman to the convention was very stormy. When
the Clements faction claimed the victory, the Wells faction
started a riot. Order was restored only after the police had

loyal, making loyal acts, and not a paper oath, the test of loyalty.
This done, create a perpetual balance of power, which will at all
times secure you from political danger; or more plainly, let the negro
vote." Richmond Enquirer, April 7, 1868.
8 Richmond Enquirer, May 8, 1869.
' Richmond Enquirer, lune 10, 1869.

72 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
made an unsuccessful effort to restore order, and the mayor of
Petersburg had threatened to call in Federal troops. As a result
of this disorder the Conservative faction was overpowered.
The Radicals, now in possession of the field, elected from among
their number the permanent officers and appointed a new state
central committee. Six negroes were members of the newly
appointed central committee of the party. Wells received the
nomination for governor. The leading white Radicals had ex
pected to nominate for lieutenant-governor, Dr. W. C. Douglas,
of Richmond _ County, but a colored delegate, Lewis Lindsay,5
nominated Dr. J. D. Harris, a negro,, of Hampton, Virginia.
Edgar Allen, in order to further discredit the Wells ticket in
the eyes of the people of the State, helped to win the nomina
tion for Harris by an eloquent speech, which completely won
over the negro delegates.6 Resolutions were adopted by the
convention advocating the early restoration of Virginia under
the new constitution without any changes or amendments, an
early election in order to insure a Radical victory, the right of
the "real" Republican party to dictate the manner of restoring
the State to the Union as well as the constitution and laws under
which the State should be restored, and the disfranchisement of,
and the refusal of amnesty to, the great body of the white peo
ple of the State.
After the adjournment of the convention, the more moderate
Republicans met and drew up resolutions to the effect that it
was their opinion that the large majority of the intelligent peo
ple of Virginia were willing to carry out in good faith the meas
ures proposed by Congress for the reconstruction of the South
ern States. "We believe," continued the resolutions, "that they
will cheerfully support true and well-known Republicans for
State officers, and to afford them an opportunity to do this we
respectfully recommend: for Governor, G. C. Walker, of Nor
folk city; for Lieutenant-Governor, John F. Lewis, of Rock
ingham County; for Attorney-General, J. C. Taylor, of Mont-

0 The Enquirer, March 11, 1869. For an account of the Convention,
see Enquirer, March 10, 11, 1869, and other papers of those dates.
' The Richmond Whig. March 11, 1869.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 73
gomery County." 7 These resolutions were signed by over one
hundred and fifty of the most intelligent and respectable mem
bers of the Republican party in the State and show clearly the
influence of the Committee of Nine. In fact, those who had
been mainly instrumental in drawing up the resolutions were
members of the conservative Republican committee that had as
sisted Mr. Stuart's Committee of Nine in Washington during
the month of January.
The Committee of Nine had suggested that a conservative
ticket be put in the field against Wells, regardless of party lines.
It was even suggested that in case the conservative faction of
the Republican party was unable to defeat the nomination of
Wells in the coming election, that they withdraw from the con
vention and nominate candidates of their own, and thus defeat
the Wells ticket by dividing the party. But no definite arrange
ment had been made with the moderate Republicans.8 It is
probable that the allied factions saw at an early date the neces
sity of supporting a conservative, or moderate, Republican ticket
in order to defeat the Wells faction, but wisely kept their plan
to themselves until public opinion was ready for its adoption.
At any rate it was adopted in April 1869 by the Conservatives
and moderate Republicans.
On the twenty-eighth of that month a convention of the Con
servative party met in Richmond at the Exchange Hotel, the
political rendezvous of that day.9 The attitude of the people in
regard to the New Movement had changed. After the first heat
of bitter protest had passed away, they had recovered their good
judgment and self control and were determined to save, if pos
sible, the remainder of their political fortunes. Resolutions were
adopted urging the voters to defeat the objectionable clauses of
the constitution when it was submitted. The candidates who had
been nominated by the Conservatives about twelve months be
fore withdrew in order to give the party a free hand in this
crisis. A few days later the state central committee urged the

' Appleton's Annual Cyclopaedia, 1869.
8 Stuart, The Restoration of Virginia, pp. 51, 52.
• Richmond Enquirer, April 29, 1869.

74 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
people to support the conservative Republican candidates. It
was felt that although the Conservative party could probably
win by an honest count, since the choice would lie between With
ers, a "red-handed Confederate colonel," and Wells, a "loyal"
Republican, the latter might be "counted in" by the election of
ficials.10 Such was the party alignment when, on May 4, 1869, Presi
dent Grant named July 6, 1869 as the time of the election in
Virginia and proclaimed that a separate vote would be taken on
the disfranchising and test oath clauses. Notwithstanding the
disappointment of the Conservatives because the county organi
zation clause was not submitted to a separate vote, the cam
paign, which had already been inaugurated, was conducted with
energy. Walker was greeted with enthusiasm by Conservatives
in all parts of the State. Wells also conducted an efficient cam
paign, mostly among the negroes.
The Conservatives were beginning to feel confident of victory,
when it became known, just before the election, that General
Canby, who had succeeded General Stoneman as commanding
general of the District in March 1869, was determined to ad
minister the "iron clad" oath to the officers-elect. Should this
be done, the candidate having the next highest vote would be
counted in. Only Radicals would then be elected, and it would
have meant disaster to the Conservatives and to the State.
Upon hearing this through Mr. Stuart, the President issued an
order preventing General Canby from carrying his designs into
effect.11 The attitude of the conservative whites towards the negroes
in this campaign is very interesting. The Conservative party
had organized as a white man's party after the bitter campaign
of 1867, but the new organization, which included the moderate
Republicans, sought the aid of the conservative negroes just as
the Conservative party had done in the election of 1867. Most
of the political shortcomings of the negroes were charged to
their white Radical advisers, who were cordially hated during

10 Stuart, Restoration in Virginia, p. 52.
11 Stuart, The Restoration of Virginia, pp. 63-66.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 7'5
their stay in Virginia. The negroes themselves, if moderate,
were preferred as candidates to these men. The Richmond
Dispatch, a conservative paper, in commenting on the election,
said, "Dr. Norton [colored] of Williamsburg, will be no doubt
elected in the First District. He is, we believe, conservative, and
opposes Ayer, the bitter Radical from the North. We shall con
sider Norton's election a victory." 12 In several counties the
white Conservatives nominated negroes for office. Three of
these were elected to the General Assembly.13 Some of the
most substantial negroes aided the Conservatives in this cam
paign as they had done in 1867.
About a week before the election, some two hundred and fifty
Conservative negroes of Richmond, at the risk of personal vio
lence from the colored Radicals, arranged a barbecue for their
men and invited a number of prominent white Conservatives.
The speeches on both sides were harmonious and good feeling
prevailed. The hosts displayed a banner upon which was a pic
ture of a white man and a colored man shaking hands. Under
the picture was written, "United we stand ; divided we fall."
By an unhappy coincidence a nearby bridge fell soon after the
appearance of this banner, carrying with it a crowd of people.
Many were injured and several killed.14 Among those who
were killed was Colonel James R. Branch, a prominent white
Conservative, of Richmond.
The Radicals encouraged the superstitious negroes in believ
ing that this accident was an evil omen against the affiliating of
members of their race with the Conservative party. The Radi
cal newspapers attributed much importance to the providential
warning, as they interpreted it to the negroes. One of them,
the Richmond Evening Journal, of July 3, 1869, said of the ac
cident, "That colored vote of ours is a pozi'er. It is directed by
a religious sentiment. The hand of God is in it to curse those
who apostatize, and to bless and guide those who go faithfully
to the polls and vote for the Republican ticket. . . . There has

12 (Ayer was elected, however). Dispatch, July 7, 1869.
13 The Nation, July 15, 1869.
14 Richmond Dispatch, July 2, 3, 1869.

76 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
been no 'colored Conservative barbecue' and there will be none.
An awful fiat has forbidden, and that finger will not again be
tempted to be uplifted against colored apostasy." 15
During this campaign most of the negroes were completely un
der the influence of the Union League.16 Some of them were
persuaded by the anti-Wells Republicans to follow them into the
Conservative ranks. Others had been persuaded to abandon the
League by the farmers, who in some cases refused to employ a
member. As the day of the election drew near the negroes showed a
growing tendency to nominate men of their own color as candi
dates for election to the General Assembly and to Congress. On
May 24, the first unmixed negro state convention ever held in
Virginia met in Petersburg in answer to a call issued by the
colored people of that city. The object of the convention, as
expressed by Dr. Bayne, was to bring it about that the State
would have no peace while all of its offices were filled with
white men. The convention endorsed the whole Underwood
Constitution and the Wells ticket.17
In a number of counties in the State the negroes put candi
dates of their own race in the field against those of both the
Walker and the Wells tickets. In Norfolk city they had two
colored candidates for the State Senate and three for the House
of Delegates. In six Congressional districts they had candidates
for the House of Representatives.
The vote in the election of 1869 was perhaps the largest that
had ever been cast in the history of the State. The returns are
very interesting since they show the vote by race as well as by
party. They are as follows :18

15 Quoted in the Richmond Dispatch of luly 5, 1869. According to
the Dispatch (July 9) the accident was made to help in intimidating
those of the negroes who had deserted the Union League. Barbe
cues were given the negroes in several counties to win them from
the League.
10 The Richmond Dispatch, July 2, 1869.
17 The Richmond Enquirer, May 28, 29, 1869.
18 Code of Virginia. 1873, p. 28.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS

77

Total Numb

er of Reg-

Number

of Votes

For the Con- Against

istered

Voters.

Cast.

stitution. the Consti

White

Colored

White

Colored

tution.

149,781

120,103

125,114

97,205

210,585 9,136

For 4th

For 7th

clause Sec.

Section,
1, Art. Ill
Against
Article
Against
Not Voting
of Constitu
It.
III
It.
White Colored
tion.
84,410
124,360
83,458
124,715
24,637 22,898
For Governor For Lieutenant-Gov. For Attorney-General
Walker Wells Lewis Harris Taylor Bowden
119,535 101,204 120,068 99,600 119,446 101,129
The color line in this election was drawn more sharply than
in the previous election. That part of the constitution not in
cluding the two parts that were voted on separately was accepted
by both sides almost unanimously. Walker was elected govern
or by a majority of 18,331 out of 220,739 votes. The Conserva
tives, Lewis and Taylor, were also elected lieutenant-governor
and attorney-general, respectively. Of the six candidates for
the three highest state offices, Taylor received the greatest num
ber of votes and Harris, his colored opponent, the smallest. Evi
dently some of the Radicals did not support their colored candi
date. The most interesting and significant feature of the elec
tion was the vote on the clauses that were submitted separately.
The negroes voted almost unanimously for these clauses, which
if adopted would have disfranchised thousands of white men
and disqualified from holding office practically all the white men
of the State. The efforts to break the hold of the Union League
on the negroes had been successful only to a very small degree,
and the negroes voted as they had been instructed by their Rad
ical leaders.
Of the 43 senators elected to the General Assembly, 30 were
Conservatives and 13, Radicals. Of the 138 delegates elected, 96
were Conservatives and 42, Radicals. There were 6 negro Rad
icals among the senators elected, and 18 negro Radicals and 3
78 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
negro Conservatives among the delegates. The Conservative
candidates won 5 out of the 9 Congressional districts.
To the country at large this seemed like a victory of the mod
erate faction of the Republican party, but it was really a victory
of the old Conservative party. It meant that the State had
passed directly from under a fairly efficient military government
to one under Conservative control, and that Virginia was thereby
spared several painful years of carpetbag-negro rule, like that
which had existed in most of the other Southern States. There
remained, however, from Reconstruction, a new and cumber
some government, the provision for an expensive public school
system, a large public debt, and other new and fearful prob
lems — social, political and racial. These problems had to be
faced and solved by a poverty-stricken state, carrying a heavy
debt and a burden of about one hundred and fifty thousand
newly enfranchised freedmen, who were densely ignorant and
well organized under unscrupulous leaders politically hostile to
the white population.
The election had been a quiet one in spite of the bitterness of
the campaign that preceded it.19 The general apprehension that
had been felt over this feature of the election is shown in the
frequent comment, "No disturbance," "All quiet," and other
similar laconic phrases in the telegraphic reports to the news
papers of the elections in the black counties of the State. In a
few of the reports, mention was made of the fact that some
negroes had voted with the whites for Walker.20
There was great rejoicing among the Conservatives over the
results of the election. The Norfolk correspondent of a Rich
mond paper said, "While I write, bonfires are burning, music
playing, and other demonstrations of a rejoicing people" are in
progress. There were similar celebrations throughout the
State. The exodus of the carpetbaggers was anticipated with
keen pleasure. "Thank God," writes the editor of the Richmond

18 The Dispatch, July 8, 1869, considered this "a marvel of these
days." 20 Richmond Dispatch, July 7, 1869.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 79
Dispatch, "they must soon depart or take to some honest liveli
hood." In September 1869, the provisional Governor, Wells, finding
the political climate of Virginia no longer congenial, resigned,
and the governor-elect, Walker, succeeded him in office. A few
days later, October 5, 1869, the first General Assembly that had
met in three years, and the first in ten years to receive the un
qualified recognition of the Federal government convened in
Richmond. The Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments were
submitted to the Assembly by Governor Walker on the third
day of its session. The former amendment was ratified in the
Senate by a vote of 36 to 4, and in the House of Delegates by
a vote of 126 to 6. The latter amendment was ratified in the
Senate by a vote of 40 to 2, and in the House by a unanimous
vote. The virtual unanimity with which the amendments were
ratified is interesting in view of the fact that before the Assem
bly had been able to effect a permanent organization and pro
ceed with its work, the Radical members had attempted to have
the test oath required of all the members, and followed this vain
attempt by a protest against the loyalty and legality of the As
sembly. The Radical party expressed its disapproval of the July elec
tions in resolutions adopted by its State convention which met
in Richmond on November 24, 1869. It was therein declared
that "the election held in this State on the 6th of July, last, re
sulted in a Confederate triumph, which we unhesitatingly assert
was achieved by artifice, intimidation and fraud." 21 "We be
lieve," continued the resolutions, "that the secret of our defeat
can be found in the unfortunate submission to a separate vote
of the test-oath and disfranchising clauses of the State consti
tution, in direct opposition to the deliberate opinion of the rank
and file of the Republican party in Virginia." An appeal was

21 The election was conducted under the supervision of Federal
officials, and two local men of each race were chosen to challenge
the voters at the respective voting places. The Commanding Gen
eral at the time was a Radical sympathizer. The accusation of the .
Radicals, like many similar statements to gain the support of the
North, was without foundation.

80 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP papers
made to Congress to "guarantee to Virginia a republican form
of government" by either requiring the test-oath of those elected
and upon their refusal to take it to count in the candidate having
the next highest vote, or by requiring a new election in order to
have a vote taken on the constitution as a whole. "In event of
a new election," continued the appeal, "we would ask for a mili
tary force sufficient to protect us in our political and civil rights.
. . . This is perhaps our last contest. On your decision, loyalty
in Virginia lives or dies. If you decide against us, no one will
dare avow his Republicanism. The pernicious example set here
will extend to other Southern states; the colored people will
again be at the mercy of their former masters ; the national debt
will be repudiated; and the rebel Democratic yoke may be placed
on the necks of the American people in 1872." 22 These resolu
tions are sufficient to show the character and the methods of
the "rank and file of the Republican party in Virginia," and to
explain, in part at least, the solidarity of the opposition to that
party in the Commonwealth since 1867.
Fortunately for the State, Congress did not heed the cry of
the Radicals, and Virginia took her place in the Union by an act
of Congress of January 26, 1870.

Appleton's Annual Cyclopaedia, 1869, p. 714.

CHAPTER VII.
The Elimination of the Carpetbaggers — 1869 to 1879.
The first phase of the history of the negro in Virginia politics
ended with the Conservative victory of 1869, which brought the
State back into the Union in 1870 under the control of the na
tive white Conservatives. The victory had been fairly won
under the careful supervision of the Federal authorities. The
Radical domination of the State government by means of the
colored vote was ended. But the Radicals retained their hold
on local governments in the black counties and were a constant
menace to the political welfare of the State. Grave economic
troubles had arisen out of war and reconstruction. But before
the people of the State could turn their attention to these mat
ters, the political field had to be cleared of carpetbaggers and
their radical followers, and the negroes relegated to the back
ground in the affairs of government.
The economic troubles were intimately bound up in State pol
itics with the State debt of over forty-five million dollars that
had been contracted before the War of Secession for works of
internal improvement.1 The greater part of the debt had been
made during the hopeful decade just preceding the war; and
during the decade of war and reconstruction that followed, it
was enormously increased by the unpaid interest that accumu
lated. Had there been no war, the debt, representing for the
most part good investments, would not have been a burden to
the people. In 1870, however, it weighed like a mill-stone upon
the State, and was to dominate Virginia politics for the next
half a generation. In 1866 the payment in full of the debt and
accumulated interest was pledged by the last legislature repre
senting the old regime. By the code of honor of this regime,

1 R. L. Morton, "The Virginia State Debt and Internal Improve
ments, 1820-38," The Journal of Political Economy, April, 1917. W.
H. Ambler, The History of Sectionalism in Virginia.

81

82 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
those who governed the State guarded "its honor as jealously as
they guarded honor in their personal affairs. Fraud had been
practically unknown in the public affairs of the Commonwealth.
The stand taken by the legislature in 1866 was heroic in view of
the extreme poverty of the State at that time.
At the beginning of his administration Governor Walker took
a very hopeful view of the situation. In his message of March
8, 1870, he advocated the funding of the entire debt on a basis
most favorable to the creditors, and the passage of other laws
to strengthen public and private credit. ¦ His advice was heartily
seconded by the press of the State and was approved by conser
vatives everywhere.
The legislature showed by its acts a desire to conform to the
new order of things and to follow the lead of the Governor in
an effort to strengthen the financial condition of the Common
wealth. A good system of public schools was inaugurated un
der the very efficient management of the first superintendent
of public instruction, Dr. W. H. Ruffner; and provision was
made for putting into operation the new system of local gov
ernment required by the Underwood Constitution. But by tak
ing advantage of the provision in the constitution that reap
portionment should be made on the basis of representation in the
General Assembly, the legislature broke up the gerrymander of
the Underwood Constitution.2
Closely associated with the debt question was the question of
railroad ownership and control. Governor Walker advocated
the abandonment of the State's interest in the railroads. As a
result of its policy of borrowing, the State owned a controlling
interest in its main lines of communication. In response to the
advice of the Governor, the legislature, after a bitter struggle,
passed an act 3 providing for the sale of the State's railroad
stock at a sacrifice. The negro vote was the deciding factor in
the passage of this bill.4 The act was not favorable to the in-

2 J. A. C. Chandler, Representation in Virginia (Johns Hopkins Uni
versity Studies, vol. xiv), pp. 79-80.
8 Act of March 28, 1871.
4 C. C. Pearson, The Readjuster Movement in Virginia, p. 29.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 83
terests of the State, and the people felt that their interest had
been bartered away. This was one of the most important
pieces of legislation of that session.
The most important act of the session was the Funding Act,
which was passed two days later. By this act it was provided
that the old bonds could be exchanged for new ones, bearing
six per cent interest — the old rate — for two-thirds of the
amount of the old bonds, respectively, and the overdue inter
est on them. With these were to be given interest-bearing
certificates for the other third upon which was stated that pay
ment of this would be made in accordance with such settlement
as would thereafter be made between Virginia and West Vir
ginia. Interest promises were to be in the form of coupons re
ceivable in payment of taxes or other dues to the State.5
The bill was rushed through the House at the close of the
session with little opportunity for debate. It received the sup
port of half the Conservatives and of all the Republican mem
bers but one.6 The negroes, who were Republicans, voted
against the bill at first, but reversed their vote three hours
later.7 It was believed that they had been bought.
After the passage of this act, the revenues of the State were
not sufficient to pay the six per cent interest on the debt and at
the same time pay the other appropriations provided by her
laws.8 The current expenses of the State, which had averaged
a little over half a million dollars, now required an annual ap
propriation of over a million dollars. To offset this, only lit
tle could be realized from the sale of the State's railroad assets
under the act of March 28, 1871. 9 Furthermore, taxes were

0 Act of March 30, 1871.
8 Journal of the House of Delegates, March, 1871. Journal of the
Senate, March, 1871.
7 House Journal, 1871-1872, pp. 31, 137, 297 ff; the Richmond Whig,
Enquirer, Dispatch, February 14-20, 1872 — cited in C. C. Pearson, The
Readjustee Movement in Virginia, p.- 32. See also F. G. Ruffin, The
Cost and Outcome of Negro Education in Virginia, (Pamphlet) Rich
mond, 1889; Virginia House Journal and Documents, 1874-1875, p. 30.
8 Journal and Documents of the House of Delegates, 1874-1875; W.
L. Royall, The Virginia State Debt Controversy, p. 21.
' Senate Journal and Documents, 1874-1875, Doc. 1.

84 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
already high and the people were in very straightened circum
stances. The negroes, who constituted over a third of the pop
ulation, had practically no property at all to be taxed.
There had been little interest taken in the campaign of 1870.
Three Republican and five Conservative representatives were
elected to Congress. The color line had appeared as usual be
tween the two parties. At the end of the legislative session of
1870-1871 party issues were still ill defined. The debt and rail
road controversies of that session had not been strictly along
party lines. Party platforms had been conciliatory and not
clear cut. ¦ There were factions in both parties over the recent
legislation and on account of strife between the carpetbaggers,
supported by the negroes, and their allies, the scalawags, over
the giving of Federal patronage.10 But the Conservatives re
organized the party in their convention of August 30, 1871.
The old ante-bellum leaders, who had been barred from poli
tics, now made their presence felt. In the words of Professor
Pearson, this marked "the beginning of a Confederate reaction
against the compromising idea that had prevailed for two
years." It should be noted, however, that six negro members
from Richmond were given a hearty welcome at this conven
tion and Governor Walker was invited to be present. About a
month later, the Republican convention formulated a platform
in which the Conservative party was severely arraigned. The
Funding Act, which had received the votes of their own dele
gates when passed, received special condemnation. It was also
stated in the platform that the Conservatives had not fulfilled
the requirements of the new constitution in regard to the pub
lic schools and in regard to the right of negroes to sit on juries.
In the November election which followed, the Conservatives
increased their majority in the House of Delegates by fifteen
members and in the Senate by six.11 The number of negroes in

10 C. C. Pearson, The Readjuster Movement in Virginia, p. 38.
" In the House of Delegates there were 97 Conservatives and 35
Republicans, 14 of the latter colored; in the Senate there were 33
Conservatives and 10 Republicans, 3 of whom were colored. The
Richmond Dispatch, November 16, 18, 1871; Appleton 's Annual Cyclo
paedia, 1871.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 85
the House was reduced from twenty to fourteen, and in the
Senate, from six to three.
In the meanwhile, the financial situation of the State was be
coming very serious. The State government found it impos
sible to meet the obligations imposed by the Funding Act of
March 1871 and defaulted in the payment of the interest on
the new bonds. In March 1872, an act was passed over the
Governor's veto forbidding tax collectors from receiving the
coupons, already issued, in payment of taxes.12 But the Vir
ginia Court of Appeals, in December 1872, declared this act an
impairment of the obligation of contract and therefore uncon
stitutional.13 As a result, coupons were redeemed as before.
A deficit occurred in the State's revenue. On account of this
the public schools suffered most heavily.14 Out of this state of
affairs grew the Readjuster Movement. The new development
in the debt question was looked upon with alarm by the Con
servative leaders, especially those of the old school, who be
lieved with William L. Royall, that "all of this proceeded di
rectly from the new order of things which the introduction of
the negro as a voter produced." 15
The legislature of 1872-1873 did not improve the situation
by acts to reduce the expenses of the government or to improve
the credit of the State, though elected with that end in view.
The Conservative party failed to carry the State for Horace
Greely, the Liberal-Republican candidate, in the national elec
tion of 1872. In the Congressional elections of that year, Rad
ical (Republican) candidates were elected from the four east
ern and southern districts — the black districts— of the State.
The remaining five were won by the Conservatives.16 The Re-

12 Act of March 7, 1872.
18 Antoni v. Wright, 22 Grattan, 833.
14 For account of arrears in the appropriations for the public
schools, see the Governor's Message, December 6, 1876, House Jour
nal and Documents, 1876-1877.
15 W. L. Royall, The Virginia State Debt Controversy, p. 23. Mr.
Royall was chief counsel for the bondholders during the contro
versy. " The first amendment to the Underwood Constitution was

86 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
publican success in this election greatly encouraged them and
aroused the Conservatives to increased efforts in the campaign
for the election of the higher State officers and members of the
General Assembly.
The campaign of 1873 was one of unusual interest through
out the Commonwealth. The Radical, or Republican conven
tion assembled in Lynchburg on July 30. About half of its
members were colored.17 Robert W. Hughes, a former se
cessionist and a man of ability, who came from southwestern
Virginia, was nominated for governor; C. P. Rumsdell, a car
petbagger from an eastern county, for lieutenant-governor; and
David Fultz, an old Union man, from Augusta County, for at
torney-general. Thus every faction of the party and every sec
tion of the State were represented. The platform adopted was
generous, progressive and of wide appeal.
The Conservative convention, held in Richmond a few days
later, August 6, was one of the largest and most enthusiastic
meetings ever held by the party. Their nominations and plat
form, like those of the Republicans, were made with a view to
harmonize contending factions and sections. General James L.
Kemper from the Valley, an officer in the Mexican war and in
the War of Secession, was nominated for governor; Colonel R.
E. Withers of the Southwest, for lieutenant-governor; and
Raleigh T. Daniel, a prominent lawyer and party leader, of
Richmond, for attorney-general. Kemper owed his nomina
tion largely to the influence of William Mahone, whom he had
supported in the contest over the railroads. Withers, on the
other hand, was an enemy of Mahone.18

adopted by the people at this election. The usury clause was
stricken from the constitution, giving the legislature a free hand in
setting the rate of interest. The constitution underwent many
changes in this way. For these changes, see later codes of Virginia,
and, for a convenient summary of them, see David L. Pulliam, The
Constitutional Conventions of Virginia (Richmond, 1901) pp. 165-179.
A change in legislative representation had been made, but this
had been required by the constitution.
17 Current newspapers. Appleton's Annual Cyclopaedia, 1873.
" R. E. Withers, Autobiography.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 87
The return of the old leaders to political life was made pos
sible by the wholesale removal of disabilities by Congress in
1872. The same qualities that had brought these men to the
front in times of war brought them to the front in political af
fairs, and their rank in the army made them heroes in the pop
ular mind. The platform adopted by the convention had much
in common with the platform adopted by the Radicals the pre
vious week, but it was not quite as liberal in content and tone.
A comparison was drawn between the condition of Virginia
under Conservative control and that of other Southern states
under Radical rule ; justice to all, regardless of race or nativity,
was made the aim of the party; the new system of public
schools was pointed to with pride, and liberal support of pub
lic school education was advocated.19 Conservatives were ad
vised to vote against all independent candidates.
In spite of the fortunate nominations and the progressive
platforms of the two parties, the true issue of the campaign,
negro control in politics, could not be concealed. The cam
paign was a struggle of the carpetbaggers to regain their for
mer prominence through the aid of the negroes. The bitter
ness of their fight was increased by the realization that this
would be, perhaps, their last one if they were defeated at that
time. So sharply drawn was the line between the whites and
the blacks that, as The Nation expressed it, it was "barely an
exaggeration to say that it was a struggle of races." 20 The
Conservatives, who had refrained from recognizing the color j
line in former campaigns, now frankly did so, and challenged
the whites to be true to their race by supporting their party.
They had tried in vain to effect some kind of compromise to

19 It may be noted in this connection that there were in Virginia
390,913 negroes over ten years of age who could not read, and 445,893
who could not write. Report of the Superintendent of Public Instruc
tion of Virginia, 1871, p. 202. (According to the census of 1870 the
total colored population was 512,841.)
20 The Nation, November 6, 1873. The question was asked in an
editorial in the Richmond Dispatch, March 4, 1873: "Shall the whites
rule and take care of the negroes, or shall the negroes rule and take
care of the whites?" There was no longer a compromise here.

