Citation
Speaking in Florida on the issues of presidental reconstruction, 1865-1867

Material Information

Title:
Speaking in Florida on the issues of presidental reconstruction, 1865-1867 A rhetoric of reunion
Creator:
Kearney, Kevin Emmett, 1929- ( Dissertant )
Place of Publication:
Gainesville, Fla.
Publisher:
University of Florida
Publication Date:
Copyright Date:
1960
Language:
English
Physical Description:
vi, 301 ; 28cm.

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Counties ( jstor )
Former slaves ( jstor )
Governors ( jstor )
Legislature ( jstor )
Political parties ( jstor )
Political speeches ( jstor )
Rhetoric ( jstor )
Slavery ( jstor )
Voting ( jstor )
War ( jstor )
Dissertations, Academic -- Speech -- UF ( lcsh )
Reconstruction -- Florida ( lcsh )
Speech thesis Ph. D ( lcsh )
City of Tallahassee ( local )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Abstract:
Abbreviated introduction: During the Middle Period in American History, 1812 to 1850, circumstances gave rise to a series of political issues, clustering around the basic questions of slavery and state sovereignty. In 1820, 1832 and 1850, these issues were temporarily resolved through compromise. By 1861, however, events had intensified old antagonisms, causing the South to withdraw from the Union. Compromise proved unworkable, and a divided nation resorted to the force of arms to resolve the issues. After the war, during the Reconstruction period, 1865 to 1876, the nation was troubled with the problems Inherent in the formulation of an acceptable plan of reunion. The situation was complicated by the fact that the would-be arbitrators viewed the questions of Reconstruction with an eye to the advancement of party aims. Presidential Reconstruction, congressional Reconstruction, and Republican rule in the South produced a series of political crises which culminated in decision at the ballot box. By studying the composite rhetoric—what the speakers of a movement said, rather than what one man said—one can characterize the structure or patterns of this rhetoric and evaluate its worth. Such a study not only provides a fresh approach to the history and criticism of American public address, but may suggest new or neglected criteria of criticism. A study of this type may enable us to ask questions about rhetoric that have not been asked by the student of the Individual orator. Locating a rhetorical movement for study, within the framework of the Reconstruction period, is largely a problem of choice. One person cannot attempt to study, in its entirety, any one, let alone all six, of the rhetorical movements that occurred during these years. This may be illustrated by analyzing the two rhetorical movements that evolved from the issue of presidential Reconstruction during the years 1865 to 1867.
Thesis:
Thesis - University of Florida.
Bibliography:
Bibliography: . 290-300.
General Note:
Manuscript copy.
General Note:
Vita.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
Copyright [name of dissertation author]. Permission granted to the University of Florida to digitize, archive and distribute this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.
Resource Identifier:
024483098 ( AlephBibNum )
01718988 ( OCLC )
AAQ0519 ( NOTIS )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text








SPEAKING IN FLORIDA ON THE ISSUES OF

PRESIDENTIAL RECONSTRUCTION 1865-1867:

A RHETORIC OF REUNION











By
KEVIN EMMETT KEARNEY


A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE COUNCIL OF
THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY










UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
January, 1960










ACIXOWLEDLCALTS


The writer wishes to acknowledge his indebtedness to all who have

helped make this study possible. This, of course, includes those who

have assisted in preparing the study, those who aided in research, and

those who gave financial and moral support.

Contributions made by individual members of the supervisory com-

mittee cover all three categories. The late Dr. Dallas C. Dickey, who

served as chairman until 1957, pointed the way by asking: "What do you

suppose southerners were saying after Appomattox?" His interest in

southern oratory and his personal standards of scholarship left their

mark on his colleagues and his graduate students. This study consti-

tutes a partial answer to his question and a token tribute to his

memory.

Dr. Douglas Ehninger, who was appointed chairman following Dr.

Dickey's death, and who is presently serving as Visiting Professor at

the State University of Iowa, had some questions of his own which served

as an additional source of enrichment and inspiration. The organization

and content of the study reflect his concern for clarity and scholarship

and his personal interest in the study itself.

The present chairman, Professor II. P. Constans, Chairman of the

Department of Speech, and other members of the committee, Dr. Roy E. Tew

and Dr. Charles K. Thomas of the Department of Speech, and Dr. George

Bentley, Dr. Franklin A. Doty, and Dr. Rembert W. Patrick of the History

Department also assisted the writer by checking the manuscript and by










making helpful suggestions. The writer is especially indebted to

Professor Constans for his interest and encouragement and to the con-

mittee members from the History Department for their guidance and

criticism on matters connected with the history of the Reconstruction

period.

Others to whom the writer is indebted arc those who assisted in

research. MIr. Julien C. Yonge, Director of the P. K. Yonge Library of

Florida History, extended valuable service. Mrs. Harriet S. Skofield,

Librarian of the Library of Florida History, and her successor, Miss

alrgaret Chapman, also provided valuable assistance. Others who aided

in the search for materials aro: Dr. Dorothy Dodd, State Librarian,

Tallahassee, Florida; Mr. John W. Griffin, Executive Historian, St.

Augustine Historical Society, St. Augustine; Miss :arjarct Donnell,

Reference Librarian, Indiana State Library, Indianapolis, Indiana;

trs. Drucella Thompson, Newspaper Division, Indiana State Library;

Mr. Philip Falco, Eewspaper Division, New York Public Library Annex,

New York City, New York; Mr. Rutherford D. Rogers, Chief, Reference

Department, New York Public Library; Miss Albertina T. B. Traver, Refer-

ence Librarian, Adriance Memorial Library, Poughkeepsie, New York; Miss

Gladys E. Love, Head, General Reference Division, Rochester Public

Library, Rochester, New York; Mrs. Belle H. Waterman, Librarian,

Skaneateles Library Association, Skaneateles, New York; Mr. William H.

Smith, Newspaper Division, Syracuse Public Library, Syracuse, Iew York.

Special thanks are extended to the Department of Speech, the

College of Arts and Sciences, and the Graduate School of the University











of Florida for the opportunities and financial assistance extended in

the form of graduate assistantships and fellowships. Thanks are also

due to Butler University and the Directors of Lilly Endowment, Inc.,

for a grant which enabled the writer to devote the summer of 1959 to

the study.

The writer is deeply indebted to his mother, Mrs. D. C. Kearney,

and his wife, Eleanor Jean, for their confidence, sympathy, and en-

couragement. It is, indeed, difficult to estimate the contribution of

a wife who spends hours typing and proofing manuscripts, foregoes numer-

ous social pleasures, willingly accepts solitude, and acts as an "in-

truder" when she feels there is a need for words of encouragement.











TABLE OF CONTENTS


Acknowledent. . . . . . . . .. .. ii

CHAPTER

I Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . 1

II Speaking to the Revolutionists During the Preconvention
Period: A Rhetoric of Acquiescence. . . . . .. 14

The Scene. . . . . . . . . .. . 14
The Discourse . . . . . ........ . 27
Speech of Alfred Sears at King's Ferry ...... 27
Speech of William Marvin at Jacksonville . . .. 33
Speech of William Marvin at Quincy . . . ... 45
The Rhetoric . . . . . . . . .. . 56

III Speaking to the Freedmen During the Preconvention Period:
A Rhetoric of Acquiescence . . . . . . .... 65

The Scene. . . . . . . . ... .. .. 65
The Discourse. . . . . . . .... . . 70
Speech of William Marvin to the Freedmen in
Marianna. . . . . . . . .... 70
The Rhetoric . . . . . . . . ... 86

IV Speaking at the Constitutional Convention of 1865: A
Rhetoric of Adjustment . . . . . . . .... 92

The Scene. . . . . . . . ... ..... 92
The Discourse. . . . . . . . .... 99
Speech of E. D. Tracy and Message of Marvin .. . 99
Speech of Oliver 0. Howard . . . . . . 109
Letter of Thomas Brown and Speeches of Thomas
T. Long, Samuel Spencer, and Thomas Baltzell. . 113
Speech of Marvin . . . . . . . . .. 115
The Rhetoric . . . . . . . . ... .121

V Speaking and the Inauguration of Conservative Government:
A Rhetoric of Adjustment . . . . . . .... 127

The Scene. .................. . .. 127
The Discourse .................. .. . 139
Speech of William W. J. Kelly. ......... . 139
Farewell Speech of William Marvin and Inaugural
Address of David S. Walker . . . . .. 141
Speech of Wilkinson Call . . . . . ... 165
The Rhetoric ..................... 171










TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)


CHAPTER

VI Speaking in Florida in 1866: A Rhetoric of Vindication.

Prologue to the Rhetoric of Vindication . . . .
The Scene . . . . . . . . . . .
The Discourse . . . . . . . . . .
Speeches of William W. J. Kelly and Dillon Jordan .
Speech of David S. Walker . . . . . . .
Speech of Wilkinson Call. . . . . . . .
Speech of E. W. Perry . . . . . . .
Speech of Thomas T. Long. . . . . . . .
Message of David S. Walker . . . . . .
The Rhetoric. . . . . . . . . .

VII The SpeakinG of Florida's Senators-Elect in the Campaign
of 1866: A Rhetoric of Vindication . . . . .

The Sce e . . . .. . . . . . . .
The Discourse . . . . . . . . . .
Speech of William Marvin at Rochester . . . .
Speech of Wilkinson Call in New York City . . .
Speech of William Marvin in Syracuse . . . .
Speech of Villiam Marvin at Brooklyn. . . . .
The Rhetoric . . . . . . . . . .


VIII Speaking in Florida on
struction: A Rhetoric
Failure? . . . .


the Issues of Presidential Recon-
of Reunion or an Oratory of


Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . .

Biographical Sketch. . . . . . . . . .










CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION


During the Middle Period in American history, 1812 to 1850, cir-

cumstances gave rise to a series of political issues, clustering around

the basic questions of slavery and state sovereignty. In 1820, 1832,

and 1850, these issues were temporarily resolved through compromise.

By 1861, however, events had intensified old antagonisms, causing the

South to withdraw from the Union. Compromise proved unworkable, and a

divided nation resorted to the force of arms to resolve the issues.

After the war, during the Reconstruction period, 1865 to 1876,

the nation was troubled with the problems inherent in the formulation

of an acceptable plan of reunion. The situation was complicated by the

fact that the would-be arbitrators viewed the questions of Reconstruc-

tion with an eye to the advancement of party aims.1 Presidential Recon-

struction, congressional Reconstruction, and Republican rule in the

South produced a series of political crises which culminated in decision

at the ballot box.


1Paul Buck emphasizes that reunion was to a large extent compli-
cated by political considerations. "It became the interest of the
Democratic party to 'forget' the war and to patch up quickly a truce
which would re-admit their Southern Allies to the political contest.
But it was equally important to the Republicans that the past be not
forgotten and that a reunion which would increase the strength of their
opponents should be postponed. The process of reconciliation was fatefully
involved in this counter-purpose of party aims." Paul H. Buck, Tue Road
to Reunion, 1865-1900 (Boston, 1947), p. 73.










The presidential attempt at Reconstruction touched off a national

debate during the years 1865 to 1867. The South sought a resumption of

normal relations with the federal government as a means of supplanting

martial law with civil rule. The presidential plan provided an oppor-

tunity to achieve this goal. Southern Democrats and former Whigs, who

joined forces and called themselves Conservatives, accepted and defended

the presidential plan. Their efforts, along with those of northern Demo-

crats, and a few moderate Republicans,2 were ultimately countered by

Radical Republicans, who argued against presidential Reconstruction be-

fore audiences in the northern and western sections of the nation, and

by southern Unionists or Loyalists, who voiced their opposition in the

South and in the North.3 The differences between these parties were


2In his attempt to reconstruct the South, Johnson ultimately re-
ceived the support of northern Democrats, some moderate Republicans who
were opposed to the Radical Republican leadership of their party, and
the Conservatives in the South. Representatives of these various politi-
cal groups banded together in Philadelphia, in August of 1866, as the
"friends of the President" and sought to organize a "National Union
Party." William A. Dunning, Reconstruction, Political and Economic,
1865-1877 (NPe York, 1907), pp. 72-76. Vol. XXII of The American Nation:
A history from Original Sources by Associated Scholars, ed. Albert B.
iart; Ilichael Iartin and Leonard Gelber, The Ileu Dictionary of American
History (New York, 1952), p. 428.

3The Radical Republicans and the southern Unionists or Loyalists
were the antagonists of presidential Reconstruction. In order to avoid
confusion and to contest "the assumption by the president's supporters
that they were in the truest sense the upholders of the Union," the
Radical Republicans and the southern Loyalists called themselves "Union-
Republicans." Dunning, Reconstruction, Political and Economic, 1865-1877
p. 76.
The Radical Republicans have been described in terms of three
principal elements: "First, the extreme negrophiles, who, on abstract
grounds of human equality and natural rights, demanded full civil and
political privileges for the freedmen; second, the partisan politicians,











resolved at the ballot box following the congressional campaign of

1866. A sufficient number of Radical Republicans were elected to

Congress to enable that body to discard the presidential terms of Re-

construction and in March of 1867 to substitute its own.

The congressional acts of Reconstruction, which became law over

the presidential veto, and which were not ruled on by the Supreme Court,

produced debates throughout the insurrectionaryy districts" of the

South.4 Because these terms were the law of the land, the crucial


who viewed the elevation of the blacks mainly as a means of humbling
the Democrats and maintaining the existing spremacy of the Republican
Party; and third, the representatives of an exalted statesmanship, who
saw in the existing situation an opportunity for decisively fixing in
our system a broader and more national principle of civil rights and
political privilege." After the President and Congress became openly
hostile over Reconstruction, the Republican extremists gradually won
over many of the moderate Republicans in Congress. Following the con-
gressional election of 1866, the Radicals controlled a two-thirds majority
in both houses of Congress. William A. Dunning, Essays on the Civil War
and Reconstruction and Related Topics (New York, 1931), pp. 85-91.
The southern Loyalists, those who reputedly opposed disunion in
1861, and remained loyal to the Union throughout the war, initially en-
dorsed Johnson's reconstruction policy. By 1866, however, they became
the political allies of the Radical Republicans on the grounds that the
application of the presidential terms had left the southern state govern-
ments in the hands of the "ex-rebels." Although they were "a small and
unimpressive element . and could not by themselves contribute much
to the cause of the Congress party," their testimony regarding rebel ter-
rorism during the war and rebel rule under the Johnson governments
strengthened the Radical Republican position. Dunning, Reconstruction,
Political and Economic, 1865-1877, p. 77.

4In 1867, the Radicals "proceeded far in the control of the
Supreme Court by so limiting its appellate jurisdiction as to avert a
decision which might overrule the reconstruction acts." J. G. Randall,
The Civil War and Reconstruction (Boston, 1953), P. 751. When the
Supreme Court agreed to hear the case of Ex part McCardle, a case which
involved the question of the legality of the arrest of a Mississippi
editor under the Reconstruction acts, Congress passed a law relieving
that body of appellate jurisdiction in cases involving these acts. For










issue become this: Who should lead the states back into the Union,

Conservatives or Republicans? Again, the issue was resolved at the

polls. Southern Negroes and their carpet-bag friends wrote new state

constitutions, inaugurated Republican state governments, and sent

Republicans to take their seats in Congress. By 1870, all of the "un-

reconstructed" states had been re-admitted to the Union under the

auspices of the Republican party.5

Soon a major problem emerged as a result of the supremacy of the

Republican party in the South. The Republicans attempted to defend

their administration, and were countered by the Democrats who advocated

political reform and sought release from the Republican yoke. The issue

was resolved by 1876, when the Democrats generally regained political

control of the South.

These three political phases of the Reconstruction era--the presi-

dential attempt at reunion, the temporary victory of the Radicals, and


a discussion of the McCardle case, see Ellis M. Coulter, The South Dur-
ing Reconstruction, 1865-187 (Baton Rouge, 1947), p. 122. Vol. VIII of
A lJUotorj of tm: South, ed. l:endell H. Stephenson and Ellis M. Coulter.

5Eleven southern states were re-admitted to the Union between
1866 and 1870. Tennessee was re-admitted in 1866, after ratifying the
Fourteenth Amendment. The remaining ten states became members of the
Union, after complying with the congressional terms of Reconstruction,
in 1868 and 1870. The representatives of Arkansas, North Carolina, South
Carolina, Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, and Florida were admitted to seats
in Congress in 1868. Virginia, Texas, Mississippi, and Georgia were re-
admitted in 1870. Georgia was admitted to Congress in 1868, but her re-
admission was repealed by Congress when the Georgia legislature expelled
its twenty-eight Negro members "on the ground that a Negro had a right
to vote, but not to hold office." For a description of the congressional
terms of Reconstruction and a narrative of their execution, see Francis
D. Simkins, A History of the South (New York, 1953), PP. 264-277.




5




the eventual triumph of the Democrats--may be characterized as a series

of debates. Three principal questions caused six different political

groups to espouse a cause and attempt to influence public judgment

through persuasion.

The cumulative efforts of any of these groups may be thought of

as a rhetorical movement. Such a movement, moreover, may be said to have

inceptive, progressive, and terminal phases.6 The inception of the move-

ment stems from a situation, issue, or proposition that motivates men to

bring about change or achieve a specific goal through persuasion. When

their efforts culminate in success or failure, the rhetorical movement

has reached its terminus. The stream of discourse produced between the

inceptive and terminal phases comprises the progressive phase of the

movement.

By studying the composite rhetoric--what the speakers of a move-

ment said, rather than what one man said--one can characterize the struc-

ture or patterns of this rhetoric and evaluate its worth. Such a study

not only provides a fresh approach to the history and criticism of Ameri-

can public address, but may suggest new or neglected criteria of criti-

cism. A study of this type may enable us to ask questions about rhetoric


6n an essay outlining a methodology for the study of the rhetori-
cal structure of an historical movement, Lcland Griffin characterized the
inceptive, progressive, and terminal phases of a rhetorical movement and
suggested that they be employed in delimiting such a movement for study.
See Leland M. Griffin, "The Rhetoric of Historical Movements," Quarterly
Journal of Speech, XXXVIII (April, 1952), 184-188; Leland M. Griffin,
"The Rhetorical Structure of the Antimasonic Movement," The Rhetorical
Idiom Eszsays in Rhetoric, Oratory, language, and Drama, cd. Donald C.
Bryant (Ithaca, New York: 1958), pp. 145-159.










that have not been asked by the student of the individual orator.

Locating a rhetorical movement for study, within the framework

of the Reconstruction period, is largely a problem of choice. One per-

son cannot attempt to study, in its entirety, any one, let alone all

six, of the rhetorical movements that occurred during these years. This

may be illustrated by analyzing the two rhetorical movements that evolved

from the issue of presidential Reconstruction during the years 1865 to

1867.

Anyone attempting to study the rhetorical movement favoring

presidential Reconstruction would have to analyze: (1) the speaking of

federal officials and Conservatives in the South, (2) the speaking of

Democrats and moderate Republicans in Congress, (3) the speaking of

northern Democrats, Conservatives, and moderate Republicans in the

congressional campaign of 1866, which was decided by voters in the

northern and western parts of the nation, and (4) the speaking of

President Johnson, including his messages to Congress and his famous

"swing around the circle."7

A study of the rhetorical movement opposing presidential Recon-

struction would have to include: (1) the speaking of Radical Republi-

cans and southern Loyalists in the South, (2) the speaking of the


TFor a rhetorical analysis of Johnson's "swing around the circle,"
see Gregg Phifer, "The Last Stand of Presidential Reconstruction; a
Rhetorical Study of Andrew Johnson's Swing around the Circle in 1866"
(unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, State University of Iawa, 1949); Gregg
Phifer, "'Not for the Purpose of Making a Speech': Andrew Johnson's
Swing around the Circle," Speech Monographs, XXI (November, 1954),
285-293.










Radical Republicans in Congress, and (3) the speaking of Radical Re-

publicans and southern Loyalists in the congressional campaign of 1866.

Because of the scope of these rhetorical movements, the student

must choose sides and select a segment of some one movement for study.

This dissertation represents an attempt to describe and evaluate the

rhetorical movement favoring presidential Reconstruction in Florida

during the years 1865 to 1867.8

Aside from the writer's personal interest, a number of reasons

might be offered for the selection of: (1) this particular historical

period, (2) a rhetorical movement in Florida, (3) a rhetorical movement

on the issue of presidential Reconstruction, and (4) a rhetorical move-

ment favoring presidential Reconstruction.

First, as to the selection of the Reconstruction era, the

existence of the three previously mentioned controversial issues during

this period precipitated a great amount of speechmaking. Yet relatively


8The study of an individual orator has been a common approach in
writing the history and criticism of American public address. In recent
years, however, more attention has been given the movement approach,
wherein an attempt is made to study the rhetoric of "nameless men," who
spoke on a specific theme within the framework of a given historical
period. For examples of movement studies, see Leland M. Griffin, "The
Antimasonic Persuasion: A Study of Public Address in the American
Antimasonic Movement, 1826-1838" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Cor-
nell University, 1950); Donald H. Ecroyd, "An Analysis and Evaluation
of Populist Political Campaign Speech Making in Kansas, 1890-1894"
(unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, State University of Iowa, 1949); Stanley
B. Wheater, "Persuasion in the Save the Union Meetings, 1859-1861"
(unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin, 1955); Huber
U. Ellingsworth, "Southern Reconciliation Orators in the North, 1868-
1899" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Florida State University, 1955);
and Robert W. Smith, "A Study of the Speaking in the Anti-Secrecy Move-
ment, 1868-1882, with Special Reference to the National Christian Associ-
ation" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, State University of Iowa, 1956).










little of this speaking has been studied. As Dallas C. Dickey observed,

"The speaking of southerners on the problems of reconstruction is un-

known except for that of a few men. . ."

This generalization is particularly true with respect to the Re-

construction period in Florida. Although samples of the discourse have

been preserved along with other materials of Florida history, the speak-

ing of Floridians on the issues of presidential Reconstruction has not

been studied. None of the general state histories give more than pass-

ing notice to the speaking of these years.10 William W. Davis' history

of the Reconstruction period in Florida contains some extracts from the

discourse, but makes no attempt at analysis.11

Since relatively little of the discourse of the Reconstruction

period has been studied, the selection of a rhetorical movement dealing

with the presidential Reconstruction seems a logical place to begin.


9Dallas C. Dickey, "Southern Oratory: A Field for Research,"
Quarterly Journal of Speech, XXXIII (December, 1947), 458-463. Watson's
survey of southern oratory is too comprehensive to admit concentrated
study of a particular historical period. Reconstruction speaking is
treated as one of seven aspects of "Post-Bellum Oratory in the South,
1865-1909," and only one speech is supplied to illustrate the speaking
of the period 1865 to 1867. Thomas E. Watson, History of Southern Ora-
tory (Richmond, 1909), pp. 71-75. Vol. IX of The South in the Building
of the Nation.

10See Caroline M. Brevard, A History of Florida front the Treaty of
1763 to Our Own Times, ed. James A. Robertson (Dcland, iForida. 1924)
II, 124-142; Frederick U. Dau, Florida Old and fIev (Hlew York, 1934), pp.
275-278; J. E. Dovell, Florida: Iistoric, Dramatic, Contemporary (New
York, 1952), II, 525-557; V. T. Cash, The story of Florida (ICu York,
1938), I, 458-476; and Kathryn T. Abbey, Florida Land of Chan. (Chapel
Hill, 1941), pp. 293-315.

11Uilliam U. Dnvis, The Civil War and Reconstruction in Florida
(Columbia University Ztudies in History, Econmlco and iPblic Lna; Vol.
LIII, Ho. 131. New York, 1913).










Presidential Reconstruction, congressional Reconstruction, and Republi-

can rule of the South occurred in chronological sequence. A knowledge

of the rhetorical movements favoring and opposing the first attempt at

reunion will provide insights into the movements that followed. As the

investigator proceeds from one movement to another, it is important to

know, for example, that white Floridians who opposed Negro suffrage in

their speeches favoring presidential Reconstruction, later had to appeal

to Negro audiences for votes when they sought to retain political con-

trol of their state under the congressional terms of Reconstruction.

The same reasoning applies to the selection of a rhetorical move-

ment favoring presidential Reconstruction. President Johnson set out to

reconstruct the South between the months of April and December of 1865,

a period during which Congress was not in session. The rhetorical move-

ment opposing his scheme came as a result of what is sometimes judged to

be premature and unauthorized action. Hence, an analysis of the rhetori-

cal movement favoring the presidential plan may aid in understanding the

inception of this counter-movement.

Further, the rhetorical movement favoring presidential Reconstruc-

tion in Florida was selected because the counter-movement in the state

represented only the sporadic efforts of an impotent minority. In

1865, there was no organized group standing in opposition to the execu-

tion of the presidential plan of reunion in Florida. Florida's Loyalists

initially endorsed the presidential terms of reunion with the expectation

that they would be recognized as the rightful heirs to political leader-

ship in the state. They did not, however, achieve the prominence they









sought. Few, if any, of their number were elected members of Florida's

state government, inaugurated in accordance with the presidential plan

in December of 1865.

After Congress met in the same month, it became clear that the

presidential sheme might not represent a final settlement. As opposi-

tion to presidential Reconstruction grew stronger in Washington, Loyal-

ists in Florida became more vocal. From about February of 1866, until

the passage of the congressional terms of Reconstruction in 1867, this

disgruntled minority, together with a small number of Republicans in

the state, voiced their opposition to the "rebel rule" created and sanc-

tioned by the presidential plan of Reconstruction. This seems to have

been the nature and extent of the rhetorical movement opposing presi-

dential Reconstruction in Florida during the period 1865 to 1867.12


12The extant newspapers of the period,1865 to 1867, yield the
following accounts of the activities of Unionists and Radical Republi-
cans in opposition to presidential Reconstruction in Florida:
Meeting of "loyal citizens, Fcrnandina, February, 1866: Liberty
Billings, a former officer of a Negro regiment and a one-time resident
of Ifcw Hampshire, delivered a speech in which he characterized the John-
son government in Florida as "infamous," and described President Johnson
as an "usurper." The acts of the new Florida legislature, which met in
December of 1865, and adjourned in January of 1866, were held to be "ini-
quitous and disgraceful--the work of men fresh from rebel camps." For
an account of the meeting and the Billings speech, see Tallahassee Tri-
Weekly Florida Sentinel, February 17, 1866; Gainesville Weekly Iew Era,
February 24, 1866; Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, February 2', D166,
in Tallahassee Tri-WccI:ly FLorida Scntinel, February 27, 1866.
Meeting of "th!e truly Loyal non of Florida, Tampa, March 15,
1866: Florida's Unionists met for the purpose of "taking the initiatory
steps for the formation of a truly loyal party." In future elections for
state officers, the party members pledged themselves to support 'men who,
during the rebellion, have been known to sympathize with the Government
of the United States. . ." All "true Union men" were not prepared to
accept the position "that a man's participation in the rebellion should
be used as an argument to place him in power in the State or Federal










A final concern is that of the methodology employed in research

and in the writing of the study.

The writer began his search for materials by making an inventory

of the extant resources of the period. Pertinent general and special

histories, and theses and dissertations were consulted for information

on the historical background. Texts of speeches and related materials

were collected from newspapers, legislative and convention journals,

diaries, manuscript collections, government publications, and periodi-

cals. The investigation of these resources was carried on chronologi-

cally, proceeding from the inception of the rhetorical movement to its

termination.


Government." For an account of the meeting, the text of the resolutions
adopted, and the reaction of the Conservative press, see Tallahassee
Semi-Weekly Floridian, May 1, 1866; Jacksonville WeeJly Florida Union,
May 5, 1866; Gainesville Weekly New Era, May 25, lbo6; Tampa Weeky
Florida Peninsular, June 23, 1866.
Union Club meeting, Fernandina, July 4, 1866: Daniel Richards,
a Radical Republican from Illinois, who was stationed in Florida as a
United States tax commissioner, gave a speech denouncing the "validity"
of the Johnson government in Florida. "There is no such thing as la
existirn- here," he declared. "The rebels have cade what they call a
Constitution, enacted laws and elected officers, but none are valid.
Rebels cannot nmae a Constitution and execute Laws for . loyal
people." For an account of the occasion, see the speech and the reac-
tion of the Conservative press in Tallahassee Semi-4eelty Floridian,
July 26, 1866. See also Hew York Tines, July 23, and 29, 18.8. Rich-
ards later wrote his congressman and confided that if "union men" were
to be assured of protection in Florida, "they would [have to] organize
. . and overthrow and revolutionize the State government." He chal-
lenged the authenticity of the text of his Fernandina speech as pub-
lished in the New York Times, and regretted that President Johnson might
dismiss him as tax commissioner "for something I didn't say." Daniel
Richards to Elihu B. Washburne, Sterling [Illinois], September 11 and
November 6 and 7, 1866. George C. Osborn, "Letters of a Carpetbagger
in Florida, 1866-1869," Florida Historical Quarterly, XXXVI (January,










The method utilized in writing the study takes the form of a

chronological narrative of the rhetorical movement. The story of the

movement (Chapters II through VII) is narrated within a frame of

reference that precludes historical hindsight. Each narrative chapter

is divided into three sections: "The Scene," "The Discourse," and "The

Rhetoric." In "The Scene" an attempt is made to answer two questions:

To whom was the discourse directed, and why? The section of "The Dis-

course" constitutes an account of what was said or written.13 In the

1958), 254-255, 256-258.
Union-Republican or southern loyalists convention, Philadelphia,
September 3-7, 1866: In August of 1866, the Radical Republicans issued
a call for a national convention to counteract the effect of the National
Union convention, an assemblage of the "friends of the President," which
had met in Philadelphia on August 14, 1866. Hence, Florida's Loyalists
were invited by Ossian B. Hart, a native Floridian who became governor
in 1873, to attend a state convention of "Unconditional Unionists" at
Tallahassee on August 22, for the purpose of appointing delegates to the
Union-Republican convention in Philadelphia. For information regarding
the state convention, see Tallahassee Tri-Weekly Florida Sentinel, Aug-
ust 7, 1866; Tallahassee Semi-Weekly Floridian, August 23, September 4
and 7, and October 5, 1866; Gainesville Weekly New Era, August 10, 1866;
rew York World, September 4, 1866; Syracuse Dnill Journal, September 12,
1866. For information concerning the activities of Florida's Loyalists
at the Union-Republican convention in Philadelphia, see New York Times,
September 5, 6, and 8, 1866. For the reactions of the Florida press,
see Tallahacsee Scni-Wco]:ly Floridian, September 18, 1866. Tallahassee
Tri-eel-ly Florida Sentinel, Geptenber 18, 1866; Gainesville Weekly New
Era, September 28, 1066; Tanpa Weekly Florida Peninsular, October 5,

Public meeting to advocate the establishment of territorial govern-
ment in Florida, Fernandina, December 11, 1866. For an account of the
meeting and the reaction of the Conservative press, see Tallahassee S-ii-
Weekly Floridian, December 21, 1866.

13Although the study is largely limited to the speaking, all of
the extant discourse, whether written or spoken, which was pertinent to
the principal issues of the movement, is taken into account. In follow-
ing this procedure, the writer has been guided by Donald Bryant's con-
cept of the scope of rhetoric: "Rhetoric must be understood to be the
rationale of informative and suasory discourse both spoken and written."
Donald C. Bryant, "Rhetoric: Its Functions and Its Scope," Quarterly
Journal of Speech, XXXIX (December, 1953), 407.




13





section entitled "The Rhetoric, an attempt is made to define the ends

of those who produced the discourse and to describe the means which they

employed to achieve their objectives. Finally, a synthesis characteriz-

ing the structure of the movement as a whole, an evaluation of the rhet-

oric, and certain generalizations regarding the unique characteristics

of this rhetorical movement favoring presidential Reconstruction in

Florida during the years 1865-1867 are presented in the final chapter

(Chapter VIII).










CHAPTER II

SPEAKIITG TO THE REVOIUTIONISTS DURING TEE
PR ECOVENTION PERIOD: A RHETORIC OF ACQUIESCE~EE


The Scene

On the evening of April 9, 1865, a group of Tallahassee citizens

gathered in the hall of the House of Representatives. The occasion was

one of musical festivity. "A magnificent quartette was singing 'The

Southern Marseillaise,' when a gentleman entered the door and advanced

rapidly up the aisle, bearing aloft in his hand a telegram." The music

stopped and the messenger read aloud: "General Lee surrendered the army

of Northern Virginia today, at Appomattox." The war was over!

Said Susan Eppes, who was present:

That .. .as the death knell of all our hopes and for a
moment a silence as of the grave filled the hall; then
followed such a scene as we pray we may never see repeated.
Tears and cries and lamentation, the bitterness of heart-
broken woe. Men, women, and children, wept aloud as they
realized the calamity which had befallen us. Few slept
that night and the sun arose upon a miserable, broken-
hearted people--far too miserable even to talk it over
with each other. It was as though our nearest and dearest
lay dead within the house.1

The Florida Union reflected a similar emotion when almost a month

later it reported the surrender of Confederate General Joseph E. Johns-

ton. "The present is not a fitting time for comment," it said. "A


1Susan B. Eppes, Through Some Dventful Years (Mcon, 1926), pp.
266-267. The final capitulation of southern armed resistance took
place in successive stages, with the surrender of Joseph E. Johnston
on April 26, Richard Taylor on May 4, and Kirby Smith on May 26.
Randall, The Civil War and Reconstruction, pp. 279-684.










sufficient time must first elapse for careful consideration and

thought. . .

During the first months of peace, the men and women of Florida

were too much occupied with the inaediate needs of life to take time to

estimate the plight of their state. When estimates were made, however,

the findings were appalling. By July of 1865, even the most casual ob-

server was aware of the striking military, economic, social, and politi-

cal changes that had affected his society.

The cost of the war could not be measured with adjectives or

statistics. More than 17,000 Floridians had been in uniform. Of this

number, 2,334 wore the blue, 15,000 the gray. About 5,000 Confederates

never returned home. The fate of the Fifth Florida Infantry provided a

sample of the havoc wrought by war. In 1861, it numbered almost 1,100

men. At Appomattox fifty-three survivors surrendered. Their comrades

had deserted or were disabled, dead, or imprisoned.3

Many of the people at home did not have to rely on newspapers or

casualty lists for knowledge of war. Residents of coastal areas and

parts of the interior such as Fernandina, Jacksonville, St. Augustine,


2Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, May 6, 1865.

3Florida furnished the Union Army with 1,290 white soldiers and
with 1,044 Negro soldiers. Davis estimated that 6,700 Floridians served
in Confederate ranks through the entire war or until they were disabled
or killed, 6,400 for the last three years, and 2,000 for the last two
years or less. Of the 5,000 Confederates who died, 1,000 were reported
killed in battle, while the remaining 4,000 died of wounds or disease.
Davis, The Civil :'rr Cad Reconttrwction in Florida, pp. 224-225; 322-324.
Benjamin C. Truman reported that 18,000 Florida men served in Confederate
ranks, and that 6,000 died in action and from disease. New York TiLnma
December 25, 1865.









Tampa, Cedar Keys, Apalachicola, Pensacola, Baldwin, Sanderson, Gaines-

ville, Starke, Olustee, Palatka, Picolata, Magnolia, Milton, Natural

Bridge, and Marianna had experienced federal attack and occupation.

While burdened with these recollections the mind of the Floridian

was of necessity brought to focus on the problems of the living. Those

who had survived would have to make a new beginning, for the economic

resources of the state had dwindled, and in some instances vanished.

emancipation accounted for one type of economic loss: $22,000,000 in-

vested in slaves had evaporated. A total of 61,745 Negroes passed from

slavery to freedom, and 5,152 slaveholders plunged from a condition of

wealth to one of relative poverty.5 Although the economic impact of

emancipation affected the entire state, slaveowners in the'black arc"

area were hardest hit.6 In Tallahassee alone "there were about 800

persons owning slaves valued at from $3,000 to $500,000, all gone by the

same act. .. ."7


For an account of the Civil War in Florida, see Davis, The Civil
War and Reconstruction in Florida, pp. 150-174, 268-316; Rembert W. Pat-
rick, Florida Under Five Flags (Gainesville, 1955), PP. 50-55.

5Davis, The Civil War and Reconstruction in Florida, p. 324. For
statistical information on the people of Florida in 1860, see Kevin E.
Kearney, "Political Speaking in Florida from 1859 to 1861" (unpublished
Master's thesis, University of Florida, 1955), PP. 7-8. The estimate of
the number of slaveholders in 1860 is given in Gainesville Weekly New
Ea, July 15, 1865.

5The plantation counties of Jackson, Gadeden, Leon, Jefferson,
Madison, Alachua, and Marion formed what has been called the 'black arc,"
and contained 64.4 per cent of Florida's slave population. Edwin L.
Williams, Jr., "Negro Slavery in Florida," Florida Iistorical Quarterly,
XVIII (January, 1950), 187.

Observations of "Hawk-Eye" in the Burlington [Iowa] Bawk Eye,
April 4, 1866, in Tallahassee Semi-Weekly Floridian, April 24, 1866.











Destroyed real property totaled at least $22,000,000. Repudi-

ation of the state debt, the confiscation of cotton, and the public sale

of homes and estates for the non-payment of taxes accounted for addi-

tional losses.

The plight of one of Florida's citizens serves as an example of

the economic havoc wrought by war and emancipation. A business associate

of David L. Yulee sought employment for a friend in Hamilton County. He

wrote:

I have a friend . (Dr. Marion) who was the owner of
80 negroes and 25000 in Confederate Bonds and is now pen-
niless [,] a man of unimpeachable veracity, and good business
qualities. He writes to me and asks me if there is any thing
he can get to do down this way to support his family--a wife
and two children.9

The Florida Union probably had men like Marion in mind when it charac-

terized the plight of the penniless. "To most of them the future is

dark and uncertain. Many who were looked upon as wealthy men are now

penniless, their Confederate money being worth no more than so much

trash. To obtain a livelihood now becomes an important question with
,,10
them. 0

The anguish resulting from the loss of loved ones and wealth was

intensified by rapid changes of a social and political nature. Although


'Among the states east of the Mississippi, only South Carolina
and Alabama surpassed Florida in the proportional decline of property
values." Davis, The Civil War and Reconstruction in Florida, p. 324.

9John S. Purviance to David L. Yulee, Cottonwood, January 29,
1866, David L. Yulee Papers, P. K. Yonge Library of Florida History.
Cited hereafter as Yulee Papers.

10Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, May 27, 1865.










Appomattox made such changes inevitable, it was not until after the

formal surrender of the state itself that defeat really came to Florida.

On May 10, a Tallahassee resident was startled "by a cry from our little

'black boy,' of 'Yankees!' 'Yankees!' and I found myself running to the

front, to see Gen. [Edward M. ] MCook and staff enter to take command

of our little city." The General "made a very modest entrance, respect-

ing the humiliation of the people by leaving his cavalry some four

miles distant to approach more leisurely."11 McCook's orders read in

part:

Upon your arrival at Tallahassee you will take all neces-
sary steps to carry into effect the terms of the conven-
tion arranged by General Sherman and General Johnston, and
to restore the country to peace and good order. . Compel
all editors of newspapers to publish their papers in the
interests of peace, good order, and national unity. . .
Exact a parole to this effect or prohibit the publication.
. Discountenance public meetings of all kinds in order
that excitement may be allayed and dispassionate reason may
resume its sway.12

After occupying Tallahassee and accepting the surrender of Flor-

ida troops, McCook wrote his superior:

On the 10th instant I reached Tallahassee. . The rebel
troops with all the public property in the District of


1Ellen Call Long, Florida Breezes: or, Florida, Neu and Old
(Jacksonville, 1883), pp. 330-301. Tallahaesee was the only southern
capital east of the Mississippi that did not fall during the war. For
the story of the surrender of Tallahassee, see Albert H. Roberts,
"Tallahassee Rejoins the Union," Apalachee (publication of the Talla-
hassee Historical Society, 1944), pp. 74-80.

12Jaes H. Wilson to Edward M. MeCook, iacon, May 4, 1865, in
The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the
Union and Confederate Amices, Series I, Vol. XLIX, Pt. 2 (Washington,
1897) p. 602.










Florida were surrendered to me by Maj. Gen. Samuel Jones
on the 10th day of May, and the U. S. flag raised over
the state-house. . In my intercourse with the citi-
zens and surrendered soldiers of this Florida coand I
found only the more entire spirit of submission to my
authority, and in the majority of instances an apparent
cheerful acquiescence to the present order of things.13

Shortly after sending this communication, however, the coaaan -

ing general was confronted with two problems. First, Abraham K. Alli-

son, Florida's governor, announced his plan for the reconstruction of

the state.1 Second, several planters in the Leon County area asked

that military aid be granted to compel the return of Iegroes to their

homes and work. While awaiting word from his superior on the Allison

incident, McCook proceeded to clarify the federal government's position

with regard to the status of the Negro.

Planters in Middle Florida and other portions of the interior


13Edward M. McCook to E. B. Beaumont, Macon, June 1, 1865, ibid.,
PP. 943-9~5.

14Abraham K. Allison, a native of Georgia, but long a resident of
the state, become governor of Florida in April of 1865, acceding to the
position as president of the state Senate following the suicidal death
of Confederate Governor John Milton. Patrick, Florida Under Five Flanrs,
P. 55; Quincy Weekly Gadsden Democrat, July 21, 1893. On .sly 13, Alli-
son informed McCook that he had appointed five commissioners--David L.
Yulee, J. Wayles Baker, Mariano D. Papy, E. C. Love, and J. L. G. Baker--
to proceed to Washington "for the purpose of making known to the executive
authorities of the United States the step in progress for harmonizing
the government of this State with the Constitution of the United States
and of conferring generally with the public authorities of the Federal
Government concerning our affairs. Official Records of the Rebellion,
Series I, Vol. XLIX, Pt. 2,p748. Allison announced further particulars
of his plan in a proclamation calling for an extraordinary session of
the state legislature on June 5, and for an election of a governor on
June 7. Philip D. Ackerman, "Florida Reconstruction from Walker through
Reed, 1865 to 1873" (unpublished Master's thesis, University of Florida,
1948), p. 29.










which had not bean occupied by the federal military apparently had been

startled by McCook's emancipation order of nay 20. It informed "those

who seem to be ignorant of the fact," that the President of the United

States had issued, in 1862, "a proclamation changing the status of per-

sons held as slaves," and that the proclamation had been in effect

since January 1, 1863. Moreover steps were taken to notify the Negro

of his freedom. M essoners, says Long, 'penetrated to our kitchens and

plantations, informing the negroes, who in wonderment left hearth and

field to hang around the Yankee camp to know more about 'dis here free-

dom.' 15 In Tallahassee a festival was held by the Negroes on the day

of the proclamation.

There was a broad grin on every countenance, shaking of
hands, and a general air of extreme satisfaction, but no
outbreaks, no offensiveness; nothing to indicate a feeling


15Long, Florida Breezes, pp. 381-382. Long furnishes an explana-
tion for the surprise in Middle Florida a the news of emancipation.
"Although the emancipation of the slaves had been discussed as a prob-
able result of the war, yet we in Middle Florida were so removed from
the advance or occupation of the South by the army, that we had not re-
alized that this was an accomplished fact." The news "surprised many;
as if there had never been a formal declaration of the same two years
before by President Lincoln; though, truth to say, it had never reached
us, and elsewhere, as here 'freedom' had followed in the wake of the
army." Ibid., p. 381. The Florida Union corroborates Long's account ef the
situation with the statement that "up to that time [May 20] there had been
a feeling of hope on the part of the planters that they would be allowed
to retain their slaves and a Gradual emancipation policy would be adopted.
The receipt of this order put an end to all such hopes." Jacksonville
Weekly Florida Union, ay 27, 1865. The abolition of slavery was not an
avowed purpose of the Civil War. It emerged as a 'war measure." During
the early years of war, slaves who entered the Union lines were returned
to their owners. One scheme followed another. At one point slaves were
considered as "contraband." Lincoln posed colonization and 'compensated
emancipation" as possible solutions. Hence, southerners were confused by
conflicting reports and proposals. For an historical treatment of the de-
velopment of the emancipation policy, see George R. Bentley, A History











of triumph, or joy of escape from thraldom. Some families
were disturbed by the sudden departure of house servants,
but generally both white and black accepted the situation
together, willing to wait and learn the duty required
respectively.l1

An observer for a Jacksonville newspaper reported that "the

manner in which the negroes received the intelligence varied. Some re-

ceived it in silence; these were the more intelligent portion who were

not totally in ignorance of what had been going on. Others were con-

siderably astonished, and scarcely comprehended its meaning."17

While some Negroes may have been confused, the social implica-

tions of the change were patent to the whites. In the absence of Negro

servants Florida's women were urged "to scorn and scout all the vanities

of pride and fashion," and to remember "that woman's glory consists in

being useful as well as ornamental. . ." Young men accustomed to

"living in ease" were praised for taking "the plough and the hoe" and

going "to work in the field to save the crop."18

Political changes required further adjustments. In reply to his

query regarding Allison's authority, McCook received orders not to


of the Freedmen's Bureau (Philadelphia, 1955), pp. 1-15; Randall, The
Civil War and Reconstruction, pp. 477-511.
16Long, Florida Breezes, p. 382.

17"Report on the Interior, Tallahassee, May 23, 1865," Jackson-
ville Weekly Florida Union, May 27, 1865. For a thorough account of
the Negro's passage from slavery to freedom, see Coulter, The South
During Reconstruction 1865-1877, pp. 47-69.

18Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, June 24 and October 28, 1865.
Some planters refused to believe that the free Negro would be a success-
ful laborer and determined to procure white laborers from the Iorth.
See the Gainesville Weekly New Era, November 11, 1865.










recognize the Governor or any state official purporting to act under

his instructions.19 On May 24, the last vestiges of Florida's Con-

federate government were swept away by a military order that proclaimed

martial law to be "the only law" existing in Florida. Layers, practic-

ing physicians, and ministers of the gospel were required to take the

oath of allegiance to the United States and were "expected . to aid

the authorities in preserving and bringing the people back to a cheer-

ful and hearty obedience to the authority of the General Government."

All of the legal proceedings and acts "of the so-called Confederate

Government, or of the State of Florida as one of the members of that

Government" were declared null and void.20 Military rule replaced civil

law. The state was reduced to the status of a military department, and

humiliated by the presence of "blacks in blue."21 It became clear that


19Ackerman, "Florida Reconstruction from Walker through Reed,
1865 to 1873," P. 31.

20General Orders Number 22, issued at Jacksonville, May 24, 1865.
Official Records of the Rebellion, Series I, Vol, XLVII, Pt. 3 (Washing-
ton, 1895), 623.
21By early June the disposition of troops was as follows: five
companies at Tallahassee; one at Madison; one of the Third United States
Colored at Monticello; two companies, one white and one colored, at Lake
City; at least five companies, some white and some colored, at Gaines-
ville; one company at Nownansville; one at Micanopy. Plans were made to
occupy Ocala, Waldo, and Palatka. The scheme was to post troops "so
that they may be easily united, if necessary, at the same time covering
as large an extent of territory as possible." Brigadier General Israel
Vagdes to Major U. L. M. Burger, Jacksonville, June 4, 1865. Ibid., p. 622.
022. In accordance with General Orders Number 118 of the War Department
June 27, 1865, Major General John G. Foster was appointed to command the
Department of Florida, a subdivision of the "Military Division of the
Gulf." Ibid., Series I, Vol. XLIX, Pt. 2, 1039-1040. For information
on the disposition of the military throughout 1865, see Ackerman, "Flor-
ida Reconstruction from Walter through Reed, 1865 to 1873," pp. 31-33;










those who had worn the mantle of Confederate authority were not to be

among those who would initiate the reconstruction of the state. Three

of Florida's wartime leaders, David L. Yulee, Stephen R. Mallory, and

Abraham K. Allison were placed under federal arrest and imprisoned.22

Chaos, sorrow, and frustration were the constant companions of

defeated and demoralized Floridians. There arose a philosophy based on

the realities of the moment. A Gainesville newspaper reflected the at-

tempt to shape these impressions and emotions into an acceptable code

of conduct for a "stateless" citizenry:

It is true, alas! too true, that the sword and torch
have desolated much of our hitherto, happy land--that the
ravages of war have left no trace of remembrance of many
once happy homes--that many of our people have been re-
duced from affluence and wealth to penury and want ...
Let it be so--whether this should or should not be the
case, we left to arbitration, and by the result of that
arbitration, we are, in this, as in all other matters,
forced to abide.