88 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
break the solid ranks of the negroes under their Radical lead
ers in order to avoid the race issue in politics. There was now
but one course to pursue, that of drawing the color line just as
their opponents had done. The whites in the central, eastern
and southern counties of the State had borne patiently the re
sults of Reconstruction. They had in their local offices and as
their representatives in the legislature their former servants —
carriage drivers, butlers, shoemakers and field hands — and self-
seeking white adventurers from without the State and native
demagogues. Some of the negro officers were honest and cap
able men who exerted a good influence over their people ; but
even these were lacking in training and experience to represent
educated white constituencies which had always possessed a
genius for politics and a high standard for its officers. Accord
ing to Dr. W. H. Ruffner, the State Superintendent of Public
Instruction, there was in these counties "one agonizing desire;
it is for honest, enlightened, local government, and for deliver
ance, not only from the actual incubus, but from the constant
dread of semi-barbarous rule." 21 The weakening of the Re
publican party by the many political scandals during President
Grant's administration, and by the panic of 1873, diverted the
mind of the North from Southern affairs and gave the Con
servatives in Virginia more freedom from outside influence in
politics. It was also at this time that there occurred the famous
decisions of the Federal Supreme Court in the Slaughter House
Cases, which marked a reaction in that court against the undue
interference of the Federal government in the political affairs
of the individual states.
During the campaign of 1873 the Radicals adjured the ne
groes to support their party, and reminded them that the
whites, or Conservatives, had once held them in slavery and
would do so again if they could control the government. In
answer, the Conservatives urged the whites to be loyal to their
race and to remember the crimes committed under negro local
rule in the State. For example, reference was made to the rav
ishing of an old lady by two of Kellogg's colored policemen, of

21 State School Report, 1873, p. 204.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 89
which deed the Lynchburg News said, "It seems monstrous to
suppose that any white men, having a mother, sister, wife, or
daughter can march up to the polls and vote to place in power
a party which connives at such outrages." 22 The horrible ex
ample of Radical-negro rule that could then be seen in other
Southern states afforded the white Conservatives an ample and
just reason for the existence of their party.
The election resulted in the defeat of the Republicans. Kem
per won with a majority of 27,239 votes out of the 214,237
cast. Withers and Daniel were also elected. In the General
Assembly the Conservatives had as the result of the election 33
men in the Senate and 99 in the House of Delegates. The Re
publicans had 9 men in the Senate and 33 in the House. A
third of the Republicans in the Senate and over a half of the
Republicans in the House were colored.23
One of the hardest things for outsiders to realize was the
friendly relations that still existed between the members of the
two races in Virginia outside of politics. In spite of bitterness
engendered -by political strife and outside interference, when
blacks met whites in everyday life, the old attachment that had
existed between master and servant before the war continued
to exist. The negroes continued to look to the whites for pro
tection, advice and employment; and the whites depended upon
the negroes for their labor. In speaking of this in 1873, Dr.
Ruffner said, "In spite of the political contests on the race line,
the personal relations between the white .and colored people are
not only friendly, but are more free and genial than commonly
exist between the corresponding classes of whites." 24 In his
message to the General Assembly of January 1, 1874, Governor

22 The Nation, November 6, 1873.
23 Warrock-Richardson Almanac, 1874; Appleton' s Annual Cyclopae
dia, 1873; The Richmond Dispatch, November 17, 1873.
During the legislative session of 1874, Colonel Robert E. Withers
was chosen United States Senator. His closest opponent in the
contest for the position was James P. Evans, a negro, who received
15 votes, all but one of which were colored. Virginia now had two
Conservative United States senators. Journal of the House of Dele
gates, 1874, pp. 72-73.
21 The Virginia School Report, 1873.

90 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
Kemper pointed to the fact that there was not a single discrim
ination in regard to race in the laws of the State, and that the
Federal government had not had a single occasion to interfere
in the domestic affairs of the State upon the pretext of injus
tice or inequality in the Virginia code of laws, or in their ap
plication and enforcement between the races. In reference to
the recent defeat of the carpetbaggers, he said, "Recent events
prove how futile, and how disastrous to its authors, must be
any attempt to array the colored race as a political combina
tion upon any principle of antagonism between the races. All
such attempted combinations of the past are dissolved and dis
persed and we are afforded a golden opportunity for settling
forever the internal jealousies which have hindered our mate
rial progress, and for completing thf pacification of all elements
of the body politic." The Governor advocated the division of
the races socially and their mutual aid along all lines of prog
ress. He desired the moral and educational betterment of the
colored people. In political affairs he was confident that the
white people would lead on account of their superior numbers,
wealth, political training and intelligence.25
The growing strength of the Conservative party was further
shown in the returns of the Congressional elections in the fall
of that year, 1874. With the exception of one representative,
William H. H. Stowell, administration candidate from the
Fourth District, all the representatives elected were Conserva
tives.26

25 Journal and Documents of the House of Delegates, 1874, pp. 10-11.
28 Excitement ran high during political campaigns. John Goode
defeated James H. Piatt of Vermont in a warmly contested election
for a seat in Congress from the district in which Norfolk city is lo
cated. Piatt had made himself exceedingly obnoxious to the white
people of the district and Goode gives the following account of the
reception that he received upon his victory over Piatt:
"The city was brilliantly illuminated and nearly the entire popu
lation turned out to meet me at the station, and with a torchlight
procession escorted me to my house."
In this district the negroes nominated as candidates one of their
number, Robert Norton, in a mass meeting at Yorktown. John
Goode, Recollections of a Lifetime, pp. 107 ff.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 91
After the defeat of the Radicals at the polls the Conserva
tives, under the guidance of their old leaders, proceeded with
the undoing of Reconstruction in the State. Resolutions had
already been adopted by the previous Assembly to amend the
article in the Underwood Constitution relating to county or
ganization.27 These resolutions were now finally adopted. The
amendments, therein, provided for the abolition of a third of
the local officers of the State and for changing the name "town
ship" (which was a constant reminder of Reconstruction ad
venturers that had introduced the township system in the Com
monwealth) to "magisterial district," the old name. This
amendment was submitted to the people in the fall of 1874 and
was ratified by a good majority.28
During the session of 1874-1875 the legislature, acting upon
the Governor's advice, again laid violent hands upon the Un
derwood Constitution, and the reaction against Reconstruction

27 Acts of Assembly, 1872-1873, p. 274; Journal and Documents of the
House of Delegates, 1874, pp. 20-24.
28 Governor Kemper was not satisfied with the amendment because
it was not drastic enough, and strongly advocated further amend
ments. "That instrument," he said, referring to the Underwood Con
stitution, "imposes upon the impoverished and sparce population of
Virginia a frame-work of State and local government so complicated
and costly that it must of necessity be oppressive in any but a densely
settled state. After Virginia had been stripped of a third of her
territory and more than half of her material values — when the legis
lature should have been reduced in numbers one-half, and the gov
ernment conformed to the diminished size and resources of the State
— the legislative department was made relatively large, its sessions
twice as frequent, and the whole machinery of the government more
expensive than when the State was powerful, rich and prosperous.
The Constitution is full of details which belong only to the domain
of ordinary legislation. It puts unusual and meddlesome restric
tions upon the legislative power, which cripple the government in
its efforts to equalize the burdens of taxation, and to restore the
State credit. It contains provisions and allusions touching our past
history which are irritating and offensive to a majority of the peo
ple." Furthermore, he said, it had abolished the "ancient, honest
and manly mode of voting by the living voice," and had substituted
the secret ballot, a source of fraud, dissimulation and falsehood.
Journal and Documents of the House of Delegates, 1874, pp. 482-484.

92 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
went on apace. Two sets of amendments were adopted for sub
mission to popular vote. The first of these dealt with that part
of the constitution relating to the elective franchise and quali
fications for office ; the second had to do with the article relat
ing to the legislative department. To the former disqualifica
tions from voting — insanity, bribery at elections, embezzlement
of public funds, duelling (or aiding in a duel), treason and fel
ony — was added petit larceny. This was the first time that dis
crimination had been made against the negroes through legis
lation striking at their peculiar characteristics. The following
oath, that had been required of "every person offering or ap
plying to register," was stricken from the constitution :
"I  do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I am not
disqualified from exercising the right of suffrage by the Constitution
framed by the Convention which assembled in the city of Richmond,
on the third of December, eighteen hundred and sixty-seven, and
that I will support and defend the same to the best of my ability."29
Thus an unhappy reminder of the past was removed and the
ground was cleared of this obstacle to tender consciences in the
future. By the second group of amendments, adopted at this time, the
number of members of the House of Delegates was reduced
from 132 to not over 100; the General Assembly would meet
biennially instead of annually; power was given the General
Assembly to provide for the government of cities and towns,
and to establish such courts therein as might be necessary for
the administration of justice; the General Assembly was given
the power to remove disabilities incurred by aiding or partici
pating in duelling; and finally, the former custom of requiring
the payment of a poll tax as a requisite for voting was re
vived.30

20 Acts of Assembly, 1874-1875, p. 399, ch. 313. Submitted to the
people by act of the General Assembly, Acts 1875-1S76, p. 82, ch. 87;
p. 87, ch. 88. These amendments were ratified by a large majority.
Even at this date Federal troops were used at the polls in Peters
burg. ,0 This tax requirement did not prove satisfactory as there was
no provision made for a set time for the payment of this tax before

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 93
Although the poll tax requirement as a requisite for voting
was aimed chiefly at the negro,31 who it was believed would not
pay his poll tax, the fiscal need' for the law was largely respon
sible for its existence. The change in the constitution was
strongly urged by Governor Walker at the beginning of his ad
ministration on this account. In 1873, Dr. Ruffner advocated
the payment of a two dollar poll tax as a requisite for voting
in order to provide money for the public schools. He reminded
the people of the fact that it was the custom in Virginia before
1867 to require tax receipts of those desiring to vote and cited
this as "evidence, that this movement (for the poll tax require
ment) is not aimed at the rights and privileges of any particu
lar color or condition." 32

the elections. It was consequently often paid at the last moment
for the voter. Fraud resulted, and much money was needed by each
party for the purchasing of votes. Furthermore, some of the poorer
whites were disfranchised thereby. When the Readjuster party came
into power in 1880 the legislature proposed an amendment to abol
ish that part of the constitution. The amendment, according to law,
had to be passed by a second session of the legislature. It was ap
proved a second time and was ratified by the people in 1882. There
was no change in the suffrage after this until 1902. J. A. C. Chan
dler, The History of Suffrage in Virginia, Johns Hopkins University
Studies, 19th Series.
For the acts relating to these amendments, see Acts of Assembly,
1874-1875, p. 399, ch. 313. Submitted to the people by the act of As
sembly 1875-1876, p. 82, ch. 87; p. 87, ch. 88.
The amendment relating to duelling was made in behalf of some
of the old leaders who had participated in duelling. Duelling ex
isted in Virginia until about 1880 in spite of the better judgment and
the disapproval not only of the people in general but also of those
who participated in them. For an interesting account of the last
and most famous of the post-bellum duels fought in Virginia and of
the attitude of one who figured prominently in these affairs and in
Virginia politics of the period, see W. L. Royall, Some Reminiscences,
pp. 64-100.
" The Richmond Dispatch, February 28, 1880.
82 He said furthermore that the restrictions on the franchise that
existed in some parts of New England at that time were much more
severe. In Connecticut, for example, no man could vote who could

94 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
The change in the constitution which placed the form of
government for the respective cities in the hands of the legisla
ture was one of the most important adopted at this time. This,
like several other contemporaneous changes, was designed to
deliver the local governments of the black belt out of the hands
of the negroes and their leaders.
It was at this time that disillusionment first came to the negroes
in regard to their white allies, the Radical-Republicans from
abroad. Upon the failure to receive the Federal support which
they had so earnestly prayed for, the more aspiring and capable
carpetbaggers had sought other occupations or more propitious
fields for their political activity; some had joined the Conserv
ative ranks. But the less capable of these unwelcome invaders
still lingered in the black counties, courting favor with the col
ored people in order to win an office here and there. These
men, had, by their familiarity with the colored people and by
their lack of real sympathy and regard for them, brought upon
themselves the contempt of the negroes, who after all still
prided themselves on their friendship with the "quality." Fi
nancial troubles had diverted the attention of the people of the
North from their former wards at the South. The negroes
now began to realize that they were not only forsaken by their
former political allies but also that the whites were no longer
in the mood to compromise in political affairs.
The colored voters gave vent to their dissatisfaction in a
state convention held at Richmond on August 20, 1875. The
meeting was called for the purpose of preserving the rights of
the colored people and of securing redress for the wrongs
which they claimed to have received at the hands of the local
authorities and at the hands of the Republican leaders in Rich
mond and Washington. There were many delegates present
from all parts of the State. Like former Radical gatherings of
this kind, it was characterized by much speaking, excitement
and confusion. Resolutions were adopted as follows :

not read; and in Massachusetts the ability to read and write was re
quired of voters. Annual Report of the Superintendent of Public In
struction of Virginia, 1873.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 95
"Believing in a republican form of government such as emanated
from the reversionary right of all power, that it should not or would
not be deemed improper or impertinent for us, who represent nine-
tenths of the Republican voters of Virginia, to state candidly and
earnestly some of our grievances, which we have borne patiently as
a party and as a class, and to call the attention of the Administra
tion thereto and ask, respectfully but firmly, that they be noticed,
and, as far as is in the power of the Administration, that they be
rectified, and the party relieved of unnecessary burdens, harmonized,
inspired anew and prepared to run in the next presidential race and
gloriously and triumphantly win: and whereas we deem it essential
to this end that the party in the State should control its own in
ternal economy without the interference in our local politics of po
litical stock-brokers and speculators to dictate Federal appointments
over the head of our own State Committee, and to keep them there
against our respectful protests and petitions: therefore —
"Resolved, That while we reiterate unflinching fidelity to the prin
ciples of the Republican party and, per consequence, fealty to the
Administration, we again respectfully ask and think it right for the
Administration to stretch out its hand and save us and the organi
zation as it exists, and which we acknowledge, by recognizing such
organization as the supreme power of the party, and listen to their
behests rather than to those interested individuals, whether they
live here, in Massachusetts, or any other portion of the land.
"Resolved, That we look with the utmost anxiety and alarm at the
condition of disorganization and disaffection existing in the party
in the State, caused by the appointment of a number of Federal of
fice-holders all over the State, many instances of which occur to us
who are pronounced Democrats, who would blush Judas-like were
Republican sentiments imputed to them, and of others who are an
incubus to the party and are preparing the way for a precipitate
desertion into the Democratic lines in case the late lamented Con
federacy shall succeed in establishing its power and supremacy again
in 1876."33
The proposed amendment of the constitution making petty
larceny a cause of disfranchisement was discussed by members
of the convention and denounced as an unjust discrimination
against their race. Resolutions were adopted denouncing it.34
One delegate said, "It is hard that a poor negro cannot take a
few chickens without losing his right to vote."

83 Appleton's Annual Cyclopaedia, 1875.
34 See contemporary newspapers, the Richmond Dispatch, Whig
and Examiner; Appleton's Annual Cyclopaedia, 1875.

96 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
The effects of the end of carpetbag rule and of the operation
of the new legislation undoing Reconstruction may be seen in
the results of the elections of 1877 and 1878. As the result of
the former elections the number of Republican members of the
House of Delegates was reduced from twenty-two to nine.
There were only seven negroes left in the legislature. The rep
resentatives elected to Congress in 1878 were Conservatives
with the exception of one Republican from the Fourth District.
Now that the Conservative party was no longer held together
by the race question and that the Republican party had become
practically a negro organization, the number of independent
members of the House of Delegates had increased from six to
twenty-three. The negroes, who had been "noisy and jubilant" over Hayes's
election in the national contest of 1876,35 did not realize that
this election meant a compromise between the North and the
South, nor did they suspect that it marked the beginning of a
deadlock between the great political parties which was to exist
from 1875 to 1879, and which was to prevent all interference
in Southern affairs by the national government. Furthermore
there were many in both sections who had begun to say, in the
words of an eminent Southerner, "I am tired of this turmoil
and distrust. I want a country I can love." 36
After the elimination of the carpetbaggers and the undoing
of a large part of their work in the early seventies, the race
question in politics had become of little importance until the
debt controversy gave origin to the Readjuster party in 1879.
The recrudescence of the race question has occurred in Virginia
politics only in times of political stress, when the negro vote has
been necessary to keep a certain element in power. Just as the
carpetbaggers had thus won supremacy for a short time during
Reconstruction, and had made the race question a political issue
during the several years that followed in order to regain their

85 Alderman and Gordon, /. L. M. Curry, A Biography, p. 235.
80 Ibid., p. 235. See also p. 238. Hayes offered Curry a place in
his cabinet and even considered giving General Joseph E. Johnston
a place there.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 97
supremacy, so General William Mahone — taking advantage of
the debt problem — built up a powerful political machine with
the aid of the negro votes, dominated State politics from 1879
to 1883 and, after his defeat, continued to make the race ques
tion a campaign issue for several years longer with the hope
of regaining power.
The Readjuster Movement in Virginia grew out of the in
ability of the people of Virginia in their crippled financial con
dition to construct a satisfactory policy in regard to the State
debt. The history of this movement is one of great interest and
importance, not only as a chapter in Virginia history during a
critical period but also as an account of a reaction against the
ancient order of things, which occurred between 1876 and 1900.
This reaction, which we are about to study, resembled Re
construction in its radical tendencies, its type of leaders and
their use of the negro vote to further their ends. And just as
the drawing of the color line during Reconstruction brought a
reaction against the negroes in the Southern States, which
showed itself in election frauds, intimidation and, finally,
amendments to the state constitutions, so this second movement
brought its reaction in the form of a new type of politicians in
the South — the anti-negro politicians — and forced the adoption
of new state constitutions around the year 1900.
—7

CHAPTER VIII.
The Readjuster Movement in Virginia, 1879-1883.
It is not in the scope of this paper to give a detailed account
of the Readjuster movement in Virginia.1 But since the suc
cess of the Readjusters was obtained with the aid of the solid
negro vote, it is not out of place here to give briefly the history
and results of the movement.
The issue of the State debt had not been squarely faced be
fore 1879. The Funding Act of March 1871 was unsatisfac
tory to all factions. The attempt to prevent the payment of in
terest coupons into the treasury had failed. As a consequence
they continued to be received and the State could not meet its
obligations to its public schools and its creditors. Governor
Walker had taken entirely too hopeful a view of the financial
condition of the State and of its ability to meet promptly its
obligations. The creditors and the world at large had been
given reason to believe from the official statements of the Gov
ernor that the resources of the State, which had suffered four
years as a battle field, had been but little diminished. He had
said that if the lands of the Commonwealth were fairly as
sessed there would be enough revenue, without increasing the
rate of taxation, to pay the interest on the public debt and to
defray the current expenses of the State government. After
such official statements it was only natural that those who were
not in the position to know the real state of affairs in Virginia
should have looked upon the defalcation of the payment of in
terest on the bonds of the State and the attempts to defeat the
purpose of the Funding Act as bad faith on the part of the peo
ple of Virginia. As a consequence British financiers were not
only refusing to loan money in the State but were in some cases

1 For a full account of the period, see C. C. Pearson, The Read
juster Movement in Virginia.

98

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 99
advising others to do the same. Thus further financial distress
was caused.2
Governor Walker's cheerful estimate of the resources of Vir
ginia were, unfortunately, not founded upon sufficient evidence,
and proved to be highly exaggerated. To outward appearances
the scars of war were to some extent healed. Farm buildings,
implements, fences and other property that had been taken
away or destroyed by contending armies were being replaced.
But the increase in such property was balanced by the capi
tal borrowed for procuring it. The prosperity of Virginia,
whose population was almost entirely rural, depended upon its
agriculture. The national census of 1870 shows that the num
ber of acres in cultivation within the limits of the present State
of Virginia was less by over two millions in 1870 than in 1860,
that the number of pounds of tobacco had been reduced two-
thirds, and that the number of bushels of corn and wheat had
been reduced to about half. Of twenty-four and a half million
acres of land in the State only about eight million one hundred
thousand were improved farm land. This productive portion
had to bear the burden of taxation for the entire State. Added
to the loss of men and capital during the war, there had been
since its close bad seasons for crops and a lack of dependable
labor. The labor system had become completely disorganized
and demoralized. The negroes were still enjoying the novelty
of their new estate and could not be depended upon to remain at
work. On the average they were producing little besides food

2 The Nation, November 1, 1874; Journal and Documents of the
House of Delegates, 1874-1875, Document No. 1.
In his message of March 27, 1874 to the legislature, Governor
Kemper said, "The State credit is prostrate. The best bonds of
Virginia rate lower in the Stock Exchange of London than those of
Egypt, Turkey or Peru, and our credit ranks in the grade of such
countries as Mexico and San Domingo. No grosser fallacy can be
conceived than the one which claims that a commonwealth can
flourish while its credit is in a state of prostration or dishonor."
Capital was badly needed to develop the resources of the State.
Journal of the House of Delegates, 1874, pp. 348-349.

100 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
and clothing for themselves, and there was no other labor to be
had in a large section of the State.3
The statement of Governor Walker that the state assessment
of property was too low was erroneous. The national valua
tion of all property, real and personal, in Virginia in 1870,
was $409,588,133. The state valuation of the same property
was $336,686,433.23 or 82 per cent of the national assessment.
In the United States as a whole the national valuation of that
year was 32 per cent higher than the state valuations ; and in
the six New England states together with New York and Penn
sylvania, a contiguous group of prosperous states, the aggre
gate valuation of the respective state assessments was only 42
per cent of the aggregate Federal valuation in those states.
This was evidence of the fact that the state assessment in Vir
ginia was relatively very high.4 Virginia was at a lower ebb
economically in 1875 than in the hopeful year just after peace
was made in 1865. The decrease in realty values had occurred
in all the counties of the State except in seventeen or eighteen,
mostly white counties of the Southwest; and in a large part of
the black belt they decreased over twenty-five per cent.5
The State's revenue for the fiscal year ending September 30,
1873, excluding the cost of collection, amounted to $2,421,945.41.
During the year there was collected from the people in local
taxes, excluding the cost of collection, $2,217,538.49. Thus
there was a net aggregate of $4,639,483.90 paid yearly (this be
ing an average paid) in taxes by the people. Large amounts
collected as corporation and Federal taxes were not included in
this sum.6
Payment in full that year of the interest on the State debt as-

3 Journal and Documents of the House of Delegates, 1874-1875, p.
16; Ibid., Document No. 1; P. A. Bruce, The Plantation Negro as a
Freedman, chs. XII, XIII, XIV; contemporary accounts in news
papers and personal reminiscences.
4 Journal and Documents of the House of Delegates, 1874-1875, Doc
ument No. 1.
5 C. C. Pearson, The Readjuster Movement in Virginia, map oppo
site page 66.
" Journal and Document of the House of Delegates, 1874, p. 346 ff.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS

101

sumed by the Funding Act would have necessitated the increase
in the State and local taxes (exclusive of corporation and Fed
eral taxes) to $5,964,425.77 because the revenues for that fiscal
year had fallen $1,324,941.87 short of the necessary amount for
the support of the government and the payment of this interest.7
In his inaugural address of January 1, 1874, Governor Kem
per voiced the sentiments of the conservative white people of
the State when he said, "Obligations to public creditors, bind
ing the honor and good faith of the Commonwealth, should be
fulfilled to the utmost of her ability in any event and under all
circumstances. No other calamity could inflict greater detri
ment, either moral or pecuniary, upon the whole body of the
people than a deliberate breach of public honor." He recom
mended the taxation of such subjects as had been exempted in
the past, strict economy and the elimination of all unnecessary
offices. He hoped that by these means Virginia could meet her
obligations without further increase in the existing taxes.

7 State Collections and Disbursements

in Virginia

1869-1877:

Year

Total State Ordinary ex-

Extraor

Paid from

Paid on in

Total-dis

revenue

penses of

dinary

State treas

terest on

bursements

govern
expenses
ury for pub
debt
ment
of govern ment
lic schools
1869-'70 .
. $1,487,353.84 $1,041,682.22
$ 17,933.60
$ 346,034.86
$1,405,650.68*
1870-'71 .
. 2,732,456.75
1,243,682.66
129,548.05
$382,000.00
99,980.05
1,855.210.76*
1871-'72 .
. 2,160,598.36
1,098,808.83
40,026.83
385,994.26
639,114.65
2,163,944.57*
1872-'73 .
. 2,421,945.41
1,082,536.00
13,885.54
375,000.00
1,290,758.79
2,762,180.32*
1873-'74 .
. 2,578,938.25
1,057,975.14
55,407.52
345,000.00
1,691,191.96
3,149,574.62*
1874-'75 .
. 2,647,790.05
980,450.89
28,177.65
423,000.00
1,417,345.41
2,848,973.95t
1875-'76 .
. 2,679,339.66
975,282.85
138,432.83
443,000.00
1,105,305.88
2,662,021.56$
1876-'77 .
. 2,505,387.17
967,393.42
92,252.52
326,266.46
1,062,110.17
2,448,022.57||
^Journal and Documents of the House of Delegates, 1874-1875, Doc
ument No. 1, p. 24; Senate Journal and Documents, 1875-1876, p. 15.
fSenate Journal and Documents, 1875-1876, p. 15.
JHouse Journal and Documents, 1876-1877, p. 11.
\\Ibid., 1877-1878, p. 12.
102 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
These measures, however, could, be taken, for the most part
only by amending the constitution — a process requiring at least
two years. And there was need of immediate relief. Further
direct taxes on real and personal property would mean, at this
time, the virtual confiscation of private property. Some other
remedy was necessary. In a message to the legislature in
March, 1874, Governor Kemper said, "Our relief is in the res
toration of confidence and understanding between the State and
her creditors ; in such a settlement of the public indebtedness
as will restore respect in our good faith, as will command the
assent of creditors and secure to them the regular payment of
the utmost interest we are now able to pay, only postponing
such part of our undertaking as our poverty renders impossible
of performance for the present. It is certainly in our power,
if we now enact a just and efficient system of taxation, and
prudently husband our resources, to pay, henceforward, four
per centum per annum on the entire debt intended to be as
sumed by the Funding Act. It is believed that an understand
ing can be had with creditors by which we might guarantee
with certainty the regular* and punctual payment, in semi-an
nual installments and at convenient places, of two-thirds of the
accruing interest for the present, giving proper certificates for
the deferred interest and providing for the full interest, to
gether with all arrearages on interest account, as soon as our
steadily increasing resources shall permit." 8
In order to compromise with the creditors, and thereby ef
fect an honorable settlement of the debt question, the Governor
and Treasurer of the State, with the approval of the legislature,
called a meeting of the home and foreign bondholders in Rich
mond in November, 1874. The meeting bore no immediate fruit
in legislation, but the bondholders were made to realize the real
financial condition of the State, which they had never realized
before. Hugh McCulloch was a representative of the foreign
bondholders at the meeting; and it was due, doubtless, to his
influence that these bondholders were afterwards less severe in
their criticism of Virginia's attitude towards them.

Journal and Documents of the House of Delegates, 1874, p. 348.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 103
The elections of 1877 brought into the legislature twenty-two
independents. The elimination of the Republican party as a
considerable factor in State politics, the subsequent relief from
the race question for a time, the grange movements, and the
State debt, divided the voters of the State into numerous fac
tions. But most of the independents and not a few of the oth
ers were followers of Mahone and advocated his plans of "re
adjustment," or partial repudiation of the interest on the State
debt. Mahone had proved a failure in the extensive railroad
interests which he controlled. He had also failed by a small
margin to receive the nomination for governor in the Demo
cratic convention of 1877. He therefore seized upon the idea
of readjustment as a means of bringing himself into power.
The general feeling of discontent, the looseness in party lines,
the bad economic condition of the State, and the certainty of
gaining the entire negro vote if he opposed the conservative
whites made the time propitious for his plot. Furthermore he
now had a large following in the General Assembly. The
election of Colonel F. W. M. Holliday, an able and staunch
"debt-payer," however, neutralized Mahone's power in the leg
islature since the Readjuster vote was not strong enough to
override the executive veto.9 Consequently the legislature
spent two years of its existence in a hopeless contest with the
Governor over the debt problem. At the end of its second ses
sion, however, the contest ended by the passage of the McCul
loch bill with the approval of Governor Holliday.10 This bill
offered the creditors new bonds with tax receivable coupons
and bearing three per cent interest for ten years, four per cent
interest for twenty years and five per cent interest for ten
years. The bonds were free from taxation. Under the terms
offered with these bonds it was provided that Virginia be re-

8 Governor Holliday received his education at Yale College and
at the University of Virginia. He was a gentleman of the old school,
well read and well traveled. His record in the Confederate Army
was good, and only the loss of an arm prevented him from receiving
a higher commission.
"The bill was named for Hugh McCulloch, who was largely re
sponsible for its existence.