Gainesville Weekly New Era, August 12, 1865; Tallahassee Semi-Weekly
Floridian November 3, 1865; Jacksonville Weelly Flor-Lda Union. December
2, 1865; New York Times, December 25, 1865.

22ulee was "charged with treason while holding a seat in the
Senate of the United States, and tth plotting the capture of forts and
arsenals of the United States, and with inciting war against the Govern-
ment." Mallory, who had served in the United States Senate and as secre-
tary of the Confederate Navy, was "charged with treason, and organzing
and setting on foot piratical expeditions against the commerce and marine
of the United States on the high seas." Information does not seem to be
available on the reason for Allison's imprisonment. Tallahassee Tri-
Weekly Florida Sentinel, January 20, 1866. All were confined in 1865.
Yulee and Allison were imprisoned at Fort Pulaski, and Mallory at Fort
Lafayette. Allison was released in September of 1865; Mallory and Yulee
were released on parole in March of 1866. Jazksonville Wcckly Florida
Union, September 16, 1865; Tallahassee Tri-Weekly Florida Sentinel,
March 17 and April 7, 1866.










It became the duty, then, of all "to submit quietly to the decree of

fate," and to rely "implicitly upon the mercy and bounteousness of a

just God . ."23 Thus it was that in May of 1865, the conquered

lived in the presence of the conqueror and pondered their fate.

When William Marvin, who was appointed Florida's provisional

governor on July 13, 1865, recalled the significant events of his life,

he included his impression of Florida's people in 1865.

I found the people very poor. Their seaports having been
blockaded throughout the war, little or no cotton had
been raised. Many families were in mourning for the loss
of their sons. . I found the whites everywhere ready
to admit that they were a conquered people and willing to "
"accept the situation . ." The negroes, . did not
seem to have any very clear ideas touching their new con-
dition of freedom. . They were generally greatly per-
plexed to know how they were to get a living, and who was
to take care of them. . Nor, indeed, were the white
people free froa many cares and anxieties not only as re-
garded their present condition as to food and raiment, but
also their future prospects. Their political and social
relations were all broken up; their state was under martial
law, and some of the citizens threatened with prosecution
for treason.24

On 4ay 29, President Johnson issued an amnesty proclamation, and

announced the terms under which the southern states could be restored

to their normal relations with the federal Union.25 Basing his plan on


23Gainesville Weekly New Era, August 12, 1865.
2\evin E. Kearney, "Autobiography of William Marvin." Florida
Historical Quarterly, XXXVI (January, 1958), 216-218.

25A11 those who participated in the rebellion, with the exception
of certain specified classes, were granted pardon along with the "restor-
ation of all rights of property, except as to slaves, and except in cases
where legal proceedings under the laws of the United States providing for
the confiscation of property of persons engaged in rebellion have been
instituted. . ." In order to obtain pardon, each individual had to










Lincoln's philosophy of Reconstruction, Johnson outlined his policy in

a proclamation which named W. W. Holden provisional governor of North

Carolina. The provisional governor was instructed to call a convention.

The delegates to the convention, and those who elected them, were to

take the amnesty oath and were to qualify as voters in accordance with

the constitution and laws of Iorth Carolina in force prior to the seces-

sion of the state. The duties of the constitutional convention were

well defined. It was to prescribe "permanent voting and office-holding

qualifications" for the citizens of the state, repeal the ordinance of

secession, abolish slavery, and repudiate the Confederate war debts.

After the convention completed its work, the loyal citizens

might choose their state officials. The newly elected legislature

would then meet, ratify the Thirteenth Amendment to the federal Consti-

tution, and elect United States senators and representatives. Upon the

completion of these steps, the Secretary of State, William H. Seward,

would issue a proclamation retiring the provisional governor, and re-

storing the functions of the state to the regularly elected governor.26


take the amnesty oath, swearing that he would "henceforth faithfully
support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Union
of the States, . ." and that he would "abide by and faithfully support
all laws and proclamations which have been made during the existing
rebellion with reference to the emancipation of slaves. . ." Those
excepted from the general amnesty were permitted to petition for a
special pardon. A copy of the proclamation may be found in James D.
Richardson, A Compilation of the Messac and Paerc of the Presidents,
1789-1897, VT (Wacniington, 1899), 310-312. Cited hereafter as Iseacsves
and Paoers of the Presidents.

26Similar proclamations were issued for all the southern states.
The Johnson plan, which was similar to that advanced by Lincoln, was
premised on the belief that a loyal nucleus of citizens in each of the










This was the process Florida w a to follow also, a process that

was to begin with the Floridian's accepne of defeat and with his ac-

quiescence in the political settlement proposed by the President. It

is the sty of this beginning, or more specifically, the story of the

speaking that was an important part of this bcGinnlna, that constitutes

the subject matter of the remainder of this chapter.

So far as the writer knows, there are three extant samples of

what speakers said to the white people of Florida during the pre-conven-

tioe period in 1865: the speech of Alfred Sers, a Union officer, at

King's Ferry on July 23, 1865, and two speeches by William Marvin, pro-

visional governor, one in Jacksonville on August 3, 1865, and one in

Quincy on r 5, 1865.27

Both speakers, as we shall see, dealt with some of the major ad-

ju nts that the southerner had to accept as a consequence of war and

defeat, when they pointed out that economic adjustment would depend on

the white people's vill s to recognize the Negro's capabilities as

a free laborer and that social adjustment would require mutual respect

and sympathy on the part of both races. We shall see, moreover, that

the principal speaker, the Provisional Governor, had the further respon-

sibility of telling the white people, particularly the revolutionists-


southern state could be eqpowered to reorganize the state and thus ready
it for a renewal of its proper relations with the federal government. A
detailed account of the Lincoln and Johnson plans of Reconatruction may
be found in Randall, The Civil Var and Reconstruction, pp. 699-717.

Marvin also spoke to the white people in Marianna on September
16, 1865, but so far as the writer knows, the opcch ws not preserved.
Tallahssee Semi-Weekly Floridian, September 26, 1865.











the ex-Confederates and secessionists--about the President's plan of

reunion and of convincing them that it would be to their best interest

to acquiesce in this settlement. Finally, we shall see that, aside from

the specific ends of either speaker, both provided answers for some of

the vital questions of the period. Would the federal government confis-

cate the property of those who had supported the Confederacy? Would

Negro suffrage be forced upon the South? What were the presidential

terms of reunion? Who were the pardoned and the unpardoned? Was Flor-

ida a state in the Union or a political wasteland? If Florida was al-

lowed to control its own politics, would the Loyalists--those who had

not supported secession or the Confederacy--be given any advantage over

the revolutionists?


The Discourse

Speech of Alfred Sears at King's Ferry

On July 23, the "loyal citizens" of Nassau County gathered at

King's Ferry "to consider the subject of reorganizing the State. "28


28The audience was said to contain 150 of "the most respectable
citizens of the county. . ." Some had come twelve miles or more to
attend the meeting. There seemed to be"a deep interest in returning
to the fold. . ." The citizens of Nassau were somewhat divided in
their attitudes. "Among some of the citizens who had suffered by the
war, an absurd bitterness toward Lincoln exists for the Emancipation
Proclamation, but the feeling is by no means general; there is a con-
siderable body of men in the county who refused to be honeyfugled or
forced into Jeff Davis' armies, and who have been under national pro-
tection the greater part of the war; these men are determined to have
their influence." Port Royal New South, August 19, 1865, in Jackson-
ville Weekly Florida Union, September 9, 1865.










The meeting was organized with the election of E. D. Tracy, former

president of the Florida Senate, as chairman. "After a few remarks by

Mr. Tracy, he proceeded to raise the 'old flag,' for which three cheers

were given; then the Rev. Mr. Emerson called upon God for his blessing

on this people, and his protection to the flag which he had so wonder-

fully preserved during the last four years of trouble." Next came the

report of a committee which submitted resolutions hailing "with patri-

otic enthusiasm the return of peace and good government," and recogniz-

ing Andrew Johnson as "a true friend of Republican Government ..

Following the adoption of the resolutions, S. B. Noyes, Collector at

Fernandina, was called on to speak. Noyes praised President Johnson as

a "true friend of republican liberty, in whose hands the interests of the

whole people would be safe."

When Noyes finished speaking, the chairman introduced the speaker

of the day, Major Alfred Sears, a federal officer in charge of construc-

tion at Fort Clinch in Fernandina.29 Sears dealt with four principal

topics: the status of Florida as a free state, the freedmen as laborers,

Negro suffrage, and the need for education.

Sears dwelled only briefly on Florida's future as a free state.

The people, he said, would have to organize under a free state consti-

tution. Such a condition had to be accepted, "if for no other reason,

because it is inevitable." He counseled acquiescence as a substitute


29
Sears was identified as an "Engineer of Construction" at Fort
Clinch in Fernandina, and as 'a long-time citizen of Florida." The con-
text of the speech indicates that he was probably a former resident of
Massachusetts. Ibid.; Jacksonville Weekly Florida Times, October 5, 1865.











for demoralization and inactivity. "Let us not spend time in grumbling

over what cannot be helped, but go to work, encourage the emigration of

laborers to our beautiful State, and hire men to raise crops, to carry

on arts and manufactures."

His experience with freedmen "during the last three years," Sears

continued, convinced him that once they "learn that work is necessary . .

to live, they become industrious and excellent laborers." His contact

with the whites,on the other hand, had taught him that many questioned

the ex-slave's potential as a salaried laborer.

In an attempt to change the opinion of the King's Ferry audience

on this point, Sears used empirical proof recounting how he had cured

absenteeism, demanded punctuality, and earned the respect of the IIegroez

at Fort Clinch.

Absenteeism was cured by withholding rations.

If my Negro men absented themselves from the work a day
for which a ration had been issued from my coamissariat,
I charged them with the price of that ration when I set-
tled with them at the end of the month. They soon learned
that the ration was not a gratuity, but a part of their
wages to be paid for work.

Once this lesson was learned, "they became more constant in duty ... ."

Those who had worked only eight or ten days a month soon worked the full

twenty-six.

Another lesson was in punctuality.

If a m[a]n failed to make his appearance while the roll
was being called, he was docked for a quarter of a day.
It was necessary to be absolute in this thing; they thought
it was a great hardship that when they were only five
minutes late they should not go to work immediately, but
must wait till the end of the first quarter.--However, they
learned finally to be punctual.










"Certain old notions about Saturday afternoon" were eradicated in the

same fashion. "The negroes found, . that it paid to work all the

time. "

The application of a common rule for black and white laborers

also helped to bring the freedmen into industrious habits. They learned

that "if I did certain things to the negroes that forced them to work

more steadily than had been their custom, I did the very sane things by

the white laborers. They observed what was going on; they said, 'It's

mighty hard on us, but he serves all alike!"

Sears, as a Massachusetts man, saw the free labor question as one

of interest versus prejudice. The object of his discussion was to induce

his auditors to lay aside their prejudices toward the Negro and devote

their energies to procuring the best results from the freedman's labor.

Such a policy was better than "fretting because 'niggers put on airs.'"

The speaker clarified his position by recounting a conversation with one

of his white laborers.

One of my white laborers, a native of this county, wanting
higher wages, complained that he didn't receive as much as
a "nigger." "That's very true," I said, "but you are not
worth as much." "Well," he replied, "I think a white man
ought to be worth as much as a nigger any time." I was
forced to say thatt I reckon a man's value to me as a
laborer b[y] the amount of work he is able to accomplish;
that I do not pay a premium on color; I pay for work.

Sears concluded his analysis of the labor question by posing a

series of rhetorical questions and affirming his confidence in the good

judeaent of his listeners.

Now won't you agree with me in this proposition? Am I
not correct? And do you not feel that much of the trouble










occurring among the black proceeds in no small degree from
[o]ur own impatience under the changes that h[av]e occurred
in their relations to us? Let us [b]e honest with ourselves
and with then. Th[e]y are among us; they make the labor of
the co[un]try. . Will it not be somewhat unreasonable in us
--say a little cowardly--if [wv]e permit ourselves to be vexed
with them because they have been freed? I have no doubt you
will agree with me on this subject; that you will approach the
whole matter with the dignity becoming your manhood.

Passing on to the question of suffrage, Sears declared Negro

suffrage was a doctrine proposed by "overzealous and impractical men"

who were "agitating" for it in "various parts of the land. . ." Al-

though the subject was not worthy of argument, certain observations were

in order. First, Sears noted that the President did not countenance the

attempt to force Negro suffrage upon the South. "He is determined to let

the loyal citizens of this state settle the matter for themselves."30

Next, he maintained that northern men had not actually applied the prin-

ciple of Negro suffrage in their own section. "If negro suffrage is a

good thing in Florida, it must be good in Maine." Northerners ought to

try it first themselves, and "then advise us of the result." The suf-

frage policy of New York was an example of northern hypocrisy. While

rendering lip service to the principle, the people of the state intro-

duced safeguards against its liberal application.


30In his proclamation regarding the reconstruction of North Caro-
lina, Johnson stated definitely that the determination of suffrage
qualifications was a power that rested with the people of the states.
Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents, VI, 312-314. The
Florida Union endorsed the President's position. It editorialized:
"The people of Massachusetts or Connecticut have no more right to make
our local laws or regulate them than we have to interfere with theirs.
In that sentiment we are sustained by the Constitution of the United
States as well as the policy of the President. The question of negro
suffrage is one which we have the right to settle for ourselves."
Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, July 29, 1865.










Some of the newspapers of New York city [sic] talk of
universal suffrage as if it existed in that State. From
their tone one might infer that negro suffrage had received
a fair trial, and they are giving us the benefit of their
experience. Such, however, is not the fact. When the
question was submitted to the people of New York, they re-
fused to allow negroes to vote; and so it remains to this
day, except that few very specially favored individuals,
who among other qualifications possess a certain amount of
real estate, are permitted this right. The qualifications
I refer to are demanded only of negroes. This is the '"an-
hood suffrage" of New York.

One could reason from this that "even when the laws permit negro

suffrage, the popular prejudice against these people is so strong that

they have rarely availed themselves of the privilege." The speaker

climaxed his point by declaring that although everyone could acquiesce

in the belief that "the black laborer must be protected in all his

rights," no one "regarded the elective franchise to be one of those

rights. . .

Before concluding, Sears made some suggestions relative to educa-

tion. The political control of the state would soon be in the hands of

the people. "The rolls of Lee and Johnson's armies, at the time of their

surrender" revealed "that only one man in five was able to write his name!"

If the people did not want to be "bamboozled" by the "unprincipled men of

the State" as they had been "in times past," they ought to protect them-

selves by demanding constitutional provisos for an efficient school

system and teacher training.

Following Sears' speech, the King's Ferry audience listened to "a

few appropriate remarks" from a Dr. Smith of Georgia. "A cold dinner,

with hot coffee" followed the speechmaking and ended the meeting. There











did not seem to be any "enthusiasm among the people, but there was . .

profound attention and deep, quiet earnestness. . ." The Florida

Times considered Sears' effort an "excellent address," and regarded

the speaker as one of the most earnest and zealously patriotic of our

citizens. . ." In his attempt "to arouse the people to their in-

terests," he labored for 'the good of the State," and "not from motives

of self-aggrandizement. . .31


Speech of William Marvin at Jacksonville

On August 2, 1865, the residents of Jacksonville welcomed the

newly appointed provisional governor, William Marvin. Many of them

anxiously awaited the moment when the state would be 'put on the direct

high road towards resuming . former relations with . the Federal

government under the good flag of the Union."32 Hence the next day "a


31The speeches of Tracy, Noyes, and Smith were not reported.
Only extracts of the Sears speech were published. For an account of
the meeting, see Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, September 9, 1865.
The Sears speech was published in Jacksonville Weekly Florida Times,
October 5, 1865.

32Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, July 22, 1865. Silas Nib-
lack, who was to serve as a delegate to the constitutional convention
from Columbia County, wrote Yulee of the attitude of the people in Aug-
ust: "The people of the State have accepted in good faith their situa-
tion and very much desire law and order established by civil authority
in the State." Silas L. Niblack to David L. Yulee, Jacksonville,
August 18, 1865, Yulee Papers. Stephen R. Mallory, writing from his
prison cell, counseled a policy of acquiescence. "We are prostrated
and powerless. We drew the sword, and staked life, liberty and property
upon it. . There is no dishonor in frankly accepting the result, and
acknowledging defeat, while the obvious dictates of patriotism demand
that we make all the sacrifices required for restoration to the Union."
Stephen R. Mallory to Charles E. Dyke, Fort Lafayette, November 1, 1865,
in Tallahassee Semi-Weekly Floridian, November 21, 1865. Whitelaw Reid
reported that the people of Soath Florida "were looking eagerly forward










large crowd gathered around the music stand near Head Quarters, . .

and demanded . a speech. "33

Marvin, accompanied by General Israel Vogdes and others, appeared

and "took the stand." The Provisional Governor was fifty-seven years

old. He was beardless, almost six feet tall, and of moderate propor-

tions. Many Floridians, including the "ex-slave-holders" who had peti-

tioned Johnson for his appointment, recognized him as a devout Unionist,

who had served Florida for twenty-eight years as jurist and statesman.


to re-organization. . ." Whitelaw Reid, After the War: A Southern
Tour. May 1, 1865, to may 1, 1866 (Cincinnati, 1866), p. 187. A pre-
anble and resolution passed at a public meeting held in Waldo on August
26, 1865, was a further indication that many desired change. The pro-
visional governor was asked to facilitate "our transition from Martial
to Civil Law. . ." It was resolved that "we do solemnly declare that
in our opinion the people of this portion of the State are prepared for
such a change, and do most earnestly solicit the Governor to call a Con-
vention of the people of the State, at the earliest possible date." For
an account of the Waldo meeting, see Gainesville Weekly New Era, Septen-
ber 2, 1865.
33
Jacksonville had been a focal point of war and occupation.
Its citizens suffered through four federal invasions: twice in 1862,
and again in 1863 and 1864. Portions of the city were burned when the
Confederates withdrew in 1862. At least one-third of the city was re-
duced to ashes when the Federals withdrew in April of 1863. Re-occupied
on February 7, 1864, the area remained under Union control for the re-
mainder of the war. Davis, T1r Civil War and Reconztruction in Florida,
p. 158 et passim. A heart-rending sight confronted returning Confeder-
ates and their families. "The des lating effects of war and decay were
apparent on every side. The streets were littered with the trunks of
trees that had been felled as a barricade against the Confederate
cavalry. Ruins of buildings burned; broken-down fences and neglected
yards; dilapidated appearance of once neatly painted dwellings--all were
depressing to those who sought their former homes. And worst of all, the
best and largest dwellings that had escaped the Federal burning in 1863,
were occupied by United States officers and troops, in some instances by
negro troops, and when the owners applied for possession, many of them
learned that their property had been confiscated and sold. . ." T.
Frederick Davis, History of Jaclconville, Florida and Vicinity 1513 to
1924 (Saint Augustine, 1925), p. 149.











An opponent of secession in 1861, Marvin remained at his post as

federal judge in Key West until 1863, when he resigned because of ill

health. On this third day of August, 1865, he stood before Floridians

as the representative of the President, a position he had sought and

had been awarded on July 13.34

Marvin's opening remarks to his colored and white listeners em-

bodied several rhetorical skills. He endeavored to gain attention and

to identify himself with the audience; he employed personal proof to

establish his right to speak on the subject of reorganization; and he

alluded to the significance of his topic. He began:

Fellow Citizens:--I am happy to meet this large audience,
and discuss the important subjects which are claiming the
attention of every one. I have the right to address you,
because I am one of the oldest citizens of Florida. I came
here whilst we were yet a territory, and assisted in the
organization of the State Government. Florida is my state
by adoption and affection. Her prosperity and happiness
are linked with y own. I have a right, also, to address


34Willin bMarvin, lawyer, author, and statesman, was uniquely
fitted for the responsibilities of the provisional Governorship. A
native of New York, he had lived in Florida from 1835 until 1863. He
was well known in many parts of the state because of his service as
United States district attorney, and judge of the southern District of
Florida at Key West; as a representative of Monroe County in the terri-
torial council, and as a delegate to the first constitutional conven-
tion at Saint Joseph in 1838-39. Defeated as a Union candidate for the
office of delegate to the secession convention in 1861, Marvln served
as federal judge in Key West until 1863. Then he moved his family to
New York City, where he established a law practice which was interrupted
by his appointment to the provisional governorship in 1865. His resi-
dence in New York during the war years provided insight into northern
attitudes. As a one-time slaveowner, Marvin could understand the ad-
justments required of ex-slaveowners and ex-slaves in a pozt-rar, free
society. Kearney, "Autobiography of William Marvin," pp. 179-222.
For a narrative of the events leading to Marvin's appointment in 1865,
see Davis, The Civil War and Reconstruction in Florida, pp. 354-356.










you, because I have been appointed by the President of
the United States to aid you in the reconstruction of your
State government. I shall make known to you the plan of
the President and call your attention to those subjects
which are deemed most essential to your welfare. I trust
therefore ou will give me, on this occasion, your patient
attention.35

The subjects Marvin deemed essential to the audience's welfare

were: the policy of the federal government, the sale of confiscated lands

and property, slavery, the power of the military, and race relations.

The policy of the federal government was, said Marvin, a magnani-

mous one. Floridians must acquiesce in the fact that they were "a con-

quered people, and at the mercy of the Government." Speaking as one of

them, Marvin characterized their plight. "We are utterly helpless, and

lie passive in the hands of the victors." Will the government "press us

with its armies? Glut its sword of vengeance with our blood? Or con-

fiscate all our property?" Resuming his role as emissary of the President,

Marvin answered: "Not at all, its majesty and might are no greater than

its clemency and mercy."


35Marvin disseminated information on the presidential plan in a
written "Address to the People of the State of Florida." Dated August
3, 1865, the document contained a definitive statement of J hnson's
philosophy of Reconstruction, and a general outline of the plan's appli-
cation to Florida. The civil authorities of Florida, "having engaged in
an organized rebellion against the Government of the United States, have,
with the overthrow of the rebellion, ceased to exist, and the State,
though in the Union, is without a civil government. . The President
of the United States has appointed me Provisional Governor of the State,
and made it my duty, at the earliest practicable moment, to prescribe
such rules and regulations as may be necessary and proper for c,,veAtngr
a convention, composed of delegates to be chosen by that portion of the
people of the State, who are loyal to the United States and no others,
for the purpose of altering or amending the coniiitution of the State;
and with authority to exercise within the limits of the State, all the
powers necessary and proper to enable the loyal people of the State to











In the light of this statement the federal government's policies

of confiscation and amnesty exemption required explanation.

Confiscation was justified as a war measure. "At the outbreak

of the rebellion the so-called Confederate Goverrment confiscated the

property of all Union people, and had the insurgents been successful

. . the property of such citizen [sic] would have been confiscated

and lost to them." Hence, the "United States, . as a means of

strengthening the government, and crippling the rebellion confiscated

the property of its most guilty instigators and adherents." This wa

"in accordance with the usual practice of nations under similar

circumstances."

Why were "Generals, Judges, Governors, members of Congress,"

"those who were worth over $20,000 of taxable property, and others

exempted from the President's amnesty proclamtion? Their "prestued

superior intelligence," their "ability to take some pains to secure

pardon," and their "responsibility . to the State" were, thought

Marvin, probably "among the reasons" which led the President to exempt

the wealthier class. Circumstances would probably necessitate making

"examples of a few of the nost wicked . .persons," but very probably



restore it to its constitutional relations to the federal government."
The issue of Negro suffrage was "an open question--a proper subject for
discussion--and is to be decided as a question of sound policy by the
convention to be called." For a copy of the address, see Gainesville
Weekly New Era, August 12, 1865, or Jacksonville Weekly Florida Urion,
August 5, 1865.










most of the exempted classes would receive executive clemency.36 Marvin

concluded his discussion of the exempted classes by assuring his listen-

ers that he would "take pleasure in recommending to the favorable con-

sideration of the President all who [were] truly penitent and [gave]

good evidence of determination to be good citizens in the future."7

The next topic, that of governmental policy regarding the sale

of confiscated property, was of vital interest to the Jacksonville audi-

ence, for a sizeable portion of the city was earmarked for public auc-

tion within the next fourteen days. 8 Nrvin developed the point by em-

ploying a problem-solution sequence.


36Fourteen classes were exempted from the pardon extended in the
presidential proclamation of May 29, 1865. See Richardson, Measages and
Papers of the Prcsidents. VI, 310-312. For an interesting account of
how special pardons were obtained, see J. T. Dorris, "Iardoning the
Leaders of the Confederacy," Mississippi Valley Historical Review, XV
(June, 1928), 3-21.

37arvin played a significant part in helping to secure presiden-
tial pardon for several ex-Confederate leaders. "It was a part of my
duties to advise the President touching his granting of pardons; he re-
quired petitions for pardons to be approved by the Provisional Governors,
before being presented to him. In this way, it turned out that I was
called upon to recommend and did recommend for pardon several men who in
their fire zeal for Secession before the war broke out, had threatened
to hang me if they should catch me in the piney oods. . Governor
Allison and ex-Senators Yulec & Mallory were old friends and I very glad-
ly recommended to the President their pardon. Allison was discharged
from prison on my application. Kearney, "Autobiography of William
Marvin," p. 218.

80-n August 5, 1861, Congress levied a direct tax on real estate
in all the states. Of the total of $60,000,000, some $77,522 was appor-
tioned to Florida. On June 7, 1862, a second law was passed authorizing
the collection of the direct tax in insurrectionary districts. Talla-
hassee Tri-Weehly Florida Sentinel, January 20, 1866. The 1862 law pro-
vided "that the commissioners appointed under it should assess Southern
lands, and through advertisement notify the absentee owners of the taxes
due; should such payments not bo forthcoming, the Commission might sell











Beginning with a review of the problem, he declared:

While the war was still racing, and many of the inhabitants
of this part of the State were within the rebel lines, a Dis-
trict Court of the United States was held at St. Au _atine,
then and now occupied by Union troops, and a large nober of
decrees of confiscation of lands and houses were entered up
in the absence of the owners and without their appearing.
They were, in many, and perhaps most instances, in the rebel
country, where, perhaps, they ought not to have been, but
where they, in fact, were. The owners of these lands and
houses, in many instances, are now as well disposed to
become loyal and good citizens as any in the state. Since
these decrees were passed they have been embraced within the
Amnesty Proclamation. Under these circumstances, it appeared
desirable, that they should have an opportunity to be heard--
that the sales advertised for the 17th of August should be
suspended, and the decrees opened, and the owners allowed to
make such explanation, and set up such defences as they should
be advised by their counsel are proper to be made--in other
words, that they should have a full hearing on the merits--
and plead their pardons, if such plea should be deemed admiss-
ible in their cases.

IMarvin, apparently cognizant of the situation while still in New

York, had communicated with the Attorney General of the United States,

and was prepared to announce the remedy offered by him.

His answer was .. prompt, so read, as to give full
assurances that the Government at Washington, does not de-
sire to confiscate any person's lands without giving him
every possible opportunity to be heard. The Attorney
General ordered the sales to be suspended until the further
[orders] of the department, and he directed the District
Attorney to consent to the opening of the decrees in these
cases. By means of these orders, time and opportunity is
now given to the owners, after the country is quieted, to


at auction to highest bidders the plots or tracts." George W. Smith,
"Carpetbag Imperialism in Florida, 1862-1868," Flor2-'di Iitorical
Quarterly, XXVII (October, 191~), 112. In accordance with these laws,
"a large part of Jacksonville" was to be auctioned off on August 17,
1865. Special correspondence of the New York Tribane, dated at Jackson-
ville, Augas't 4, .--5, in Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, August 19,
1865.










cast about, look up their testimony, take advice and
counsel, and see what defence they can make.

The action of the Attorney-General, declared 4Marvin, was proof of the

government's policy of clemency. The audience was urged to accept the

action "as an omen of good--the olive branch held out by the civil

authorities to all persons who are . sincerely willing to do right,

however much they may have erred in the past."

After thus strengthening his ethos with the audience the speaker

was prepared to deal with an important condition of reunion, the aboli-

tion of slavery. "With the fall of the Confederacy, its corner stone

crumbled to dust, and the winds have scattered it. The war which was

commenced, among other reasons, for perpetuating the black man's bondage

S. .in the providence of God, brought him freedom. He can never be en-

slaved again. (A great shout among the colored people)." The constitu-

tion which the people would be called upon to form would have to "recog-

nize the order of things and secure freedom to all alike."39 With this


39Marvin's discussion of slavery was probably directed at both
the immediate and remote audiences. The Jacksonville audience had been
aware of emancipation since February, 1864, or earlier. While the
speaker probably sought to stress the fact of freedom for the benefit of
the remote, or general Florida audience, through the medium of the press.
The very fact that slavery was a dead issue needed emphasis.
Some ex-Confederates adamantly refused to recognize the validity of
Lincoln's Ea ncipation Proclamation. For example, Sears wrote Yulee:
"I notice . one or two of the most intelligent men in this county
proclaiming that the new constitution must not recognize the validity
of the war Measures liberating slaves.
"Judge Stewart is one of these; intensely bitter against Prest.
Lincoln for the Eaancipation order and declaring that it is not to be
submitted to. Such a man may do much harm by such a course, because he
is an upright intelligent citizen. But how worse than useless the com-
bat!" Alfred L. Sears to David L. Yulee, Fernandina, August 15, 1865,
Yulee Papers.











done there would be "nothing to hinder a restoration of our constitutional

relationship with the general government. . ." Actual restoration

would be "through a convention to be called at no distant day to alter

or amend the State constitution." All were urged to lose no time "in

becoming qualified to vote for members of the convention. 40

The next point clarified was that, until civil government was

restored, the preservation of peace and order would "continue in the

hands of [the] military authorities" [sic]. Some would ask: "Why don't

you assume control at once of the civil administration as we prefer

civil rule?" Marvin answered that he had "no authority to resuscitate

the civil authorities or to appoint any one to office beyond what is

necessary to the calling of a convention. My business is to assist you

in organizing a government. I trust you will cheerfully acquiesce in

this arrangement."

In the exposition of his final point, the speaker strove for em-

phasis by addressing the races individually. Florida was entering upon


40Marvin set forth the qualifications of voters in his written
address of August 3, 1865: "The persons qualified to vote at such elec-
tion of delegates and the persons eligible as members of such conven-
tion, will be such persons as shall have previously taken and subscribed
to the oath of amnesty as set forth in the President's Proclamation of
May 29th, .. and as are also qualified as prescribed by the constitu-
tion and laws of the State in force immediately before the llth day of
January 1861, the date of the so called ordinance of secession. Where
the person is excepted from the benefits of the amnesty proclamation,
he must also have been previously specially pardoned by the President
before he can become a qualified voter or eligible as a member of the
Convention. This interpretation of the two proclamations of the Presi-
dent I received from himself in person, and also from the Attorney
General." For the text of the address, see Gainesville Weekly leu Era,
August 12, 1865, or Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, August 5, 1065.










a new career; her success would depend on a "good understanding" between

the races.

Marvin first exhorted his white audience to adopt a humanitarian

attitude toward the Negro. "Some persons," he affirmed, "disappointed

and vexed, will not have any faith in the colored man."

They will not think of him with pleasure, now that he has
become free. They have no anxiety to see him socially and
morally elevated because they have no faith in his capabili-
ties. Let me say in all plainess [sic] to such, try him.
Give him a fair chance. Teach and encourage him. Your hap-
piness and prosperity are now inseperably [sic] connected
with the welfare of this people. . They cannot remain in
a stationary condition. Their movement must be upwards or
they will become, in many cases, the veriest vagabonds, and
rest like an incubus upon the country. In many respects the
white man is superior to the colored man [italics mine] and
his responsibility is correspondingly increased. We want the
colored people here. In their muscles and sinews the State
has immense wealth; but that they may be made available we
must treat them kindly . .

The Negro audience, in turn, was called upon to play its part in

adjusting to the new order of things and to recognize the difficult ad-

justments incumbent upon the white people. The orator's admonitions to

his colored listeners were clothed in simple language.

And you, my colored friends, must not be idle or lazy. Labor
is the law which God has imposed upon us all. I have been
and expect to be one of the most laborious men in Florida.
If you are respectful to all and industrious, you will be
protected by the law in the enjoyment of all the rights of
humanity. You must keep away from taverns and try to edu-
cate your children in the fear of the Lord. Send them to the
Sunday school. The white man, too, must school himself to
this new order of things. His responsibilities and duties
are of the most imrious [sic] character. He must meet them
like a hero, or the worst of consequences will follow to
himself and family.

All bore a heavy burden of responsibility. "Schools must be established











over the land." Missionaries and teachers must be sent out "from among

yourselves. . ." Promotion of the ''intelliCence, virtue, and general

elevation of all the people of the State" was a common task. Ministers

of the Gospel, in particular, had an awful responsibility in atte=ting

to promote "peace on earth and good will to men."

Having urged the Negro, white man, minister, teacher, and states-

man to accept their appointed tasks, Marvin was ready to close. In his

peroration he again stressed the theme of acquiescence, counseling a

willing acceptance of the decisions of Providence. The future of the

state, he said, rested on the shoulders of the individual citizen.

Let every man, woman and child throughout the State cease
to murder [sic] or complain against the dispensations of
Providence, but cheerfully and hopefully accept the new
order of things, as coming from Him whose ways are not as
man's thoughts. There is a bright prospect in the future
for our beautiful State. The rainbow of promise is seen
in the dissolving clouds. Let each man do his own duty
and God will bless us.41

Editorial reactions to the speech were complimentary. The New

Era regarded Marvin's "written address to the people," of August 3, and

the Jacksonville speech as "two very important documents." When studied

together, they gave "a clear conception of the Governor's views upon the

past, present, and future."42 The Florida Union said that the discourse


41For an account of Marvin's speech, see Gainesville Weekly Hew
Era, August 12, 1865.

Ibid. Following his evaluation of Marvin's speech, the editor
urged all to take an active interest in the reorganization process. While
it was generally agreed that the coming state convention would be an
"important era," there were some who treated "the matter with great in-
difference. It is not . because they do not, in heart, feel a deep
interest in the State and the welfare and happiness of the people, but










made available "a full definition of the 'Governor's policy'." It

hailed Marvin as one who "knows the condition and wants of the people."

The fact "that it was mainly through his efforts that the Government . .

ordered a suspension of all proceedings under the Confiscation Act,"

would not lessen the respect and estimation in which he was held. In

short, the Provisional Governor had come to point the way and manner by

which the people of Florida could "reestablish their civil government

and renew their constitutional relations with their sister States in

the Union." This gave the "press of Florida . a community of in-

terests, a common end and object to labor fon . ."43

The Unionists or Loyalists in East Florida also reacted favor-

ably to Marvin's explanation of Johnson's policy. 4 cn of this per-

suasion had met several tines during the war, under the protection of

the federal military,to organize a loyal state government, but their

efforts had been repeatedly thwarted by the frequent withdrawal of

federal forces.45 Now that Florida was safely in the hands of the


from the fact that they labor under mental desperation. They have
given up all hopes for prosperity in the future. We should be up and
doing. . .

43Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, August 5, 1865.
44,
-Sears, the Union officer who had addressed the "Loyal citizens"
at King's Ferry, wrote Yulee: "There are in town one or two copies of
Marvin's address at Jacksonville on his way to Tallabassee. All Union-
ists like it much." Alfred L. Sears to David L. Yulee, Fernandina,
August 15, 1865, Yulee Papers.

451n 1arch of 1862, a group of Jacksonville Unionists attempted
"loyal political reorganization." In 1863, Unionist political rallies
were held in Saint Augustine and Fernandina. Perhaps the most formidable
Unionist atteit at political reorganization took place in Jacksonville











federal military the Unionists could look forward to organizing a new

state government. 1arvin's Jacksonville speech, in short, marked for

them the beginning of an era filled with the promise of public office.


Speech of William Marvin at quincy

Governor Marvin performed many labors between speeches. He had

to interview pardon seekers, confer with military authorities and agents

of the Freedmen's Bureau, and draft proclamations to inform the citizen-

ry of the mechanics of presidential Reconstruction. He realized, how-

ever, the importance of supplementncg actions and written instructions

with the spoken word in areas where emancipation was still a novelty and

southern mores a deeply ingrained pattern of thought. His extant

speeches indicate that he concentrated on the "black arc" counties.

Marvin visited Quincy early in September, and remained for a time

as the guest of Charles H. DuPont. On September 4, he consulted with

the citizens to determine "for himself, the spirit and temper of the
1146
people. . ." On the following morning an audience composed entirely

of white persons assembled to hear him speak.47


in 1864. This movement allegedly steamed from Lincoln's scheme to recon-
struct Florida for the purpose of acquiring the state's electoral votes
in 1864. The project, however, is said to have failed because the
Unionists in Florida were few in number and divided politically. Davis,
The Civil War and Reconstruction in Florida, pp. 250-255.

Quincy Semi-Weekly Commonwealth, in Jacksonville Weekly Florida
Union September 16, 1865.

Quincy, located just north and west of Tallahassee in the "black
arc" area, remained free from federal attack or occupation during the
war, a fact which meant that southern customs, for the most part, had not
been disturbed. This probably explains why Marvin spoke to the white










"After being handsomely introduced by Judge DuPont, the Governor

stepped forward, dressed cap a pie in white, and certainly the personal

[sic] of His Excellency was inviting." His opening remarks resembled

those used at Jacksonville. Again, the aim was to establish common

ground with his audience. He began;

FELLOW CITIZES: I am happy to meet so many of you this
morning, and, beneath the shade of this grove, discuss the
great questions which at this time are of such overwhelming
interest to the State. Though not a native of Florida, my
youth and the pride of my manhood have been spent among you.
I have sorrowed in your sorrow, and your happiness has been,
and still is, mine. I am willing, in this emergency, to do
ay full share of labor to restore to our beautiful country
more than its ancient prosperity.

Some of the questions Marvin thought worthy of discussion were:

the status of Florida as a state; the matters which must be recognized

in the new state constitution; and the folly of resistance to federal

domination.

Florida's political status, he began, was a matter that required

clarification. Was Florida a state, and if so, what was its relation to

the Union? Two points were advanced in answering this question.

First, as a consequence of the fall of the Confederacy, Florida's

state government, "which had been identified with it, and supported it,

. . went down to ruin among the general ruin which overwhelmed the


people on September 5, and to the freedmen on Sunday, September 10. He
did not wish to offend the sensibilities of the white people or inter-
fere with plantation routine by calling the freedmen from the fields on
a working day. The speaker's choice of Sunday as the best time to speak
to the freedmen, moreover, is an integral part of the rhetoric of the
freedom speech which is described in the next chapter.











States of the South." Floridians were without "a government of any

kind," and remained in a condition of "anarchy" and "confusion" until

the general government "extended" martial law "over the State."

Second, although a state in the Union, Florida could not resume

its normal relations with the general government until a new state

government had been organized in accordance with "the new order of

things." Marvin's explanation of this point provided a summary of

President Johnson's philosophy of Reconstruction, and a statement of

its application to Florida.

After much discussion by the best and soundest thinkers
in the nation, the question has been settled with much un-
animity, that the secession of a State is an impossibility.
A rebellion cannot be a success, unless it amounts to a revo-
lution, affecting alike all sections of the country. The
very soil embraced within the American Republic scorns to
receive the impress of but one government at the sae time.
It follows that Florida has never ceased to be a State in
the Union--but she has been a State in rebellion, and, by
her acts, has destroyed her State Goverment, and parti-
cularly the institution of slavery, which was nursed in its
bosom and defended by it. She is now held by martial law
in a state of tutelage, with her political rights in abeyance,
and will be kept there till she organizes for herself, on a
new basis, a new government.

Of immediate significance was the fact that the responsibility

for the organization of this "new government," and the consequent re-

establishment of civil authority, rested with the people, not the pro-

visional governor. While thus delimiting his own authority, Marvin

strove to motivate his listeners to play an active part in the business

of Reconstruction. He declared: "I am here to open the way and assist

you in this delicate and urgent business. I am not authorized to es-

tablish, by appointment, civil authority myself--that is pre-eminently










your work, and martial law will prevail till you take it in hand and

accomplish it."

Such a declaration naturally led to a discussion of the work to

be done. Iarvin assumed that the audience had seen his "proclamation

ordering an election on the 10th of October, and a meeting of delegates

on the 25th. . Although the subject night, perhaps, be left

without further comment, Marvin, "being able . to look over the

whole ground," felt duty bound "to call . attention to a few mat-

ters which must characterize the Constitution to be framed." These

were: (1) freedom for all; (2) the equality of the Negro before the

law; (3) the incorporation of the Thirteenth Amendment into the state

constitution; and (4) the admission of the Negro as a witness in the

courts. Such revolutionary proposals required a careful explanation

for the "black arc" audience.

"The future Constitution of Florida must guarantee freedom alike

to all; it must not be black or white, but FREE!" This guarantee, de-

clared the speaker, was necessary for two reasons. First, the institu-

tion of slavery had ceased to exist. Any attempt to revive it would be

fruitless. Second, if slavery continued, Floridians would live under a

constant threat of Negro insurrection. It was well, in Iarvin's judg-

ment, that slavery had "passed away forever."


,Issued on August 23, the proclamation set forth qualifications
for voting and membership in the convention; outlined the procedure for
taking the anmesty oath; made provision for the conduct of the election;
and directed that the convention 'provide, by a schedule, for the elec-
tion of a Governor and General Assembly, and for the reorganization of a
permanent State government." Gainesville Weekly New Era, September 2,
1865; Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, September 2, 1865.










Supposing the institution remained, and the 150,000
colored troops, who have been thoroughly drilled in the
use of arms, and instructed in the rights of freemen,
and who have exhibited on maay a bloody field, and in
the storming of batteries, a steadiness and a courage
equal to that of the white man, were turned loose ong
us, how long would that institution last, or whose life
or property would be secure? In that case, slavery would
disappear in carnage and in rivers of blood. Thank God,
the thing is out of the way and we are safe!

Next, "as citizens, before the law, the freedmen must be in all

respects our equals." Marvin did not believe "that as a race they are

or can be made during many generations, if ever, the equals PERSONALLY

of the Caucasian race, or can enjoy the same political or social posi-

tion," but this did not constitute a "reason why Constitution or law

should discriminate against them." To be sure, the right of suffrage

did not "necessarily follow, for that is not a natural, but a political

right, which may be granted or with-held, as sound policy may dictate."

The Negro, then, was to be the equal of the white, but this equality

was restricted to the legal realm. 9

The third obligation was the incorporation of the Thirteenth

Amendment into the state constitution, and its ultimate adoption by the


49The demand for legal equality probably seemed reasonable, so
long as the political and social supremacy of the whites received un-
qualified acknowledgment. Marvin's statement of the issue differed only
slightly from an editorial appearing in the Gaincsvillo Wcelly [eew Era
of August 19, 1865. The New Era editorialized: "We are bound to treat
the negroes as freemen. We are, and always will be the superior race.
We shall continue to rule politically. They have and always will have,
the protection of law." After hearing, or reading, the Quincy speech,
Mrs. Yulee wrote her husband: "How do you like Gov [sic] Marvin's
speech at Quincy? I am satisfied with securing the Negroes their civil
rights. They ought to be protected from injustice, but they are incap-
able of the right of suffrage." Iannie C. Yulee to David L. Yulee,
Wickland, October 3, 1865, Yulce Papers.










legislature.50 If the people were in earnest in recognizing the complete

freedom of the blacks, and in perpetuating that freedom, public opinion

would not be a deterrent to the incorporation of the amendment. Of more

importance, however, was the consideration 'that the Government . be

convinced that we are acting in good faith in framing a Constitution."

Were there any objections to the amendment? The speaker had heard two.

Some believed its adoption would be "assenting to abolition," and these

persons preferred having that measure forced upon them. Mervin countered:

"Very well, it is forced upon you by Government, and by accomplished facts

and you must consent to it or you are a beligerent [sic]." Florida's

consent had to go "on record in the most formal, solemn and binding man-

ner, as a condition precedent to peace and a restoration of State rights."

A second objection was: "We are unwilling to impose abolition upon

others." Again, the answer was direct:

You do no such thing. Congress demands this of all the
late insurgent States. Six of them have already complied
with the demand. In so doing, they acted simply for them-
selves. Let Florida frame a free Constitution, adopt the
amendment, and you give evidence to the world that you are
taking steps which neither you nor your posterity can re-
trace, and you prepare the way for admission into the great
sisterhood of States.

A final requirement was "that persons of color . be admitted

as witnesses in all our Courts of civil jurisprudence." Because of


50Marvin explained that the Thirteenth Amendment "prohibits
slavery or involuntary servitude, except when the party has been duly
convicted of crime, by due process of law. . The amendment also
granted the "United States the power to enforce this provision." Formal
ratification was a function of the state legislature, but Marvin was of
the opinion that the incorporation of the language of the amendment into
the state constitution would serve to demonstrate the good faith of the
Florida convention.











personal conviction and a knowledge of the audience's prejudices regard-

ing Negro testimony, Marvin was prepared to argue at length in favor of

this policy. "I am aware that this is a hard doctrine to many," he

said, "but it is not, and never was such to me."

Some believed "the negro constitutionally a liar--that false-

hood is marrow in his bones, and that it circulates in his blood." This

was a slander on God and man. Thirty years in the South had convinced

Marvin "that the slave. . often told the truth, whilst the master . .

lied." Some might perjure themselves, but "who does not know that every

Court room is the theatre of more or less false swearing?" A wise

Providence seldom permits a perversion of justice by false witnesses.

"Perjury is such a monster--that the hissing of their tongues makes a

sort of Babel of the witnesses' stand, warring with each other and with

reason, and with a thousand circumstances which surround, reveal and

guard the truth."

Marvin next called on personal experience to prove that in the

past some guilty persons had gone unpunished because the Negro was not

able to testify. "Many are the instances in which I have known guilty

parties to go unwhipped of justice because colored people could not come

into the Court. . ." Their admission as witnesses "would have given

the State's prison or the gallows its due, and relieved society of . .

dangerous characters." "I have," said Marvin, "much feeling upon this

subject, because the impressive and painful lessons of years crowd in

upon my memory."

The proposal to admit Negroes as witnesses gained further










justification from precedent. The audience knew "that the menial

classes of all nations are permitted to appear in Court and testify,

and that in some instances Lords end nobles have been sent to the gal-

lows on the evidence of house servants." The Negroes were "as well

qualified to testify as they."

If the Negroes were barred from the courtroom, they would have

little chance for justice. "The Government and the world are aware of

this." In all probability Congress would not regard Florida's constitu-

tion "as republican in form, or calculated to secure the ends of justice

to all citizens, unless the negro is permitted to come into Court as a

witness." If the convention denied the Negro this right, and Congress

rejected the constitution on that account, the speaker would "acquiesce

in the justice of the decision."

Marvin concluded his arguments on Negro testimony by urging his

audience "to make a clean breast of this whole business, [to] do full

justice to the negro, though he is of an inferior race," and thereby

"remove the whole subject growing out of his slavery, emancipation and

status, from the theatre of politics." Two years' residence in the North

provided sufficient proof of the wisdom of such a course. While there

was no "unkind feeling . among any class, a stern determination

exists everywhere that slavery, in all its forms and phases, shall be

buried so eternally deep, that it will know no resurrection." All were

determined "that the elements which enter into the foundation of our

Government shall be of universal application, making us a happy and

powerful people."











Having told his listeners that a reorganization of the state

government would be necessary and the constitution would have to re-

flect the changed condition of affairs, the speaker depicted the might

of the Horth and the nation as a means of prompting the to acquiesce

in defeat.

What is our condition? Florida has suffered many losses. "Our

property lies ruined and scattered in the wide sweeping and bloody

paths of war." The ruin wrought here was, however, but one view of the

case. "The suffering has not all fallen to your lot. The sacred re-

mains of 200,090 Northmen [sic] lie buried in Southern graves!" Such

heroism "touches the chivalrous feelings of the South, and teaches us

that we were conquered, not by menials or cowards, but by foemen worthy

of our steel." This was the lesson of the war, and it contained implica-

tions for the future. Although the conquered and the conqueror alike

sustained great losses, the muscle and fiber of northern men were not

to be underestimated.