104 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
leased definitely from its obligation for West Virginia's third
of the debt.
The new funding scheme was supported by the Council of
Foreign Bondholders of London, and by prominent New York
bankers. Public opinion at home and abroad favored it, and
the support of the bondholders, which was necessary for its
success, seemed assured. The success of the bill depended
upon the ability of the State to meet the interest payments fully
and promptly. This was difficult but not impossible from the
point of view of the debt-payers. So difficult was the task
ahead for the State, which was in a most deplorable condition
financially, that Mahone and Massey, the Readjuster leaders,
found some very capable and honest supporters. But the lead
ing classes supported the McCulloch Act.11 This act not only
afforded the creditors a satisfactory adjustment of the debt,
but also afforded the State a relief from its worst fiscal bur
dens until it was to grow strong enough to bear them. It be
came a law on March 28, 1879, in spite of the opposition of
Mahone and his followers.
Soon after the elections of 1877 Mahone had begun to or
ganize a party to force "readjustment" upon the State. Since
the Funding Act of March 1871 had been upheld by the high
est State court, and all attempts to prevent the execution of the
law declared unconstitutional, the only resource left to Mahone
for defeating the act was to fill the offices of all departments of
the State with his followers, who would stop at nothing to ren
der the coupons useless as tax-paying instruments. With this
end in view Mahone called a convention which met at Rich
mond in Mozart Hall, February 25 and 26, 1879. All parts of
the State were represented. There were present men of every
political complexion — liberal Conservatives, Republicans, Green-
backers and independents of various kinds. The negroes had
played very little part so far in the movement. There were
only a few in the convention, those from Halifax and New
Kent counties. Although no positive constructive policy in re
gard to the debt was proposed by the convention, there was a

11 House Journal and Documents, 1878-1879, p. 10.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 105
great deal said on the subject during the two days of the meet
ing. The Governor and the courts were accused of having be
trayed "the people" into the hands of brokers and bondholders.
There was much talk of the rights of "the people" and the
iniquity of the "rings." Mahone advocated a further lowering
of the interest on the debt. Finally the convention adopted a
platform and an address to the people which enunciated the ar
ticles of faith of the Readjuster party, which was being
formed. They were in substance as follows : That the Mc
Culloch Act was drawn up in behalf of the brokers and per
petuated the most objectionable features of the Funding Act
and added others; that Virginia should disown all responsibil
ity for West Virginia's third of the debt; that "in any settle
ment with the State's creditors, the annual interest of the rec
ognized indebtedness must be brought within her revenues un
der the present rate of taxation ; that "the capacity of these
revenues must be determined by deducting therefrom the nec
essary expenses of the government, the apportionment to
schools, and reasonable appropriations for the support of the
charitable institutions of the State;" that any settlement, to be
final, must rest "upon the sovereignty of the State;" that no
settlement could be made except by the will of the people of the
State and subject to the alteration of the legislature at any
time ; that "the rate of taxation is as high as can be borne, and,
instead of entering into any understanding that may necessitate
an increase of taxation, a diminution in public burdens should
be provided for."
The intentions of the Readjusters were here made plain. A
large part of the interest upon the State debt was to be repu
diated, in spite of former contracts with the bondholders and
the decisions of the courts on the .subject. It was claimed that
the State was bankrupt and could not do otherwise. A party
organization was formed with General Mahone as chairman of
the State executive committee and therefore head of the party.12
The leaders of this new party were mostly self-made men.

12 For proceedings of this convention, see the Richmond Whig
and the Richmond Dispatch of February 26 and 27, 1879.

106 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
Some of them were honest in their convictions that circum
stances justified readjustment, others were more careful of
their own material welfare and political advancement than for
a nice observance of ethical principles. Of such as these latter
was William Mahone. There were some members of the old
aristocracy among the Readjusters, but they were few. Among
these were James Barbour, William E. Cameron (editor and
the mayor of Petersburg) and John S. Wise.
Next to Mahone in power and the most interesting figure in
the Readjuster party was John E. Massey, then of Albemarle
county. "Parson" Massey (as he was called) was, like Ma
hone, a self-made man. He had been, respectively, teacher,
lawyer^ preacher and farmer. He had been a Conservative in
politics but was led to advocate readjustment through the be
lief that the Funding Act was unjust and that the people were
not receiving fair treatment at the hands of those in power at
Richmond. Just as Mahone was the master organizer and in
triguer of the movement, so Massey was the campaigner par
excellence. Possessed of a reputation for piety, a knowledge
of human nature, a cheerful countenance, fluency and a ready
wit, he went about the State speaking from the platform on
week days and from the pulpit on Sundays. His readiness at
repartee was more effective than logic in discomforting his op
ponents, and was especially effective among the unlettered
whites and negroes.13
Among the leading Funders (the opponents of the Readjust
ers) were Governor Holliday; John Randolph Tucker, founder
of the law school of Washington and Lee University and for a
long time professor there; John W. Daniel, later United States
senator and long prominent in Virginia politics ; General W. C.
Wickham, a prominent business man and a conservative Repub
lican ; and J. L. M. Curry, a professor in Richmond College
and later embassador to Madrid. The Funders had the sup
port of the Richmond papers, with the exception of the Whig,
which was under Mahone's control. Furthermore they repre-

13 The Autobiography of John E. Massey.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 107
sented the great mass of the respectable and intelligent whites
of the State.
The campaign of 1879 was vigorously conducted on both
sides.14 Neither party bid for the colored votes at first, and
the race question was shunned. In September, however, Mas
sey made a speech in Petersburg in which he intimated that ne
groes would be welcomed as Readjusters. The Readjusters
spread the rumor among the negroes that the Funders wished
to increase their burdens, and that their own party would give
them more rights. Churches and societies were made use of
to spread the rumor and to win the colored vote for the party.15
The Funders now tried to divide the colored vote through
some of the negro leaders. They hired negro speakers, estab
lished clubs among the colored people, ran Republican candi
dates to split the Readjuster vote and in six counties at least
they voted for these candidates, two of whom were negroes.
But these efforts did not succeed. The negroes remained un
der the control of their old leaders, who were now on the side
of the Readjusters, and voted against the majority of the
whites just as they had always done.16 The campaign ended
amid great excitement. The Readjusters with the aid of their
colored allies won both houses of the legislature. They elected
fifty-six out of one hundred delegates, eleven of , whom were
negroes ; and they elected a majority of Readjuster senators,
two of whom were negroes.17
The most absorbing topic before the newly-elected General
Assembly was, of course, the State debt. With a majority in
both houses of the legislature, the Readjusters passed a bill
known as the Riddleberger Bill,18 which embodied the plan of

'* For the Democratic platform, see the Richmond State, August
8, 1879.
15 C. C. Pearson, The Readjuster Movement in Virginia, p. 128.
16 W. L. Royall, Virginia State Debt Controversy, pp. 27-37.
17 The Richmond Dispatch, November 14, 1879; The Warrock-Rich-
ardson Almanac, 1879; Appleton's Annual Cyclopaedia, 1879.
18 The Nation (March 4, 1880, xxx, 166) makes the following com
ment on the passage of this bill: "Under the lead of a popular but
unscrupulous demagogue they [the Readjusters] made a dash for the

108 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
settlement that became the central feature of the debt contro
versy from this time until its final settlement. It was vetoed
by the Governor as a violation of the constitution of the United
States, of the constitution of Virginia and of "the spirit which
has ever moved and inspired the traditions of the Common
wealth." Since legislation of this kind was unable to escape
Governor Holliday's veto, the Readjusters had to content them
selves with filling the State offices with their men, and with
improving their party machinery in order to insure the election
of a Readjuster governor in 1881.
The appointment of county judges in the hundred counties
of the State fell to this legislature. There were comparatively
few reputable lawyers in the Readjuster party. Consequently,
in order to get men who would be true to the party, many in
competent and unscrupulous men were chosen. As a rule the
new appointees did not bring credit upon their party and in
many cases caused much scandal. To make way for these new
men the supreme court judges and about three-fourths of the
county and corporation judges were removed. This tampering
with the judiciary, which was traditionally the most honored
and incorruptible part of the State government, marks the be
ginning of the reaction against Mahone which led to his down
fall.19 The wholesale removal of officers did not end here. Boards
of directors of the State asylums and educational institutions
were removed and their places filled with Readjusters. In like
manner the county and city superintendents of schools, and

control of the State government, one of the chief railway lines of
the State, and, the United States Senatorship; finding 'readjustment'
a popular means to these ends, they used it with great success.
* * * The fact that most of the Republicans voted with the re-
pudiators, however, is a really discouraging thing. It contradicts
the inference, drawn by every one at the time of the election, that
the color line was broken; and they appear to have got nothing of
any account in exchange for their adherence to what is probably as
disreputable an organization as now exists in this country."
18 The Autobiography of John E. Massey, pp. 216-217; W. L. Royall,
State Debt Controversy, ch. 5.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 109
even the State superintendent of education, Dr. Ruffner, were
made to give place to men from the party in power. Dr. Ruff
ner was replaced by a man lacking both in mental and moral
fitness for the position in which he was placed.20
The Readjusters claimed that this ruthless use of the spoils
system was necessary to rid the government of inefficient
"Bourbons" and to let "the people" have more say in the gov
ernment. But the appointments made in no wise justified the
removals. Mahone was elected to the United States Senate
and took his seat at the time of the special session beginning
March 4, 1881. Two years later, H. H. Riddleberger, another
prominent Readjuster, was elected as his colleague. They
served until 1887 and 1889, respectively.
The Readjuster party had organized as a faction of the Dem
ocratic party, and Mahone had denied emphatically that he had
any agreement or sympathy with the Republican party. Had
Mahone and his associates declared themselves Republican
sympathisers at first they would have lost the support of that
part of the native white people that followed them. No white
Virginian of either faction was in the mood to join their com
mon enemy. The memory of the evil influence of the Repub
lican party in Virginia affairs in the past could not be forgot
ten; and now while they were combating the evils done by that
party, the Republican politicians and newspapers at the North
were prodding the South with harsh criticisms and pious advice
which could not veil the sectionalism and partizanship back of
it all.21

20 C. C. Pearson, the Readjuster Movement in Virginia, p. 148; Au
tobiography of John E. Massey, p. 204.
n The following editorial from the New York Times of January 5,
1880, is not an extreme example of this sort of thing:
"The old slave masters must domineer and tyrannize; they must
keep the colored man in subjection and misery; they must raise a
barrier of intolerance against enlightened ideas, and fight against
the incursion of those who would work for free institutions. * * *
But one great change they must recognize. They can never again
tyrannize over the nation. * * * The civilization of the South
is of the past. * * * It must go down, and the sooner, the bet
ter for the South and the better for the nation."

110 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
In the fall of 1879 Mahone secretly promised the Republican
leaders the support of his party in the presidential elections of
the following year. In order to do this and at the same time
keep his Democratic followers in line for the State elections of
1881, Mahone induced his party convention to reject the prof
fer of the Funder Democrats to coalesce in national politics on
an equal footing, and to present thereby a solid front for Han
cock and English. As a result both Funders and Readjusters
nominated electors for the Democratic candidates although only
the Funder Democrats were recognized by the national Demo
cratic organization as the true Democratic party in Virginia.
The Republicans were encouraged by this dissension in the
Democratic ranks to make a vigorous campaign in the State.
There were now three sets of candidates in the field. By draw
ing off votes from the Democratic party Mahone had accom
plished his purpose of aiding the Republicans while nominally
refusing to support that party.22 So cleverly had this master
politician worked -his plan that many Virginians continued to
believe that he was as ardent a Democrat as he still professed
to be. Circumstances, however, not only made him show his
true colors but also gave him great notoriety in Congress.
When the Senate was about to organize in March 1881, by
the appointment of committees, it consisted of seventy-six
members. Of these thirty-seven were Republicans and thirty-
seven were Democrats. Of the remaining two, Senator Davis,
an Independent from Illinois, had been elected by Democratic
voters and had declared that he would affiliate with their party.
It was evident therefore that the vote of the Readjuster Ma
hone, who had been elected by Democratic voters, would decide
whether there would be a Democratic or a Republican organi
zation, since the Republican president of the Senate could cast
a deciding vote in case of a tie. General Mahone, now forced
to take sides openly, cast in his fortune with the Republicans as
he had already secretly bargained to do as early as the fall of
1879. Riddleberger followed his example in 1883. These men

22 W. L. Royall, State Debt Controversy, ch. iv; Appleton's Annual
Cyclopaedia, 1880.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 111
were quite willing to exchange their votes for special favors at
the hands of the party. They were only used as pawns by the
Republicans and received consideration only so long as their
votes were of special value to the party. So engrossed were
they in political affairs in Virginia that they took little interest
in national politics except to cast the deciding vote for the Re
publicans when called upon to do so.
Mahone's position in the Senate gave him prestige and com
plete control over Federal appointments in Virginia. He was
also in a position now to obtain campaign funds in the North.
He used his increased prestige and power to strengthen his party
and his own position in that party. The Readjuster party was
rapidly changing into Mahone's party. By working quietly
through his confederates, Mahone laid his plans to further in
crease his power. In the fall of 1881 he had the following
pledge sent to each of the candidates for the legislature for his
signature :
"I hereby pledge myself to stand by the Readjuster party and
platform, and to go into caucus with the Readjuster members of the
legislature, and to vote for all measures, nominees and candidates
to be elected by the legislature that meets in Richmond, as the cau
cus may agree upon.
"Given under my hand and seal this  day of September,
A. D. 1881."23
Judge Lybrook received one of these documents enclosed with the
following letter from Fernald, the collector of internal revenue at
Danville, Va.: "U. S. Internal Revenue Office,
Danville, Va., Sept. 14, 1881.
Dear Judge, — ¦
I send you herewith two 'pledges' to sign one and have the party
nominee for your county to sign the other one, and return to me,
and I will forward them to Gen. Mahone, who directed me to do
this. Of course it is nothing for an honest man to do and sign his hand
to his faith. Please attend to this promptly. Fernald."
This is an illustration of Mahone's methods.

28 Letter of Judge Lybrook's in the Richmond Disptach, September
12, 1882.

112 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
Since Mahone was the political boss of the State, Readjuster
candidates had little chance for election without his endorse
ment; and the returns that fall showed that most of the candi
dates that were elected had signed the pledge.
In the elections of 1881, the Readjusters chose a majority in
both houses of the General Assembly and all the high State of
ficials. The following Readjuster candidates were elected: for
Governor, William E. Cameron, a Readjuster-Democrat ; for
Lieutenant-Governor, J. F. Lewis, a Republican; and for At
torney-General, F. S. Blair, a Greenbacker. Mahone defeated
the nomination for Governor of Massey (who next to Mahone
was the most powerful man in the party) because Massey
would not submit to his pledges or follow him blindly.24 Mas
sey could have thwarted Mahone's schemes had he been chosen
governor. Mahone now had every reason to believe that he was su
preme in Virginia politics, since he had control of his party in
the State and the aid of the administration. President Garfield
had given him only negative support, but he had been assassi
nated in July 1881, and President Arthur rendered Mahone ef
fective aid in the fall campaign by putting an end to the inde
pendent Republican move that was threatening to separate the
Republicans from the Readjusters in Virginia.25 Senator Don
Cameron and other supporters of the Administration also ren
dered Mahone and his party great aid in the campaign of 1881
by collecting funds through assessments and subscriptions to
provide Mahone with funds to pay the poll taxes of the negroes
in order that they might vote the Readjuster ticket.26 Office
holders throughout the State were assessed by Mahone for
campaign purposes.27
In spite of some discontent in the Readjuster party with Ma
hone and his political methods, the party was held together by

24 W. L. Royall, State Debt Controversy; Autobiography of John E.
Massey. 23 W. L. Royall, State Debt Controversy, p. 54; Appleton's Annual
Cyclopaedia, 1881.
28 T. V. Cooper, American Politics.
" Autobiography of John E. Massey, pp. 199, 206.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 113
the fact that the debt question was still unsettled. In 1882 the
Readjusters had for the first time an opportunity to readjust
the State debt according to their original purpose and un
hampered by the Governor's veto. Accordingly they passed
two acts known as "Coupon Killers," which virtually destroyed
the tax-receivable coupons of the Funding Act of 1871. These
acts provided that if coupons were presented in payment of
taxes, a like amount in cash had to be tendered at the same
time. The coupons were then received for identification and
verification by the collector, who should certify them to the cor
poration or county court, which should, in turn, empanel a jury
to decide whether they were genuine or not. If they were de
clared to be genuine, the cash received from the taxpayer
should be returned to him and the coupons received in the treas
ury in payment of taxes. The reason given in the preamble of
the act for its existence was that there were many stolen and
counterfeit bonds with coupons attached in circulation. But
there was not sufficient evidence to show that such strenuous
measures were necessary on this account.28 These acts vir
tually destroyed the coupons by making their acceptance in pay
ment of taxes depend upon such difficulties and expense, and
the probability of their acceptance by the State was much les
sened by the fact that the judges of the county and corporation
courts were now for the most part Readjusters. The Read
justers were correct in believing that the remedy given the
bondholders was sufficient to prevent the laws from being un
constitutional, as impairing the obligation of contract. Other
"coupon killers" followed from time to time, and in spite of
much litigation the scheme won out.29

28 Acts of January 14 and January 26, 1882. House Journal and
Documents, 1881-1882, Documents 2 and 8; Senate Journal and Docu
ments, 1881-1882, Document 15. Antoni v. Greenhow, 107 U. S. R.
p. 792; W. L. Royall, State Debt Controversy. For Readjuster view,
see Autobiography of John E. Massey, pp. 43-47. Massey originated
this method of killing the coupons.
28 W. L. Royall, State Debt Controversy, pp. 55 ff; W. L. Royall,
Some Reminiscences. Royall was attorney for the bondholders in
their fight over these Readjuster acts.

114 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
After the passage of the first two "coupon killers," the leg
islature of 1882 passed, with some qualifications, the Riddle-
berger Bill, which had been vetoed by Governor Holliday two
years previously.30 This statute placed the new principal of
the State debt at $21,035,377.15, which was to bear interest at
three per cent. Under this arrangement the annual interest
was reduced over fifty per cent and the principal was scaled
about ten million dollars. The bonds issued under this act were
known as "Riddlebergers." The bonds and coupons were not
exempt from taxation, nor were the coupons tax-receivable.
Interest on the bonds was to be paid out of any money not oth
erwise appropriated.
In January 1882, Mahone and his machine leaders offered to
re-elect Massey Auditor of Public Accounts, but only on condi
tion that he submit to caucus rules. He refused to do this and
was deposed accordingly by Mahone, who told Massey's friends
that he had declined to accept the nomination of the Readjuster
caucus.31 But Massey had not been buried politically, as fur
ther events proved, for now that the aims of the original Read
justers had been practically accomplished, he was free to op
pose Mahoneism.
There were in the General Assembly of Virginia at this time
a majority of fourteen Readjusters in the House -.of Delegates
and a majority of six in the Senate. Mahone left his place in
the Senate at Washington and came to Richmond in order to
formulate such laws for his caucus as would give him supreme
control over State affairs. But there were in the legislature
four Readjuster senators, two former ^Democrats and two for
mer Republicans, who had refused to sign the Mahone caucus
pledge and were therefore not bound by the caucus.32 These
men, with the aid and encouragement of John E. Massey, voted
with the Funders and were thereby able to defeat Mahone's

" Act of February 14, 1882, Acts of Assembly, 1881-1882, p. 88.
81 Autobiography of John E. Massey, ch. xviii.
82 They were Samuel H. Newberry of Bland county and Peyton G.
Hale of Grayson county, Democrats; and A. M. Lybrook of Patrick
county and B. F. Williams of Nottoway county, Republicans.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 115
measures by a majority of one in the Senate. On account of
the importance of the votes of these senators at this critical
time they were known as the "Big Four." 33
The character of the bills introduced by the caucus and de
feated by the aid of these four Readjusters indicate how greatly
Virginia's welfare was menaced by Mahoneism, which was the
outgrowth of Readjusterism. A bill was introduced by the
caucus providing for the removal of a great many of the petty
officers of the State, such as notaries public, public school trus
tees and commissioners of chancery, in order to make vacancies
for Mahone's followers. The appointment of many of these
was to be made in Richmond in order to bring them under Ma
hone's central control. An attempt was made to gerrymander
the Congressional districts in such a manner as to increase the
number of representatives in the black counties, which sup
ported Mahone and the Republican party. Mahone's paper,
the Richmond Whig openly asserted that should the bill, which
had already passed the house by a large majority, be passed in
the Senate, Virginia would send eight, instead of two, admin
istration representatives to Washington. The Whig regretted
that still more could not be sent and added, "But it is the best
that can be done, and we are content . . . Already we
have at Washington two senators and two representatives who
stand firmly and cordially by President Arthur; and under this
bill, if passed by the Senate, our liberal forces will send to
Washington six more supporters of the Federal administration
than we now have. To intrench and further it, the present ap
portionment bill is avowedly framed — to elect eight congress
men out of ten who shall be committed and pledged to support
President Arthur and his administration."34 Another caucus
bill provided for the creation of a board of railroad commis
sioners, to be chosen by the Governor. The board was to have
complete supervisory control of the railroads and could dismiss
employees at its pleasure. The purpose of this was to bring

88 Autobiography of John E. Massey, ch. xix. Royall, State Debt
Controversy. 84 The Whig, April 10. 1882.

116 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
the railroad systems of the State with their numerous employ
ees under Mahone's control. Another caucus measure pro
vided that judicial sales be made only through a commissioner
of sales appointed in each county by the Governor. Commis
sioners of sales had always been appointed by the courts as oc
casion demanded, and no fault had been found with that sys
tem. Furthermore a bill was introduced which provided that
the commissioners thus chosen select a newspaper in each of
their respective counties and cities which should have the ex
clusive right to publish their official notices. In this way Ma
hone would secure both an agent and a subsidized newspaper
in each county and city of the State. These and similar bills
designed to further Mahone's interests were introduced into the
legislature by the Readjuster caucus and failed to pass only
through the aid of the recalcitrant Big Four, whom Mahone
tried in vain to seduce.35
Although these measures had been defeated, the Readjusters
passed at this time all the laws that they had promised their
constituents in the beginning. They made laws which settled
the State debt along the lines originally advocated by their
party, passed acts giving the apportionment for public school
purposes priority over appropriations for paying the interest on
the public debt and those for other causes, repealed the provi
sion in the constitution which made the payment of poll taxes a
requisite for the franchise, and passed an act to suppress duel
ing. They had also defeated the "Bourbon" Funder leaders.
The original purposes of the Readjuster party were therefore
accomplished. The issue in the next succeeding campaign was
Mahoneism. The Readjusters now became known as the Ma-
honeites, and the Funders, Anti-Mahoneites, with little change
of personnel in either party. The most substantial element of
the Readjuster party joined the Anti-Mahoneites, and the re-

88 Letter of Judge Lybrook (one of the Big Four) in the Rich
mond Dispatch, September 12, 1882; B. B. Munford, "What is Ma
honeism?" in the Richmond State. September 13, 1889; W. L. Royall,
State Debt Controversy, 68-69; Autobiography of John E. Massey, chs.
xix, xx, xxi; Appleton's Annual Cyclopaedia, 1882.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 117
mainder of that party now consisted almost entirely of the old
elements of the Radical party of former days, that is, the old
alignment of Radical Republican leaders, drawn from the ranks
of Northern immigrants and the less respectable native white
politicians, with the solid mass of negro voters. Once more the
national Republican party was allied with what was most dis
reputable in Virginia politics.
The new alignment in political affairs began to show itself in
the Congressional elections of 1882. But the question of the
constitutionality of the Coupon and Riddleberger Acts had not
been finally disposed of by the Supreme Court of the United
States, and the Funders were still hoping for a verdict against
them. Then too, it was not an easy matter for some Readjust
ers to come back quickly into the party they had just bitterly
opposed. However, their old leader, John E. Massey, was en
dorsed by the Democratic State Committee as a candidate for
Congressman-at-large from Virginia. He was opposed by the
Readjuster candidate, John S. Wise, and the candidate of the
few straight-out Republicans in the State, Rev. John M. Daw
son, colored. Wise was elected, and Readjusters were also
chosen from five of the nine Congressional districts.36
Mahone was once more victorious and the Conservative-
Anti-Mahoneites were more than ever determined to crush him.
But the Conservatives now realized that to defeat Mahone, their
own organization must be strengthened and their platform fur
ther liberalized to satisfy the Readjusters who were joining
their ranks.
An opportunity soon presented itself to the Conservatives to
effect a compromise with the moderate Readjusters. The de
cision of the Supreme Court in March 1883 that the act known
as "Coupon Killer No. 1" was constitutional,37 sustained the
Readjuster party in its debt legislation. The Funders, who had
been fighting to defend the Supreme Court in its former posi-

88 The First, Second, Fourth, Seventh and Ninth.
87 Antoni v. Greenhow, 17 U. S. Reports, 769; W. L. Royall, State
Debt Controversy, ch. vi; Appleton's Annual Cyclopaedia, 1883, "Ob
ligation of Contracts."

118 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
tion on the question, could now accept gracefully the status quo
of the difficult question as here decided and unite both Funder
and Readjuster Conservatives in the attempt to defeat the cor
rupt rule of Mahone.
A Democratic State convention met in Lynchburg on July
25, 1883. It was well attended and very enthusiastic. Massey
and other ex-Readjusters were present. The platform that was
adopted advocated a number of liberal reforms, condemned
Mahoneism, the bosses and the rings, and accepted the recent
settlement of the debt controversy as final.38 This platform
successfully united the Democratic party, and a new and com
plete organization upon an efficient basis gave the party new
life. John S. Barbour, a railroad official of great executive
ability, was made chairman of the State executive committee
and much power over party affairs was placed in his hands.
For the first time the Conservative party assumed the name
"Democratic" — an evidence of the abandonment of old issues.39
But the strengthening of the Conservative-Democratic party
did not necessarily mean its success. Mahone had a well or
ganized party completely under his control. The local, State
and Federal offices were for the most part in the hands of his
followers, and more effective still were the solid ranks of the
negro voters, who followed Mahone's men with childlike con
fidence and obedience. With this solid mass of voters behind
him, only a few white followers were necessary to give Mahone
a majority of voters in the State. They could be found among
those who had been estranged from the Democratic party by
the bitterness of the State debt controversy, from among the
unscrupulous or ignorant whites in the black counties and from
among the whites of the white counties which were not con
fronted with the danger of "Africanization" in local affairs.