Their wealth and resources have astonished the nations of
the earth, as well as ourselves, and let me say to you
that the forth is so firmly fixed in its position that
the conflict of the last four years, calling to the field
a million and a half of men and spending money in propor-
tion, has had but the slightest effect upon either busi-
ness or society; and the Government was never so strong in
men, resources and the affections of the people, as when
the war closed. -- At the time of Lee's surrender, Grant
had under his command 800,000 men, and could have held
every position he occupied, and concentrated at any given
point 500,000 of his veteran troops.

The wonder was "not that you were conquered, but that you were able to

hold out so long against such fearful odds." Moreover, the implications










were clear. "The Southern people are brave as the bravest; but it is

folly for them to think that one is a match for ten of the same blood,

and each as brave as himself."

What was true of the North was true of the nation. "The United

States was never so powerful. . ." Not even in the midst of war,

"when you seemed to be a full match for the Great Republic, did France

and England combined dare to insult the old flag. Their sympathies

were with you, but they dared not make them of any practical value, and

now both nations are ready to get down on their marrow-bones at her

bidding!" Floridians formed a part of a "great, powerful and honored

Republic," and could "share in its glory."

The Quincy audience heard Mtrvin climax his effort with the pre-

diction that they would be numbered among the staunchest of Americans.

"When a few years shall have passed away, and the exasperations of the

present are healed, none will be prouder than yourselves to say, 'I AM

AN AMERICAN CITIZEN=L '51

The Democratic Commonwealth, Quincy's only newspaper at the time,

did not comment on the Marvin speech itself, but judging from its reac-

tion to his visit to Quincy, the speech must have been well received.


51For the complete text of Marvin's Quincy speech, see Jackson-
ville Weekly Herald, September 15, 1865. The editor prefaced the speech
text with some facts relative to its authenticity. IHe noted: "We have
been kindly furnished by a gentleman who was present, with a copy of the
speech delivered by Gov. Marvin, on the 5th inst., at Quincy. It is
proper for us to say that the Governor was not aware that the speech was
preserved, and that there has been no opportunity of presenting it to
him for revision or correction. But we have no doubt that he will see
in it a very correct likeness of himself as he appeared on that occasion,
so far as the Living Orator can be transferred to print."










The Comoanealth editorialized: "His conciliatory and considerate

policy coamends him varmly to the people of Florida. "52

It is this type of reaction that suggests that as Iarvin paved

the way for political reunion during the pre-convention period, he

earned the respect of Loyalists and revolutionists alike. As the Jack-

sonville Times, a Republican paper that supported Florida's Loyalists,

put it, Marvin had through "his good sense, his high character, [and]

his impartiality not only made himself a favorite throughout the State,

but by prudence and shill [had] exercised a happy, and . a lasting

influence upon its welfare. . ."53

The Provisional Governor's preconvention speeches to the white

people also received a favorable press in the North. In the opinion of

Benjamin C. Truman, a special correspondent for the New York Times,

I hrvin in his tour of the 'most important places" in Middle and Eastern

Florida had taken the "'bull by the horns,' to the great consternation

of narrow-minded politicians, and to the disgust of the 'crackers' and

the ignorant masses generally. . ." He had effectively "explained to

the people the policy of the President, and vhat was expected of

then."5



52Quincy Semi-Weekly Commonwealth in Jacksonville Weekly Florida
Union, September 16, 1865.

53Jacksonville Weekly Florida Times, December 7, 1865.

54Report of Benjamin C. Truan, dated at Tallahassee, December
7, 1865, in New York Times, December 25, 1865.










The Rhetoric

When William ~Mrvin accepted his appointment as provisional

governor, he accepted the responsibility of preparing Florida for a

resumption of its normal relations with the federal government. Poli-

tical reunion under the President's plan became Mrvin's personal goal

and the goal of those who were to join him in producing a rhetoric of

reunion.

After considering the problems involved in accomplishing this ob-

jective, Marvin realized that reunion hinged on the attainment of three

intermediate goals: (1) getting the people of Florida to accept the

President's terms of reunion, (2) creating a stable economic and social

climate in which the political adjustments could take place, and (3)

getting the people to carry out the necessary acts and procedures. The

first end was the object of a rhetoric of acquiescence. The third goal

was the object of a rhetoric of adjustment, and the second goal was a

common aim of both rhetoric.

Because he was familiar with conditions in the state, Marvin

realized that the attainment of the first goal, getting Floridians to

accept the President's terms of reunion, was a problem of persuasion.

Ihd President Johnson wanted to impose a set of terms on a conquered

people, he could have written out a military order. Because he believed

however, that neither the war nor the victory of the North had impaired

or voided state rights, this was not the course he followed. His plan

of Reconstruction called for acquiescence in certain demands, but, at

the same time, provided that the actual process of adjustment be carried











out by the people themselves within the framework of the democratic

process. If the people were willing to accept the settlement, they

would co-operate by taking the amnesty oath, by electing delegates to

a constitutional convention, and by electing officers for a new state

government. If they were not willing to cooperate, they could reject

the settlement simply by staying away from the polls.

Knowing that the primary objective of the pre-convention period

would be to persuade the people to accept the President's terms of re-

union was one thing; working out a rhetorical strategy that would ac-

complish this end was yet another. Who would favor the President's

terms of reunion? Who would oppose them, and on what grounds? low

many would be opposed, and what would be the extent of audience hos-

tility? Was there anything about the terms of reunion that might ap-

peal to certain audience desires, attitudes, or prejudices?

Marvin realized, first of all, that the white people who were to be

the agents of political adjustment made up two distinct classes, accord-

ing to their background: Loyalists and revolutionists. The Loyalists,

men who had not supported secession or the Confederacy, he believed,

could be counted on to support the President's plan of reunion. But

there were not enough such men to reconstruct the state, for most Flori-

dians had been revolutionists who had either supported secession or

the Confederacy, or both.

Insight acquired from personal contact with the revolutionists

ruled out any false notions the speaker might have had regarding this

class. tany of them, Marvin knew, harbored beliefs and attitudes that










were at odds with his purpose. In 1861, he had witnessed the fervor of

the secessionists,55 and during the first years of the war and on his re-

turn to Florida in 1865, he had come face to face with the bitterness

resulting from the loss of loved ones killed in the conflict. karvin

also expected hostility from the planters and from property owners who

had been impoverished by war and defeat.

Further analysis, however, brought to light certain potential

avenues of persuasion. Marvin knew, for example, that southerners were

a proud people, that they wanted civil rule restored as quickly as poss-

ible, and that perhaps more than anything else, they were int..zested in

the preservation of white supremacy. It was this sort of analysis that

provided basic clues that ultimately lead to the strategy of his

rhetoric of acquiescence.

Marvin used this strategy in his pre-convention speeches when he

called for acquiescence in the President's terms of reunion on the

grounds: (1) that what was demanded was nothing more than formal recog-

nition of fait accoa~li, (2) that equality for the freedmen was not re-

quired, and (3) that acquiescence was the only logical course for a

conquered people.

The Provisional Governor appealed to the logical judgment of his


551n 1860, Marvin had been elected as a Unionist delegate to the
secession convention but was "counted out." His opponents in Key West
denounced hin as a traitor to the state, and two Marion County delegates
boasted to the convention in Tallahassee that they would hang Marvin if
they caught him in the "pincy woods." "If I had gone into the interior
of the State at that time," 1arvin told a New York reporter, "it would
have been at the risk of my life, undoubtedly." Syracuse Sunday Herald,
March 5, 1899.










listeners when he pointed out that what the President demanded was

formal recognition of accomplished facts. What Marvin said of slavery

at Jacksonville, for example, also applied to the Confederate debt and

to the -hole history of secession. The cornerstone of slavery had

"crumbled to dust" at Apponattox and "the winds [had] scattered it."

Floridians would be forced to acknowledge this fact when they wote a

new state constitution. When Marvin told the people of Quincy that

Florida would have to ratify the Thirteenth Amendment he carefully ex-

plained that they would not be "assenting to abolition"; it was being

forced on them by "accomplished facts."

Viewed in this light, the President's demands were not unrealistic.

In fact, under the circumstances, they were reasonable. What made them

acceptable, however, stemmed from a full realization of what was not be-

ing demanded. By emphasizing that the President had not made Negro suf-

frage a condition of reunion, Marvin made the conditions that were being

required appear more favorable. An appeal to the basic wants, beliefs,

or prejudices of the audience--to the southerner's desire for white

supremacy--became the "sugar coating" of the rhetoric of acquiescence.56

In his Jacksonville speech, the Provisional Governor asked the

white people to give the freedmen a fair chance. Because "the white man

[was] superior to the colored man," it was his responsibility to look to

the welfare of the freedmen. His written address to the people of Flor-


56For an historical interpretation of the significance of the
theme of white supremacy in southern society, see Ulrich B. Phillips,
"The Central Theme of Southern History," The Amcrican Historical Review,
XXXIV (October, 1928), 30-43.










ida, released to the press the day before, however, made clear that

whether this responsibility included the conferring of suffrage was "an

open question"--one that would be left to the decision of the constitu-

tional convention. In the heart of the "black arc" at Quincy, Marvin

left no margin for doubt regarding what was and what was not demanded.

Slavery was dead. It had "passed away forever." So far as law was con-

cerned the freedman was now the equal of the white. Suffrage, on the

other hand, did not "necessarily follow." It was not a natural right,

"but a political right, which may be granted or with-held [sic] as sound

policy may dictate." Leaving nothing to inference and making no attempt

to shield the central appeal of acquiescence, Marvin declared that he

did not believe "that as a race [Negroes were or could] be made during

many generations, if ever, the equals PERSONALLY of the Caucasian race,

or [could] enjoy the same political or social position . "

After minimizing what was demanded and emphasizing what was not

demanded, Marvin clinched his appeal for acquiescence in the President's

terms of reunion by fostering a general attitude of resignation. To re-

fuse to acquiesce in defeat would be sheer folly. The Jacksonville audi-

ence was told not to "murmur or complain against the dispensations of

Providence, but [to] cheerfully and hopefully accept the new order of

things, as coming from Him whose ways are not as man's thoughts." The

white people of Quincy were tactfully but candidly told that acqui-

escence in defeat was their only logical course. "The Southern people

are [as] brave as the bravest," he had declared; "but it [would be]

folly for them to think that one is a match for ten of the same blood,











and each as brave as himself."

If a revolutionist who had heard the Provisional Governor had to

tell another what he had heard, he would probably have explained: (1)

Actually the President only wants us to acknowledge what has already

been accomplished; (2) He is not asking us to accept the freedmen as

political or social equals; (3) Since there is no doubt about the fact

we have been licked, resistance is out of the question. The conclusion?

The only logical thing to do is to acquiesce in the President's terms

of reunion.

This was the core of the strategy of acquiescence, but the

rhetoric of acquiescence as a whole embodied other characteristics.

Aside from the basic strategy evolved from an analysis of the subject

and audience, and in addition to the persuasive effect of a general

pattern of arrangement that placed a discussion of what had to be done

first, and what did not have to be done second--a technique that was con-

sistently used whenever the speaker took up the question of the Negro's

status--the rhetoric of acquiescence was also made up of a judicious

combination of ethical, logical, and pathetic appeals, language that

suggested impartiality yet reflected personal interest, and data that

were exaggerated to carry a point.

Marvin's use of logical and pathetic proofs was by no means

limited to the basic strategy of acquiescence. Proofs of this type,

along with ethical appeals, were often used to create positive audience

attitudes and to gain belief on points that were subordinate to the

basic strategy.










The Provisional Governor always began his talks to the revolu-

tionists by establishing his ethos; that is, he worked for the respect

and good will of his audience. He told the people in Jacksonville that

he had a right to speak to them because the President had appointed him

to assist in the work of Reconstruction. A common ground appeal--a

rhetorical device whereby a speaker identifies himself with a hostile

audience through positive reference to their cherished attitudes or be-

liefs--was also used to win good will. At Jacksonville, Marvin explained

that Florida's prosperity and happiness were inseparable from his own.

At Quincy, he declared: "I have sorrowed in your sorrow, and your hap-

piness has been, and still is mine."

Logical and pathetic appeals were combined to make the abolition

of slavery appear less odious when the speaker pointed out that if the

institution were to remain, it would ultimately be overthrown by the

Negroes who had been trained in the skilb of war. Appealing to the

southerner's fear of Negro insurrection, Marvin told the revolutionists

in Quincy that it was a good thing slavery was "out of the way." This

was preferable to having it "disappear in carnage and in rivers of

blood."

Ethical and logical proofs were blended to create a favorable at-

titude toward the federal government. At Jacksonville, Marvin contended

that the "majesty and might" of the federal government were no greater

than its "clemency and mercy." Some revolutionists whose property had

been confiscated during the war might question such a statement, but

confiscation was a war measure. The "so-called Confederate Government"











had confiscated Union property during the war. Hence, there was nothing

unreasonable about the federal government's policy of confiscating the

property of revolutionists. Proof of the government's clemency, more-

over, could be found in United States Attorney General James Speed's

order that the sale of confiscated property be suspended until the

owners had had an opportunity to establish their loyalty or prepare a

proper defense.

The Floridian's desire for self-rule was consistently exploited

as an incentive for acquiescence in the presidential terms. This sort

of appeal came at the beginning of the Quincy speech. After identify-

ing himself with the audience and characterizing the plight of the

people, Marvin candidly announced that Florida would remain "in a state

of tutelage, with her political rights in abeyance, .. till she or-

ganizes for herself, .. a new government." Tile se "spring of

response" was tapped at Jacksonville when Marvin made it clear that the

military would continue to rule until the people had taken matters in

hand and had worked out their own redemption.

Marvin's use of language was another important part of the

rhetoric of acquiescence. His matter-of-fact statements regarding what

had to be done and his candid declarations regarding the finality of

defeat and the end of the Confederacy gave the revolutionists a clear

picture of his position and, at the same time, made a favorable impres-

sion on the loyalists. Marvin's style as a whole, rather than any par-

ticular thing he said, placed a premium on loyalty to the Union and yet

possessed an undertone of respect for Confederate heroism.










Marvin's use of personal pronouns ias a technique that helped him

stay on common ground with his listeners. He subordinated his status

as provisional governor and created the impression that one Floridian

ms talking over a problem with another when he spoke in terms of

restoring "our" constitutional relationship with the general government.

We" are helpless, was one of the statements used to characterize the

condition of Florida's people. At Jacksonville he called upon each man

to do his part in preparing Florida for reunion. "Let each man do his

own duty," he declared, "and God will bless us."

On at least one occasion, Marvin's sincere desire to persuade the

revolutionists to accept defeat and acquiesce in the presidential terms

of reunion caused him to commit the error of overstatement. While de-

picting the might of the North in order to foster an attitude of resig-

nation, in his speech at Quincy he exaggerated when he credited General

Grant with the almost incredible feat of being able in April of 1865 to

concentrate 500,000 of his troops "at any given point."

Marvin's speeches to the revolutionists did not constitute the

whole of the rhetoric of acquiescence. Circumstances were such that he

found it necessary to speak to the freedmen and, as we shall see, these

speeches were not only linked with economic and social problems, but

constituted an integral part of the rhetoric of acquiescence.










CHAPTER III

SPEAKING TO THE FREEDOM DURING THE PRECONVENTION PERIOD:
A RHETORIC OF ACQUIESCEICE


The Scene

William Marvin realized that getting the revolutionists to ac-

quiesce in the President's terms of Reconstruction was only part of his

job in preparing Florida for a resumption of its normal relations with

the federal government. He knew that the creation of a new state

government, and for that matter reunion itself, could not be accom-

plished without the permissive atmosphere of a stable economy and a

peaceful society. Firsthand experience with life as it had been in

ante bellun Florida, moreover, had taught Marvin that the tranquility

and the economic stability of Florida's new social order would depend

on the degree of harmony that could be established between a people
1
who had only recently been half-slave and half-free, and on the rapid-

ity with which the ex-slave could adjust to his new status as a free

laborer.


1The census of 1860 listed Florida's population as 140, 24--77,747
white, 932 free colored, and 61,745 slaves. Population of the United
States in 1860 (Washington, 1864), p. 53. The New Era cited an 1663
census in reporting that the Negro population had increased to 63,000 in
1863, and used Freedmen's Bureau reports to support the claim that the
number of Negroes had soared to 100,000 in 1866. Gainesville Weekly New
Era January 27, 1866. Benjamin C. Truman, a correspondent for the 1cw
York Times, estimated that Florida's Negro population had increased by
about 20,000. "Florida," he reported, "had about sixty thousand colored
men within her possessions before the war, which were . increased to
eighty thousand, about twenty thousand slaves having been sold into or
urged into the State during the war from neighboring states liable to
fall into Federal hands." Report of Benjamin C. Truman, dated at Talla-
hassee, December 9, 1865, in New York Times, December 25, 1865.










The white people, accustomed as they were to a society that had

been regulated by one legal code for slaves, another for free Negroes,

and a third for whites, were not experienced in the give and take so

essential to racial harmony; and what aggravated the situation even more,

they lacked confidence in the ex-slave's ability to function as a free

laborer. This, of course, explains why both Alfred Sears and William

Marvin called on the white people to accept the freedom of the slave,

to be patient with him until he had learned how to live with freedom,

and not to let their prejudices stand in the way of his development as

a free laborer.

The freedmen, on the other hand, were ill-equipped to contribute

to Florida's economic and social stability; in fact, there was a strong

possibility that they would unwittingly produce economic and social

chaos. This stemmed from the fact that they constituted the backbone

of a labor force that was essential to an agrarian economy, and from their

heritage as slaves.

The Florida Union pointed up the significance of the freedmen's

role in Florida's economy when it observed in May of 1865, just after

the planters had sowed the season's crop, that its cultivation would

require the freedmen's undivided attention and industry. Whether the

ex-slaves would stay on the plantations and tend to the crop, it con-

tinued, was a question that constituted a great "source of uneasiness,"

for if they neglected their work for two weeks or more, the crop would










be lost and entire counties impoverished.

Contributing to this uneasiness was the realization that a people

who had known no life but that of slavery might not believe they were

free until they had had an opportunity to put that freedom to some sort

of practical test. Many of the freedmen, it was feared, would settle

on freedom of movement as just such a test. From slavery days, the

freedman knew that if he left the plantation, he would have to have a

pass. He knew that if he tried to escape, he would be pursued and,

when captured, returned to his master. Accustomed as he was to the

restraints of slavery, it seemed almost inevitable that he would experi-

ment with freedom by leaving the plantation and by wandering off beyond

the reach of the master to determine for himself how far he could get

without pass or pursuit.3

Another concept of freedom that was harbored in the minds of

many ex-slaves--one that went hand in hand with freedom of movement--

was that freedom meant freedom from work, that it was a sort of continu-

ous jubilation.4 Again, this kind of thinking had been shaped by the

freedman's experience as a slave. His contact with free people had

largely been limited to the plantation, and the thing that impressed

him most about "free folks" was their leisure. Freedom in the mind of

the ex-slave, explained the Florida Union, was a notion that involved


Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, May 27, 1865.

3Coulter, The South During Reconstruction, 1865-1877, p. 50.

Ibid.










freedom from want "without the necessity of unremitting labor, . .

the practice of economy, [or] the exercise of care or forethought for

the future."5

As ironic as it seemed, it was nonetheless true that if enough

ex-slaves wandered to test their freedom, they would unwittingly strike

a devastating blow against the economy that had profited from their

slavery. Furthermore, because many harbored the notion that freedom

was a sort of lazy man's paradise, it followed that many would become

vagrants and thereby bring about even greater economic discord and com-

pound it with social chaos.

Still another side of the freedman's nature that promised to

undermine the economy, produce social unrest, and engender racial ten-

sion was his ignorance--a carry-over from the slave codes of a bygone

era.6 The particular facet of this ignorance that complicated the

freedman's adjustment as a social man and a free laborer in 1865 was

his credulity. It was this aspect of his nature that prompted the Flor-

ida Union to take a dim view of the many stories that were circulating

throughout Florida during the pre-convention period. "Some days," it

related, "a report will travel about the country that the lands, crops

and everything [sic] is to be given to the negroes; then a report that


5Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, September 9, 1865.

Although some Negroes might have received private instruction,
most were illiterate. Prior to 1865, it was illegal for Negroes to
meet for any purpose other than work or religious services. Simkins,
A History of the South, p. 126; Thelma Bates, "The Legal Status of the
Ilegro in Floridarid' orida Historical Quarterly, VI (January, 1928), 176.











the emancipation proclamation is to be null and void. To [the] darkened

minds [of the freedmen]," it warned, "such stories appear as credible as

official orders."' The New Era made the same point, but added a touch

of humor when it explained that the freedmen had lost whatever ~onse

they had the moment the freedom horn blew.

Not long after July 4, 1865, a resident of Leon County, one of

seven principal "cotton producing plantation counties" in Florida,9

told of a warning that had come true.

Negroes from a circle of twenty or thirty miles assembled
in Tallahassee on the 4th inst., with the avowed expecta-
tion of receiving a share of the property of the white
people, which they had been informed would be divided among
them. Though they walked this and shorter distances, they
supposed they would drive home with their own carriages, or
"a-horseback." And thus the poor creatures are deluded by
their own bewilderment.10

Incidents such as this constituted in a sense the humorous side of the

tragic comedy that evolved from the Negro's passage from slavery to

freedom. The tragic part of the drama, on the other hand, stemmed from

a realization of what could happen if the freedmen, who made up approxi-

mately half of the state's population, wandered to test freedom,

languished in idleness, waited in ignorance for their share of the white

people's property.


7
Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, June 24, 1865.

8Gainesville Weekly New Era, December 16, 1865.

9Jilliams, "Negro Slavery in Florida," p. 187.

loLong, Florida Breezes, pp. 382-383.










Under these circumstances and in the interest of the social and

economic adjustments that were essential counterparts of political ad-

justment, it is little wonder that William arvin made the instruction

of these children of freedom a part of the rhetoric of acquiescence.

So far as the writer knows, there are two extant "freedom

speeches," but since both cover the same ground, we need examine only

one of them.11 As we shall see, Marvin's freedom speech in Marianna,

located in the heart of Florida's plantation counties, provided some

basic answers to some basic questions. Are we free? What about "dis

here freedom"? What is freedom? Where did it come from? Is the story

about the President's plan to give us "forty acres and a mule" true, or

is "[dis] a bad egg dat chicken won't hatch no how!"


The Discourse

Speech of William Marvin to the Freedmen in Marianna

As Villiam Marvin moved from place to place in his pre-convention

tour of the "black arc" counties, his activities began to take on a


ll0f the two extant speeches to freedmen in 1865, one at Quincy
on September 10, 1865, and one at Marianna on September 17, 1865, the
Marianna speech was selected because it was reported in detail. For an
account of the Quincy speech, see Quincy Semi-Weekly Commonwcalth, Sep-
tember 16, 1865, in Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, September 30,
1865. Chaplain H. H. Moore, later appointed superintendent of education
for freedmen, spoke to Negro audiences during the spring and sumner
months. Jacksonville e'-kly Florida Union, June 24, 1865; Jacksonville
Weekly Herald, August 31, 10.5. larvin talked to Monticello's Negroes
in late Uovcnber. The Reverend L. M. Hobbs, later named state superin-
tendent of Negro schools, addressed the same audience a week earlier.
Jacksonville Weekly Florida Times, December 7, 1865. J. C. Gardner, a
Gainesville attorney and later a Freedmen's Bureau agent for Alachua
County, spoke to Negroes in Gainesville on December 10, and in Micanopy
on December 24, 1865. Gainesville Weekly New Era, December 16, 1865.










meaningful pattern. After his arrival in a community he would spend

some time studying local conditions. A day or so later he would address

the white people of the area concerning the changes they had to accept

and the political settlement that had been offered by the President.

The "freedom speech" came last, and for reasons connected with the ex-

slave's duties as a field hand and his religious proclivities, it always

came on the Sabbath. When Marvin visited Quincy, for example, he ar-

rived on September 4, spoke to the white people on the following day,

and gave a "freedom speech" five days later on Sunday, September 10.

The pattern at Marianna was the same. Marvin talked to the

white people on September 16,13 and on the following day--Sunday, Sep-

tember 17, 1865--spoke to the freedmen.


1Marvin's choice of Sunday as the best time to talk to the freed-
men was influenced by two important considerations. The freedmen were
needed in the cotton fields during the week, and Sunday, as had been the
case in slavery days, was the customary time for leisure and Christian
worship. In short, Sunday was the best day from the planter's point of
view because Marvin could talk to the freedmen without interfering with
the cultivation of the crop. From the speaker's point of view, Sunday
was also ideal inasmuch as the ex-slave's experience with religion con-
stituted a potential avenue of persuasion--a frame of reference which
the speaker could use to clarify and support whatever ideas he wished
to convey. For information on the slave's religious experience, see
Ulrich B. Phillips and James D. Glunt (eds.), Florida Plantation Records
from the Papers of George Noble Jones (St. Louis, 1927), p. 31; uillians,
"Negro Slavery in Florida," pp. 189-190.

13The writer was not able to locate the speech of September 16.
A Tallahassee newspaper reported that "the Governor addressed the people
of Jackson at Marianna on the 16th inst." A spectator related "that the
speech had a happy effect." Tallahassee Semi-Weekly Floridian, Septem-
ber 26, 1865.










At this town, when the appointed hour arrived, more than a

thousand :Neroes had assembled to hear Marvin speak. Before the

Provisional Governor and his escort appeared, the Negroes sang "several

hymns in Camp Meeting Stentorian style." After "a very appropriate

prayer," by the Reverend Mr. West, pastor of the Marianna Methodist

Church, Marvin began his speech, but was interrupted by a sudden rain.

The heroess were "drenched to the skin," and "their starch lost its

stiffness and their swell collapsed. . ." When the rain stopped,

"the crowd gathered again, but materially changed in the 'pomp and

circumstance of' liberty. . ." Marvin began anew.

In his opening remarks he traced the source of the Negro's free-

dom. To begin with, the colored people had not won their freedom on

the battlefield. The "terrible war" had been between the white men of

the North and the South.

With this war you had nothing to do; you neither commenced
it, nor did you end it,nor is the result attributable to
you at all. It was a white man's war. It is true, that a
few colored men were enlisted in the army of the U. S., but


14The Floridian provided a vivid account of the Negro audience:
"It was on the sabbath and they appeared in their best--starched, ruf-
fled and gay--both sexes fully represented, and all ages, sizes, shapes,
and complexions, from the unadulterated, impenetrable black African, to
the fair mixture that tells of an association of blood in which the
Anglo Saxon is even or greatly has the advantage." Ibid.
Marianna was one of the "sore spots" in Florida's interior.
Less than a year before, on September 23, 1864, Marianna had been the
scene of a federal raid, led by General A. Asboth. Some three hundred
old men and boys, who tried to meet the attack, were forced to retreat
to a church. Asboth's men set fire to the structure and shot the de-
fenders as they ran for cover into the churchyard cemetery. The com-
munity had been plundered, and prisoners and booty carried off to a
federal base at Pensacola. Davis, The Civil War and Reconstruction in
Florida, pp. 311-312.











they fought no battles; or if engaged at all in such, they
were trifling affairs; indeed, you had nothing to do with
it. You remained at home, worked, beloved yourselves, and
the blood of no man is on your hands.

Second, emancipation was not a war aim. "At the beginning, the war was

neither intended nor prosecuted . to liberate you from slavery.

Neither the Northern white man nor the Southern white man expected nor

intended such a result; neither, therefore, is entitled to your thanks

or gratitude."

To whom, then, should thanks be offered for the boon of freedom?

The answer supplied by the speaker was in keeping with the religious

atmosphere of the occasion. He declared:

To a higher power should you feel grateful for your freedom
today--to the Providence, and tender mercies of Almighty God.
You are free; as free as the white man--(A voice--"Thank the
Lordy, blessed Moses Jesus!" followed by many pious ejacula-
tions)--and never again so long as the U. S. exist . .will
you be reduced to slavery.

Another question the colored people should be able to answer for

themselves concerned the identity of their friends. Who were their true

friends? To whom could they look for guidance and sympathy? Answering

in favor of the Southern white people, Marvin said:

If you ask me the question, whether the white man of the
North or the white man of the South is your friend, I will
answer you by saying that I hope and believe both of them
are; but if it comes to a question of certainty as to which
of the two is your better friend, I shall answer plainly and
tell you, the white man of the South. I was born in the North,
raised and educated there, but I have spent the last thirty
years of my life in the South, and I consider myself capable
of judging between the two people particularly in reference
to yourselves. I know the Northern man, or Yankee, as you
call him, from the crown of his head to the sole of his foot,
and I tell you today as your friend, that the Southern white
man, with whom you were raised and who is acquainted with your
habits and customs, is the best friend you have.










Moving on to the broader topic of the responsibilities of free-

dom, hMrvin explained that freedom could "prove a blessing . looking

to .. advancement and civilization, or a curse, involving a condition

of vagabondism and ultimate destruction." The outcome, of course, rested

with the colored people themselves. "It is with you, and you alone to

determine," he declared. Iibcration had come "unexpectedly" and involved

"a state of trial" for both former slaves and owners. While the masters

had to accept the financial losses involved in emancipation, the colored

people had the obligation of demonstrating their appreciation of freedom

through "good conduct." The best way they could do this would be to

measure up to their new roles as free laborers and social citizens.

Instruction relative to the obligations of a free laborer came

first. Drawing on his knowledge as an ex-slaveholder, Marvin told the

freedmen that he knew they would want to test their freedom.

I know, that though I am here as the Governor of the State,
and tell you that you are free, that you will not believe it.
You are prepared to say, that you remain on the same planta-
tions and are controlled and directed by the same owners,
for whom, as before, you have to work, and that you do not
understand by such facts that you are free; and on and after
the first of January next, I know as well as if I witnessed
it now, what you will do. You will leave your old homes--
drift about the country--float from plantation to plantation--
hundreds of you will come to town, and everywhere you will be
looking for freedom, and it will only be when your old masters
and mistresses do not pursue you that you will be convinced that
you are no longer slaves. And when you shall find as you will
that you are free-find it with hungry stomachs and with nothing
to eat, with the fact that none cares for you, and that you are
driven more than ever to care for yourselves you will then begin
wisely to consider what is best to be done. 1


15Mrvlin's fears were well founded. In fact, his prediction
materialized before the first of the year. Editorials in a Tallahssce











Following this attempt to talk the ex-slaves out of wandering to

test freedom, Marvin raised another question: "After you shall have


newspaper indicated that the city had been transformed into a camping
ground for Negro vagrants. The Floridian of November 3, 1865, editori-
alized: "We call the attention of the powers that be to the depredations
committed on the City Cemetery. The fences and palings enclosing graves
are being torn down and carried off, probably for fire-wood by the idle
neg-os (sic] who infest the city and its suburbs." On November 7, it
reported that "every tenement, stable and outhouse is filled, and . .
that in some tenements they are so thick that men, women and children
live together indiscriminately. .. ." The November 28 issue recalled
Marvin'S prediction at Marianna, that hundreds of Negroes would come to
the towns, and reported that "Tallahassee has already witnessed the
evil. .. Ever since their freedom, not only from the immediate neighbor-
hood, but from the neighboring counties, they have been crowding into this
place." The situation was described as a "public disorder" which posed a
threat to "health, morals and industry." Tallahassee Semi-L'ce:ly Flori-
dian, November 3, 7, 28, 1865. For further information on Negro vagrancy
in Florida, see Tallahassee Tri-Weekly Florida Sentinel, January 2, 1866;
Jacksonville Weekly Times, February 8, in Tallahassee Tri- eekly Florida
Sentinel, February 10, 1866.
Though enough Negroes wandered to produce public disorder and
caused a great deal of anxiety on the part of the white people, the prob-
lem did not reach anticipated proportions. Military and civil officials
joined forces to campaign against idleness and inculcate habits of in-
dustry among the freedmen. Many freedmen, moreover, had an opportunity
to test freedom during the Christmas holidays--a period that came between
crops. By the end of January and the beginning of February, 1866, the
planters began to express their confidence in the ex-slave as a free
laborer. The Hew Era, the most extreme of Florida's Democratic papers,
was among the first to praise the freedmen. Generalizing with respect
to Alachua and Marion Counties, it announced "that the negroes [were]
doing exceedingly well. . ." Gainesville Weekly New Era, February 17,
1866. A business associate who wrote David L. Yulee, one of Florida's
former senators imprisoned at Fort Pulaski, of affairs on his plantation,
reported: "I am truly glad to have it in my power to tell you that, . .
the negroes, . are working very well. . I have been surprised to
see such a great change for the better." John S. Purviance to David L.
Yulee, Cottonwood, March 6, 1866. Yulee Papers. For further informa-
tion on the freedmen's successful adjustment as a free laborer, see
Abraham K. Allison to David L. Yulee, Quincy, February 22, 1866, ibid.;
Marianna Weekly Courier, February 1, 1866, in Tallahaacee Tri-Weekly
Florida Sentinel, February 6, 1866; Tallahassee Tri-Weeily Florida
Sentinel, February 13 and August 9, 1866; Gainesville Ueczly Hew Era.
July 20, 1866.










found your freedom, and driven by stern necessity to do something for

yourselves, the question is, What is the best for you to do?" The

answer was couched in simple language.

My advice is to remain on the plantations where you have
been accustomed to work, with your former owners if they
will make a contract with you. Make the best contract
you can with them, and show to them that you are willing
to work better, now that you are compensated for your work,
than you ever have done before. Be faithful, be truthful,
be honest, be interested in the affairs of the plantation;
see that the mules are well fed, that the hogs get good at-
tention and that the things entrusted to you be not
neglected.

The mention of contracts naturally led to some advice concerning

them. They might be made with former owners, if they were "kind," but

no member of the audience need "remain with such as are disposed to

treat you cruelly and meanly. . ." The contract should be "for a

part of the crop or so much money. . ." When making a contract, more-

over, the freedmen should be sure "that the man with whom you make it

has property--has land, or mules and wagons and cattle out of which you

may, if necessary, get your pay. .. ." As everyone knew, "all you can

get from a cat is his skin. ..

Making a contract was one matter; abiding by it another. The

audience was counseled not to "break off" from an agreement, because

. . you will do great injustice alike to those who have employed you

and to yourselves." They must develop "a character for faithfulness,

truthfulness and industry." Such was their duty, "a duty which you owe

to your God who has given . you freedom, to yourselves and to the

great country that protects you." Those who did not labor "would soon











form habits of great idleness and indolence--would resort to stealing

to keep from starving, and thus become a curse even to themselvess]"

What was true for the freedmen also held true for the women. Freedom

was not an excuse to "put on airs."l6 Addressing the women directly,

Marvin declared: "Do not think because you are free, that your hus-

bands are to support you, and that you are to sit all day in your

houses and do nothing." Able bodied women were to "go into the fields

and work as . before." This would be "lady-like." There was

"nothing more trifling, . than a good-for-nothing shiftless woman."

Everyone had to work. The destiny of the entire race was in the hands

of each individual.

The white man, continued Marvin--emphasing the freedman's need

to establish a good record as a competent laborer--can care for himself

"without you." There is "no danger of his starving; if anybody is to

starve," he said, "it will be you and the fault will be yours." As

proof of the fact that the white was not dependent on the Negro, Marvin

referred to the "thousands of white men in the North who have never

owned a slave ahd scarcely have ever seen one, whose industrious pursuits

and habits have secured to them a good living, and many of them fortunes."

The sane would be true "with the white of the South if there was not one


l6Social aspirations seemed to be universal among the Negro
women. They "retired from the cotton fields, for no lady worked in the
fields, if, indeed, anywhere. Their first great ambition was to wear a
veil and carry a parasol." Coulter, The South During Reconstruction,
1865-1877, pp. 52-53. The New Era revealed that the freedwonen in Flor-
ida were no exception. "In many instances," it reported, "the negro
women, as their co-workers say, 'have the devil in them' and will not
wok. Gainesville Weekly New Era, February 17, 1866.










of you to remain in the country."

With freedom "found," then, the colored people could improve

themselves by remaining on the plantation, by making contracts with

their former masters, and by establishing proper habits of industry.

Marvin introduced his next point--the social responsibilities

that went with freedom--by contrasting freedom with slavery. In tell-

ing his colored listeners of some of the differences between the two

conditions, the speaker created a vivid comparison through his use of

concrete, personalized examples and plain, direct language.

You will have much to think about, great trials to en-
counter--difficulties to contend with never experienced
before, and harder work . to do than you have ever
done before. Heretofore, comparatively, you have had no
cares. Your masters, influenced by interest aside from
human feelings, which none question many of them having,
have fed you, clothed you, and when sick have nursed you
and when necessary have employed medical attendance; the
raising of your children has received almost their exclu-
sive care; they furnished the old women to watch over them
during the absence of their mothers, who came two or three
times to nurse them during the day. Now, as freed men and
women, you are by your work to feed yourselves, clothe your-
selves, employ medical attendance, [and] raise and educate
your children.

Would the children be raised properly? Marvin was afraid some

might suffer. He knew of instances where "mothers . neglected their

children to perish and to die." They wished them dead "so that they no

longer would be on their hands." These "abominable" and "unnatural"

acts would, "in time, bring down on the heads of those base enough to

commit them the awful punishment they deserve."

Education was one of the privileges of being free. Some of the

listeners who were "old or grown up to be men and women," could not











expect to experience "much of the benefits of freedom," but they would

have the privilege of sending their children to school, and "so preparing

them that they will be greatly benefited by it." Children should be

reared "in the fear of the Lord, and when they shall be as old as you,

they will know something about freedom and be far better calculated than

you now are to get along in the world."

Another matter incident to freedom was matrimony.17 Those who

had "never been regularly married," were ordered to "go at once and get

a clergymen [sic], or a magistrate, and be so." Moreover, the law of

God allowed the taking of "only one wife, or one husband."

Saving and the ownership of property were also emphasized as im-

portant aspects of freedom. Marvin suggested the proper policy by hav-

ing his audience visualize the benefits of industry and thrift.

Some of you will work hard, make a little money and save it,
and so on, till you get one, or two, or three hundred dol-
lars, and then you will buy a piece of land, and you go to
some white man kindly disposed to the colored man and borrow
money enough to buy a mule and a plough, &c., and you will set
up for yourselves. Others will in time buy town lots and
build on them, and so on; others will work and save till they
will own considerable property and become good examples for
emulation.

The next bit of instruction concerned politeness, a subject

which Marvin emphasized by identifying it with employment. Again, the


17In the ante bellum South, marriages among slaves were "arrange-
ments of convenience"; hence, many unions had to be legalized and sancti-
fied. Coulter, The South During Reconstruction, 1865-1877, p. 53.
Legislation requiring that Negroes living as husband and wife "be
regularly joined in the holy bands of matrimony" by October 11, 1866,
produced numerous marriage rites. An Alachua County judge, for example,
"joined together in wedlock as many as twenty couples in one day."
Gainesville Weekly New Era, July 13, 1866.










speaker's style was plain and direct.

Do not think that, because you are free, you have a right
to be impudent, uncivil, or impolite to white people. You
have no such right. Impoliteness is not justifiable in any
one. You should be as civil, as polite as you always have
been. . You do not wish to make white people hate you.
It is to them that you are to look for almost everything;
you want to be instructed by them; you want to learn from
them a great many things you cannot possibly learn without
them; so you must be polite and civil to them and don't put
on airs and flaunt and look insolent at them, and don't as I
have heard has been done in places, jostle, or rub, or shove
up against them when passing them on the road. Such a course
is highly wrong and will get you into trouble. Some of the
most polite men I have ever seen were colored men who have been
raised in good families. They were naturally polite and knew
well how to be so, and it is so with you. You can be as
polite as any one, and you ought not to be otherwise. It is
a duty which is due to yourselves; it is gentlemanly and lady-
like, and, now that you are free, you should try and be gentle-
men and ladies. You have a greater inducement now than you
ever had before, and if you wish to be esteemed as ladies and
gentlemen, you must conduct yourselves accordingly. Call your
old Master, Master, and your old Mistress, Mistress. It is
right that you should; it is proper, it is polite. You do not
mean by calling them so, that you belong to them, but that you
wish to be respectful and polite, and to give no cause for offence,
but rather desire to please. I don't say that you must call them
Master or Mistress; but I say it is civil and polite in you to do
it, and you ought, therefore, to do it. I have known many white
servants, and there are thousands in the North where I was raised,
and it is so in England, too, who call those who employ them
Master and Mistress. It is a term of respect and deference, and
they call them thus because this is so. There they, as I said
before, are white servants, and they till the land, feed the
stock and do other work that is done here, and they are respected
and all of them find employment, as you may do if you will conduct
yourselves properly.

If the colored people reflected upon their status, they would have

to conclude that the mantle of freedom did not make them the "equal" of

the whites. To be equal, they would "have to be able to write a book,

build a railroad, a steam engine, a steamboat and thousands of other

things. . ." The white people were far ahead of them, and it was











foolish "to think they are not superior to you and will ever be .. "

The whites, however, were willing to help them "rise," on condition that

the colored people try to "raise" themselves. It was to the advantage

of the audience, then, to labor to make "fast friends" of the white

people rather than bring scorn upon their race through "bad behavior."

Having told the ex-slaves that they were "as free as the white

man," and having instructed then in some of the responsibilities of free-

dom, Marvin next tried to discredit a rumor that had been spread among

the colored population in various parts of the "black arc." He referred

to "a story circulated in Middle Florida that on the first of January. .

the land, mules, &c., will be taken from your former owners and divided

among you." He wondered if anyone in the audience had heard the story.

"Have you? Speak out. If you have tell me so. ('Ise hearn it, Ise

hearn it,' said all.) Well who told you so? (An answer, 'the soldiers')

What soldiers? These soldiers in town? ('No sir, the Confederate

soldiers.')"

The speaker went on to relate that he had attempted to discredit

the same story for "the colored people in Quincy"; they had not under-

stood. He wanted the audience before him to "understand . and be-

lieve what I say." The President had sent him to talk to then and to

tell them the truth. "If he had thought I would not tell you the truth,"
,18
explained Marvin, "he would not have sent me." The President did not


1A New York Times correspondent, writing from Tallahassee on
October 26, reported: "The black population have a firmly established
belief that the estates of the slaveholders are to be divided among the
former slaves--that they are to be provided with homes and means to live










plan to give them 'one foot of land, nor a mule, nor hog, nor cow, not

even a knife and fork or spoon. (A voice, 'Dar! . hear dat? dat's

a bad egg dat chicken wont hatch no how!')" The President had granted

freedom and that was "everything he intends to give you. .. ."

The reason for the President's decision was just; in fact, the

President had received his instructions from God.

Before the war each one of you was worth in dollars and
cents to your owners, eight hundred, or a thousand, or
fifteen hundred dollars--worth more than fifty acres, or
eighty acres of land and a mule thrown in. Well, the
President has, in giving you your freedom, taken so many
dollars and cents from your old masters, and he thinks, as
I do, they have lost enough, and you by it have had enough
given to you. If he were to give you more it would prove
a curse to you. God has directed the President how much to
give you and he will give no more.

The Lord knew what was best for them. If they were given land

and mules, they would be proud and say, "I have land now and a mule and

I am a gentleman, and I ain't going to work." It was best for them to

be content with their freedom, "and what else you have you will have to

get by work." They were at liberty to work for themselves. They had


independently by the government. .. When Gov. Marvin, in a recent
speech, undertook to undeceive them, they turned from him in disgust
and believed him in league with their old masters to deceive then." New
York Times, November 10, 1865. Perhaps, it was the fact that Marvin
failed to convince the Quincy Negroes that prompted him to establish his
ethos with the Marianna audience, before refuting the story of the land
and mules.
In his attempt to clarify the matter for the Q-uincy Negroes, Mur-
vin had explained that the story of free land and mules had been started
by General Edward M. McCook's men. "These men said this because thyy
did not know the war was over and were here amongst us endeavoring to
use this as one of the means of stopping the war." See Marvin's speech
to the freedmen in Quincy, Quincy Weekly Comsonwealth, September 16, 1865,
in Jacksonville Weekly Florida Unlon, September 30, 1865.











"none other to work for." They belonged to "no man," and had "ceased

to be property."

As he approached the conclusion of his speech, Marvin again ex-

horted the audience to "struggle hard and do right," and to "live as

good men and women." They all appeared to be well equipped for work;

they were "well fed, well clothed, healthy, strong, full of muscle and

sinew, showing kind treatment. . ."

Finally, Marvin said he believed he had "covered the whole ground."

If he had left "anything out" he wished to be informed "what it [was]."

After answering a few questions he again inquired if all were satisfied.

"Are you? (We are,' by all.) Will you promise me to do the best you

can, be kindly disposed to all,to be good men and women? ('We will.')"

Marvin, who had validated many of his pronouncements on this Sunday morn-

ing by relating them to "God" or the "Lord," closed with a benediction:

"God help you do it."19

The probability is that this speech on freedom and its responsi-

bilities both pleased and disappointed the Marianna Negroes. Writing of

the reaction of Florida's Negroes to his "freedom speeches," Marvin


19For the text of the Marianna speech, see Tallahassee Semi-Weekly
Floridian September 26, 1865; Jacksonville Uecl-ly Florida Union, October
7, 1865. When a portion of the speech became a szurzc of controversy
between the Jacksonville Herald, which was owned by a northerner, and
the Florida Union, which stipported Johnsonian Reconstruction, its authen-
ticity came into question. The Florida Union affirmed: "until we see a
contradiction or denial of that speech of the Governor, as reported, we
S. believe that the address was substantially reported in the language
uttered by him on the occasion. . ." Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union,
October 7, 1865. No contradiction or denial appeared In subsequent is-
sues of the Florida Union.










related: "Judging from the stolid and indifferent manner which they

exhibited when spoken to on the subject, one would not suppose that they

regarded freedom as 'a thing of beauty and joy forever.'20

Some who had children by several women were hard put to choose a
21
wife.2 Others were infirm and aged, and now that they were no longer

wards of their former masters, feared for their survival.22 All who had

heard the story of "forty acres and a mule" were, no doubt, provoked by

the speaker's denial of its truth. On the other hand, the prospects of

freedom were pleasant and the speaker's expressions of confidence in his

listeners flattering.

The arianna speech had its effect both within the "black arc," and

outside. Charles E. Dyke, owner and editor of the Democratic Floridian,

wrote: "We have read a number of addresses to similar audiences from

several distinguished gentlemen, but none of them, in appropriateness,"

equalled that of Marvin.23 The Jacksonville Herald, which had been

purchased by a northerner, E. H. Reed of Wisconsin, did not share the


20Kearney, "Autobiography of William arvin, p. 217.

21For a report of a conversation on this subject reputedly held
between Marvin and a freedman at Marianna, see Tallahassee Semi-Weekly
Florldian, September 26, 1865.

22Such was the concern of an aged Negro who queried Marvin after
he had finished speaking to a colored audience in Jefferson County. For
a report of the dialogue, see Kearney, "Autobiography of William Iarvin,"
p. 217. For information on the problem of aged freedmen, see editorial:
'What will become of Old Pompey?" Monticello Weekly Famiy Friend, in
Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, December 9, 185.