"The Democratic party," said the platform, "accepts as final the
recent settlement of the public debt pronounced constitutional by
the courts of last resort, State and Federal, and will oppose all agi
tation of the question or a disturbance of that settlement by appeal
or otherwise." The Richmond Dispatch, July 27, 1883.
8" The Richmond Dispatch, July 26, 27, 28, 1883; the Richmond
Whig, July 25, 26, Nov. 7, 1883.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 119
The alliance with the blacks, which was the chief element of
Mahone's strength, proved, in the end, to be his undoing. In
order to win and keep the fealty of the colored voters, Mahone
had resorted to tactics which Radical leaders had previously used
in Virginia. The results were the same. Although his pre
tended love for the colored people resulted neither in legislation
to benefit them nor in high rewards in the way of office, the col
ored people were given some local offices in the black counties ;
and they were taught that the great body of whites, which made
up the Democratic party, wished to bring them once more into
bondage. Conditions similar to those that prevailed during the
Reconstruction period existed in numerous localities through
out the State at this time as the result. Mahone filled the of
fices of the State, counties and cities with men who were his
willing tools Some were Northerners of the carpetbag type,
others were native whites of the scalawag calibre. The acts of
these officers and their inflammatory speeches threw the credu
lous negroes into a high state of excitement, and caused many of
them to be exceedingly disagreeable and unbearably imperti
nent to the whites.
The Democrats hesitated before drawing the color line, but
as the campaign progressed the attitude of their opponents in
duced them to recognize the race question as an issue that could
not be avoided in politics. "I am a Democrat because I am a
white man and a Virginian," said Major John W. Daniel to an
audience in the Southwest.40 Excitement grew more intense
as the election approached, and the relations between the races
grew more strained. The tenseness of feeling gave way in
Danville to a street fight between the races that completely
turned the scales in behalf of the Democrats in the elections,
which came a few days later, throughout Virginia. This con
flict was known as the "Danville riot."
Danville, a town in southeastern Virginia, had in 1880 a pop
ulation of 7,526, of which 4,397 were colored and 3,129 were
white. By 1883 the percentage of negroes had become even
larger. Yet in this town the whites paid in round numbers

40 The Richmond Dispatch, October 26, 1883.

120 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
$40,000 in taxes and the negroes paid only $1,200, or $800 less
than the amount appropriated out of the local taxes simply for
the education of the colored children of the town. Prior to
1882 Danville had no wards and the government of the town
as a whole was in the hands of the whites. But in 1882 the
Mahoneites had gotten their legislature to amend its charter so
as to divide the town into three wards with four councilmen
and one justice of the peace from each ward. The division
was made in such a way as to secure for the negroes the power
of electing seven out of the twelve members of the council, all
the justices of the peace and four out of the nine policemen.
One of the negro policemen served also as a health officer and
another as weighmaster of the public scales and clerk of the
market. Twenty out of the twenty-four stalls of the market
were rented to negroes by the town council. And the market
was in a most dilapidated and filthy condition. The chairman
of the council, Colonel Raulston, carpetbagger internal revenue
collector at Danville and a tool of General Mahone's, had
openly avowed upon assuming his office as chairman that it was
his aim to build up the Radical-negro party in that locality.
The members of the town council were in his employ. The po
lice courts with their corrupt judges were a farce. The Fed
eral internal revenue office was also filled with negro employ
ees, or in the language of a former revenue officer of the town,
"My office looks Africa because I have so many colored peo
ple in it." 41

41 The following extract from a speech of W. L. Fernald, Repub
lican (white) collector of internal revenue at Danville, which was
delivered at Halifax Court House in behalf of Mahone's party, gives
not only a picture of a Radical-Republican leader but also gives an
example of the kind of speeches that were used to inflame the col
ored people by Mahone's followers:
"It does those Funder overseers so much good to see a nigger's
back whipped. Every time they see a nigger's back cut, they jump
up and clap their heels together like game cocks. * * * You will
see colored judges and lawyers in that courthouse, and you will
have good schools if the Readjusters succeed. * * * When a
colored man comes out against the Readjuster party, he has sold
himself. A man who goes against his race and color is a damned

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 121
For over a week before the election, business in Danville had
given place to politics. Incendiary speeches were made to the
negroes by their leaders of both races, and two mass meetings
were held by them just before the riot took place on November
3. Whites were menaced by armed negroes, and white women
were pushed from the sidewalk.42 Conditions were unbear
able. The riot, which occurred a few days before the election,
followed an accidental discharge of a pistol during a dispute
between a white man and two negroes. A crowd gathered but
dispersed after several people had been killed.43 The governor
sent militia to restore order, but before it could arrive the
whites had the situation in hand. News of the riot and the
conditions back of it spread rapidly over the State and united
the whites against Mahone as nothing else could have done.44
Similar conditions had prevailed in other localities of the black
belt and other riots were narrowly averted.
The returns of the elections in November (1883) showed a
complete victory for the forces opposed to Mahone. The newly
elected Assembly contained a Democratic majority of about
two-thirds in each house. And contested elections together
with the resignation of several Readjusters soon brought the
Democratic majority to over two-thirds in both houses of the

scoundrel. * * * Some will say, what will become of the Repub
lican party if we all go over to the Readjusters? There is nothing
in a name except the smell. * * * My office looks Africa be
cause I have so many colored people in it." Quoted from the Rich
mond Dispatch by C. C. Pearson, The Readjuster Movement in Vir
ginia, p. 155.
42 The Richmond Dispatch, October 23, November 4, 1883.
43 The Richmond Dispatch, November 4, 1883.
44 W. L. Royall, Some Recollections. The New York Tribune, the
Cincinnati Commercial Gazette and other Republican papers accused
the whites of the State of conspiring to massacre the colored peo
ple of Danville in order to intimidate them throughout the State be
fore the election. The Republicans even went so far as to have the
affair investigated by a committee of the United States Senate. The
accusation was groundless. The Richmond Dispatch; John Goode,
Recollections, p. 119.

122 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
legislature. There were only a few negroes elected, most of
them from the Fourth Congressional District.45
The acts of the Assembly of 1883-1884 show the effects of
the compromise between the Funder and Readjuster elements
in the Democratic party. The debt question was declared to be
settled. The liberal acts passed by the previous legislature con
cerning the suffrage, taxation, appropriations for public schools,
and others of like nature were kept on the statute books; and
the liberal -program in regard to the public institutions was en
larged. But those acts which were the products of Mahone
ism were changed and the whole political machinery, built up
by Mahone, was at once attacked. One of the first resolutions
introduced into the Senate on the first day of the session was
one by Senator Newberry asking that Mahone resign from the
United States Senate. It was charged that he had betrayed his
party in order to get control of the Federal patronage in Vir
ginia; that he had absented himself from his duties in Wash
ington for about five months in order to control the legislature

48 The Fourth district was in the center of the black belt and was
solidly Republican in representation on that account. The name of
the counties of the district, their voting populations and colored
representatives are as follows:

County Delegate (Negro) White voters Negro voters
Dinwiddie (including A. W. Harris 3,526 3,741
the city Petersburg) A. Green (Petersburg)
Brunswick  1,396 1,924
Mecklenburg  A. A. Dobson 1,912 2,922
Lunenburg  1,085 1,222
Nottoway  Archer Scott 759 1,471
Amelia  Archer Scott 785 1,425
Greenesville  692 1,165
Prince Edward  N. M. Griggs 1,180 1,972
Charlotte  1,398 2,055
Powhatan  707 1,007
Cumberland  Philip S. Boiling 756 1,426
The above figures were taken from the Richmond Dispatch, Octo
ber 30, 1883.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 123
for his own selfish ends ; that he had tried persistently to prej
udice the people of other states against those whom he repre
sented; and that he had not ceased to "array class against class,
and race against race, and to influence the passions and preju
dices of one against the other by the most palpable misrepre
sentations and unparalleled vituperation." The resolution was
passed in both houses of the Assembly.46 The undoing of Ma
honeism by this legislature was complete. The Readjuster
Governor's powers of appointment were greatly curtailed' in
such a way as to give the legislature the opportunity of depriv
ing Mahone's appointees of office. There was also further cen
tralization of the appointing power in the legislature. Thus a
great many petty officers throughout the State, who had been
active agents for Mahone, were removed. Provision was made
for keeping local school officials from engaging in politics. Un
der Dr. Ruffner's administration these officials were required
to keep out of political affairs. But the Readjusters, especially
under Mahone's rule, had found them very useful as local
agents for the party. The charters of the cities with large col
ored populations were amended so as to prevent negro-Radical
domination in their affairs. such as had existed in Danville after
Mahone's party had changed its form of government. Con
gressional districts were reapportioned in favor of the Demo
cratic party; but gerrymandering was not as obvious in this as
in the former redistricting under Mahone's supervision. In
vestigations were made by the Assembly into every phase of
the State government that had been affected by Mahoneism,
and much incompetence, fraud and evil political practices were
brought to light. The work of the legislature was thorough
and drastic, but the evil which was undone and the superior
character of the new local and State officials amply justified
these measures.
In April 1884, the Coalitionist (as the Mahone State conven
tion was called) State convention met under General Mahone's
leadership, drew up a platform and instructed its delegates to
the National Republican convention to support Arthur for pres-

48 House and Senate Journals, 1883-1884.

124 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
ident, and adopted the name "Republican" officially for the
first time. Mahone again posed as the black man's friend. He
conducted his campaign with his usual vigor, but the Demo
crats carried the State for Cleveland and elected eight out of
the ten Congressmen.47
In the elections of 1885 there were to be chosen members of
the General Assembly and the Governor. Mahone again made
a desperate effort to win the State. As a compromise with
those who inclined towards the straight-out Republicans, John
S. Wise was nominated for governor by his party. The Demo
crats nominated General Fitzhugh Lee. The removal by Pres
ident Cleveland of Republican postmasters and revenue offi
cials, who had been very active in politics throughout the State,
during the summer of 1885 further weakened Mahone's organ
ization. And the Democratic organization under the capable
management of Mr. Barbour was rapidly increasing in effi
ciency. The campaign was a hard one on both sides. Na
tional interest was felt in it because of the notorious record of
General Mahone in both state and national politics, and the
knowledge that his defeat meant the loss by the Republicans of
two men in the United States Senate and of a state out of the
solid Republican South. For the first time in about twenty
years prominent Northern Republicans came to Virginia to
speak in behalf of their party candidates. Most prominent of
these were Foraker and John Sherman. Although these men
made "mild and soothing" speeches in Virginia, it was known
that they had "waived the bloody shirt" at home. Their pres
ence therefore aided the Democrats more than it hurt them.48

Eighty-five per cent of the total vote was cast in the election.
The total Democratic vote for President in the State was 145,497;
the total Republican vote, 139,356.
48 While Sherman was speaking in Virginia, the following head
lines appeared in his own paper in Ohio, the Cincinnati Commercial
Gazette: "Desperate Doings — Smacking of the Murderous Old Danville
Methods— Inaugurated as the Last Hope of Virginian Bourbons-
Republican Meetings broken up at various places, while their lead
ers are Brutally Assaulted— Democracy's Scandalous treatment of

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 125
The Democrats were again victorious. Accusations of fraud
were made by both parties and doubtless there was occasion for
them, but the large vote cast by the Republican party, which
was composed largely of negroes, shows that there was no
foundation to the Republican report that there was widespread
"bulldozing" by the Democrats in the election.49 "The Demo
crats," said a telegram from Mahone on hearing the election
returns, "have carried the State and legislative tickets by un
scrupulous use of election machinery, over which they have ab
solute control, and which was provided by their past usurping
legislature with this end in view." The Richmond Dispatch in
denying this accusation said, "What a characteristic effort to
poison the mind of the Northern public. 'Unscrupulous' for
sooth! Indeed does that word come with poor grace from the
leader of a party that has flooded the State with bogus bal
lots." 50
Although the negroes had voted without hindrance in this
election, it was at this time that the people of Virginia resolved
to eliminate them from politics regardless of any means short
of violence. They were tired of the danger and friction which
their presence in governmental affairs caused.
The first phase of the Readjuster Movement gave momentum
to the liberal movement already begun in Virginia laws and in
stitutions. The second phase, Mahoneism, was more important

Sherman and Villification of Foraker." Quoted in Richmond Dis
patch, November 3, 1885. See similar articles quoted from the New
York Evening Post and the New York Tribune. On the other hand.
the Washington Post took the following view of the situation:
"There is but one issue to be decided tomorrow in the Common
wealth of Virginia and that is designated most fitly by the word
'Mahoneism.' Can Mahone, with 120,000 negroes at his back, rein
force his failing columns with a sufficient number of white men to
perpetrate for an indefinite number of years his rule as a freebooter
and a pirate over the people of his own state."
The Nation shared the opinion of the Post as to Mahone's charac
ter and purposes.
48 The vote for Lee was 152,544; and for Wise, 136,519. Note the
Richmond Dispatch, November 16, 1885.
80 The Richmond Dispatch, November 4, 1885.

126 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
in Virginia history from a political point of view. It left its
traces on the political life of the Commonwealth for years to
come. The methods introduced by Mahone to place himself in
power were adopted by his opponents as the only means to de
feat him, and men's consciences became more or less accus
tomed to such political methods. The next fifteen years were
marked by an increase of race friction and the increased use of
loose political methods to defeat the negro vote. It was to rem
edy this unhealthy state of affairs, to leave neither cause nor
excuse for fraud in politics, that changes were made from
time to time in the fundamental laws of Virginia.

CHAPTER IX.
Politics and Race Friction— 1885 to 1900.
In 1888 the deadlock which had existed between the Demo
cratic and Republican parties in national politics since 1876 was
broken. In the elections of that year the Republicans won
the presidency and a majority in both houses of Congress. In
Virginia they elected two representatives and successfully con
tested the elections in the Third and Fourth Districts. There
were three candidates in the Fourth District,1 Edward C. Ven-
able, Democrat; A. W. Arnold, Republican; and John W.
Langston, independent Republican, nominated by a negro mass
meeting. The returns of the election gave Venable 13,298
votes; Langston, 12,657 votes; and Arnold, 3,267.
Langston was a Virginia mulatto, who had been educated at
the North, where he had lived until he came to Petersburg, Vir
ginia, as a teacher. He was unscrupulous although intelligent
and fluent. Shortly after his arrival in the State he entered
politics with the determination to defeat Mahone in his own
district. For several months before the election he canvassed
the district, bitterly denouncing Mahone and the whites of both
political parties, and drawing the color line with the greatest
severity. The colored leaders who were in the legislature or
had been there remained true to their party and Mahone. They
condemned Langston and the methods that he used to win the
colored votes as tending to produce friction between the races
and to alienate the white Republicans and the other whites in
the State, who were paying the greater part of the taxes to sup
port the colored schools and to support the regular functions

1 In this district were the counties of Amelia, Brunswick, Din-
widdie, Greenesville, Lunenburg, Mecklenburg, Nottoway, Powhatan,
Prince Edward, Prince George, and Surry, and the city of Peters
burg. The White population in 1880 was 59,011, the colored popu
lation, 100,487. See note, page 122.

127

128 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
of government.2 But they were insulted and persecuted by
other members of their race who followed Langston. Langs-
ton's chief appeal to the people was that there were enough ne
groes in the district to elect a negro to Congress and that it was
time for them to have a representative there. By his oratory,
he worked the ignorant and excitable negroes into a kind of
frenzy. The whites were denounced and the fires of race ani
mosities were constantly stirred. The bitterness engendered by
this campaign 3 and the revival of the race question in the na-

The United States Census of 1890 shows the following facts:
White population in Virginia  1,015,123
Colored population  640,857
Total  1,655,980

Value of property belonging to whites  $351,919,071
Value of property belonging to negroes  10,503,671
Total  $362,422,742
Percentage of property held by whites  97.2
Percentage of property held by negroes  2.8
Value of property per capita of whites  $346.67
Value of property per capita of negroes  16.39
3 The following is a part of the testimony of J. H. Van Auken, a
Republican from the Fourth Congressional District of Virginia, be
fore the Committee on Elections of the House of Representatives:
"Question. Then explain, if you please, how with Arnold, the reg
ular nominee of the party, supported by its entire organization in
all its great influence, skill, management, and outlay, Arnold ran so
poorly in the district? — Ans. For long months prior to the election,
and for long months before the convention, Mr. Langston had, un
opposed, been making a canvass, in which he and his emissaries had
insidiously and industriously played upon the passions and preju
dices of the colored people, basing his claims for Congress largely
on the fact that the negroes outnumbered the whites very largely,
and it was time for them to send a negro to Congress. He aroused
even the women, got up an immense religious fervor in his favor
and aroused the prejudice of the large mass of the unthinking col-

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 129
tional elections of 1888 were doubtless largely responsible for
the great increase of crime and lynching during the next few
years. The elections in Virginia of 1889 marked the end of Ma
hone's political career. Having lost his seat in the United
States Senate, he sought to become governor of the Common
wealth. The campaign for governor and for members of the
legislature, which were to be chosen at the same time, was con
ducted with the usual vigor by the two opposing party leaders,
Barbour and Mahone. Mahone's party was weakened by the
revolt of John S. Wise, William E. Cameron and their friends,
the most brilliant and worthy of his followers. This faction
held a convention in October at which about two hundred del
egates were present. Resolutions were adopted containing fif
teen articles condemning Mahone's actions, and adding the res
olution, "That the defeat of William Mahone is essential to the
salvation of the Republican party." Pressure was brought to
bear on the colored voters from all sides. Not a few votes
were bought for a dollar or for two dollars each by the Demo
crats. The usual method of bribing them, however, was to buy
their preachers or other leaders. The great mass of the ne
groes remained true to their old leaders, who followed Ma
hone.4 The defection of the Wise-Cameron wing left Ma
hone's party, which had already been deserted in 1883 by the
best of the Readjusters, still less reputable, both at home and
abroad. Philip W. McKinney, the Democratic nominee, was
elected governor by a majority of 42,000 votes out of a total
of 283,000. In the legislature, the Democrats won the greatest

ored people to such an extent as I never witnessed before and hope
never to witness again. * * *
"This feeling was intensified largely under the teachings and lead
ership of young colored men, who had no memories of the past,
which enabled them to properly appreciate what the Republican
party had done for their race, hence no feeling of gratitude."
Report No. 2,462, House of Representatives, Fifty-First Congress,
first session, pp. 3 and 4. See other testimony in the report.
4 F. G. Ruffin, White and Mongrel, (pamphlet) Richmond, 1890.
Evidence of contemporaries.
—9

130 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
majority that any conservative party had won in the State since
the enfranchisement of the negroes.5 Only about twenty-four
Republicans were left in the General Assembly. Among them
were five negroes.6
The victory of the Republicans in the national elections of
1888 resulted in their attempt to give tangible expression to the
desire of regaining their former power which had been menaced
for several years by the creation of the solid Democratic South
at the expense of their colored allies. This desire found expres
sion in a bill introduced in 1890 by Representative Lodge of
Massachusetts. This "force bill," as it was called, was de
signed to place Federal elections in the Southern States under
the control of Federal officers and Federal troops. President
Harrison had advised such a measure in his first message to
Congress in December 1889. The bill passed the House, but
died in the Senate. Around this bill there was centered a bit
ter debate in Congress and throughout the Nation, which
served only to stir up past memories and to increase the soli
darity of the South against the aggressiveness of Northern Re
publicans.7 The conservative people of the North, however, who had

8 The Richmond Times, November 29, 1887; the Richmond Dis
patch, November 10, 1889; the Richmond Times, November 27, 1889;
the Warwock-Richardson Almanac, 1890 and 1891.
8 There was one colored Senator, N. M. Griggs, of Prince Edward,
who represented the counties of Amelia, Cumberland and Prince
Edward. He was one of the members of that half of the Senate
which was chosen in 1887. The other four negroes were delegates
from Mecklenburg,. Nottoway and Amelia, New Kent and Charles
City, Elizabeth City, Warwick, and James City.
7 Hilary A. Herbert, editor, Some Noted Men of the Solid South,
Why the Solid South.
The attitude tha't was most resented by Southerners at this time
was that expressed in a speech before the Paper Trade Association
of Boston by William E. Barrett, speaker of the Massachusetts
House of Representatives, in which he confidently asserted that the
"Southern Question" would be solved through "the infusion into the
South of New England men, capital and ideas." The Richmond
Dispatch, March 22, 1890.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 131
contrasted the ten years of bayonet-negro rule in the South
with the decade of home rule there, were willing to let that
section manage its own affairs.8 The many Northerners who
had gone South to invest their money and to live were not slow
in appreciating the situation from the Southern point of view.
By voting for the Force Bill the Republican representatives
from Virginia did not increase their popularity with the ma
jority of the people of the State, nor did their conduct aid their
party in the State elections that followed.9
The political contests in 1888, especially in the Fourth Con
gressional District, and the agitation over the Force Bill caused
the speedy end of the Republican office-holders in Virginia, at
least for a time. In 1890 Democratic representatives were
elected in every district of the State. There was opposition in
only four districts by regular Republican candidates. Inaction
was advised by Republican leaders on the grounds that they
were being cheated by the Democrats at the polls. In 1891
there were only three Republicans in the General Assembly,
and for the first time since 1867 there were no negroes in the
State Senate. In 1893 the Republicans made no nomination
for governor or for members of the legislature. Some of the
Republicans supported independent candidates, and others,
candidates of the People's party.
The People's party, aided by the Southern Republicans, suc
ceeded in 1890 and in 1892 in dividing the whites in several of
the Southern States, thereby capturing the legislature in South
Carolina, Alabama, Missouri and Georgia; in electing several
Congressmen in the South — one of them colored; and in elect
ing governors in Georgia, South Carolina and Tennessee.10

8 E. L. Godkin, "The Republican Party and the Negro," in the
Forum, March, 1889 (vii, 246 ff). For a conservative Southern view
of the situation, see Wade Hampton, "What Negro Supremacy
Means," Forum, June, 1888 (v, 383 ff). See also editorial in the Na
tion, July 3, 1890, p. 5, containing an extract from a speech by Ham
ilton G. Emart, Republican representative to Congress from the
Ninth District of North Carolina.
' The Richmond Times, October 21, 1890.
10 James M. Callahan, "Political Parties in the South Since 1860,"
in The South in the Building of the Nation, iv, 640.

132 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
But memories of the Force Bill and the danger of giving the
negroes the balance of power through division of the whites
held the South in line for Cleveland in the fall of 1892.
The Virginia Populists had their first convention in 1892
and in the election of that year gave their presidential candi
date 12,191 votes. In 1893 they elected thirteen members to
the General Assembly. This movement received the support
of the Republican element in the State and of the more illiter
ate Democrats. As a result of the fusion of the Republican
and People's parties, the Republicans elected about thirty-six
members to the General Assembly, and further strengthened
that party in the Southwest.
The success of the Democratic party in the national elections
of 1892 placed both houses of Congress and the presidency in
the hands of Southerners and their sympathisers, and demon
strated the futility of the bloody-shirt-negro-agitation methods
of previous campaigns. In 1894 Congress repealed all the ex
isting statutes providing for Federal supervision of elections.
Time and a more hopeful outlook in the South, and a better
understanding of conditions by the North were bringing the
sections of the country closer together. The war with Spain
at this time had a nationalizing influence; and the problems of
suffrage, confronting the Republican party in the insular pos
sessions, which were similar to those with which the South had
been struggling, forced them to see the suffrage question from
a new angle. Consequently the Southern States were left to
deal with the suffrage of the ignorant masses within their bor
ders without interference.
This new era in national life was reflected in the political af
fairs in Virginia. The State government and the bondholders
had in the winter of 1891-1892 reached a settlement which was
satisfactory to both sides. Mahoneism had been defeated.
New interest was taken in national affairs, in education, eco
nomic development and social reforms. But the old elements
of danger remained in politics and were prevented from show
ing themselves by the use of political methods which were evil
in themselves and tolerated only because they prevented greater
evils. The governor of the State frankly admitted in his mes-

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 133
sage of December 4, 1895, that prior to 1894 "there had been
much confusion and disorder at the voting places, and that
large sums of money had been used in every election to corrupt
voters by all political parties, and men's ballots had been pur
chased like stocks in the market," and added "that this condi
tion of affairs should cease in the interests of our institutions
had long been apparent to every honest and right-thinking cit
izen." This state of affairs caused grave concern to the people
of Virginia, who had begun to realize that the whole body poli
tic was threatened with this infection.
It was in order to secure decent and honest elections and to
eliminate the most objectionable of the voters that there was
enacted in March, 1894, the Walton Act, which introduced a
modified form of the Australian ballot system, the main fea
tures of which exist today. Official ballots were required.
Booths placed forty feet from outside observers were to be
provided to enable the voters to prepare their ballots secretly
and without interference. Upon entering the booth, the voter
must be given by one of the judges a ballot, which he was for
bidden to take outside of the polls. He was allowed two and
a half minutes in which to prepare his ballot and could secure
the aid of one of the judges of election in marking his ballot
if "physically or educationally" unable to do it himself.11
This system of elections was a great improvement over the
former one. In the words of the Governor, "The excitement,
confusion and disorder, and the badgering, pulling and hauling
of voters that prevailed to such a disgusting extent," under the
old system were eliminated.12 Bribing was made much more
difficult, since there was no way for the voter, who had to be
alone in the booth, to show his ballot after marking it. Bogus
ballots, which had played an important part in former elec
tions, could no longer be used. Many illiterate voters were

11 The original act provided for the appointment of a special con
stable for this purpose. But the arrangement, which was expensive
and which lent itself easily to fraud, was not desired by the author
of the law and was changed at the next session of the legislature.
12 Governor's Message, House Journal, 1895-1896, p. 34.

134 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
practically disfranchised by the Walton law in spite of the fact
that they could receive official assistance if necessary. Many
negroes hesitated in getting a Democratic election judge to as
sist them in marking their ballots; others were timid or
ashamed to acknowledge their ignorance; and many that at
tempted to vote could not correctly mark their ballots in the al
lotted time. In some voting precincts, from a third to a half
of the ballots had to be thrown out because they were incor
rectly prepared. The governor of the State actually proposed
in 1898 that emblems be used on the ballots to distinguish the
candidates of the two parties in order to enable illiterate voters
to vote as they desired. Fortunately, the General Assembly
did not consider his proposition.
Upon losing their votes through legal and illegal methods,
and lacking aggressive leadership, the colored people grew apa
thetic, and many did not go to the polls in the elections of 1896
and 1897. In 1896 the Democrats had their own way in all the
black counties, and the white counties of the Southwest and the
Valley, now relieved from the fear of negro domination in the
eastern counties, became more independent in politics and gave
more support to the Republican party. In 1897 a Democratic
governor, Charles T. O'Ferrall, was elected.13
In spite of the fact that the white people of Virginia had
practically disfranchised the negroes by the middle of the nine
ties, they were greatly dissatisfied with political conditions as
they existed. The system of fraud that had been built up to
defeat Mahoneism by disfranchising the negroes had a demor
alizing effect upon the whole electoral system and was finally
used where whites alone were concerned. And the political
unity of the whites, made necessary by the solidarity of the col
ored voters against them, prevented independent voting and
thereby virtually disfranchised the whites in national and some
times even in state elections. These evils were forcibly brought
before the people by the presidential election in 1896. There
was in Virginia a strong gold-standard faction in the Demo
cratic party which had the enthusiastic support of the Rich
mond Times, a paper that had been founded to support the

13 The Richmond Dispatch, November 3, 1897

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 135
"Debt-payers" in their fight against Readjusterism. In the
Southwest and the Valley, where the whites had a free hand
and where there was less reason for prejudice against the Re
publican party, the Republicans either won or ran up large mi
norities. In the eastern counties, however, which had been the
Republican stronghold in the State on account of the colored
vote, Bryan won with large majorities, thereby gaining the
State by over nineteen thousand majority.14 The men who
had opposed the regular Democratic organization were warmly
assailed by former political associates for forsaking the party,
and the "gold Democrats" felt that they did not get a square
deal at the polls. After this there was an increased demand for
the elimination of fraud in elections, and the causes back of it,
by the revision of the suffrage article in the State Constitution.
The Richmond Times led the way in this demand. This desire
for cleaner and more independent politics resulted in the new
Constitution of 1902.
The changes made by this constitution in the suffrage can be
rightly understood and appreciated only by a knowledge of the
race conditions and relations — within and without the borders
of the Commonwealth — that insured and hastened the calling of
the Constitutional Convention of 1901.
The history of race relations in the South shows that most
of the friction that has existed between the races since the War
of Secession can be traced directly to political agitation. The
unscrupulous leaders of the negroes endeavored to keep them
united by vilifying the whites and by stirring up race preju
dices and passions. Their propaganda was more easily spread
on account of the advent of the younger generation of negroes
who were reared in the years of turmoil during and after Re
construction and who lacked both the friendship of the whites
and the training and discipline that were given them before the
War of Secession. The percentage of older freedmen on the
prison records was comparatively low. The records of the
Virginia penitentiary for the years 1871 to 1888 inclusive show
that an average of 67 whites and 247 negroes were received

14 W. L. Royall, Some Reminiscences, ch. v.

136 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
into that institution yearly. With the census figures of 1880 as
a basis, it is seen that the percentage of negroes received yearly
into the penitentiary was seven times as great as that of the
whites.15 Even after making allowance for possible discrimi
nation against the negroes by the courts, the contrast is very
striking. However, such statistics do not show that the more
unfortunate race was proportionally inferior, because crime is
the ally of poverty and ignorance the world over. But such
statistics were naturally used in those days against the negro
as such.
The general lawlessness that followed war, the lack of any
system of police in the rural districts, which contained most
of the population of the State, and the inadequacy and ineffi
ciency of the State and local governments compelled the people
to take the law into their own hands to a great extent. Under
these conditions, mob violence could not be readily checked.
In those days, lynchings for the crime of rape which is the
most unspeakably hideous of all crimes to a Southerner, espe
cially when the offender is of another race, was deemed the
only quick and certain method of punishment and a wholesome
lesson to would-be offenders. It was considered necessary for
the protection of women scattered on lonely plantations through
out the country.16
Records show that lynchings were the result of the nature of
the crime rather than of mere race prejudice, as was generally
believed outside of the State. But there was only a short step
between lynchings for rape and lynchings for murder — and for
even lesser crimes. From 1880 to 1888 inclusive, there were
eight white and eighteen colored people lynched, or an average
of one white to two colored victims a year in Virginia. Of
these twenty-six, nine were accused of rape or attempted rape
and twelve of murder.
In the decade of the nineties, contemporary evidence of all
kinds shows that the number of rapings by negro men were

18 Frank G. Ruffin, Cost and Outcome of Negro Education in Vir
ginia. Table prepared by W. W. Moses, superintendent of the Vir
ginia penitentiary, 1871 to 1888 inclusive.
" Governor McKinney's Message, House Journal, 1893-1894.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 137
increasing at an alarming rate. This marked increase
began to be evident about the end of the year 1888. The in
crease was without doubt due to the excitement arising out
of the State and national elections of 1888 and 1889. There
occurred in 1888 the election to Congress of John M. Langston,
an illegitimate mulatto, who openly advocated the mingling of
the races and other things repugnant to the whites. The char
acter of the campaign which he conducted has been described
above. It did much to increase the strained relations already
existing between the two races. Then in 1889 came another
election, in which negroes were led in masses to the polls to
aid Mahone, who met his last great defeat in that campaign.
There were the usual strained race relations that followed such
campaigns. After 1888 the number of cases of rape was increasing at an
alarming rate throughout the South.17 Virginia afforded no
17 Note contemporary newspapers, periodicals of all kinds, con
temporary memoirs, etc. As an example, see the following articles
in one volume of the Forum, vol. xvi (September, 1893-February,
1894): Atticus G Haygood, "The Black Shadow in the South;"
Charles H. Smith, "Have American Negroes Too Much Liberty?"
L. E. Beckley, "Negro Outrage No Excuse for Lynching;" Walter
Hines Page, "The Last Hold of the Southern Bully."
Bishop Atticus G Haygood, of whom James Bryce says, the ne
gro has no better friend, quotes in his article, named above, Dr. E.
E. Hoss, editor of the Christian Advocate (the chief organ of the
Methodist Episcopal Church South) as saying that "three hundred
white women had been raped by negroes within the preceding three
months." "I believe," added Bishop Haygood, "Dr. Hoss's state
ment to be under rather than above the facts in the case. Not a
few such crimes are never published." Bishop Haygood remembered
only one such crime that occurred before the War of Secession. He
said that Reconstruction has taught the negro his rights, not his
responsibilities; license rather than liberty. The younger negroes
were taught that it was their business to keep the white Southern
man down and to hate him, rather than to be guided by him. A
certain class of Northern newspapers dilated on the horrors of lynch
ing and reported all violations done negroes while barely comment
ing on the nature of the crime or the horrors of rape. Public rec
ords show that the negro criminals were for the most part those
who grew up under the loose regime of Reconstruction.

138

PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS

exception to the rule. The most brutal as well as the most fre
quent criminals in these cases were negroes. Where whites
were guilty of such brutality as was shown by these men, they
met with the same punishment. During the five years that fol
lowed 1888 (1889 to 1893 inclusive) there were thirty-five
lynchings in the State. The victims in all but five cases were
colored. The crime charged against fifteen of these was rape
or attempted rape and that against fourteen was murder.18

18 LIST OF LYNCHINGS IN VIRGINIA FROM 1880 TO 1897 INCLUSIVE,

1880 1881
1882 1883
1884 1885
1886 1887
1888
1889 1890
1891 1892
1893 1894 1895
1896 1897 Total

¦a V o c
jj. V l
21 1
1
1 1
1 4 1
13

T3 <uu o
"3
U 2
3 2
2 2
2
2 1
2 76 5
12. 1 1
51

Va,n! Ihuo
ft 2
11
2 2 2221
15

O. rt
•o VaS OJ
< 1 l
13 22 1
11

<D
•a 3 3 3
33 1 1
1
5 6
1
27

en3
.2-M
c3
.2 «

•a
'*£ *" o
t bo

Seduction of
a white
female (idiotic)

1 1
2

1 1

1

1

'gg.IH3.S

O M
K.S

1 1

J! «
¦9 M
S51. eg"
Bob

3 3
4 3
3 3 31
3
7 1
6 9
12 0 0 1 a

64

This table is found in Senate Journal, 1897-1898, p. 16. (Also in
House Journal .of that year) Governor O'Ferrall says of it, "This ta-

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 139
Twelve negroes were lynched in 1893. On September 20 of
that year a climax was reached in mob violence with a riot that
occurred in Roanoke, a peaceful and thriving town outside of
the black belt. A negro man assaulted an old lady in a lonely
house, robbed her and beat her almost beyond recognition. She
revived and informed the authorities, who found the criminal
and lodged him in jail. Upon hearing of the crime, a mob
gathered and demanded the negro. The mayor of the town or
dered the mob to disperse and finally called out the militia.
But the crowd attacked the jail and militia in spite of the en
treaties of the mayor and the warning from the commanding
officer of the militia that they would fire if necessary. Finally
the mob succeeded in overpowering the militia, and succeeded
in lynching the negro. They also drove the mayor from the
town for a time. Eighteen people were killed and twenty-
seven wounded in the riot.19
This affair emphasized the dangers and the disgrace of mob
rule and aided in crystallizing public sentiment against such
occurrences. In his message to the legislature of December 6,
1893, Governor McKinney gave an account of the riot and bit
terly condemned the lynching. He said that the government of
the State was now firmly established and in the hands of the
people of Virginia, and that an excuse for mob rule no longer
existed. "The law in the State of Virginia," he said, "will be
enforced . . . The military when ordered out will
carry loaded rifles, and will use them when ordered to do so by
the officers in command, and the consequences must rest upon
the heads of those who make it necessary."
The State was fortunate in the election as governor, in the
fall of 1893, of Charles T. O'Ferrall, who also vigorously op
posed mob violence and who promised in his inaugural address
to rigidly enforce the law and to prevent lynchings to the best
of his ability. He was fearless in his effort to redeem his

ble is authentic and is prepared from the reports of the clerks of
courts of the various counties and cities from 1880 to 1894, and from
direct information in the executive office since."
10 Senate Journal, 1893-1894, Governor's Message, pp. 45-50.

140 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
promise. No lynchings occurred during the first two years of
his administration, 1894 and 1895. The militia was employed,
however, in several counties to prevent mob violence.20 In 1896
only one lynching occurred in the State; and in 1897 one white
man and one negro were lynched. Governor Tyler was able to
make a similar report during the next administration. During
1898 and 1899 there occurred two or three lynchings, "which,"
according to the Governor, "could not have been prevented
though the local officers did all in their power." For the next
two years of his administration, he said, "The order of our
State has been good, and it is a gratifying fact that the preva
lence of that menace to civilization — mob law — has been no
tably less. With the exception of one or two counties the peo
ple of the State have been law-abiding and peaceful." 21 Dur
ing the next seventeen years Virginia was free from lynchings,
and the attempted lynchings were much fewer.22 The provo
cations for lynchings had not ceased in the later nineties, how
ever, and continued to strengthen the demand for the removal
of the negroes from politics.23

20 The militia was used in the following counties for this reason
during those two years: Prince William, Augusta, Frederick, Clarke,
Lunenburg and Albemarle. (House Journal, 1897-1898, p. 21). Dur
ing the last two years of the administration, 1896 and 1897, the mi
litia was called out to aid the civil authorities by the mayors of Al
exandria, and Portsmouth, and by the sheriffs of Albemarle, Shenan
doah, Fairfax, and Culpeper counties.
71 House Journal, 1899-1900, p. 37; ibid., 1901-1902, p. 34.
M For a thoughtful and interesting discussion of this subject, see
Thomas Walker Page, "Lynching and Race Relations in the South,"
North American Reviezv, August, 1917.
88 During four years, ending December, 1897, there were committed
to the penitentiary, for various terms, fifty-eight criminals for at
tempted rape and twenty-nine for rape. Of these eighty-seven,
twenty-four were white and sixty-three were colored. In addition
to these cases, there were eight men hanged for the crime. House
Journal, 1897-1898.
According to Governor O'Ferrall's report in December, 1897, "The
rapidity with which the number of criminal assaults has grown in
the Southern States, and in fact in the country at large recently,

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 141
As an outcome of the friction between the races, an act was
passed by the Virginia legislature requiring railroad companies
to provide separate coaches for white and colored passengers.24
This legislation, like most legislation of its kind, resulted from
a demand for it extending over a number of years 25 because
of numerous instances of strife between members of the two
races when thrown together on cars. These instances became
more numerous and the proverbial straw which brought mat
ters to a climax came early in January, 1900. It was a rela
tively small affair and would not have attracted state-wide at
tention had it not been one of several such happenings that had
occurred within a few weeks of each other. A half drunken
negro made himself very disagreeable to a white woman by
whom he was sitting in a car. When asked to take another
seat, he refused and was ejected by a white man. There were
other drunken negroes on the car with guns, and a fight, which
would have proven a serious affair, was narrowly averted.26
This event was the occasion of much discussion of race rela
tions throughout the commonwealth, which resulted in the en
actment of the law, on May 12, 1900, which prevented the re
currence of such troubles.
The political situation as regarding the negroes in Virginia
was strongly influenced by the political and race relations that
existed in other Southern States at this time, especially by
those existing in the adjoining State of North Carolina. It will
not be a digression from the subject under discussion to pause
here to note briefly the situation in that State during the nine
ties.

should stimulate the legislature of every State to take the most vig
orous steps to stamp out the horrible crime."
Professor R. H. Dabney of the University of Virginia, wrote in
1901, "Race hatred has not yet been violent except in wreaking ven
geance for the crime of rape. But the steadily growing frequency of
this crime is fearfully increasing the bitterness." Article in the Rich
mond Times, October 6, 1901.
M Most of the other Southern States had already passed similar
laws. G. T. Stephenson, Race Distinctions in American Law.
25 Governor's Message, House Journal, 1891-1892.
28 The Richmond Times, January 12, 1900.

142 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
According to the census of 1890 there were 1,055, 382 whites
and 561,018 negroes in that State, the percentage of negroes in
the total being, therefore, 34.7.27 In fifteen counties the ne
groes were in the majority. But the whites, who controlled the
State government, had made laws which enabled them to con
trol the government in these counties during the twenty-three
years prior to 1894. In 1894, Republicans, Populists and negroes
fused and gained partial control of the State and local offices.
Two years later they got complete control of these offices. A
Republican governor was elected, and the legislature was under
the control of the fusionists. The legislature immediately decen
tralized the State government in such a way as to make the ne
groes supreme in those counties and towns where they were in
the majority. The offices were filled with incapable whites and
negroes. Two years of riot and corruption, like those which
prevailed in the days of Reconstruction, followed. 27a Condi
tions became intolerable. Neither the property nor the persons
of the whites of the black belt were safe. Crime increased and
went unpunished. The negroes who had been peaceful under
the former government had their heads completely turned by
the sight of their fellows in office and by the speeches of their
leaders. They became unbearably insolent.
In Wilmington, where three-fifths of the population was col
ored, white women were even slapped in the face or pushed
from the sidewalk without provocation by negro women.
When the whites began to arm and to make plans to defend
themselves from insult and injury, there was talk among the
negroes of poisoning the whites and of burning their homes at

27 These figures closely resemble those for Virginia at that time.
2'a One thousand negroes became office holders in the State. There
were three hundred negro magistrates and twenty-seven negro post
masters. The collector at the port of Wilmington was colored. The
offices in the eastern counties were almost all filled with negroes and
their white leaders. Thus the counties in a large part of the State
were ruled by the mass of ignorant and shiftless negroes and the
-unscrupulous whites, who paid only a negligible per cent of the
taxes and who were most inefficient and corrupt in administering the
affairs of government.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 143
night. In November the white men organized to insure order
on election day. On the day after election they destroyed the
press of a negro newspaper that had published an article which
not only insulted white women but also tended to encourage
the crime of rape, a brutal instance of which had just been
committed by a negro in an adjoining county. No other prop
erty was destroyed by the whites and no physical harm was
done anyone. About a mile from the scene of this occurrence,
however, a negro mob fired at a group of white men on the
street, injuring one seriously. A fight ensued. There were
two or three other affrays during the day, and by night thou
sands of negroes were hiding in the swamps. During this riot,
seven negroes were killed and thirteen wounded. There was
no wanton killing or vandalism. Three whites were wounded.
In the midst of the tumult, the incapable town authorities re
signed and the leaders of the whites were put in charge of
town affairs. The new officials issued an order at once that
business be resumed as usual on the following day, and that all
appear at their tasks without firearms. The order was obeyed.
Peace was restored. Parties were organized to go in search of
the fugitive negroes and to assure them that they could safely
return to their homes, and vigilance committees saw to it that
those who had not fled were not molested in their work. The
whites had accomplished their purpose. They were in control
of the town and had given the negroes a warning that insolence
and lawlessness must cease.
In 1896 the white Democrats effected a revolution in North
Carolina, and came once more into control of the legislature.
In 1900, Charles B. Aycock, in opening his successful cam
paign for governor, made the statement that the State consti
tution must be amended to disfranchise the negro, and that or
der and development demanded that the existing system of
government be changed.28 North Carolina passed her law for

28 For an account of the "revolution" in North Carolina and of
the race troubles in Wilmington in particular, see. the following ar
ticles, which are valuable in giving unbiased views of this and sim
ilar race troubles and their causes:
"The Race Problem in the South— I. The North Carolina Rev-

144 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
separate coaches for the races in 1899 and made a new consti
tution, which disfranchised most of the negroes in 1900.
The revolution in North Carolina was watched with interest
and sympathy by Virginians, who had similar elements of dan
ger to guard against. The situation which had necessitated it
was similar to what had existed in Virginia and which might
occur again.
Of the many methods used to win the votes or the neutrality
of the negroes during the eighties and especially during the
nineties, bribery was the one most generally resorted to. The
usual sum for an individual vote was one or two dollars. The
most usual way of bribing was to pay negro preachers 29 or

olution," by A. J. McKelwey, editor of the North Carolina Presbyterian,
II. "A Negro's View," by Kelly Miller, of Howard University, in
the Outlook; Henry Litchfield West, "Race War in North Carolina,"
the Forum, xxvi, 574 ff. (January, 1899). Alfred M. Waddell, article
in Proceedings of the Montgomery Conference on Race Problems in the
South, 1900; and the Richmond Times, August 1, 1900.
20 Contemporary evidence; Philip Alexander Bruce, The Plantation
Negro as a Freedman.
With not a few worthy exceptions, the negro preachers in the
South, especially in the rural districts, were chosen not on account
of any very superior moral fitness, but because of their fluency and
aggressive personality. They were therefore the natural leaders
of their race. The church was at that time a kind of political or
ganization. Those of its members who voted with the whites against
the will of the preachers were ostracized and were sometimes turned
out of the church. These preachers appealed to the emotions rather
than to the head, and they kept the negro voters under their control.
An interesting example of the influence of these men in politics
is furnished by the election in Richmond in 1875. There were to be
elected two State senators from Richmond. General Bradley T.
Johnson and William E. Tanner were the Democratic nominees.
The Republicans had no regular nominees; but two independent
candidates, Knight and Starke entered the field with the expectation
of being elected by aid of the negro vote. lohnson, "at very con
siderable expense," had organized Johnson clubs among the negroes
and had a large number of colored voters pledged to him. There
were eighty-five pledged to him in one precinct. Up to the Sunday
preceding the election (which took place the next day) Johnson had
no opposition among the negroes. On Sunday night, however, when
all the negroes attended church, their preachers announced from

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 145
others of influence among the colored people fifteen, twenty
and sometimes fifty dollars or more for their influence in a
certain district, or for a certain number of votes. As a traveler
in the South expressed it, "The negro vote, like the cotton
crop, is always on the market, to be sold to the highest bidder.
The negro is for sale today as much as ever." 30
Other methods were used to defeat the colored vote. Ballot
boxes were stuffed with tissue ballots and otherwise tampered
with. In some counties the negroes' love of running for office
proved their undoing. Several colored candidates for office
would appear in the field. The whites would studiously avoid
the appearance of uniting on one candidate, and at the same
time agree among themselves to vote in a body for only one
man. In some instances the whites went so far as to put for
ward colored candidates to divide the negro vote. Intimida
tion was seldom resorted to. In Charlotte county a colored
candidate for the legislature was shot by a white man in his
audience. The victim, a mulatto shoemaker named Joseph R.
Holmes, had represented Charlotte and Halifax counties in the
Underwood Convention. Needless to say there were no more
negro candidates for office in Charlotte county. However, this
was a very extreme example of intimidation.
The Walton law of 1894 prevented much confusion at the
polls, but it was not sufficiently effective in weeding out objec
tionable votes and in preventing fraud.31 It was generally ad
mitted in 1900 by men of all parties in the State that the ne
groes were being defrauded at the polls and that those who had
charge of the party machinery in local elections often treated

their pulpits throughout the city that all were expected to vote for
Knight and Starke. Tanner and lohnson were elected but did not
receive a single negro vote. W. L. Royall, State Debt Controversy,
pp. 37-39; Senate Journal and Documents, 1875-1876.
" Henry M. Field, D. D., Bright Skies and Dark Shadows.
81 The Richmond Times, January 4, 1898; Address of J. Hoge Ty
ler to the legislature, House Journal, 1899-1900, p. 32; John Garland
Pollard, "Unrestricted Suffrage and its Corrupting Influences," the
Richmond Times, July 15, 1900; Numerous references in the news
papers and other contemporaneous sources of 1900 and 1901.
—10

146 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
the whites who differed with them in the same fashion. Men
of the yonger generation were losing their respect for the sanc
tity of the ballot and for politics in general.32 The need for an
amended constitution to remedy this state of affairs was very
urgent.

82 A delegate from the Southwest made the following statement
on the floor of the Constitutional Convention of 1901 without having
its truthfulness challenged: "I do not deny, and I am ready to show,
if it were necessary, that they [elections] have not been fair in the
black belt, but it is of no use to show that, because it is admitted all
over this floor by every member on it." Debates of the Constitutional
Convention of 1901, p. 211; Other contemporary sources.

.y'' »
f Witt "-f

percentage of negroes
in Total Population
by Counties 1900

OVER 62)4*

^ 30-62M*

23-37K?. \ZK-ZS%0-12x91

FOR FIGURES SEE APPENDIX

CHAPTER X.
The Constitutional Convention oe 1901-1902 and the
New Constitution.
The question of calling a convention to revise and amend the
Constitution of 1868 was submitted to the people three times
prior to 1900.1 The Constitution of 1868 provided that no
such election be held in the State until after the general elec
tion to be held in 1888, and that a vote be then taken on the
question. But the danger of a return to Mahoneism was too
great at that time for the whites to advocate any measure re
stricting the suffrage or reducing the number of local offices.
Furthermore, it was not felt that the State could afford to bear
the expenses of a convention at that time. Economy had been
written into all political platforms for many years. A conven
tion was advocated, therefore, by neither party. The first ref
erendum for a convention was defeated by a vote of 63,125 to
3,698. By 1897 public sentiment in its favor had greatly in
creased. In the election of that year the convention was again
defeated — this time by a vote of 183,453 to 38,326. But no
definite program could be agreed upon as a basis for revising
the constitution. As in the previous election, no party was
committeed on the subject and no canvass was made. In 1900
the General Assembly again provided for a vote on the calling
of a convention.2 Both parties now took sides on the question.
The Democratic State convention at its meeting in Norfolk on
May 2, 1900, advocated the calling of a convention to revise
the Underwood Constitution. It also passed a resolution
"That it is the sense of this convention that in framing a new
constitution, no effort should be made to disfranchise any citi-

1 Numerous amendments had, however, changed the original con
stitution in a great many different places. For a convenient list of
these amendments, see J. N. Brennaman, A History of Virginia Con
ventions, p. 122.
2 Act of March 5, 1900. 147

148 phelps-stokes fellowship PAPERS
zen of Virginia who had a right to vote prior to 1861, nor the
descendant of any such person, and that when such constitu
tion shall have been framed it shall be submitted to a vote of
the people for ratification or rejection." 3 The Republican
party declared emphatic opposition to a constitutional conven
tion. "Let every voter," urged the chairman of the party, "get
to the polls on the 24th of May 1900, and snow the attempted
outrage under." 4 In this election 77,362 votes were cast for
a convention, and 60,375 against it.5
The returns of the election show some odd results. Of the
100 counties, 48 were for and 52 against a convention. Of the
35 counties in which there was a majority of negroes, 18 voted
for a convention and 17 against it. Of the 65 white counties,
30 voted for and 35 against a convention — 25 of the latter be
ing west of the Blue Ridge Mountains. The 32 counties west
of the Blue Ridge contained a population of 454,209 whites and
58,599 negroes, or a majority of over 400,000 whites. Yet all
but 7 of these counties voted against the calling of a constitu
tional convention. In the 30 white counties that voted in favor
of a convention, there were 375,039 whites and 184,139 ne
groes, or a majority of 190,900 whites ; and in the 35 white
counties that opposed the convention, the whites numbered
416,848, and the negroes only 83,174, or a white majority of
333,674. In the 35 black counties which had a majority of
16,491 male negroes of voting age the majority against a con
vention was only 422.6 These figures show that the election

8 The Richmond Times, May 3, 1900.
4 Ibid., May 11, 1900.
8 The total possible vote in the State was about 447,000.
' Charlotte county had 1,847 more colored than white inhabitants.
Its majority for the convention was 476. Prince Edward county with
its majority of 4,493 negroes had a majority of 64 for the conven
tion. Many had been eliminated, doubtless, by the usual methods.
But the small negro vote may be accounted for in most cases by
the fact that the negroes had ceased to vote and did not have their
former leaders to bring them to the polls. Nevertheless not a few
colored votes were cast. Debates of the Constitutional Convention of
iooi, p. 3,000.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 149
was won in those counties having the largest negro population,
although it was a foregone conclusion that the negro would be
disfranchised if a convention were called.
Two questions naturally arise from the consideration of
these facts : Why did the white counties oppose the calling of
a convention? and why did not the blacker counties oppose it?
The answer to the first question is found in the social and
economic differences of the two sections. As long as the East
was swamped in negro-carpetbag rule under Republican lead
ership the West was solidly Conservative, or Democratic.
When the East became solidly Democratic the West became
largely Republican. This change in the political affiliation of
the Southwest was due in part to the old sectional spirit that
made the opposition of the West to the East in politics tradi
tional in Virginia. The influence of Mahoneism and Populism,
the freedom from the menacing presence of the negro in local
politics, and the growth of large mining interests in the West
and Southwest, all united in turning these sections towards the
Republican party.
Mahoneism had made a strong appeal to the vast numbers of
illiterate whites in the western counties. Mahoneism paved
the way for Populism; and Populism paved the way for the
Republican party, which was associated with both the Mahone
and the People's party in Virginia. The Republican party was
still the colored man's party in the State. And, furthermore,
in the white counties little was to be gained in local politics by
the elimination of the negro vote, and in State politics there
was little for the West to be anxious about so long as the
whites in the eastern counties were in control of the political
machinery. Perhaps the greatest cause of the opposition in
the Southwest to the calling of a convention was the fear that
the illiterate whites of that section would be excluded along
with the illiterate negroes in the eastern counties. In the
Ninth Congressional District, which lies wholly west of the
Blue Ridge Mountains, there were more than nine times as
many white as negro voters. Yet there was 1 voter out of ev
ery 4.2 in the district who could not read and write. The per-

150 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
centage of illiteracy was greater among the white than among
the colored voters of the district, the ratio of illiterate to liter
ate white voters being 1 to 4.6, and that of the colored 1 to 21.
In the Fourth District, on the other hand, which remained
longest under negro domination and which was one of the most
aggressive sections in bringing about the disfranchisement of
the negroes, there was one-sixth less white than colored voters.
In this district the ratio of white illiterate to literate voters was
1 to 10.8, and the ratio among the negro voters was 1 to 1.6.
The proportion of white voters in the Ninth District who could
not read and write was more than twice as great as that in the
Fourth District ; and the proportion of negro voters in the
former district who could read and write was thirty-three per
cent larger than that in the Fourth District.7
It is obvious from these figures that the problems facing the
sections represented by these two districts were very different.
The western counties had little reason for desiring to disfran
chise their small negro minority or to endanger the suffrage of
their illiterate whites who were of the same race and political
faith as the literates. In the black counties there were no such
bonds between the mass of literates and illiterates.
In the black counties the burden of taxation fell upon the
white minority and the whites desired control of expenditures.
The total amount of taxes paid by the negroes of the State for
the fiscal year ending September 30, 1902, if used solely to
cover the amount appropriated for colored schools, would
cover less than half of the expenditure for their schools alone
— exclusive of the pay of county and city superintendents and
the expenses of the State Department of Education.8 Al-

7 Debates of the Constitutional Convention of 1901, p. 3,000; Journal
and Documents of the Convention of 1901. For map showing bound
aries of the districts, see opposite page.
8 The following tables, from the Report of the Auditor for the
fiscal year ending September 30, 1902, show the economic differences
that existed between the two races in Virginia at this time. The

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 151
though no little progress had been made in bettering their con
dition, the majority of them still remained ignorant and were
a constant social danger.9
The Constitutional Convention of 1901-1902 began its ses
sion on June 12. Of the one hundred delegates eighty-eight
were Democrats and twelve, Republicans. There were men of
all shades of political beliefs represented. The personnel of
the Convention was much above that of the average legislative
body of the State. John Goode, who had served in the Seces
sion Convention of 1861 and in the Confederate Congress, was
elected chairman.
In the campaign preceding the convention and in the con
vention itself no attempt was made to conceal the main pur-

white population was 1,192,858 and the colored population was
661,326, or 32.6 of the total population.
Total Value of Personal Property
Owned by  Whites Negroes Total
$108,660,967 $ 4,298,501 $112,959,468
Total Value of Land, Town Lots
and Buildings  316,633,102 13,281,889 329,914,991
Taxes Paid
On Personal Property By Whites By Negroes Total
For the Government  $ 326,174.16 $20,556.33 $ 346,730.49
For Schools  101,119.29 4,281.04 105,400.17
Total  $ 427,293.29 $ 24,837.37 $ 452,130.66
On Real Estate:
For the Government  $ 942,718.99 $39,818.79 $ 982,537.78
For Schools  314,453.34 13,293.84 327,747.18
Total  $1,257,172.33 $ 53,112.63 $1,310,284.96
On Income  $ 64,190.15 $ 33.00 $ 64,223.15
Capitations  264,690.00 125,5_33.00_ 390,223.00

Total Taxes  $2,013,345.77 $203,516.00 $2,216,861.77

' W. E. B. DuBois, The Negroes of Farmville, Virginia; Contempo
rary evidence of various kinds.