23Tallahassee Semi-Weekly Floridian, September 26, 1865.











enthusiasm of the Floridian.24 It took exception to Narvin's treatment

of the Negro's role in the war; he had asserted it was "a white man's

war." Such a statement was "a falsehood and a slander. 25 The Florida

Union, a staunch advocate of Johnsonian Reconstruction, entered the

skirmish by coming to Marvin's defense. "This language of the Governor

is true, every word of it." It had been a "white man's war," and until

"the promulgation of President Lincoln's emancipation proclamation it

was prosecuted without any ultimate view of changing the status of the

negro in the then slave States." Colored soldiers had numbered only

150,000 and "were not enlisted to any great extent till near the close

of the war. . ." The Herald was admonished to "try to hunt up

modesty and decency enough to prevent . calling Gov. Marvin, a liar
,,26
and a slanderer."2

The Jacksonville Times, a Radical Republican paper that supported

the Unionist element in Florida, did not restrict its comments to the


24During the short period of its existence, August to December
of 1865, the Jacksonville Weekly Herald served both Democrats and Repub-
licans. The paper was started as a Democratic organ in August of 1865,
with Joseph F. Rogero as proprietor, and Holmes Steele as editor.
Gainesville Weekly New Era, August 19, 1865. In its third issue, Rogero
reported that he had sold the paper to E. H. Reed. The New Era, in its
coverage of the sale, related that E. H. Reed was the son of Harrison
Reed, United States postal agent for Florida. Ibid., September 2, 1865.
By December of 1865, the Herald had been absorbed by the Jacksonville
Times, a Radical Republican paper that supported the Unionists in Flor-
ida. See Jacksonville Weekly Florida Times, December 14, 1865.
25Jacksonville Weekly Herald, September 29, in Jacksonville :.eckly
Florida Union, October 7, 865.
26The Florida Union defended the position taken by Marvin con-
cerning the Negro's role in the war, in its issues of October 7 and 21,
1865.










Marianna speech. Instead, it came out with a "blanket editorial"

covering the Provisional Governor's speechmaking to all classes during

the preconvention period. Ignoring politics and the squabble over the

Mariana speech, it editorialized:

If it is difficult for the slave to fit himself at once
for the exercise of the duties and responsibilities of a
freedman, it is also difficult for the master to immedi-
ately shake off the life-long habits of arbitrary power
and at once regard his late chattel as changed to a full
man and equal, before the law and before God, with him-
self. But Gov. Marvin has allayed the bitterness of
prejudice by his frank, generous and manly bearing, and
has commanded the respect of all classes by his adherence
to truth and his undisguised utterance of the well-defined
purposes of the federal Government.27


The Rhetoric

What William Marvin said to the white people during the precon-

vention period was largely aimed at persuading them to acquiesce in the

President's terms of reunion. His remarks, and those of Alfred Sears

concerning racial harmony and the Negroes as free laborers, concerned

the related end of creating a stable economic and social atmosphere for

political adjustment.

As we analyze the rhetoric of the "freedom speeches," we see that

the Provisional Governor's remarks to the freedmen also constitute a

rhetoric that served these same two ends. Marvin had to convince the

ex-slaves they were free, and educate them regrding their economic

and social responsibilities without undermining the rhetoric of

acquiescence.


27Jacksonville Weekly Florida Times, October 5, 1865.











Talking to thousands of illiterate ex-slaves on such intangible

matters as freedom and its responsibilities was a difficult atsigisent,

but not an impossible one for a speaker who was skilled in discovering

and employing the available means of persuasion. Marvin fashioned his

rhetoric from proofs which he derived frno his knowledge of the audi-

ence and his analysis of the occasion, and from rhetorical techniques

which he selected and used because of their appropriateness for his

purpose and his audience.

Proofs were needed to convince the ex-slave that he was free.

These were found in his background as a Christian and in the atmosphere

of the immediate occasion. Much of Marvin's personal proof or ethos

in the Marianna speech stemmed from the fact that he spoke on Sunday

and that his speech was preceded by religious songs and by prayer.

When he told the ex-slaves freedom had come from God, he, in effect,

combined a religious identity with an appeal to the ex-slave's belief

in God to establish or "prove" the reality of freedom.

Restatement was the rhetorical method chosen to reinforce belief

in freedom. The theme "you are free" or "God has given you freedom,"

or a combination of the two ideas, was systematically emphasized through-

out the speech. Marvin began with statements to this effect, worked them

into transitions, included them along with advice on a variety of sub-

jects, and incorporated them into his peroration.

One internal suymmry contained this statement: "I have told you

that you are free, as free as the white man, that you never will again

be slaves--that God himself has given this freedom to you. . ." In










the course of advising the freedmen to make contracts with their em-

ployers, Marvin admonished them to be faithful. It was their duty to

be so, "a duty which you owe to your God who has given you freedom. .. ."

As he neared his conclusion, he restated the theme of freedom four dif-

ferent ways: "You now are at liberty to go to work for yourselves; you

have none other to work for. You belong to no man; you have ceased to

be property; you never will be sold again. . ."

Proof was also needed to discredit the rumors about gifts of

land and mules. Here again, the speaker used religious identity and

an appeal to the freedman's belief in God to carry his point. In addi-

tion, he strengthened his own status as an authority figure by identify-

ing himself with President Johnson. The President had sent him to tell

"the truth." God had directed the President to give them freedom, and

in keeping with God's wishes this was all the President intended to give

them.

Getting the ex-slaves to understand and to carry out the responsi-

bilities of freedom required rhetorical techniques that would produce

clear understanding and pathetic appeals that would supply the necessary

motives. Clarity was achieved through rhetorical tactics typical of the

rhetoric as a whole. The speaker's style was paternalistic. His language

resembled that of a father speaking to his children. Examples wore numer-

ous and specific. Explanations were simple, lengthy, and sometimes

repetitious. Parallel sentence structure provided a means of emphasis,

and references to familiar objects were often employed for clarity.

Pathetic proofs or the motives supplied to bring about the desired










conduct, centered in the ex-slave's social aspirations, his moral con-

victions, and his physical needs.

Freedwomen were not to put on airs; they were not to sit in their

houses all day and do nothing. It was perfectly "lady-like" to work in

the fields. Those who were not married were to be so, but there could

only be one husband or one wife, "for such is the law of God." Being

polite was one way of being respected as "ladies and gentlemen." Those

who floated from plantation to plantation or drifted into town looking

for freedom would find it with "hungry sto~achs and with nothing to eat."

Those who were honest, faithful, and industrious, those who fed the

mules, took care of the hogs, and looked after the affairs of the plan-

tation would enjoy the friendship and succor of the white people. For

them, freedom would prove a blessing involving "advancement and civili-

zation" rather than a curse "involving a condition of vagabondism and

ultimate destruction."

This kind of information and advice, of course, was important

because of its contribution to the economic and social stability so

essential for political adjustment. But what of the affinity of the

"freedom speech" with the rhetoric of acquiescence?

The connection becomes clear if one recognizes that when Marvin

talked to the freedmen, he was also talking indirectly to the white

people. Many white people listened to the freedom speeches, were told

about them, or read them in their newspapers. What they heard or read

reinforced the rhetoric of acquiescence. Thus Marvin's method of an-

nouncing freedom to the Negroes strengthened his status with the










southern white people, and the tenor of his remarks on the responsi-

bilities of freedom reinforced the central theme of the strategy of

acquiescence: White men shall rule!

Moreover, the Provisional Governor won the confidence of the

southern white people by neutralizing the source of freedom--a technique

which he was not able to carry off without doing violence to the facts.

According to 1arvin, freedom had not been granted by the northerner or

southerner; and what was even more to the point, the ex-slave had not

himself earned freedom on the battlefield. To divest the northerner

and southerner of any connection with emancipation by attributing free-

dom to God vae one thing; but to wipe out the Negro's connection with the

war by asserting that the war had been "a white man's war" was another.

Such a claim not only contradicted what Marvin had said to the white

people at Quincy loss than two weeks before; it left him open to the

charge of "falsehood"--a charge which wva, in fact, made by the northern

owned Jacksonville Herald.2 Few, if any southerners, however, ques-

tioned MJrvin's assertion. No one, moreover, challenged his claim that

the southern white man was the freedman's best friend.


28The speaker wac guilty of emphasizing the Negro's role in the
war--he had exhibited courage on 'aony a bloody field"--to help the
white people rationalize the abolition of slavery and to minimize it.
The phrase colored men "fought no battles" sought to divest the freed-
men of any feelings of importance growing out of their connection with
the war.
The Herald was justified in charging Marvin with falsehood, for
when he told the freedmen at Marianna that the war had been "a white
man's war," he went too far. Abrahan Lincoln had authorized the use of
colored troops in 1863, and by the end of the war there were 186,000
regroes in the Union service. Negroes recruited in Florida served as
occupation forces in Jacksonville, were sent on raiding expeditions in










In his speeches to the revolutionists, !hrvin had nurtured

the southern ego with statements about the superiority of the white

people and had buttressed his appeal for acquiescence in the President's

terms of reunion by emphasizing that Negro suffrage was not among them.

Having told the white man he was superior, MNrvin now proceeded to tell

the Negro he was inferior. He was not to be impolite to the white

people. "It is to them that you are to look for almost everything; . .

you want to learn from them a great many things you cannot possibly

learn without them. . ." Former masters oucht to be called "anster,"

and mistresses, "mistress," as a sign of respect. Freedom did not make

the colored people the equal of the whites. "They are far ahead of you,

and it is foolish for you to think they are not superior to you and will

ever be. . ."

Statements such as these were calculated to reduce racial tension

by inculcating a spirit of submissiveness in the freedmen but, at the

same time, they contained persuasive implications for the white people,

implications that reinforced the face saving feature of the strategy of

acquiescence.

In sum, while the freedomn speeches" fell short of accomplishing

one of their central purposes inasmuch as great nxubers of freedmen

wandered and many became vagrants, the claim can be made that they con-

tributed significantly to the economic and social stability that made

political reorganization possible.

East Florida from 1863 to 1865, participated in skirmishes at Marianna
and Natural Bridge, and played a prominent part in the battle of Olustee.
See Randall, The Civil War and Reconstruction, pp. 503-505; Davis,The
Civil War and Reconstruction in Florida, pp. 218-242.










CHAPTER IV

SPEAKING AT THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION OF 1865:
A RHETORIC OF ADJUSTMaT


The Scene

Through the pre-convention speeches and proclamations of William

Marvin, the provisional governor, Floridians had learned that they must

be the agents of their own redemption. During September of 1865, atten-

tion was focused on the nomination of delegates to a constitutional con-

vention. With the election set for early October, candidates were

nominated at public meetings held during September.

In at least three counties, Unionists vied with ex-Confederates

for seats in the convention.1 Such was the case, for example, in Colum-

bia County, located in north-central Florida. The "loyal citizens" net in

Lake City on September 16, and nominated William M. Dukes and William H.

Christi as convention candidates. Before adjourning, they adopted a

platform containing eight resolutions. Three were significant. One ac-

cepted the "overthrow of slavery"; it was "something of the past."

Another called for constitutional and legal guarantees for all in the

protection of their person and property, "regardless of color, religion


In his testimony before a congressional committee in 1866, Marvin
explained that he did not believe "that there were any tickets run in any
of the counties, . which could be called in opposition to the recon-
struction of the Union. There were in some of the counties candidates
running who claimed to be old Union men, and claim to be at present the
Simon Pure Union men all through, who were opposed by men who went into
the war and were in the confederate army. That was the case, I think,
in three counties." Report of the Joint Committee on Reconstruction
(Washington, 1866), 39th Cong., 1st Seas., Pt. 4, p. 7.










or birthplace." The third was an unqualified stand on debt repudiation:

'"e are unalterably opposed to the recognition, directly or indirectly,

of any debt or obligation whatever, incurred by the State while in

rebellion. . .

Six days later the ex-Confederates met in the same city and named

their slate for the convention. Silas L. Niblack, who became Democratic

candidate for Congress in 1870,3 and Thomas T. Long, an ex-Confederate
4 [
and secessionist, were nominated by acclamation.5

A "large and spirited meeting of . colored sold rs and citi-

zens" held in Jacksonville on September 18 reflected an interest in the

approaching convention that extended beyond the nomination of candidates.

The group met in the Baptist Church "to take into consideration the


2For an account of the Union meeting, see Jacksonville Weekly
Florida Times, October 5, 1865.

3Quincy Weekly Journal, September 2, 1870.

4Long was a politician who believed in casting his lot with the
party in power. In 1860, he was an avid Democrat and one of the leaders
in the movement for secession. During the war he served in the Confeder-
ate army. In 1865 and 1866, he joined with the Conservatives to support
presidential Reconstruction. When the Johnson government fell, he joined
forces with the Republicans and was rewarded with a political appointment
from Republican Governor Tarrison Reed. Testimony Taken by the Joint
Select Committee to Inqaire into the Conditic-. of Affairs in tne Late In-
surrectionary States (Wacnington, 1872), XIII, :; fernandina Weekly Last
Floridian, January 19, 1860; Tallahassee Icely Florldian, August 18, i2o.
For Long's secession speaking, see Kearney, "Political Speaking in Florida
from 1859 to 1861," pp. 46, 59, 72, 107.

5Long was present at the meeting and, being called on for a speech,
he expressed his views on the issues and accepted the nomination. For an
account of the "ex-confederate" meeting, see Jacksonville Weckly Florida
Union October 7, 1865. For reports of other pre-election nmetings held
at Jacksonville, Madison, and Gainesville, see Jacksonville Weekly Herald,
September 22, 1865; Tallahassee Semi-Weekly Floridian, September 26, 1865;
Gainesville Weekly New Era, October 7, 1865.










interests of the colored population of the state and adopt such measures

as the exigencies of the case seemed to require." Addresses were given

by "several soldiers and citizens," and by a "Reverend Mr. Harris" of

Beaufort, South Carolina. Before dispersing, the group appointed a

committee to prepare resolutions expressing the sense of the meeting,

and "a petition to the Convention . asking for the right of

suffrage."

At a subsequent meeting on September 26, the resolutions and

petition were reported and adopted. In its resolutions the group acknowl-

edged "with gratitude the position taken by Gov. MARVIN, in his procla-

mation and in his recent speech at Quincy, in regard to the rights of

colored men. . ." The governor was tendered "profound thanks" for his

declaration "that the freedom proclaimed by the federal government is

intended to be the full, ample and complete freedom of a citizen of the

United States." Further, it was resolved that the suffrage petition ap-

proved by the meeting be circulated throughout the state for signatures,

and that copies of the resolutions and petition be given to Marvin,

Major General John G. Foster, Brigadier General John ewton, Colonel

Marple, and the subordinate officers of the district.


Addressed to the convention, the petition read in part: "The
undersigned, colored soldiers and citizens of __ grateful to Al-
mighty God and to the federal govermnnt [italics mine] for our libera-
tion from slavery and the acknowledgment of our rights as freemen, . .
ask of your honorable body, that in framing the Constitution . you
may make it in all respects to conform to the principles of Republican
government--doing away with distinction on account of color and recog-
nizing the rights of all. . .
"We respectfully, but earnestly, ask that we may be admitted to




Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID ECWZCY7AC_209430 INGEST_TIME 2017-07-19T20:38:46Z PACKAGE UF00098047_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES



PAGE 1

SPEAKING IN FLORIDA ON THE ISSUES OF PRESIDENTIAL RECONSTRUCTION 1865-1867: A RHETORIC OF REUNION By KEVIN EMMETT KEARNEY A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE COUNQL OF THE UNr\'ERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA January, I960

PAGE 2

ACKNOtfI£DGi-fiiir]TS The writer vlshes to acknowled^ his indebtedness to all who have helped make this study possible. This, of course^ includes those who have assisted in preparing the study, those who aided in research, and those who gave financial and moral support. Contributions made by individual members of the supervisozy committee cover all three categories. The late Dr. Dallas C. Dickey, who served as chairman until 1957* pointed the way by asking: "What do you suppose southerners were saying after Appomattox?" His interest in southern oratory and his personal standairds of scholarship left their mark on his colleagues and his graduate students. This study constitutes a peirtial answer to his question and a token tribute to his memory. Dr. Douglas Ehninger, who was appointed chaiiman following Dr. Dickey's death, and who is presently serving as Visiting Professor at the State University of lovm, had some questions of his own which served as an additional source of enrichment and inspiration. The organization emd content of the study reflect his concern for clarity and scholarship and his personal interest in the study Itself. The present chairmem^ Professor H. P. Constans, ChairmEui of the Department of Speech, and other members of the coomittee. Dr. Roy E. Tew and Dr. Charles K. Thomas of the Department of Speech, and Dr. George Bentley, Dr. Franklin A. Doty, and Dr. Rembert W. Patrick of the History Department also assisted the writer by checking the manuscript and by 11

PAGE 3

making helpful suggestions. The vriter is especially indebted to Professor Constans for his interest and encouragement and to the comndttee nenbers from the History Depeurtaaent for their guidance and criticism on matters connected with the history of the Reconstruction period. Others to vhom the vriter is indebted are those who assisted in research, llr. Julien C. Yonge, Director of the P, K. Yonge Library of Florida History, extended valuable service. Mrs. Harriet S. Skofield, Librarian of the Library of Florida History, and her successor, IUss Margaret Chapman, also provided valuable assistance. Others who aided in the search for materials are: Dr. Dorothy Dodd, State Librarian, Tallahassee, Florida; l^» John W. Griffin, Executive Historian, St. Augustine HistoriceJ. Society, St. Augustine; I^ELss J^iargaret Donnell, Reference Librarian, Indiana State Library, Indianapolis, Indiana; Mrs. Drucella Thocipson, Newspaper Division, Indiana State library; Mr. Philip Falco, Kewspaper Division, New York Public Library Annex, New York City, New York; Mr. Rutherford D. Rogers, Chief, Reference Department, New Yoric Public Library; Mss Albertina T. B. Traver, Refer** ence Librarian, Adriance MemorisLl Library, Poughkeepsie, New York; Miss Gladys E. Love, Head, General Reference Division, Rochester Public Library, Rochester, New York; I«!rs. Belle H. Waterman, Librarian, Skaneateles Library Association, Skaneateles, New York; Mr. William H. Smith, Newspaper Division, Syracuse Public Library, Syracuse, New York. Special thanks are extended to the Department of Speech, the College of Arts and Sciences, and the Graduate School of the University ill

PAGE 4

of Florida for the opportunities and financial assistance extended in the form of graduate assistanfcships and fellowships. Thcmks are also due to Butler Ifaiversity and the Directors of lilly Endowment, Inc., for a grant which enabled the writer to devx>te the summer of 1959 to the study. The wrtter is deeply indebted to his mother, Mrs. D. C. Kearney, and his wife, Eleanor Jean, for their confidence, sympathy, and encouragement. It is, indeed, difficult to estimate the contribution of a wife who spends hours typing and proofing manuscripts, foregoes numerous social pleasures, willingly accepts solitude, and acts as an "intruder" when she feels there is a need for words of encouragement. Iv

PAGE 5

TABLE OF COIWEOTS Acknowledgments 11 CHAPTER I Introduction 1 II Speaking to the Revolutionists During the Preconvention Period: A Rhetoric of Acquiescence 1^ The Scene l4 The Discourse 27 Speech of Alfred Sears at King's Ferry 27 Speech of VJ 111 lam Marvin at Jacksonville 33 Speech of William Marvin at Q^incy ^5 The Rhetoric 56 III Speaking to the Freedmen During the Preconvention Period: A Rhetoric of Acquiescence , 65 The Scene 65 The Discourse 70 Speech of V.'llliain Marvin to the Freedmen in Maxianna 70 The Rhetoric 86 IV Spealcing at the Constitutional Convention of I865: A Rhetoric of Adjustnent 92 The Scene 92 The Discourse 99 Speech of E. D, Tracy and Message of Marvin 99 Speech of Oliver 0. Ho^rard I09 Letter of Thomas Brown and Speeches of !niomas T, Long, Samuel Spencer, and Thomas Baltzell. . . II3 Speech of Marvin II5 The Rhetoric 121 V Speaking and the Inaugiaration of Conservative Government: A Rhetoric of Adjustment 127 The Scene , , 127 The Discourse I39 Speech of William \i, J. Kelly I39 Farewell Speech of William Marvin and Inaugural Address of David S. Walker l4l Speech of Willcinson Call I65 The Rhetoric I7I

PAGE 6

TABLE OF COKTEm'S (Continued) CHAPTER VI Speaking in Florida in 1866: A Rhetoric of Vindication. 182 Prologue to the Rhetoric of Vindication 182 The Scene 186 The Discourse 19l
PAGE 7

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION During the Middle Period in American Jaistory, l8l2 to 185O, circumstances gave rise to a series of political issues, clustering around the basic questions of slavery and state sovereignty. In 182O, l832> and 1850, these issues were temporarily resolved through compromise. By 1861, however, events had intensified old antagonisms, causing the South to withdraw frtxa the Union. Coorpromlse proved unvorkable, and a divided nation resorted to the force of arms to resolve the issues. After the war, during tlie Reconstruction period, 1865 to 1876, the nation was troubled with the problems Inherent in the formulation of an acceptable plan of reunion. The situation was cooipllcated by the fact that the would-be arbitrators viewed the questions of Reconstruction with an eye to the advancement of party aims. Presidential Reconstruction, congressicmal Reconstruction, and Republican rule in the South produced a series of political crises which culminated in decision at the ballot box. Paul Buck engjhaslzes that reunion was to a large extent con5)licated by political considerations. "It became the Interest of the Democratic party to 'forget* the war and to patch up quickly a truce which would re-admit their Southern Allies to the political contest. But it was equally important to the Republicans that the past be not forgotten and that a reunion which would Increase the strength of their opponents should be postponed. The process of reconciliation was fatefully involved in this counter-purpose of party aims. " Paul H. Buck, 'L'ue Road to Reunion. 1865-19OO (Boston, 19^7), p. 73.

PAGE 8

The presidential atteng)t at fleconstruction touched off a national debate during the years 1865 to 1867. The South sought a resumption of nonoal relations with the federal government as a means of supplanting martial lav with civil rule. The presidential plan provided an opportunity to Eu:hieve this goal. Southern Democrats and former WMgs, who joined forces and called tliemselves Conservatives, accepted and defended the presidential plan. Their efforts, along with those of northern Democrats, and a few moderate RexHihlicans, ^ were ultimately countered by Badical Republicans, who argued against presidential Reconstruction before audiences in the northern and western sections of the nation, and by soutliem lAiionists or Loyalists, who voiced their opposition in the South and in the North. ^ The differences between these i)arties were 2 In his attempt to reconstruct the South, Johnson ultimately received the suijport of northern Democrats, some nioderate Republicans who were opposed to the Radical Republicem leadership of their party, and the Conservatives in the South. Representatives of these various political groups banded together in Philadelphia, in August of I866, as the "friends of the President" and sought to organize a "National Union Bsurty. " William A. Dunning, Reconstruction, Political and EconomiCi 1365-1877 (New York, 1907)> pp. 72-76. Vol. XXII of The American Nation; A History from Original Sources by Associated Scholars, ed. Albert B. Hart; Michael ffertin and Leonard Gelber, The New Dictionary of American History (New York, 1952), p. kSQ. ^The Radical Republicans and the southern Unionists or Loyalists were the antagonists of presidential Reconstruction. In order to avoid confusion and to contest "the assumption by the president's supporters that they were in the truest sense the upholders of the Union, " the Radical Republicans and the southern Loyalists called themselves "ItoionRepublicans. " Dunning, Reconstruction, Political and Economic, 1865-i877j p. 76. The Radical Republicans have been described in terms of three principal elements: "First, the extreme negrophiles, who, on abstract grounds of human equality and natural rights, demanded full civil and political privileges for the freedmen; second, the partisan politicians.