152 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
pose of that body. The negro had been a failure and a menace
in politics. As long as he was in politics the color line was a
line of friction and danger to both races. Therefore he must
be removed, not only because he was for the most part an ig
norant and irresponsible voter who had usually stood solidly
behind the worst elements in State politics, but also because he
had been taught in the beginning to vote as a negro and must
therefore be disfranchised because he was a negro.10 There
was no animosity displayed against the negroes in the speeches
of the convention. His political sins were laid at the feet of
his teachers ; and his shiftlessness and moral short-comings
were regarded as inherent to his race or as the result of his en
vironment. The task before the convention was a most difficult one.
There were some delegates from the blackest counties, which
had suffered most from the negro franchise, who desired a
wholesale disfranchisement of the negroes in the most arbi
trary manner, and those who desired to eliminate the ignorant
and vicious voters regardless of color; there were delegates
from the Republican counties of the Southwest which had suf
fered only indirectly from the colored vote, who spoke of the
"God— given right of suffrage" with all the fervor of the Radi
cal Republicans of the Convention of 1867; and there were
delegates from the middle counties, and not a few from coun
ties of all sections, who were determined to accomplish the
purpose of the convention without resorting to methods that
would be unnecessarily radical. These last men formed the
majority element in the convention.
"The Committee on the Elective Franchise, Qualification for
Office, Basis of Representation and Apportionment, and on
Elections" was composed of twenty-two members, at least two
of whom were chosen from each of the Congressional districts
of the State. After more than three months of hard work this
committee submitted to the convention on September 26, 1901

10 It should be remembered in this connection that the first "Solid
South" was black and Republican. There was no "Solid South" be
fore the days of Reconstruction.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 153
three reports on the elective franchise — the majority report
signed by twelve of the committee headed by Mr. Thom, of
Norfolk, a minority report signed by six of the committee
headed by Senator John W. Daniel, of Campbell county, and a
second minority report submitted by one member, Mr. J. C.
Wysor, of Pulaski and Giles counties.11
The requisites for the franchise proposed in the Thom plan
were as follows: 1. The prepayment of the capitation tax of
$1.50 six months before the election, applicable after February
1, 1903; 2. residence in the State two years, in the county one
year and in the precinct thirty days; 3. the registration of the
voter as prescribed by law; 4. ability to explain the general
nature of the various officers for whom the applicant may at
that time under the laws be entitled to vote; 5. that he should
have been engaged, if physically able, for at least one-fourth
of the time during the year next preceding that in which he of
fers to vote, in a lawful trade, profession, business, calling,
work or service. In addition, further requirements were pro
vided, to go into effect January 1, 1904, as follows: 6. that
the application to register be in the applicant's own handwrit
ing; 7. that the voter prepare and deposit his ballot without
aid from another.
The minority report containing the Daniel plan recommended
as permanent requirements for those registering to vote: 1.
the ability to read any section of the State constitution which
might be submitted by the registration officers, and the ability
to give a reasonable interpretation of the same ; 2. residence
of two years in the State, one in the county or city, and thirty
days in the precinct in which the application for the right to vote
is made; 3. the prepayment of all capitation taxes six months
before the election ; 4. registration in the applicant's own
handwriting without assistance, except in the case of old sol
diers and those physically incapable of doing so.12

11 Debates of the Constitutional Convention of Virginia, 1901-1902, pp.
599-606; 620-628.
u The other minority report, that of Mr. Wysor, contained no
understanding clause.

154 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
The Daniel plan was amended by Mr. Carter Glass to pro
vide for the ending of the understanding clause requirement on
January 1, 1904. All these plans were referred to the Demo
cratic conference. After a long discussion, the Glass and
Thom factions adjourned the conference, got together and
worked out a compromise plan. By this plan the understand
ing clause was to end in 1909, subject to a vote of the people
at that time as to whether it should be permanent after that
year. This was a compromise between the Glass plan of a
temporary understanding clause and the Thom plan. The
compromise settled nothing definitely and was unsatisfactory.
It was amended by Mr. Wysor, along lines proposed at an
earlier time by Mr. Glass, so as to have the understanding
clause inoperative after January 1, 1904. This amended plan
was the one finally agreed upon.13
Article II of the present Virginia Constitution, concerning
the "elective franchise and qualifications for office," which in
cludes the Glass compromise, was finally adopted by the con
vention on April 4, 1902 by a vote of 59 to 20. Eight Repub-

" Debates, p. 2994.
It was adopted by a vote of 59-20. Journal and Documents of the
Constitutional Convention of Virginia, 1901-1902, p. 487. Mr. Wysor,
like many who voted for the Glass plan, did not favor any under
standing clause, but accepted this compromise as the only possible
means of effecting harmony among the various factions. (Debates,
pp. 2993-2994). Dr. Mcllwaine, of Prince Edward, who was elected
by the whites from the county that was the last to have negro rep
resentation, opposed even a temporary understanding clause, as too
radical, and proposed as a substitute some form of educational test
for registering. He characterized the understanding and grand
father clauses as a disgrace to the State. (Debates, 4996-3006). Mr.
Hatton of Portsmouth said, "As one of those delegates who opposed
the understanding clause and who comes from the Black Belt, I
stand here in this presence and declare my thankfulness to the Al
mighty that I and my colleagues from the Black Belt were endowed
with the wisdom and foresight to oppose and defeat the permanent
understanding clause." Although opposing both the understanding
and grandfather clauses he accepted the Glass compromise for the
sake of harmony. (Debates, 3017). There were many similar expres
sions of opinion among those who voted for the compromise.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 155
licans voted against it and none of them for it. Among the
most prominent of the twelve Democrats who voted with the
Republicans were Mcllwaine, of Prince Edward; Pollard, of
Richmond city, and Watson, of Nottoway and Amelia. Some
of these Democrats voted against the article because they con
sidered it too radical, and others because they thought that it
was not sufficiently radical.
The debate on the question as to whether the constitution
should be submitted to the approval of the people or proclaimed
by the convention was one of the longest and most earnest of
the session. Some advocated its submission to the electorate
provided for in the constitution. This would obviously have
been little more than proclamation under another guise. To
submit the constitution to the electorate as then constituted, on
the other hand, would have meant a bitter and expensive cam
paign, and it might have meant even the defeat of the consti
tution and the return to the undesirable situation of former
years. It was finally decided, on May 29, 1902, to proclaim the
constitution. By Article II of this instrument every male citizen of the
United States twenty-one years of age, who has been a resident
of the State two years, of the county, city or town one year,
and of the precinct in which he offers to vote thirty days next
preceding the election in which he offers to vote, has paid his
poll tax ($1.50) six months prior to the election, and has reg
istered, is allowed to vote.
The following could register during 1902 and 1903 :
"First. A person who, prior to the adoption of this Constitution,
served in time of war in the army or navy of the United States or of
the Confederate States; or,
"Second. A son of any such person; or,
"Third. A person who owns property, upon which, for the year
preceding that in which he offers to register, state taxes aggregating
at least one dollar have been paid; or,
"Fourth. A person able to read any section of this Constitution
submitted to him by the officers of registration and to give a rea
sonable explanation of the same; or, if unable to read such section,
able to understand and to give a reasonable explanation thereof
when read to him by the officers."

156 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
Those who registered under the above conditions during
1902 and 1903 remained permanently on the roll of voters,
provided that they did not cease to be residents of the State or
otherwise disqualify themselves.14
But after January 1, 1904, every male citizen of the United
States having the qualifications of age and residence given
above could register, provided:
"First. That he has personally paid to the proper officer all state
poll taxes assessed or assessable against him, under this or the for
mer Constitution, for the three years next preceding that in which
he offers to register; or, if he comes of age at such time that no
poll tax shall have been assessable against him for the year pre
ceding the year in which he offers to register, has paid one dollar
and fifty cents, in satisfaction of the first year's poll tax assessable
against him; and,
"Second. That, unless physically unable, he make application to
register in his own handwriting, without aid, suggestion or memo
randum, in the presence of the registration officers, stating therein
his name, age, date and place of birth, residence and occupation at
the time and for the two years next preceding, and whether he has
previously voted, and, if so, the state, county, and precinct in which
he voted last; and,
"Third. That he answer on oath any and all questions affecting his

" Those excluded from registering and voting are: "idiots, in
sane persons, and paupers; persons who, prior to the adoption of
this Constitution, were disqualified from voting, by the conviction
of crime, either within or without this State, and whose disabilities
shall not have been removed; persons convicted after the adoption
of this Constitution, either within or without this State, of treason,
or of any felony, bribery, petit larceny, obtaining money or prop
erty under false pretenses, embezzlement, forgery, or perjury; per
sons who, while citizens of this State, after the adoption of this
Constitution, have fought a duel with a deadly weapon, or sent or
accepted a challenge to fight such duel, either within or without this
State, or knowingly conveyed a challenge, or aided, or assisted in
any way in the fighting of such duel." (Officers of the federal army
or navy, inmates of charitable institutions and students at institu
tions of learning neither gain nor lose their right of suffrage by their
location in the State or in any of its local divisions). Article II, sec
tions 23 and 24. For complete text of Article II, see Appendix
No. II.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 157
qualifications as an elector, submitted to him by the officers' of reg
istration, which questions, and his answers thereto, shall be reduced
to writing, certified by the officers, and preserved as a part of their
official records."
Furthermore, since January 1, 1904, only those can vote who
have paid, at least six months prior to the election, all poll taxes
assessed or assessable against them for three years next preced
ing that in which they offer to vote. Voters, registered since Jan
uary 1, 1904, are also required, unless physically unable, to pre
pare and deposit their ballots without aid. Those registering
prior to that date can receive such aid. The understanding
clause and the grandfather clause were not effective after that
date. It was enacted that the General Assembly may prescribe a
property qualification not exceeding two hundred dollars for
voting in any election of officers, other than the members of the
General Assembly, to be elected by the voters of such county
or subdivision thereof or city, or town; such action, if taken,
to be made upon the initiative of a representative in the Gen
eral Assembly of the locality concerned.15
Rules governing registration were made, and registration of
ficers in the several counties, to hold office until 1904, were ap
pointed by the convention.16
The constitution was signed by all the Democratic members
except those who were unable to be present. Only two of the
twelve Republican delegates were willing to put their signa
tures to the instrument.17

"Article II, Section 30.
18 Journal and Documents of the Constitutional Convention of Vir
ginia, 1901-1902.
" The Republican members of the convention voted in matters of
representation and suffrage almost solidly against any changes in
the Constitution of 1868, as it then existed. Their attitude towards
negro suffrage was in keeping with the traditions of the Republican
party in Virginia and with the national Republican Platform of 1900,
which said, "It was the plain purpose of the Fifteenth Amendment
of the Constitution to prevent discrimination on account of race or
color in regulating the elective franchise. The devices of such
[state] governments, ordered by statutory or constitutional enact
ment, are revolutionary and should be condemned."

158 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
The new constitution of Virginia was a remarkably conserv
ative and moderate instrument in view of the political and ra
cial conditions that existed and that had existed in the State.
Its reception at the hands of the public in the North shows a
marked change in the attitude of that section towards the
struggle of the Southern States to solve their great problem.
But there were still some voices raised in protests which sa
vored of the violence and sectionalism of the ultra-abolitionists
of the days of war and the Reconstruction. The Nation, for
example, which had shown remarkable moderation when the
South was passing through its most trying period, hailed the
work of the Virginia convention of 1901 as a "monstrous con
stitution." "The most preposterous questions," it said, "which
no constitutional lawyer of eminence could answer off-hand,
have been asked of negro citizens of means, probity, and
standing, when they have sought to exercise the right of suf
frage conferred upon them by the Congress and the people of
the United States." 18 The fallacy and injustice of this state
ment is apparent from a glance at the constitution. No man
fulfilling the common requirement of age and residence, who
had about three hundred dollars' worth of property upon which
he paid taxes, (that is, upon which state taxes aggregating at
least one dollar had been paid), was required to interpret the
constitution or was prevented from voting if he paid his poll
tax 19 — be he white or black. "Men of means, property and
standing" are obviously not excluded from voting under the
Constitution of 1902. In fact an argument used on several oc
casions by those advocating these requirements in the conven
tion was that the better class of negroes would welcome the

18 The Nation, December 25, 1902 (lxxv; 496).
10 There were at this time only 8,144 male negro citizens of the
Commonwealth who were assessed for taxes on real estate valued
at $300. (There were 95,662 whites). Document in Journal and
Documents of the Constitutional Convention of 1901. There were only
31,976 colored males in the State in 1901 assessed for taxes on prop
erty of the value of $100 whether real, personal, or both combined.
Ibid., Document No. 17. There were at that time 69,358 .illiterate
male negroes of voting age. Ibid., Document No. 7.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 159
elimination of those of their race who cast discredit upon all
colored voters, and that the regulations placed upon the suf
frage would stimulate the more worthy and ambitious among
those who were disfranchised to better their economic and so
cial condition. Some of the better class actually advocated the
limiting of the negro vote for these reasons. The objectional
grandfather and understanding clauses were in force only
eighteen months.
These clauses were incorporated in the constitution for the
purpose of giving many illiterate whites the opportunity to en
roll, while excluding illiterate negroes. This was necessary in
order to obtain the support of the western counties for the
constitution. The illiterate whites were fewer in number than
the illiterate negroes and had not been a political menace ex
cept when they combined with the negroes in State politics.
Furthermore, as the Reviezv of Reviews rightly observed,
there is nothing "radically unfair in this plan. Generally
speaking, the illiterate white man possesses greater political ca
pacity than the illiterate negro. The important part of a meas
ure of this kind is not the temporary but the permanent method
that it introduces. . . . The best and wisest friends of
the negro race are not worrying themselves at all about new
Southern franchise laws. No Southern State has made provi
sions which exclude the negro of intelligence and property." 20
The changed attitude of thoughful people in other parts of
the country towards this legislation was due to a better under
standing of the problem facing the South and to more cordial
relations between the different sections. A generation of ex
perimentation, discussion and study had forced the more open-
minded of both races, who knew conditions in the South, to
agree with Charles Dudley Warner when he said that "no per
manent righteous adjustment of relations" could come until
the negro would cease to be tempted with office for which he
was in no sense fitted, and until he was no longer made a
"pawn in the game of politics"; that liberal education for the

28 Review of Reviews, May, 1902. (xxv, 533); see also the Outlook,
June 13, 1903. (lxxiv, 399) and lxxv, 493 984.

160 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
masses of the negroes at the South had been for the most part
a failure; and that the negroes' greatest needs were social bet
terment and industrial education.21
George Washington Murray, a colored man and sometime
member of Congress from South Carolina, wrote in 1902, "As
we see it, the mistake of the nineteenth century was the at
tempt to make the ex-slave a governor before he had learned
to be governed." 22 "In my mind," wrote Booker T. Washing
ton in 1901, "there is no doubt but that we made a mistake at
the beginning of our freedom of putting the emphasis on the
wrong end. Politics and the holding of office were too largely
emphasized, almost to the exclusion of every other interest." 2S
Fortunately, the negroes of America had at this time as their
leader, Booker T. Washington, of Virginia, a man whose in
tellect, zeal and tact won him the respect and admiration of
men of both races and of all sections. He came into promi
nence at the time when the negroes were being eliminated from
politics by legal methods in one Southern State after another.
He did much to acquaint the North with the real conditions
and needs of his people in the South, to show the South the
negro point of view and to teach his people a new doctrine,
which most of their former leaders had ignored — that they
should first make themselves fit citizens before clamoring for
the full privileges of citizenship, that material prosperity and
moral worth were essential for their true enlightenment and
power, and that practical moral and manual training was what
they most needed. He also taught them that they had no need
of troubling themselves or their white neighbors about social

" Address at Columbia University before the American Social Sci
ence Association. Quoted in the Richmond Times, May 9, 1900.
a In the Twentieth Century Negro Literature, edited by D. W. Culp,
p. 232. See also article by George H. White, a negro who was
elected as a representative in Congress from North Carolina in 1896
and in 1898, pp. 224, 225. For the view of a Northern mulatto who
represented the anti-Booker T. Washington school, see article by T.
Thomas Fortune, editor of the New York Age, Ibid., pp. 227-231.
28 Booker T. Washington, The Future of the American Negro, p.
130.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 161
equality. "In all things that are purely social," he said, "we
can be as separate as the fingers, yet one as the hand in all
things essential to mutual progress." 24 His advice came at an
opportune time and aided in no small degree in turning the
thoughts of the colored people away from politics and other
things that had brought them only useless sorrow in the past,
and in interesting them in what they really needed.
It is a matter of regret that it has been necessary to disfran
chise a large body of citizens by methods some of which did
not seem in themselves commendable. But as a very just and
capable writer on the subject, Edgar Gardner Murphy, has ex
pressed it, "The supreme question was not the protection of the
negro but the protection of society itself. . . White
supremacy, at that stage in the development of the South, was
necessary to the supremacy of intelligence, administrative ca
pacity and public order, and involved even the existence of
those economic and civic conditions upon which the progress
of the negro was itself dependent." 25
The negroes were an active factor in Virginia politics for
thirty-seven years. When initiated into politics, they were led
by unscrupulous men to vote in opposition to their former mas
ters. They were taught that they were already capable of as
suming control of the government, and were carried away by
the speech-making, elections and other outward forms of
politics. In 1868 they attempted to withhold the franchise
from thousands of the white people and to prevent practically
every reputable white man in the State from holding office.
The color line was closely drawn by the negroes and their
white leaders. After the elimination of the carpetbaggers, col
ored voters were used to keep the Readjuster party and the
Mahone machine in power from 1879 to 1883. After 1883 the
negro vote ceased to determine State elections. But the ne
groes continued to elect officers in the black counties until the
nineties and were a constant source of election frauds, trickery

21 Atlanta Exposition address quoted in Booker T. Washington,
Up From Slavery, ch. xiv.
25 Edgar Gardner Murphy, Problems of the Present South, p. 190.
—11

162 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
and irritation that threatened to corrupt the whole body politic
of the Commonwealth. Race relations were becoming more
strained. To remedy this state of affairs, the Constitution of
1902 was adopted. The race question then became only a po
tential factor in Virginia politics.
The subsequent history of Virginia has proved the wisdom
of the suffrage laws embodied in the Constitution of 1902.
Fraud in elections is almost unknown in the Commonwealth,
and men have become more independent in politics. The best
element of the negroes continues to vote. The colored people
have made remarkable progress and race relations have been
good. Though the people of Virginia and of the nation can con
gratulate themselves upon this progress and harmony, they
should ever be mindful of the fact that wherever two widely
dissimilar races live side by side in great numbers and can not
mingle their blood, there exists a problem that can never be ig
nored, and that mutual undestanding, good feeling and justice
on all sides are necessary for harmony. An accurate knowl
edge of race conditions in Virginia, not only of the past but of
the present, are necessary for an unbiased judgment in consid
ering race relations. The races in Virginia now work together
in harmony and are friends. This relationship will continue
only so long as no exterior factor disturbs the equilibrium.
There can be no more appropriate conclusion to this work than
the good advice of Senator John Sharp Williams, of Missis
sippi, "In the face of this great problem, it would be well that
wise men think more, that good men pray more, and that all
men talk less and curse less."

BIBLIOGRAPHY.
A Bibliography of Virginia, Part I. by Earl G. Swem, Virginia
State Library Bulletin, vol. 8, nos. 2-4 (1915).
Ibid. Part II. Virginia State Library Bulletin, vol. 10, nos. 1-4
(1917).
A Bibliography of the Conventions and Constitutions of Vir
ginia by Earl G. Swem. Virginia Sate Library Bulletin,
vol. 3, no. 4 (1910).
Senate Journal and Documents.
House Journal and Documents.
Acts of Assembly.
Proceedings and Debates of the Constitutional Convention of
Virginia, 1901-1902 (1906).
Debates and Proceedings of the Constitutional Convention of
1867-1868, vol. I. (Debates through January 29, 1868).
The second volume was never published and there are now 1
no known reports of the debates after January 29, 1868 in ^
manuscript form. For a later effort to publish the re
mainder of the Debates see House Journal 1870-1871, p.
115. According to the Richmond Dispatch (April 25,
1868), "The Debates are utterly worthless. They are a
fraud because the jargon of the negroes is rendered into
tolerable language and will appear as the declamation of
passably well informed orators." W. M. Samuel, the of- ^
ficial reporter for the convention, frankly admitted that he
had polished up the language of the Debates. He was
aided in this work by Edgar Allen. (Documents of the
Convention of 1867-1868). The actual and complete re
ports of the convention can be had in the Richmond Dis
patch and in the Richmond Enquirer.
-Journal and Documents of the Constitutional Convention of
1901. (1901).
Journal of the Constitutional Convention of 1867-1868. (1867).
Documents of the Constitutional Convention of 1867-1868.
(1867).

164 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
Negroes in the United States. Census Bulletin no. 8.
The Negroes of Farmville, Virginia, by W. E. B. DuBois, U.
S. Department of Labor Bulletin no. 14. This is an excel
lent and candid study of local conditions in a typical
county and town of the black belt of Virginia.
H. J. Eckenrode, "Political History of Virginia During Re
construction," in Johns Hopkins University Studies, xxii
(1904).
J. P. McConnell, Negroes and Their Treatment in Virginia
from 1865 to 1867. (1909).
C. C. Pearson, The Readjuster Movement in Virginia (1917).
This and the two monographs next preceding are the best
accounts of the periods of which they treat. Note the bib
liography of this book.
C. H. Ambler, The History of Sectionalism in Virginia from
1776 to 1861, (1910).
J. A. C. Chandler, Representation in Virginia (Johns Hopkins
University Studies vol. xiv 1896).
J. A. C. Chandler, The History of Suffrage in Virginia (Johns
Hopkins University Studies vol. xix 1901).
G. T. Stephenson, Race Distinctions in American Law, (1910).
W. A. Dunning, Essays on Civil War and Reconstruction,
(1898).
William L. Royall, History of the Virginia State Debt Contro
versy, (1897).
Walter L. Fleming, Documentary History of Reconstruction,
(1906). (Note especially the introductory chapters).
P. A. Bruce, The Plantation Negro as a Freedman, (1889).
James M. Callahan, "Political Parties in the South Since 1860,"
in The South in the Building of the Nation, (1909). See
articles by Bruce, Clarke and others in this work.
Appleton's Annual American Cyclopaedia, article, "Virginia."
The Twentieth Century Negro Literature, (1902), D. W. Culp,
editor.
Thomas V. Cooper and Hector T. Fenton, American Politics,
(1882).

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 165
Warrock-Richardson Almanac. Valuable in giving political af
filiations of the officeholders of the State, but not com
plete or always dependable in distinguishing between white
and colored officeholders. Supplement with newspapers.
John E. Massey, Autobiography, (1909).
John Goode, Recollections of a Lifetime, (1906).
Thomas Cary Johnson, Life and Letters of Robert Lewis Dab
ney, (1903).
^General John M. Schofield, Forty-Six Years in the Army,
(1897).
R. E. Withers, Autobiography of an Octogenarian, (1907).
W. L. Royall, Some Reminiscences, (1909).
E. A. Alderman and A. C. Gordon, /. L. M. Curry, A Biogra
phy.
Booker T. Washington, Up from Slavery, (1907).
Alfred Holt Stone, Studies in the American Race Problem,
(1908).
Edgar Gardner Murphy, Problems of the Present South,
(1904).
B. T. Washington, Future of the American Negro.
University of Virginia Phelps-Stokes Fellowship Papers.
North American Review.
The Nation.
The Richmond Enquirer and Examiner.
The Richmond Dispatch.
The Richmond State.
The Richmond Whig.
In addition to the above items, numerous pamphlets in the
Virginia State Library, and elsewhere, local newspapers and
personal accounts of contemporaries have been made use of in
the preparation of this paper.
For an interesting short account of Reconstruction from the
point of view of Virginians, see "Reconstruction in Virginia,"
a letter written by John Randolph Tucker to Hon. G. W.
Woodward of Pennsylvania and published in the Richmond
Enquirer and Examiner, June 24, 1868.

APPENDIX I

Article III, Constitution of Virginia, 1868.1
Elective Franchise and Qualifications for Office.

Section 1. Every male citizen of the United States, twenty-
one years old, who shall have been a resident of this state
twelve months, and of the county, city or town in which he
shall offer to vote, three months next preceding any election,
shall be entitled to vote upon all questions submitted to the peo
ple at such election: provided, that no officer, soldier, seaman
or marine of the United States army or navy shall be consid
ered a resident of this state by reason of being stationed therein :
and provided also, that the following persons shall be excluded
from voting:
1st. Idiots and lunatics.
2nd. Persons convicted of bribery in any election, embez
zlement of public funds, treason or felony.
3rd. No person who, while a citizen of this state, has, since
the adoption of this constitution, fought a duel with a deadly
weapon, either within or beyond the boundaries of this state,
or knowingly conveyed a challenge, or aided or assisted in any
manner in fighting a duel, shall be. allowed to vote or hold any
office of honor, profit or trust, under this constitution.
[4th. Every person who has been a senator or representa
tive in congress, or elector of president or vice-president, or
who held any office, civil or military, under the United States,
or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath as a
member of congress, or as an officer of the United States, or
as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or ju
dicial officer of any state, shall have engaged in insurrection or

1 Code of Virginia, 1873, pp. 70-71.

168 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the ene
mies thereof.
"This clause shall include the following officers : governor,
lieutenant-governor, secretary of state, auditor of public ac
counts, second auditor, register of the land office, state treas
urer, attorney-general, sheriffs, sergeants of a city or town,
commissioner of the revenue, county surveyors, constables,
overseers of the poor, commissioner of the board of public
works, judges of the supreme court, judges of the circuit court,
judges of the court of hustings, judges of the county courts,
mayor, recorder, aldermen, councilmen of a city or town, cor
oners, escheators, inspectors of tobacco, flour, &c, clerks of the
supreme, district, circuit, and county courts, and of the court
of hustings, and attorneys for the commonwealth: provided,
that the legislature may, by a vote of three-fifths of both
houses, remove the disabilities incurred by this clause from any
person included therein by a separate vote in each case.] 1
Sec. 2. All elections shall be by ballot, and all persons enti
tled to vote shall be eligible to any office within the gift of the
people, except as restricted in this constitution.
Sec. 3. All persons entitled to vote and hold office, and none
others, shall be eligible to sit as jurors.
Sec. 4. The general assembly shall, at its first session under
this constitution, enact a general registration law; and every
person offering or applying to register shall take and subscribe,
before the officer charged with making a registration of voters,
the following oath :
"I,  , do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I am
not disqualified from exercising the right of suffrage by the
constitution framed by the convention which assembled in the
city of Richmond on the third day of December, 1867, and that
I will support and defend the same to the best of my ability."
Sec. 5. No voter, during the time of holding any election at
which he is entitled to vote, shall be compelled to perform mil-

1 Code of Virginia, 1873, pp. 26-27.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 169
itary service, except in time of war or public danger, to work
upon public roads, or to attend any court as suitor, juror or
witness: and no voter shall be subject to arrest, under any
civil process, during his attendance at elections, or in going to
or returning from them. Oath of Office.
Sec. 6. All persons, before entering upon the discharge of
any function as officers of this state, must take and subscribe
the following oath or affirmation:
"I,  , do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will
support and maintain the constitution and laws of the United
States, and the constitution and laws of the state of Virginia ;
that I recognize and accept the civil and political equality of all
men before the law, and that I will faithfully perform the duty
of  to the best of my ability. So help me God."
[Sec. 7. In addition to the foregoing oath of office, the gov
ernor, lieutenant-governor, members of the general assembly,
secretary of state, auditor of public accounts, state treasurer,
attorney-general, and all persons elected to any convention to
frame a constitution for this state, or to amend or revise this
constitution in any manner, and mayor and council of any city
or town, shall, before they enter on the duties of their respec
tive offices, take and subscribe the following oath or affirma
tion, provided the disabilities therein contained may be individ
ually removed by a three-fifths vote of the general assembly:
"I,  , do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I have
never voluntarily borne arms against the United States since I
have been a citizen thereof ; that I have voluntarily given no
aid, countenance, counsel or encouragement, to persons en
gaged in armed hostility thereto; that I have never sought nor
accepted, nor attempted to exercise the functions of any of
fice whatever, under any authority or pretended authority, in
hostility to the United States; that I have not yielded a volun
tary support to any pretended government, authority, power or
constitution, within the United States, hostile or inimical
thereto. And I do further swear (or affirm) that, to the best

170 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
of my knowledge and ability, I will support and defend the
constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign
and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the
same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental res
ervation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faith
fully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to
enter. So help me God." The above oath shall also be taken
by all the city and county officers before entering upon their
duties, and by all other state officers not included in the above
provision."] 2

Code of Virginia, 1873, p. 27.

APPENDIX II

Article II, Constitution of Virginia, 1902.
Elective Franchise and Qualifications for Office.

Sec. 18. Every male citizen of the United States, twenty-one
years of age, who has been a resident of the State two years,
of the county, city, or town one year, and of the precinct in
which he offers to vote, thirty days, next preceding the election
in which he offers to vote, has been registered, and has paid his
state poll taxes, as hereinafter required, shall be entitled to vote
for members of the General Assembly and all officers elective
by the people ; but removal from one precinct to another, in the
same county, city, or town shall not deprive any person of his
right to vote in the precinct from which he has moved, until the
expiration of thirty days after such removal.
Sec 19. There shall be general registrations in the counties,
cities and towns of the State during the years nineteen hun
dred and two and nineteen hundred and three at such times and
in such manner as may be prescribed by an ordinance of this
convention. At such registrations every male citizen of the
United States having the qualifications of age and residence
required in section Eighteen shall be entitled to register, if he
be: First. A person who, prior to the adoption of this Constitu
tion, served in time of war in the army or navy of the United
States, of the Confederate States, or of any state of the United
States or of the Confederate States; or,
Second. A son of any such person; or,
Third. A person, who owns property, upon which, for the
year next preceding that in which he offers to register, state
taxes aggregating at least one dollar have been paid; or,
Fourth. A person able to read any section of this Constitu
tion submitted to him by the officers of registration and to give

172 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
a. reasonable explanation of the same; or, if unable to read
such section, able to understand and give a reasonable expla
nation thereof when read to him by the officers.
A roll containing the names of all persons thus registered,
sworn to and certified by the officers of registration, shall be
filed, for record and preservation, in the clerk's office of the
circuit court of the county, or the clerk's office of the corpora
tion court of the city, as the case may be. Persons thus en
rolled shall not be required to register again, unless they shall
have ceased to be residents of the State, or become disqualified
by section Twenty-Three. Any person denied registration un
der this section shall have the right of appeal to the circuit
court of his county, or the corporation court of his city, or to
the judge thereof in vacation.
Sec. 20. After the first day of January, nineteen hundred
and four, every male citizen of the United States, having the
qualifications of age and residence required in section Eighteen,
shall be entitled to register, provided:
First. That he has personally paid to the proper officer all
state poll taxes assessed or assessable against him, under this
or the former Constitution, for the three years next preceding
that in which he offers to register ; or, if he come of age at such
time that no poll tax shall have been assessable against him for
the year preceding the year in which he offers to register,
has paid one dollar and fifty cents, in satisfaction of the first
year's poll tax assessable against him ; and,
Second. That, unless physically unable, he make application
to register in his own hand-writing, without aid, suggestion, or
memorandum, in the presence of the registration officers, stat
ing therein his name, age, date and place of birth, residence
and occupation at the time and for the two years next preced
ing, and whether he has previously voted, and, if so, the state,
county, and precinct in which he voted last ; and,
Third. That he answer on oath any and all questions affect
ing his qualifications as an elector, submitted to him by the of
ficers of registration, which questions, and his answers thereto,

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 173
shall be reduced to writing, certified by the said officers, and
preserved as a part of their official records.
Sec. 21. Any person, registered under either of the last two
sections, shall have the right to vote for members of the Gen
eral Assembly and all officers elective by the people, subject to
the following conditions :
That he, unless exempted by section Twenty-two, shall, as a
prerequisite to the right to vote after the first day of January,
nineteen hundred and four, personally pay, at least six months
prior to the election, all state poll taxes assessed or assessable
against him, under this Constitution, during the three years
next preceding that in which he offers to vote; provided that,
if he register after the first day of January, nineteen hundred
and four, he shall, unless physically unable, prepare and de
posit his ballot without aid, on such printed form as the law
may prescribe; but any voter registered prior to that date may
be aided in the preparation of his ballot by such officer of elec
tion as he himself may designate.
Sec. 22. No person who, during the late war between the
States, served in the army or navy of the United States, or the
Confederate States, or any state of the United States, or of the
Confederate States, shall at any time be required to pay a poll
tax as a prerequisite to the right to register or vote. The col
lection of the state poll tax assessed against any one shall not
be enforced by legal process until the same has become three
years past due.
Sec. 23. The following persons shall be excluded from reg
istering and voting : Idiots, insane persons, and paupers ; per
sons who, prior to the adoption of this Constitution, were dis
qualified from voting by conviction of crime, either within or
without this State, and whose disabilities shall not have been
removed; persons convicted after the adoption of this Consti
tution, either within or without this State, of treason, or of any
felony, bribery, petit larceny, obtaining money or property un
der false pretences, embezzlement, forgery, or perjury; per
sons who, while citizens of this State, after the adoption of this
Constitution, have fought a duel with a deadly weapon, or sent

174 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
or accepted a challenge to fight such duel, either within or with
out this State, knowingly conveyed a challenge, or aided or as
sisted in any way in the fighting of such duel.
Sec. 24. No officer, soldier, seaman, or marine of the United
States army or navy shall be deemed to have gained a resi
dence as to the right of suffrage, in the State, or in any county,
city or town thereof, by reason of being stationed therein; nor
shall an inmate of any charitable institution or a student in any
institution of learning, be regarded as having either gained or
lost a residence, as to the right of suffrage by reason of his lo
cation or sojourn in such institution.
Sec. 25. The General Assembly shall provide for the annual
registration of voters under Section Twenty, for an appeal by
any person denied registration, for the correction of illegal or
fraudulent registration, thereunder, and also for the proper
transfer of all voters registered under this Constitution.
Sec 26. Any person who, in respect to age or residence,
would be qualified to vote at the next election, shall be ad
mitted to registration, notwithstanding that at the time thereof
he is not so qualified, and shall be entitled to vote at said elec
tion if then qualified under the provisions of this Constitution.
Sec. 27. All elections by the people shall be by ballot ; all
elections by any representative body shall be viva voce, and the
vote recorded in the journal thereof.
The ballot-box shall be kept in public view during all elec
tions, and shall not be opened, nor the ballots canvassed or
counted, in secret.
So far as consistent with the provisions of this Constitution,
the absolute secrecy of the ballot shall be maintained.
Sec. 28. The General Assembly shall provide for ballots,
without any distinguishing mark or symbol, for use in all state,
county, city, and other elections by the people, and the form
thereof shall be the same in all places where any such election
is held. All ballots shall contain the names of the candidates,
and of the offices to be filled, in clear print and in due and or
derly succession ; but any voter may erase any name and insert
another.

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 175
Sec. 29. No voter, during the time of holding any election at
which he is entitled to vote, shall be compelled to perform mil
itary service, except in time of war or public danger; to attend
any court as suitor, juror, or witness; and no voter shall be
subject to arrest under any civil process during his attendance
at election or in going to or returning therefrom.
Sec. 30. The General Assembly may prescribe a property
qualification not exceeding two hundred and fifty dollars for
voters in any county or subdivision thereof, or city or town, as
a prerequisite for voting in any election for officers, other than
the members of the General Assembly, to be wholly elected by
the voters of such county or subdivision thereof, or city, or
town; such action, if taken, to be had upon the initiative of a
representative in the General Assembly of the county, city, or
town affected; provided, that the General Assembly in its dis
cretion may make such exemptions from the operation of said
property qualification as shall not be in conflict with the con
stitution of the United States.
Sec. 31. There shall be in each county and city an electoral
board, composed of three members, appointed by the circuit
court of the county or the corporation court of the city, or the
judge of the court in vacation. Of those first appointed, one
shall be appointed for a term of one year, one for a term of
two years, and one for a term of three years; and thereafter
their successors shall be appointed for the full term of three
years. Any vacancy occurring in any board shall be filled by
the same authority for the unexpired term.
Each electoral board shall appoint the judges, clerks, and
registrars of election for its county or city; and, in appointing
judges of election, representation as far as possible shall be
given to each of the two political parties which, at the general
election next preceding their appointment, cast the highest and
next highest number of votes.
No person, nor the deputy of any person, holding any office
or post of profit or emolument, under the United States Gov
ernment, or who is in the employment of such government, or
holding any elective office of profit or trust in the State, or in

176 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
any county, city, or town thereof, shall be appointed a member
of the electoral board, or registrar, or judge of election.
Sec. 32. Every person qualified to vote shall be eligible to
any office of the State, or of any county, city, town, or other'
subdivision of the State, wherein he resides, except as other
wise provided in this Constitution, and except that this provi
sion as to residence shall not apply to any office elective by
the people where the law provides otherwise. Men and women
eighteen years of age shall be eligible to the office of notary
public, and qualified to execute the bonds required of them in
that capacity.
Sec. 33. The terms of all officers elected under this Consti
tution shall begin on the first day of February next succeeding
their election, unless otherwise provided in this Constitution.
All officers, elected or appointed, shall continue to discharge
the duties of their offices after their terms of service have ex
pired until their successors have qualified.
Sec. 34. Members of the General Assembly and all officers,
executive and judicial, elected or appointed after this Constitu
tion goes into effect, shall, before they enter on the perform
ance of their public duties, severally take and subscribe the fol
lowing oath or affirmation :
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the
Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the
State of Virginia ordained by the convention which assembled
in the city of Richmond on the twelfth day of June, nineteen
hundred and one, and that I will faithfully and impartially dis
charge and perform all the duties incumbent on me as  ,
according to the best of my ability; so help me God."
Sec. 35. No person shall vote at any legalized primary elec
tion for the nomination of any candidate for office unless he is
at the time registered and qualified to vote at the next succeed
ing election.
Sec. 36. The General Assembly shall enact such laws as are
necessary and proper for the purpose of securing the regularity
and purity of general, local and primary elections, and prevent
ing and punishing any corrupt practices in connection there-

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 177
with; and shall have power, in addition to other penalties and
punishments now or hereafter prescribed by law for such of
fences, to provide that persons convicted of them shall there
after be disqualified from voting or holding office.
Sec. 37. The General Assembly may provide for the use,
throughout the State or in any one or more counties, cities, or
towns in any election, of machines for receiving, recording, and
counting the votes cast thereat: provided, that the secrecy of
the voting be not thereby impaired.
Sec. 38. After the first day of January, nineteen hundred and
four, the treasurer of each county and city shall, at least five
months before each regular election, file with the clerk of the
circuit court of his county, or of the corporation court of his
city, a list of all persons in his county or city, who have paid
not later than six months prior to such election, the state poll
taxes required by this Constitution during the three years next
preceding that in which such election is held ; which list shall
be arranged alphabetically, by magisterial districts or wards,
shall state the white and colored persons separately, and shall
be verified by the oath of the treasurer. The clerk, within ten
days from the receipt of the list, shall make and certify a suffi
cient number of copies thereof, and shall deliver one copy for
each voting place in his county or city, to the sheriff of the
county or sergeant of the city, whose duty it shall be to post
one copy, without delay, at each of the voting places, and,
within ten days from the receipt thereof, to make return on
oath to the clerk, as to the places where and dates at which
said copies were respectively posted ; which return the clerk
shall record in a book kept in his office for the purpose; and he
shall keep in his office for public inspection, for at least sixty
days after receiving the list, not less than ten certified copies
thereof, and also cause the list to be published in such other
manner as may be prescribed by law; the original list returned
by the treasurer shall be filed and preserved by the clerk among
the public records of his office for at least five years after re
ceiving the same. Within thirty days after the list has been so
posted, any person who shall have paid his capitation tax, but
whose name is omitted from the certified list, may, after five
— ia

178 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
days' written notice to the treasurer, apply to the circuit court
of his county, or corporation court of his city, or to the judge
thereof in vacation, to have the same corrected and his name
entered thereon, which application the court or judge shall
promptly hear and decide.
The clerk shall deliver, or cause to be delivered, with the
poll-books, at a reasonable time before every election, to one of
the judges of election of each precinct of his county or city, a
like certified copy of the list, which shall be conclusive evidence
of the facts therein stated for the purpose of voting. The clerk
shall also, within sixty days after the filing of the list by the
treasurer, forward a certified copy thereof, with such correc
tions as may have been made by order of the court or judge,
to the Auditor of Public Accounts, who shall charge the
amount of the poll taxes stated therein to such treasurer un
less previously accounted for.
Further evidence of the prepayment of the capitation taxes
required by this Constitution, as a prerequisite to the right to
register and vote, may be prescribed by law.

APPENDIX III

Consolidated List of Persons Registered as Voters in the
State of Virginia under the Reconstruction Acts
of Congress. (1867).1

No. Counties, etc.
- 1 Richmond City 
-2 Norfolk County, City of
Portsmouth 
3 Albemarle 
4 Augusta 
5 Bedford 
- 6 Campbell 
- 7 Halifax 
8 Loudoun 
-¦ 9 Mecklenburg 
- 10 Pittsylvania 
11 Rockingham 
""• 12 Norfolk City 
"13 Petersburg City 
^14 Alexandria 
N 15 Amelia 
16 Amherst 
17 Botetourt 
•> 18 Brunswick 
"19 Buckingham 
^•20 Charlotte 
21 Culpeper 
-\ 22 Cumberland 
23 Fairfax 
n 24 Fluvanna 
25 Frederick 
*=26 Goochland 
-27 Hanover 
1 28 Henrico 
29 Henry 

Numb

er Registered

White

Colored

Total

Per cent
Colored

5,382

6,284

11,666

54.0

2,738

3,281

6,019

54.5

2,310

2,759

5,069

54.4

3,579

1,362

4,941

27.6

2,408

2,110

4,518

46.7

2,576

2,978

5,554

53.6

1,980

3,402

5,382

63.2

2,799

1,007

3,806

26.5

1,275

2,843

4,118

69.0

2,768

3,534

6,302

56.0

2,881

431

3,312

13.0

1,910

2,049

3,959

51.8

1,546

2,647

4,193

63.0

1,491

1,933

3,524

54.8

494

1,492

1,986

75.0

1,515

1,371

2,886

47.5

1,420

662

2,082

31.8

775

1,733

2,508

69.1

1,072

1,799

2,871

62i6

913

2,080

2,993

69.5

1,005

896

1,901

47.1

535

1,331

1,866

71.4

1,400

1,039

2,439

42.6

884

970

1,854

52.4

2,093

540

2,633

20.5

662

1,519

2,181

69.5

1,504

1,556

3,060

50.9

1,229

1,879

3,108

60.4

1,017

1,006

2,023

49.7

1 Documents of the Constitutional Convention of 1867-1868.

180 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
"¦ 30 Louisa 
^31 Lunenburg 
32 Montgomery 
"33 Nansemond 
"34 Nelson 
"35 Nottoway 
" 36 Orange 
s37 Princess Anne 
" 38 Southampton 
39 Wythe 
N 40 Chesterfield 
v41 Powhatan 
" 42 Caroline 
43 King George 
44 Spottsylvania 
45 Accomac 
" 46 Northampton 
47 Bath 
48 Highland 
49 Rockbridge 
50 Carroll 
51 Floyd 
52 Grayson 
53 Fauquier 
54 Rappahannock 
55 Northumberland 
" 56 Lancaster 
57 Richmond 
"" 58 Westmoreland 
59 Patrick 
60 Franklin 
"*61 Prince Edward 
62 Appomattox 
" 63 Prince George 
" 64 Dinwiddie 
65 Lee 
66 Scott 
67 Wise 
68 Page 
69 Shenandoah 
70 Smyth 
71 Washington 
72 Alleghany 
73 Craig 
74 Roanoke 
^75 Charles City (Co.) 

1,122

1,761

2,883

61.1

726

1,219

1,945

62.6

1,546

567

2,113

26.8

1,084

1,154

2,238

51.6

1,243

1,268

2,511

50.5

481

1,448

1,929

75.1

899

1,081

1,980

54.6

870

931

1,801

51.6

1,124

1,273

2,397

53.1

1,581

480

2,061

23.3

1,871

2,018

3,889

51.9

451

1,173

1,624

72.2

1,317

1,402

2,719

51.6

456

439

895

49.0

1,310

1,026

2,336

44.0

2,058

1,470

3,523

41.7

556

1,004

1,560

64.4

418

111

529

21.0

602

58

660

8.8

2,171

1,051

3,222

32.6

1,410

65

1,475

4.4

1,360

189

1,549

12.2

1,289

128

1,417

9.0

1,889

1,299

3,188

40.7

1,007

479

1,486

32.2

648

451

1,099

41.0

362

487

849

57.4

591

489

1,080

45.3

625

663

1,288

51.5

1,197

326

1,523

21.4

2,109

1,091

3,200

34.1

709

1,659

2,428

68.2

759

903

1,662

54.2

535

1,095

1,630

67.2

705

1,606

2,311

69.6

1,487

120

1,607

7.5

1,884

110

1,994

5.0

654

9

663

1.3

1,248

190

1,438

13.2

2,168

176

2,344

75

1,283

319

1,602

19.9

2,479

637

3,116

20.4

484

93

577

16.1

448

47

495

9.5

1,030

650

1,680

38.6

309

658

967

68.0

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 181
"76 New Kent  370 454 824 55.0
77 Clarke  763 378 1,141 34.2
78 Warren  656 197 853 23.1
-.79 Elizabeth City (Co.)  361 1,585 1,946 81.5
"80 Warwick  135 291 426 68.3
. 81 Gloucester  864 869 1,729 50.2
82 Matthews  651 334 985 33.9
83 Isle of Wight  871 656 1,527 43.0
.. 84 Surry  447 582 1,029 59.6
> 85 King and Queen  710 883 1,593 55.4
- 86 King William  488 713 1,201 59.4
87. Madison  808 599 1,407 42.5
88 Greene  556 263 819 32.1
- 89 Middlesex  388 409 797 51.4
- 90 Essex  576 1,124 1,700 66.1
91 Pulaski  693 366 1,059 34.5
92 Giles  829 139 968 14.4
93 Russell  1,415 224 1,639 13.7
94 Buchanan  463 5 468 1.1
95 Stafford  847 253 1,100 23.0
96 Prince William  958 307 1,265 24.3
97 Greenville  303 720 1,023 70.5
" 98 Sussex  535 1,109 1,639 67.5
99 Bland  687 56 743 7.5
100 Tazewell  1,309 275 1,584 17.4
101 lames City (Co.)  226 492 718 68.5
102 York  425 1,188 1,613 73.5
Total  120,101 105,832 225,933 47.0

APPENDIX IV

Population of Virginia. 1900.1
White Colored Total Per cent
County Colored
Accomac  20,743 11,827 32,570 36.3
Albemarle  18,135 10,338 28,473 36.3
Alexandria  3,962 2,468 6,430 38.3
Alleghany  11,415 4,915 16,330 30.1
Amelia  3,052 5,985 9,037 66.2
Amherst  10,807 7,057 17,864 39.5
Appomattox  5,731 3,931 9,662 40.6
Augusta  26,670 5,700 32,370 17.6
Bath  4,589 1,006 5,595 17.9
Bedford  20,617 9,739 30,356 32.1
Bland  5,285 212 5,497 3.85
Botetourt  13,284 3,877 17,161 22.5
Brunswick  7,375 10,842 18,217 59.5
Buchanan  9,687 5 9,692 .005
Buckingham  7,415 7,851 15,266 51.4
Campbell  13,641 9,615 23,256 41.3
Caroline  7,667 9,042 16,709 54.1
Carroll  18,964 339 19,303 1.75
Charles City  1,344 3,696 5,040 73.3
Charlotte  6,798 8,545 15,343 55.6
Chesterfield  11,105 7,699 18,804 40.9
Clarke  5,695 2,232 7,927 28.1
Craig  .,  4,032 261 4,293 6.07
Culpeper  8,069 6,054 14,123 42.8
Cumberland  2,791 6,205 8,996 68.9
Dickenson  7,747 0 7,747 000
Dinwiddie  5,874 9,500 15,374 61.7
Elizabeth City  10,757 8,703 19,460 44.7
Essex  3,576 6,125 9,701 63.1
Fairfax  13,576 5,004 18,580 26.9
Fauquier  15,074 8,300 23,374 35.5
Floyd  14,313 1,075 15,388 6.98
Fluvanna  5,039 4,011 9,050 44.3

* United States Census, 1900.

184 PHELPS-STOKES FELLOWSHIP PAPERS
Franklin  20,005 5,948 25,953 22.9
Frederick  12,486 753 13,239 5.68
Giles  9,997 799 10,793 7.40
Gloucester  6,224 6,608 12,832 41.4
Goochland  3,961 5,558 9,519 58.4
Grayson  15,894 959 16,853 4.69
Greene  4,783 1,431 6,214 23.0
Greenville  3,401 6,357 9,758 65.1
Halifax  17,922 19,275 37,197 51.8
Hanover  9,696 7,922 17,618 44.9
Henrico  17,246 12,816 30,062 42.6
Henry  10,881 8,384 19,265 43.5
Highland  5,269 378 5.647 6.69
Isle of Wight  6,833 6,269 13,102 47.8
lames City  1,346 2,342 3,688 63.5
King and Queen  4,006 5,259 9,265 56.7
King George  3,596 3,322 6,918 48.0
King William  3,266 5,114 8,380 61.0
Lancaster  4,058 4,891 8,949 54.6
Lee  19,116 740 19,856 3.72
Loudoun  16,079 5,869 21,948 26.7
Louisa  7,896 8,621 16,517 52.1
Lunenburg  5,133 6,572 11,705 56.1
Madison  6,695 3,521 10,216 34.4
Mathews  5,844 2,395 8,239 29.0
Mecklenburg  10,353 16,198 26,551 61.1
Middlesex  3,684 4,536 8,220 55.1
Montgomery  12,927 2,925 15,852 18.4
Nansemond  10,115 12,963 23,078 56.1
Nelson  10,403 5,672 16,075 35.2
New Kent  1,660 3,205 4,865 65.8
Norfolk  19,113 31,667 50,780 62.3
Northampton  6,141 7,629 13,770 55.4
Northumberland  5,680 4,166 9,846 42.3
Nottoway  4,966 7,400 12,366 59.8
Orange  7,050 5,521 12,571 43.9
Page  12,354 1,440 13,794 10.4
Patrick  13,779 1,624 15,403 10.5
Pittsylvania  25,605 21,289 46,894 45.4
Powhatan  2,343 4,481 6,824 65.6
Prince Edward  5,276 9,769 15,045 ' 64.9
Prince George  2,886 4,866 7,752 62.7
Princess Anne  5,505 5,687 11,192 50.8
Prince William  8,240 2,872 11,112 25.8
Pulaski  11,378 3,237 14,609 22.1
Rappahannock  6,121 2,722 8,843 30.8

THE NEGRO IN VIRGINIA POLITICS 185

Richmond  4,159
Roanoke  11,990
Rockbridge  17,715
Rockingham  30,893
Russell  17,267
Scott  22,067
Shenandoah  19,604
Smyth  15,950
Southampton  9,165
Spottsylvania  5,353
Stafford  6,489
Surry  3,286
Sussex  4,121
Tazewell  19,802
Warren  7,372
Warwick  1,159
Washington  26,434
Westmoreland  4,381
Wise  17,688
Wythe  17,653
York  3,401
Cities
Alexandria  9,987
Bristol  3,551
Buena Vista  1,978
Charlottesville  3,834
' Danville  10,002
Fredericksburg  3,446
Lynchburg  10,637
Manchester  6,376
Newport News  12,788
Norfolk  26,317
Petersburg  • 11,057
Portsmouth  11,782
Radford  2,887
Richmond  52,804
Roanoke  15,654
Staunton  5,456
Winchester  4,056
Williamsburg  1.366

2,929

7,088

41.3

3,847

15,837

24.3

4,084

21,799

18.7

2,634

33,527

7.85

764

18,031

4.23

627

22,694

2.76

649

20,253

3.20

1,171

17,121

6.83

13,683

22,848

59.8

3,886

9,239

42.1

1,608

8,097

19.8

5,183

8,469

61.2

7,961

12,082

65.9

3,582

23,384

15.3

1,465

8,837

16.6

3,729

4,888

76.3

2,561

28,995

8.83

4,862-

9,243

52.6

1,965

19,653

9.99

2,784

20,437

13.6

4,081

7,482

54.5

4,541

14,528

31.2

1,028

4,579

22.4

410

2,388

17.2

2,615

6,449

40.5

6,518

16,520

39.4

1,622

5,068

32.0

8,254

18,891

43.7

3,339

9,715

34.4

6,847

19,635

34.9

20,307

46,624

43.5

10,753

21,810

49.3

5,6,45

17,427

32.4

457

3,344

13.7

32,246

85,050

37.9

5,841

21,495

27.2

1,833

7,289

25.1

1,105

5,161

21.4

678

2,044

33.2

inide^zx:

Advertiser, Boston, 67 n.
African Church, convention in, April, 1867, 35; convention in, August,
1867, 40.
Alabama, 131.
Alexandria, Pierpont government moved to, 15; State convention
meets at, 15; Radical center, 17.
Allen, Edgar, elected by negroes from Prince Edward County, 1867,
45; 51; opposes Constitution of 1868, 67; 68, 68 n.; in campaign
of 1869, 72.
Allen, General R., and Union League, 34.
Amendment. See Constitution.
Anti-Mahoneites, 116, 117.
Arnold, A. W., 127.
Arthur, Chester A., 112, 115, 123.
Aycock, Charles B., elected governor of North Carolina, 143.
Baldwin, John B., Speaker of the Virginia House of Delegates, 1865,
18; and New Movement, 65, 65 n.; and Committee of Nine, 66,
67, 68.
Ballot, voting by, introduced in Constitution of 1868, 59 n.
Barbecue, negro, 75, 76 n.
Barbour, James, 106.
Barbour, John S., strengthens Conservative party, 118; in campaign
of 1885, 124.
Barrett, William E., quoted, 130 ri.
Bayne, Thomas, in Constitutional Convention of 1867, 51, 51 n., 52,
53, 56; and negro convention, 76.
Beach, S. Ferguson, 70 n.
Big Four, defeat Mahone's legislation, 114, 115, 116.
Blair, F. S., 112.
Bland, Jomes W. D., in Constitutional Convention of 1867, 50 n.,
52, 62 n.
Booker, G. W., 62 n.
Botts, John Minor, 23, 25, 39, 40, 41.
Bourbon, 109, 116.
Branch, James R., 75.
Bryan, W. J., and campaign of 1896, 135.
Butler, General Benjamin F., speech before the Constitutional Con
vention of 1867, 54. 187

188 index
Cameron, Senator Don, aids Mahone, 112.
Cameron, William E., Readjuster, 106; elected governor, 112; leaves
Mahone, 129.
Campaign, of 1867, 43; of 1869, 70ff.; of 1869, returns, 76, 77, 78; of
1870, results of, 84; of 1871, results of, 84; of 1872, 85; of 1873,
86ff.; of 1873, returns of, 89; of 1879, 107; of 1882, 117; of 1884,
123; of 1885, 124, 125.
Canby, General E. R. S., and election of 1869, 74.
Carpetbaggers, 20, 36, 42, 43 u., 49, 78, 81, 87; defeated, 90; 94, 96,
120, 161.
Caucus, rule of, introduced by Mahone, 111.
Chandler, L. H„ 67.
Charlotte county, 145; and Constitutional Convention of 1901, 148 n.
Charlottesville, meeting in, at Delevan Hospital, 1867, 32; conserva
tive Republicans call convention at, 1867, 39.
Clements, James H., campaign of 1869, 71.
Cleveland, Grover, wins Virginia, 1884, 124.
Coaches, separate, for races in Virginia, 141; in North Carolina, 143.
Coalitionist State Convention, 123.
Colored. See Negro.
Commercial Gazette, Cincinnati, quoted, 124 n.
Committee of Nine, chosen, 66; in Washington, 67; and campaign of
1869, 73.
Committee on the Elective Franchise and Qualification for Office,
Constitutional Convention of 1867, 55, 55 n.
Congress, refuses to admit Southern representatives, 22, 23; Act of
February 8, 1869, 59; removes disabilities from Southerners,
1872, 87.
Conservatives, early meaning of term, 43, 43 n. ; party formed,
December, 1867, 46; leaders in Constitutional Convention of 1867,
51, 52; 61, 62; candidates, 1868, 62 n.; candidates withdraw,. 1869,
73; unite with moderate Republicans, 73, 74; and negro barbecue,
75; vote on Funding Bill, 83; elected to Congress, 1870, 84; con
vention of, August, 1871, 84; in legislature, 1871, 84, 84 n. ; fail to
carry State for Greely, 85; elected to Congress, 1872, 85; con
vention of, August, 1873, platform of, 1873, 87; draw color line,
88; and election of 1874, 90; and election of 1878, 96; strengthen
party organization, 118; assume name, "Democrats," 118.
Constitution, Virginia, of 1864, 15, 16, 17; Constitution of 1868 ("Un
derwood Constitution"), adopted, vote on, 55; nature of, 56. 57,
58, 59, 60; vote on, delayed, 61, 62; approved by House of F.ep-
resenatives, 64; Stuart proposes changes in, 64; 69; approved
by Congress and submitted by President Grant to voters of Vir
ginia, 69; endorsed by negro convention, 76; vote on, returns of,
76, 77; first amended, 85 n.; clause concerning elective franchise
and qualifications for office and that part of, relating to local

index 189
government amended, 92; poll tax amendment, 92, 93; petty lar
ceny amendment in, denounced by negro convention, 95; amend
ments to, 147; Constitution of 1902, 135; 158; result of, 162; new,
in North Carolina, 144.
Constitutional Convention, of 1864, 15; of 1867-1868; 50ff.; personnel
of, 50; officers of, 51; close of, 55; of 1901-1902, 135, 147; vote on
calling, 148, 149; begins session, personnel of, 151; purposes of,
151, 152.
Convention, Unconditional Union, first statewide political convention
after War of Secession, 23, 24; Republican, at Philadelphia and
suffrage, 25; in African Church, Richmond, April, 1867, 35; Re
publican, of August, 1867, at Richmond, 40; of Conservatives, De
cember 1, 1867, organizes white man's party, 48; conservative,
and Committee of Nine, 66, 67, 67 n., 68; Radical Republican,
Petersburg, March, 1869, 71, 72, 73; moderate Republican, 1869,
72; first unmixed negro State, 76; Conservative, 1871, 84; Con
servative, August, 1873, 86; negro, August, 1875, 94; Coalitionist
(Republican), 123; Populist, 1892, 132; Democratic, at Norfolk,
1900, 147.
Cook, Fields, 35; and convention of August 1, 1867, 41.
Cooperation Movement, inaugurated, aims of, 33; 40.
Council of Foreign Bondholders of London, supports McCulloch
Act, 104.
County organization clause in Constitution of 1868, 68; not voted
on separately, 69; amended, 92.
Coupon Acts, 117.
Coupon Killers, 113, 114.
Cox, James, 43.
Currry, J. L. M., quoted, 96, 96 n.; Funder, 106.
Dabney, R. H., quoted, 141 n.
Dabney, R. L, letter of, 23 n.
Daniel, John W., Funder, 106; quoted, 119; 153.
Daniel, Raleigh T., Speech at negro meeting, 1867, 32; and New
Movement, 65 n.; and campaign of 1873, 86, 89.
Danville, riot in, 1883, 119, 120.
Davis, Jefferson, summoned by Judge Underwood, 38.
Dawson, John M., Republican Candidate, 1882, 117.
Debt. See State debt.
Debt Payer, 103.
Delevan Hospital, meeting at, 32.
Democrats, hesitate in drawing the color line, 119; legislation of,
122; in campaign of 1885, 124; successful, in Virginia, 1888, 129,
130; in Congressional election, 1890, 131; in election of 1892, 132;
in elections of 1896 and 1897, 134; in Constitutional Convention
of 1901-1902, 151; sign Constitution of 1902, 157.

190 INDEX
Disfranchising clause, Constitution of 1868, 55, 56, 56 n.; submitted
to voters separately, 69; 79.
Dispatch, Richmond, quoted, 75; quoted, 79; quoted, 87 n.; quoted,
125.
Douglas, Dr. W. C, in campaign of 1869, 72.
Downing, Speaker, Virginia legislature, 1865, views on negro fran
chise, 16.
Duelling, legislation regarding, 93, 93 n., 116.
Duval, General, and vagrants, 19.
Early, Jubal A., proposes emigration, 23 n.
Eastham, Dr., and Constitution of 1868, 58.
Election, of 1867, 43, 44, 45, 46; of 1869, 76, 77, 79, 79 n.; of 1871, re
sults of, 84; of 1874, results, 90; national, of 1876, significance of,
96; of 1877, 96; of 1878, 96; of 1879, 107; of 1881, 112; Congres
sional, of 1882, 117; of 1883, effect of Danville riot on, 121; Con
gressional, of 1884, 123, 124; of 1885, national importance of, re
sults of, 124, 125; Congressional, 1888, 127, 128; of 1889, 129, 130;
national, of 1888, results, 131; of 1890, 131; of 1893, 131; national,
of 1892, 131; of 1893, 132; of 1896 and of 1897, 134; national, of
1896, 135; of 1900, vote on calling constitutional convention, 148,
149.
Election, laws, Federal, repealed, 132.
Election frauds, 132, 134, 145, 146.
Elective franchise, in Constitution of 1868 amended, 92; reports on,
152, 153; Article II, Constitution of 1902, 154-159.
Elective franchise and qualification for office, committee on, Con
stitutional Conventon of 1901-1902, 152.
Evans, James P., 89 n.
Evening Journal, Richmond, quoted, 75.
Fernald, W. L., Readjuster, 111 n.; speech of, to negroes, 120 n.
Fifteenth Amendment, ratified by legislature, 79.
Fletcher, Governor, and New Movement, 65 n.
Foraker, J. B., Speaks in Virginia, 1885, 124.
Force Bill, 130, 131, 132.
Fourteenth Amendment, rejected by legislature, 25, 26; ratified by
legislature, 79.
Fourth Congressional District, in election of 1883, 122, 122 n. ; elec
tion of 1888, 127; counties included in, population of, 1888, 127 n.;
131.
Freedmen, vagrant, 19, 20, 21.
Freedmen's Bureau, established in Virginia, 31.
Fultz, David, and campaign of 1873, 86.
Funders, 106, 107; and Democratic party, 110; compromise with Re
adjusters, 117, 118, 122.

INDEX 191
Funding Act, 1871, 83; condemned by Republicans, 84; unsatisfactory,
98; and State finances, 101, 102.
Garfield, James A., 112.
General Assembly. See Legislature.
Georgia, 131.
Gerrymander, 82; attempted by Mahone, 115; by Democrats, 123.
Gibson, Eustace, in Constitutional Convention of 1867-1868, 51.
Glass, Carter, and Convention of 1901-1902.
Gold Democrats, 134, 135.
Goode, John, election of 1874, 90 n.; Chairman of the Constitutional
Convention of 1901-1902, 151.
Grandfather clause in Constitution of 1902, 154 n., 159.
Grange movement, 103.
Grant, U. S., General Schofield's letter to, 57; and Committee of
Nine, 69; submits Constitution of 1868 to people, sets date of
election, 1869, 69, 74; 88.
Greely, Horace, speaks in Richmond, 39 n.; aids Committee of Nine,
67; fails to win State in 1872, 85.
Gregg, General, and vagrant freedment, 19.
Griggs, N. M., 130 n.
Hale, Peyton G., and Big Four, 114 n.
Harrison, Benjamin, 130.
Harris; Dr. J. D., in campaign of 1869.
Hatton, Goodrich, 154 n.
Hawxhurst, John, 39 n.; and Republican convention of August 1,
1867, 41; and Constitutional Convention of 1867-1868, 51, 53;
62, 70.
Hayes, President R. B., 96 n.
Haygood, Atticus G, quoted, 137 n.
Henry, Patrick, views on slavery, 11.
Hodges, William A., in Constitutional Convention of 1867- 1868, 51,
51 n., 52.
Hoge, Moses D., letter to Dabney, 23 n.
Holliday, F. W. M., elected Governor, opposes Mahone, 103; early
life, 103 n.; Funder, 106; vetoes Riddleberger Bill, 108.
Holmes, James R., killed, 145.
Hoss, E. E., quoted, 137 n.
Hughes, Robert W., and campaign of 1873, 86.
Hunnicutt, James W., and convention at Philadelphia, former career,
25, 25 n.; speech in African Church convention, 34; an estimate
of, 34; victory over conservative faction of Republican party, 39,
39 n., 40; speech before convention of August 1, 1867, 40, 41; 43;
speech and arrest, 46, 46 n.; advises further disfranchisement of
whites, 55, 55 n.; 62; in campaign of 1869, 70.
Hunter, R. M. T., 47.

192 index
Illinois, legislation of, against negroes, 16 n.
Inaction, Whig and Dispatch advise Virginians against, 26; advised
by Republican leaders, 131.
Independents, elected to legislature, 1877, 96.
Jefferson, Thomas, views on slavery, 11.
Johnson, Andrew, 15; 17.
Johnson, Bradley T., 144 n.
Johnson, James F., Committee of Nine, 66.
Johnson, Marmaduke, speech before negro committee, 1867, 32; and
New Movement, 65 n.
Johnson, Solon, 32.
Johnston, Joseph E., 96 n.
Judges, changes regarding, in Constitution of 1868, 59; character of
those appointed by Readjusters, 108.
Kemper, James L, in campaign of 1873, 86; quoted, 90, 90 n., 99 n.;
and State debt, 101, 102.
Langston, John W., campaign of 1888, 128; 137.
Lee, FitzHugh, elected Governor, 1885, 124.
Legislature, of 1865, and State debt, 13, 181; of 1865 and vagrant
freedmen, 19, 20, 21, and slavery, 21; of 1869, recognized by Fed
eral government, 79; of 1869, personnel of, 77, 78; of 1869, ratifies
Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, 79; of 1871, personnel of,
84, 84 n.; of 1873, personnel of, 85; of 1881, personnel of, 112; of
1882, personnel of, 114; of 1883, 121, 122, 122 n.; of 1883, laws of,
undoing Mahoneism, 123; of 1889, personnel of, 129, 130; of 1891,
personnel of, 131; of 1893, personnel of, 132.
Lewis, John F., and campaign of 1869, 72, 77; lieutenant-governor,
1881, 112.
Lindsay, Lewis, advocates social and political equality for races, 40;
43; 51; in Constitutional Convention of 1867-1868, 52, 56; in cam
paign of 1869, 72.
Local governments, new system of, established, 82; number of offi
cers in, reduced, 92; system of, changed by constitutional amend
ment, 94.
Lodge, H. C, Force Bill, 130.
Lybrook, A. M., 114 n.
Lynching, some causes of, 128, 129; account of, 136-140.
McCulloch, Hugh, and State debt, 102; and McCulloch Act, 103 n.
McCulloch Act, 103, 103 n., 104, 105.
McFarland, William H., speech before negro committee, 32.
Mcllwaine, R. H., 154 n., 155.
McKinney, Philip, elected Governor, 129; opposes lynching, 139.
Mahone, William, in campaign of 1869, 70; and campaign of 1873,
86; and Readjuster Movement, 97; and Readjuster party, 103,

index 193
104, 105, 106; and the appointment of judges, 108; elected to
United States Senate, 109; and Republican party, 109; joins Re
publicans in Senate, 1881, 110; refuses to join Funders in na
tional politics, 110; sends caucus pledge, 111; defeats Massey's
nomination for governor, 112; aided by Republicans, 112; at
tempts to win back Massey, 114; legislation attempted by, 115,
116; 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123; and campaign of 1885, 124,
125; political methods of, 126; end of political career of, 129;
134; 137; 149; 161.
Mohoneism, undoing of, 123.
Mahoneites, 116.
Marye, John L., Jr., a Conservative leader in Constitutional Conven
tion of 1867-1868, 51; 54; candidate, 1868, 62 n.; and Committee
of Nine, 66.
Massey, John E., and Readjuster Movement, 104, 106; as campaigner,
106; breaks with Mahone, 111, 114; and Big Four, 114; joins
Anti-Mahoneites, campaign of 1882, 117.
Maury, Matthew F., discusses emigration after war, 23 n.
Missouri, 131.
Morissey, James, 43.
Mozart Hall, convention in, 104.
Murphy, Edgar Gardner, quoted, 161.
Murray, George Washington, quoted, 160.
Nation, quoted, 87, 107 n., 158.
Neeson, James, and Committee of Nine, 66.
Negroes, number in Virginia, 1865 and 1902, in Massachusetts, 5; and
suffrage in the North before 1865, 12; enfranchised in the Dis
trict of Columbia, disfranchised later, 13, 14; legislation in Illi
nois against, 16 n.; relations with whites, 1865-1867, 21; first at
tempt of, to vote in Virginia, 27; suffrage and the North, 29; reg
istrants, 1867, 30; enfranchised in 1867, 31; invite whites to con
ference, 32; and African Church convention, in Capitol Square
mass convention, advocate confiscation of "rebel" property, 35;
serve on jury in Virginia for first time, 36, 36 n.; and street cars,
36; as petty jurors, 37, 37 n.; riots in 1867, 36, 38, 39 n.; and poli
tics, 42, 43; voters, 44; conservative convention advocates con
trol of, 47; delegates in Constitutional Convention of 1867-1868,
50 n.; enfranchisement discussed, 53, 54, 55; unqualified enfran
chisement of, in constitution of 1868, 55; early opinion of grant
ing suffrage to, in North, 63, 63 n.; suffrage to, proposed by A.
H. H. Stuart, 64,' 65; resolution regarding suffrage to, in con
vention of December 31, 1869, 67 n.; support Wells, 71; members
of Republican central committee, 1869, 72; first unmixed State
convention of, 76; candidates for office, 1869, 76; in campaign
of 1869, 74, 75, 76, 77; barbecue of, 75; vote of on railroad bill,
—13

194 INDEX
82; vote on funding bill, 83; in Conservative convention, August,
1871, 84; in legislature, 1871, 84, 84 n.; members of Republican
Convention, July 30, 1873, 86; and campaign of 1873, 87; illiter
ates, 1870, 87 n.; in legislature, 181*3, 89; friendly race relations,
89; candidates nominated, 90 n.; and poll tax, 93; in local gov
ernment, 94; resolutions of, convention, August 20, 1875, 94, 95;
in legislature 1877, 96; effects of freedom on, 99; and Readjuster
convention, 104; in legislature, 1879, 107; Readjusters bid for
vote of, 107; and Mahone, 118, 119; and Danville riot, 119, 120;
elected in 1883, 122, 122 n.; whites resolve to eliminate, from poli
tics, 125; and Langston's campaign, 127, 128; statistics of, 128
n.; votes of, bought, 129; in legislature, 1889, 130, 131 n.; con
gressman, 131; none in State senate, 1891, 131; and elections of
1896 and of 1897, 134; race relations, 135; criminal statistics re
garding, 136; lynching of, 136-140; removal from politics of, de
manded, 140; law for separate cars in Virginia, 141; in North
Carolina, 143; race relations in North Carolina, 141-144; disfran
chised in North Carolina, 143; preachers, 144, 144 n., 145; meth
ods of eliminating votes of, 145; statistics, 1900, 148; in Ninth
and Fourth Congressional Districts, 149, 150; and taxation, 150,
151 n.; and Constitution of 1902, 158, 159; in politics, 161; prog
ress of, race relations of, 162.
New England, restrictions on franchise in, 93 n.
New Movement, 65, 66, 67, 68, 70, 73.
Newberry, Samuel H., 114 n.; 122.
News, Lynchburg, quoted, 89.
Ninth Congressional District, 149.
North Carolina, race relations in, 141-144; law for separate coaches,
143, 144; "Revolution" in, 143, 144; new constitution, 1900, 143.
Norton, Dr. Robert, and campaign of 1869, 75; in election of 1874,
90 n.
O'Ferrall, Charles T., elected Governor, 134; quoted, 138 n.; opposes
lynching, 139; quoted, 140 n.
Office, qualification for, in Constitution of 1868, amended, 92.
Owen, W. L., and Committee of Nine, 66.
People's Party. See Populists.
Petersburg, mass meeting in, 1867, 32; Republican Radical conven
tion in, March, 1869, 71.
Petty larceny, clause in constitution, 92.
Pierpont, F. H., governor of Restored Government of Virginia, 15;
calls extra session of legislature, 1867, 26; 39; 43; removed from
office, 62.
Piatt, James H., in election of 1874, 90 n.
Poll tax, 92, 93 n., 93, 116.
Pollard, John Garland, 155.

INDEX 195
Population, of Virginia by races, 1865 and 1902, compared with that
of other states, 5; before War of Secession, 11; of North Car
olina, 1890, 142.
Populists, 131; in Virginia, 13S; in North Carolina, 142; 149.
Porter, Charles H., 51.
Post, Washington, quoted, 125 n.
Prince Edward County, 45; vote of, on calling Constitutional Con
vention of 1901-1902, 148 n.
Public schools, mixed, debate on, 52; in Constitution of 1868, 59 n.;
inaugurated, in Virginia, 82; 85; advocated by Conservatives, 87.
Race friction, caused by political agitation, 6; causes of, 22; in cam
paign of 1867, 46; increase of, 126; 127; 135.
Race problem, in Virginia, 1865 and 1902, 5; proportional to density
of negro population, 5; before the War of Secession, 11; at end
of War of Secession, 12.
Radicals, 43, 43 n. ; win in 1867, 44; in Constitutional Convention of
1867-1868, 51; attempt to disfranchise whites, 55; candidates,
1868, 62; convention of, November, 1869, 79; protest to Congress
over Conservative victory, 79, 80; lose control in State, menace
in local governments, 81; elected to Congress, 1872, 85.
Railroads, owned by State sold, 82.
Rape, and lynchings, 136-140.
Raulston, Col. carpetbagger, 120.
Readjuster Movement, causes of, 85; and negro vote, 97; account of
98 ff. ; two phases of, significance of, 125.
Readjusters, and poll tax, 92 n.; opposed by Governor Holliday, 103;
convention of, at Mozart Hall, 104 ff.; in legislature, 1879, 107;
judges, 108; wholesale removal of officers by, 108, 109; party of,
and Republican party, 109, 110; party of, changes into Mahone's
party, 111; and election of 1881, 112; and state debt, 113, 114; in
legislature, 1882, 114; elected to Congress, 1882, 115; legislation
enacted by, 116; and Republican party, 123, 124; 161.
Reconstruction, Committee in Congress investigates conditions in
Virginia, 21; Acts of March 2 and March 23, 26, 27; beginning of,
27; registration under, disfranchise whites, 30; 57; undoing of,
91; 96.
Registrants, number of, 1867, 30.
Registration officers, chosen by Schofield, 28.
Republicans, form Union Association of Alexandria, advocate ne
gro suffrage, 17; party of, only party in Virginia, 1867, 31; radi
calism of, in Virginia, 34; attempt to create moderate party, 34;
Radical convention of, at African Church and in Capitol Square,
35; convention of, April 17, 1867, separate convention of conserv
ative, 39; compromise meeting, factions of, .39; convention of,
August 1, 1867, 40, 41; 42; 43; 43 n.; Radical, attempt to dis-

196 INDEX
franchise whites, 55; party of, 61, 62; Radical, candidates, 1868,
62; adopt universal negro suffrage, 63; Radical convention of,
71, 72; moderate, revolt, 72; Radical convention of, 79; Radical,
appeal to Congress, 79, 80; lose control of State government, a
menace in local governments, 81; vote on Funding Bill, 83; con
vention and platform of, 1871, 84; elected to Congress, 1870, 84;
in legislature, 1871, 84, 84 n.; elected to Congress, 1872, 85; Rad
ical convention of, July 30, 86; lose power, 88; defeated, 1873,
89; members of legislature, election 1879, 96; Congressional elec
tion of 1878, 96; Mahone's party adopts name of, 124; win in na
tional elections, deadlock broken, elections in Virginia, 1888, 127;
divide, 129; attempt to regain South, 130; in elections of 1890,
1891, 1893, 131; in Southwest, 134, 135; and elections of 1896 and
1897, 134, 135; in North Carolina, 142; oppose constitutional
convention, 148; in Southwest, 149; in Constitutional Conven
tion of 1901-1902, 151; in Southwest, 152; vote on Constitution.
of 1902, 157, 157 n. See also Radicals.
Restored Government of Virginia, established, moved to Alexan
dria, 15.
Review of Reviews, quoted, 159.
Richmond, succeeds Alexandria as Radical center, 37; convention of
August 1, 1867 in, 40; election returns from, 1867, 45.
Riddleberger, H. H., elected to United States Senate, 109; joins Re
publicans, 110.
Riddleberger Bill enacted, nature of, 114; Riddleberger Act, 117.
Riddlebergers, 114.
Riot, those of 1867, 36, 37; in Danville, 119, 120, 121; in Roanoke, 139;
in Wilmington, N. C, 142-144.
Roanoke, riot in, 139.
Robertson, Wyndham, and Committee of Nine, 66.
Royall, William L., quoted, 85; attorney for bondholders, 113 n.
Ruffner, W. H., first State Superintendent of Public Instruction, 82;
quoted, 88, 89; and poll tax requirement, 93; removed from of
fice by Readjusters, 109.
Rumsdell, C. P., and campaign of 1873, 86.
Scalawag, 42; 43 n.; 49.
Schofield, John M., advises Virginia to adopt Fourteenth Amend
ment, 26 n.; military governor of District Number 1, 27; disperses
negro mob, 38; re-opens polls, 1867, 44; and Constitutional Con
vention of 1867, 55; and Constitution of 1868, 55, 56, 57 n., 59,
61, 62.
Schools. See Public schools.
Secret ballot, Kemper on, 91 n.
Senate, United States, and Readjuster senators, 110.
Senex, article appears, 64.

INDEX 197
Sherman, John, speaks in Virginia, 124, 124 n.
Slaughter, J. F., and Committee of Nine, 66.
Slaughter House cases, 88.
Slave trade, opposed by Virginia, 11.
Slavery, Virginia's attitude towards, 11, 12; problem in Virginia
prior to War of Secession, 11, 12; resolution of legislature con
cerning, 21.
Smith, Gerritt, speaks in Richmond, 39 n.
Smith, George S., 22.
Snead, Edward, and Constitutional Convention of 1867-1868, 51; op
poses clauses in Constitution of 1868, 58.
South Carolina, 131.
Spain, effect of war with, 132.
State debt, resolution of legislature about, 1866, 18, 81; beginning
of, 81; and Funding Act, 83; State defaults in interest on, 83;
before 1879, 98; bondholders meeting, 1874, 102; and McCulloch
Act, 103, 104, 105; and Readjuster convention in Mozart Hall,
104; and Riddleberger Bill, 107, 114; and Coupon Killers, 113, 114;
and politics, 116, 117; settlement of, accepted by Conservative
(Democratic) party, 117, 118; 132.
Stearnes, Franklin, 43, 67, 68.
Stevens, Thaddeus, desires to punish South, 28; 35.
Stoneman, General, succeeds Schofield, opinion of Constitution of
1868, 59, 59 n., 60; succeeded by Canby, 74.
Stowell, William H. H., elected to Congress, 90.
Stuart, Alexander H. H., chairman of Conservative convention of
December 11, 1867, address to convention, 47; writes Senex arti
cle, and begins New Movement, 64; and Committee of Nine, 66;
and election of 1869, 74.
Suffrage, in District of Columbia and in Northern States, 13, 14, 17,
29; negro, opposed by Republicans, 15, 16; discussed in Conven
tion of 1867-1868, 55; early Northern view of, 63, 63 n.; adopted
by Republican party, 64; advocated in Senex article, 64, 65; res
olutions of convention of December 31, 1869, 67 n.
Sutherland, W. T., and Committee of Nine, 66.
Tanner, William E., 114 n.
Tax, poll, 92, 92 n., 93, 155, 156, 157, 158.
Taylor, J. C, and campaign of 1869, 72, 77.
Tennessee, 131.
Terry, Major-General, annuls vagrancy law, 21.
Test oath, in Constitution of 1868, 57, 57 n., 60, 69, 80.
Thom, A. P., and Constitutional Convention of 1901-1902, 153.
Thomas, Judge, 24.
Tidewater, section of Virginia, majority of negroes in Piedmont
and, 5.

198 index
Times, New York, aids Committee of Nine 67n.; quoted, 109 n.
Times, Richmond, 134.
Township, system, introduced in Constitution of 1868, 59; name
changed to "county," 91.
Tribune, Chicago, 67 n.
Tribune, New York, quoted, 34; 67 n.
Tucker, John Randolph, Funder, 106.
Tyler, Hoge, opposes lynching, 140.
Unconditional Union Convention meets at Alexandria, resolutions
of, 23.
Understanding clause in Constitution of 1902, 153, 154, 154 n.
Underwood, John C, early activities in Virginia, 24; presides at Fed
eral Circuit Court, Richmond, 1867, 36; charge to jury, 36, 36 n.;
43; chairman of Constitutional Convention of 1867-1868, 51; in
Constitutional Convention of 1867-1868, 54.
Underwood Convention. See Constitutional Convention of 1867-1868.
Union League, organized in Virginia, 31; 42; and campaign of
1869, 77.
Usury clause in Constitution of 1868, 85 n.
Vagrancy laws, effect on North of, 17.
Vagrants, menace to State, laws concerning, 19, 20, 21.
Van Auken, J. H., testifies before Reconstruction Committee, 12S n.
Venable, Edward C, opposed by Langston, 127.
Virginia, population of, by races, 1865 and 1902, 5; attitude towards
politics prior to 1861, 6; attitude towards slavery, 11, 12; growth
of anti-slavery feeling in, 11, 12; enters War of Secession, 12;
Constitution of 1864, 15; Restored Government of, 1861, 15; be
comes Military District Number 1, 27; condition of, after war,
28 n.; registration in, 1867, 30; admitted to Union, 80; financial
condition of, 1875, 85; credit of, 98, 99 n.; economic and finan
cial condition of, 98 ff. ; decrease in realty values in, 100; annual
State revenue and expenditures, 100, 101, 101 n.; statistics of,
128 n. ; separate cars for races in, 141; new constitution pro
claimed, 1902, 155.
Virginia Union Association, 70 n.
Walker, James A., candidate, 1868, 62 n.
Walker, Gilbert C, Aids Committee of Nine, 68; in campaign of
1869, 72; elected governor, 77; 78; and State debt, 82; sells State
railroads, 82; and Conservative convention, 1871, 84; and State
debt, 98, 99, 100.
Walton law, 145.
Warner, Charles Dudley, views on negro education, 159.
Washington, Booker T., negro leader, 160; quoted, 160, 161.
Watson, Dr., 25.
Watson, Walter A., and Constitutional Convention of 1901-1902, 155.

index 199
Wells, H. H., temporary governor of Virginia, candidate, 1868, 62,
63 n.; before Reconstruction Committee, 68; candidate, campaign
of 1869, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74; resigns governor's chair, 79.
West Virginia, formation of, 15; share of State debt in McCulloch
Act, 104, 105; and State debt, 105.
Wheeling, W. Va., legislature of Restored Government meets at, 15.
Whig, Richmond, sides with Readjusters, 106; quoted, 115
White, David B., 51.
Wickham, W. C, Funder, 106.
Williams, B. F., and Big Four, 114 n.
Williams, John Sharp, and negro question, 162.
Wilmington, N. C, race riots in, 142-144.
Wilson, Senator, visits Virginia, 3.4.
Wise, Henry A., opposes New Movement, 65 n.
Wise, John S., Readjuster, 106; elected to Congress, 1882, 117; and
campaign of 1885, 124; leaves Mahone, 129.
Withers, R. E., candidate, 1868, 62; in campaign of 1873, 86; United
States senator, 89 n.
Wysor, J. C, and franchise article in Constitution of 1902, 153

618L 061^30