PAGE 9

resolved at the ballot box following the congressional campaign of 1866. A sufficient mimber of Radical Republicans were elected to Congress to enable that body to discard the presidential terms of Reconstruction and in March of I867 to substitute its own. The congressional acts of Reconstruction, which became law over the presidential veto, and which were not ruled on by the Supreme Court, produced debates throughout the "insurrectionary districts" of the South. ^ Because these terms were the law of the land, the crucial who viewed the elevation of the blacks mainly as a means of hianbling the Democrats and maintaining the existing supremacy of the Republican P&rtyj and third, the representatives of an exalted statesmanship, who saw in the existing situation an opportunity for decisively fixing in our system a broader and more national principle of civil rights and political privilege. " After the President and Congress became openly hostile over Reconstruction, the Republican extremists gradually won over many of the moderate Republicans in Congress. Following the congressional election of 1866, the Radicals controlled a two-thirds majority in both houses of Congress. William A. Dunning, Essays on the Civil War and Reconstruction and Related Topics (New York, 1931)^ PP« 85-91. The southern Loyalists, those who reputedly opposed disunion in 1861, and remained loyal to the Union throughout the war, initially endorsed Johnson's reconstruction policy. By 1366, however, they became the political allies of the Radical Republicans on the grounds that the application of the presidential terms had left the southern state governments in the hsmds of the "exrebels. " Although they were "a small and unimpressive element . . . and could not by thenselves contribute much to the cause of the Congress party, " their testimony regarding rebel terrorism during the war and rebel rule under the Johnson governments strengthened the Ra,dical Republican position. Dunning, Reconstruction , Political and Economic 3 1865-1877, p. 7?. ^n 1867, the Radicals "proceeded far in the control of the Supreme Court by so limiting its appellate jurisdiction as to avert a decision which might overrule the reconstruction acts. " J. G. Randall, The Civil \^ar and Reconstruction (Boston, 1953)^ P« 751. When the Siflpreme Court agreed to hear the case of ac parte ^fcCardle, a case which involved the question of the legality of the arrest of a Mississippi editor under the Reconstruction acts. Congress passed a law relieving that body of appellate jurisdiction in cases involving these acts. For

PAGE 10

Issue became this: Who should lead the states back into the Iftiloii, ConservBtlves or Republicans? Again, the issue was resolved at the polls. Southern Megroes and their carpet-bag friends wrote new state constitutions. Inaugurated Republicem state governments, and sent Republicans to take their seats in CcMigress. By I870, all of the "unreconstracted" states had been re-admitted to the Union under the auspices of the Republican party. ^ Soon a major problem emerged as a result of the supremacy of the Republican party in the South. The Republicans atten5>ted to defend their administration, and were countered by the Democrats who advocated political reform and sought release from the Republican yoke. The issue was resolved by I876, when the Democrats generally regained political control of the South. These three political phases of the Reconstruction era — the presidential attempt at reunion, the ten^porary victory of the Rsidlcals, and a discussion of the McCardle case, see Ellis M. Coulter, The South Dur ing Reconstruction, I86g-l877 (Baton Rouge, 19^*7), P122. Vol. VIII of A History of the South, ed. Wendell H. Stephenson and Ellis M. Coulter. 5 Eleven southern states were re-admitted to the Union between 1866 and 1870. Tennessee was re-admitted in 1866, after ratifying the Fourteenth Amendment. The remaining ten states became members of tlie Union, after complying with the congressional terms of Reconstruction, in 1868 and 1870. The representatives of Arkansas, Noxth Carolina, South Carolina, Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, and Florida were admitted to seats in Congress in 1868. Virginia, Texas, I^lssisslpp:^ and Georgia were readmitted in 1870. Georgia was admitted to Congress in I868, but her readmission was repealed by Congress when the Georgia legislature expelled its twenty-eight Negro members "on the ground that a Negro had a right to vote, but not to hold office. " For a description of the congressional terms of Reconstruction and a narrative of their execution, see Francis B. Simklns, A History of the South (New York, 1953)^ PP. 26I1-277.

PAGE 11

the eventual trlttn^ of the Democrats — may be characterized as a series of debates. Three principal questions caused six different political groups to espouse a cause and atteaipt to influence public judgment through persuasion. The cumulative efforts of any of these groups may be thought of as a rhetorical movement. Such a movement, moreover, may be said to have inceptive, progressive, and terminal phases." The inception of the movement stems from a situation, issue, or proposition that motivates men to bring about change or achieve a specific goal through persuasion. When their efforts culminate in success or failure, the rhetorical movement has reached its terminus. The stream of discourse produced between the inceptive and terminal phases coinprises the progressive phase of the movement. By studying the composite rhetoric— vhat the speakers of a movement said, rather than what one man said — one can characterize the structure or patterns of this rhetoric and evaluate its worth. Such a study not only provides a fresh approach to the history and criticism of American public address, but may suggest new or neglected criteria of criticism. A study of this type may enable us to ask questions about riietoric In an essay outlining a methodology for the study of the rhetorical structure of an historical movement, Leland Griffin characterized the inceptive, progressive, and terminal phases of a rhetorical movement and suggested that they be employed in delimiting such a movement for study. See Leland M. Griffin, "The Rhetoric of Historical Itovements, ' Quarterly Journal of Speech, XXXVIII (April, 1952), l8lj-l88; Leland M. Griffin, "TliG Rhetorical Structure of the Antimasonic llovement, " The Rhetorical Idi::.:; I'jsays in I^etorlc, Oratory, Language, and Drama , ed. Donald C. Bryant (Ithaca, New York: 1958), pp. 145-159.

PAGE 12

that have not been asked by the student of the Individual orator. Locating a rhetorical movanent for study, within the framework of the Reconstruction period, is largely a problem of choice. One person cannot attempt to study, in its entirety, any one, let alone all six, of the rhetorical movements that occurred during these years. This may be illustrated by analyzing the two rhetorical movements that evolved from the issue of presidential Reconstruction during the years I865 to 1867. Anyone attempting to study the rhetorical movement favoring presidential Reconstruction would have to analyze: (l) the speaking of federal officials and Conservatives in the South, (2) the speaking of Democrats and moderate Republicans in Congress, (3) the speaking of northern Democrats, Conservatives, and moderate Republicans in the congressional campaign of 1866, which was decided by voters In the northern and western parts of the nation, and (k) the speaking of President Johnson, including his messages to Congress and his famous "swing around the circle. " ' A study of the rhetorical!
PAGE 13

Radical Republicans in Congress, and (3) tlie spealcing of Radical Republicans and Bouthem loyalists in the congressional ca nip aign of 1866. Because of the scope of these rhetorical movements, the student must choose sides and select a segoent of seme cme movement for study. This dissertation represents an attanpt to describe and evaluate the rhetorical movaaent favoring presidential Reconstruction in Florida during the years I865 to I867.® Aside from the writer's personal interest, a number of jreasons might be offered for the selection of: (l) this particular historical period, (2) a rhetorical movement in Florida, (3) a rhetorical movement on the issue of presidential Reconstructitm, and (^) a rhetorical movement favoring presidential Reconstruction. First, as to the selection of the Reconstruction era, the existence of the three previously mentioned controversial issues during this period precipitated a great amount of speechmaking. Yet relatively ®The study of an individual orator has been a ccsumon approach in writing the history and criticism of American public address. In recent years, however, more attention has been given the movement approach, wherein an attempt is made to study the rhetoric of "naioeless men, " who spoke on a specific theme within the framework of a given historical period. For examples of movement studies, see Leland M. Griffin, "The Antimasonic Persuasion: A Study of Public Address in the American Antimasonlc Itovement, I826-I838" (unpublished Ph.D. disseirtation, Cornell University, 1950); Donald H. Ecroyd, "An Analysis and Evaluation of Populist Political Carapaign Speech leaking in Kansas, 189O-I89U" (unpublished Ri.D. dissertation. State University of Iowa, 19^9); Stanley B. Wheater, "Persuasion in the Save the Union Meetings, I859-I861" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Wisconsin, 1955); Huber W. Ellingsworth, "Southern Reconciliation Orators in the North, I8681899" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Florida State University, 1955); and Robert W. Smith, "A Study of the Speaking in the Anti-Secrecy Movement, 1868-1882, with Special Reference to the national Christian Association" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, State University of Iowa, 195^).

PAGE 14

little of this speaking has been studied. As Dallas C. Dickey observed, "The speaking of southerners on the problems of reconstruction is unknown except for that of a few men. . . . "^ This generalization is particularly true with respect to the Reconstruction period in Florida. Although samples of the discourse have been preserved along with other materials of Florida history, the speaking of Floridians on the issues of presidential Reconstruction has not been studied. None of the general state histories give more than passing notice to the speaking of these years. William W. Davis* history of the Reconstruction period in Florida contedns some extracts from the discourse, but makes no attaqpt at analysis. Since relatively little of the discourse of the Reconstruction period has been studied, the selection of a rhetorical movement dealing with the presidential Reconstruction seems a logical place to begin. ^Dallas C. Dickey, "Southern Oratory. A Field for Research, " Quarterly Journal of Speech, XXXIII (Decanber, 19hj), ^58-1*63. Watson's survey of southern oratory is too comprehensive to admit concentrated study of a particular iiistorical period. Reconstruction speaking is treated as one of seven aspects of "Post-Bellum Oratory in the South, 1865-1909, " and only one speech is supplied to Illustrate the speaking of the period I865 to I867. Thomas E. Watson, History of Southern Oratory (Richmond, I909), pp. 71-75. Vol. IX of The South in tlie Building of the Nation . ^^ee Caroline M. Brevard, A Hiatory of Florida from the Treaty of 1763 to Our Own Times , ed. James A. Robertson (Deland, Florida: 192TiX II, 12l|-Il<2; Frederick W. Dau, Florida Old and New (New York, 193^), PP. 275-278; J. E. Dovell, Florida; Historic, Dramatic, Contemoyjrary (New York, 1952), II, 525-557; W. T. Cash. The Story of Florida (New York, I93O)* I* h3d-h76} and Katliryn T. Abbey, Florida land of Chaoge (Chapel Hill, 1941), pp. 293-315. •^•'•William W. Dnvis, Tlie Civil War and Reconstruction in Florida ( Columbia University Studies in History, Economics and Public law; Vol. LIII, No. 131. New York, 1913).

PAGE 15

Presidential Reconstruction, congressional Reconstruction, and Republican rule of the South occurred in chronological sequence. A knowledge of the rhetorical movements favoring and opposing the first atten^pt at reunion will provide insights into the movements that followed. As the investigator proceeds from one movement to another, it is important to know, for exanple, that white Floridians who opposed Negro suffrage in their speeches favoring presidential Reconstruction, later had to appeal to Negro audiences for votes when they sought to retain political control of their state under the congressional terms of Reconstruction. The same reasoning applies to the selection of a rhetorical movement favoring presidential Reconstruction. President Johnson set out to reconstruct the South between the months of April and December of I865, a period during which Congress was not in session. The rhetorical movement opposing his scheme came as a result of what is sometimes judged to be premature and unauthorized action. Sence, an analysis of the rhetorical movement favoring the presidential plan may aid in understanding the inception of this counter-movement. Further, the rhetorical movement favoring presidential Reconstruction in Florida was selected because the counter-movement in the state represented only the sporadic efforts of an impotent minority. In 1865, there was no orgaoized group standing in opposition to the execution of the presidential plan of reunion in Florida. Florida's Loyalists initially endorsed the presidential terms of reunion with the e:q)ectation that they would be recognized as the rightful heirs to political leadership in the state. They did not, however, achieve the prominence they

PAGE 16

10 sought. Fe\
PAGE 17

II A final concern is that of the methodology a^ployed in research and in the writing of the study. The writer began his search for materials by making an inventory of the extant resources of the period. Pertinent general and special histories^ and theses and dissertations vere consulted for infoznation on the historical background. Texts of speeches and related materials were collected from newspapers, legislative and convention journals, diaries, manuscript collections, government publications, and periodicals. The investigation of these resources was carried on chronologically, proceeding from the inception of the rhetorical movement to its termination. Govennoent. " For an account of the meeting, the text of the resolutions adopted, and the reaction of the Conservative press, see Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridlan, May 1, 1866; Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, Ifey 5, 1866; Gainesville Weekly New Era, I4ay 25> 1866; Tamaja Weekly Florida Peninsular, June 23, 1866. Union Club meeting, Femandina, July h, l866: Daniel Richards, a Radical Republican from Illinois, who was stationed in Florida as a United States tcoc commissioner, gave a speech denouncing the "validity" of the Johnson governnent in Florida. "There is no such thing as law existing here , " he declared. "The rebels have made what they call a Constitution, enacted laws and elected officers, but none cure valid . Rebels cannot mal:e a Constitution and execute laws for . . . 16yal people. " For an account of the occasion, see the speech and the reaction of the Conservative press in Tallahassee Semi -Weekly JTLorldian, July 26, 1866. See also Ifew York Times , July 23, and 29, 1868. Richards later wrote his congressman and confided that If "union men" were to be assured of protection in Florida, "they would [have to] orga.ilze . . . and overthrow and revolutionize the State government. " Be challenged the authenticity of the text of his Femandina speech as published in the New York Times , and regretted that President Johnson might dismiss hi'"i as tax commissioner "for something I didn't say. " Daniel Richards to Elihu B. Washbume, Sterling [Illinois], September 11 and November 6 and 7, 1866. George C. Osbom, "Letters of a Carpetbagger in Florida, 1866-I869, " Florida Historical Quarterly, XXXVI (January,

PAGE 18

12 The method utilized in writing the study takes the foxia of a chronoloGical narrative of the rhetorical movement. The story of the movonent (Chajrtiers II through VII ) is narrated vithin a frazne of reference that precludes historical hindsight. Each narrative chapter is divided into three sections: "The Scene, " "The Discourse, " and "The Rhetoric. " In "The Scene" an atten^)t is made to answer two questions: To whom was the discourse directed, and why? The section of "The Discotirse" constitutes an account of what was said or written. -^ In the 1958), 25'+-255, 256-258. Union-Republican or southern loyalists convention, Philadelphia, September 3-1} 1866: In August of 1866, the Radical Republicans issued a call for a national convention to counteract the effect of the National Union convention, an assemblage of the "friends of the President, " which had met in Philadelphia on August lU, 1866. lience, Florida's Loyalists were invited by Ossian B. Hart, a native Florid 1 an who became governor in 1873, to attend a state convention of 'Unconditional Unionists" at Tallahassee on August 22, for the purpose of appointing delegates to the Union-Republican convention in Philadelphia. For information regarding the state convention, see Tallahassee Tri-Weekly Florida Sentinel, August 7, 1866; Tallahassee Semi-Weekly Floridian, August 23, September k and "Y, and October 5, 1866; Gainesville Weekly New Era , August 10, 1866; New York World, September h, 1866; Syracuse Daily Journal , September 12, 1866. For infoimation concerning the activities of Florida's Loyalists at the Union-Republican convention in Philadelphia, see New York Times , September 5, 6, and 8, 1866. For the reactions of the Florida press, see Tallahassee Semi-Weekly Floiridian , September I8, I866. Tallahassee Tri-V/eekly Florida Sentinel , September 18, I866; Gainesville Weekly Ifew Era, September 28, 1366; Tang)a Weekly Florida Peninsular, October 5, 1556. Public meeting to advocate the establishment of territorial government in Florida, Femandina, December 11, l366. For an account of the meeting and the reaction of the Conservative press, see Tallahassee gpniWeekly Floridian , December 21, I866. ^Although the study is largely limited to the speaking, all of the extant discourse, whether written or siwken, which was i>ertinent to the principal issues of the movement, is taken into account. In following this procedure, the writer has been guided by Donald Bryant's concept of the scope of rhetoric: "Rhetoric must be understood to be the rationale of informative and suasory discourse both spoken and written. " Donald C. Bryant, "Rhetoric: Its Functions and Its Scope, " Quarterly Journal of Speech, XXXIX (December, 1953)> ^.

PAGE 19

13 section entitled "Tbe Rhetoric, " an attempt is made to define the ends of tiiose vho produced the discourse and to describe the means vhich they en5)loyed to achieve their objectives. Finally, a synthesis characterizing the structure of the movement as a whole, an evaluation of the rhetoric, and certain generalizations regarding the unique characteristics of this rhetorical movcEient favoring presidential Reconstruction in Florida during the years 1865-I867 are presented in the final, chapter (Chapter VIII ).

PAGE 20

CHAPTER II SPEAKING TO THE REVOLUTIONISTS DUKmO THE PRECONVENTION PERIOD: A RHET(®IC OF ACQUIESCENCE The Scene On the evening of April 9, I865, a grm^) of Tallahassee citizens gathered in the hall of the House of Representatives. Tbe occasion vas one of musical festivity. "A magnificent quartette vas singing 'The Southern Marseillaise, • vhen a gentlemsui entered the door and advanced rapidly up the aisle, bearing aloft in his hand a telegram. " The music stopped and the messenger read aloud: "General Lee surrendered the array of Northern Virginia today, at Appomattox. " The var vas over! Said Susan Eppes, who vas present: That . . . vas the death knell of all our hopes and for a moment a silence as of the grave filled the hall; then followed such a scene as ve pray ve may never see repeated. Tears and cries and lamentation, the bitterness of heartbroken woe. lien, women, and children, wept aloud as they realized the calamity which had befallen us. Few slept that night and the sun eirosc upon a miserable, brokenhearted people — far too miserable even to tallc it over with each other. It was cut though our nearest and dearest lay dead witMn the house. -^ The Florida Union reflected a similar emotion vben almost a month later it reported the surrender of Confederate General Joseph E. Johnston. "Tbe present is not a fitting time for comment, " it said. "A ^usan B. Eppes, Through Some Eventful Years (Macon, 1926), pp. 266-267. The final capitulation of southern anned resistance took place in successive stages, with the surrender of Joseph E. Johnston on April 26, Richard Taylor on May k, and Kirby Smith on May 26. Randall, The Civil Waxand Reconstruction , pp. 279-684. Ih

PAGE 21

15 sufficient time must firarb elapse for careful consideration and thought. ... During the first montlis of peace, the oen and women of Florida vere too much occupied -with the iimnediate needs of life to take time to estimate the plight of their state. When estimates were made, however, the findings were appalling. Bj July of I865, even the most casual observer was aware of the strilsing military, econotaic, social, and political changes that had affected his society. The cost of the war could not be measured with adjectives or statistics. More than 17,000 Floridians had been in uniform. Of this number, 2,33^ wore the blue, 15,000 the gray. About 5,000 Confederates never returned home. The fate of the Fifth Florida Infantry provided a sample of the havoc wrought by war. In I861, it numbered almost 1,100 men. At Appomattox fifty-three survivoi^ surrendered. Their ccxnrades had desezted or were disabled, dead, or imprisoned. ^ Many of the people at home did not have to rely on newspapers or casualty lists for knowledge of war. Residents of coastal areas and parts of the interior such as Femandina, Jacksonville, St. Augustine, 2 Jacksonville Weekly Florida Ifaion. May 6, I865. Florida furnished the Union Army with 1,290 white soldiers and with l,OMt Negro soldiers. Davis estimated that 6,700 Floridians served in Confederate ranks through the entire war or until they were disabled or killed, 6,400 for the last three years, and 2,000 for the last two years or less. Of the 5,000 Confederates who died, 1,000 were reported ld.lled in battle, while the remaining 4,000 died of wounds or disease. Davis, The Civil War and Reconstruction in Florida, pp. 22^-225; 322-324. Benjamin C. Truman reported that 18,000 Florida men served in Confederate ranks, and that 6,000 died in action and from disease. New York Times, December 25, I865.

PAGE 22

16 'lampa, Cedar Keys, Apalachicola, PenBacola, Baldwin, Sanderson, Gainesville, Starke, Olustee, Palatka, ELcolata, Magnolia, Milton, Ifetural k Bridge, and Marianna had experienced federal attaclc and occupation. While burdened with these recollections the mind of the Floridian was of necessity brought to focus on the problems of the living. Those who had survived would have to make a new beginning, for the economic resources of the state had dwindled, and in some instances vanished. Qnancipation accounted for one type of economic loss: $22,000,000 invested in slaves had evaporated. A total of 6l,7^5 Negroes peissed from slavezy to freedom, and ^,152 slaveholders plunged from a condition of vealth to one of relative poverty. ^ Although the economic impact of emancipation affected the entire state, slaveowners in the 'black arc" euren were hardest hit. In Teillahassee alone "there were about 800 persons owning slaves valued at from $3,000 to $500,000, all gone by the same act. . . . " ' h For an account of the Civil War in Florida, see Davis, The Civil War and Reconstruction in Florida , Hp. I5O-17U, 268-316; Rembert W. Batrick, Florida Under Five Flags (Gainesville, 1955)* PP50-55^Davis, The Civil War and Reconstruction in Florida , p. 32^4-. For statistical information on the people of Florida in i860, see Kevin E. Kearney, "Political Speaking in Florida from l859 to I861" (unpublished Master's thesis, Itaiversity of Florida, 1955), pp. 7-8. The estimate of the number of slaveholders in i860 is given in Gainesville Weekly Ifev Era, July 15, I865. 5 The plantation counties of Jackson, Gadsden, Leon, Jefferson, Madison, Alachua, euid Marion formed what has been called the 'Tslack arc, " and contained 61+. U per cent of Florida's slave population. Edwin L. Williams, Jr. , "Negro Slavery in Florida, " Florida Historical Quarterly , XVIII (January, 1950), I87. •7 Observations of "Hawk-EJ/e" in the Burlington [Iowa] Hawk Eye, April h, 1866, in Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian, April 2k , 1866.

PAGE 23

17 Destroyed real property totaled at least $22, OCX), 000. Repudiation of the state debt, the confiscation of cotton, and the public scae of homes and estates for the non-payment of taxes accounted for additional losses. The plight of one of Florida's citizens serves as an exan^ple of the economic havoc wrought by var amd emancipation. A business associate of David L. Yulee sought anployment for a friend in Hamilton County. He wrote: I have a friend . . . (Dr. I-larion) who was the owner of 80 negroes and 25000 in Confederate Bonds and is now penniless [ , ] a mn r^ of uninrpeachable vexacityj, and good business qualities. He writes to me and aslcs me if there is any thing he can get to do down this way to support his family — a wife, and two children. 9 The Florida Union probably had men like Marion in mind when it characterized the plight of the penniless. "To most of them the future is dark and uncertain. Many who vere looked upon as wealthy men are now penniless, their Confederate money being worth no more than so much trash. To obtain a livelihood now bee ones an important question with them."^° The anguish resultii^g from the loss of loved ones and wealth was intensified by rapid changes of a social and political nature. Although ""Amcaag the states east of the Mississippi, only South Carolina and Alabama surpassed Florida in the proportional decline of property values. " Davis, The Civil VJar and Reconstruction in Florida , p. 32^. 9john S. Purviance to David L. Yulee, Cottonwood, January 29, 1866, David L. Yulee Papers, P. K. Yonge Library of Florida History. Cited hereafter as Yulee Papers. ^'^Jacksonville V/eekly Florida Ifaion , May 27j I865.

PAGE 24

IB AEpomattox made such clianges inevitable, it vas not until after the formal surrender of tlie state itself that defeat really came to Florida. On May 10, a Tallahassee resident yas startled "by a cry frcm our little •black boy,* of •Yankees!' 'Yankees!' and I found myself running to the frc»it, to see Gen. [Edward M. ] McCook and staff enter to take command of our little city. " The General "made a very madest entrance, respecting the humiliation of the people by leaving his cavalry some four miles distant to approach more leisurely. " McCook' s orders read in part: Upon your arrival at Tallahassee you will take all necessary steps to carry into effect the terms of the convention arranged by General Sheraism and General Johnston, and to restore the country to peace and good order. . . . Compel all editors of newspapers to publish their papers in the interests of peace, good order, and national unity. . . . Exact a parole to this effect or prohibit the publication. . . . Discountenance public meetings of all kinds in order that excitement may be allayed and dispassionate reason may resume its sway. ^ After occupying Tallahassee and accepting the surrender of Florida troops, McCook wrote his superior: On the 10th instant I reached Tallahassee. . . . The rebel troops with all the public property in the District of Ellen Call Long, Florida Breezes: or, Florida, Mew and Old (Jacksonville, 1383), pp. 38O-38I. Tallahassee was the only southern capital east of the Mississippi that did not flail during the war. For the story of the surrender of Tallahassee, see Albert H. Roberts, "Tallahassee Rejoins the Union, " Apalachee (publication of the Tallahassee ELstoricea Society, 19^), pp. 7l4-30. •'^James H. Wilson to Edward M. McCook, Macon, May U, I865, in The \^ar of the Rebellion: A Compilation of tlie Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies . Series I. Vol. XLIX. Pt. 2 (Washington. 1897) P602.

PAGE 25

19 Florida were surrenderod to mo by flaj. (jen. Samuel Jones on the 10th day of May, and the U. S. flag raised over the state-house. . . . In luy intercourse vith the citizens and surrendered soldiers of this Florida cormand I found only the nore entire spirit of subiiiission to lay authority, and in the majority of instances an apparent cheerful acquiescence to the present order of things. ^3 Shortly after sending tMs cormnunication, ho-wever, the cfsnmandIng general vas confronted vith two problons. First, Ahrahaia K. Allison, Florida's governor, announced his plan for the reconstruction of ik the state. Second, several planters in the Leon County area asked that military aid he granted to compel the return of Negroes to their homes and work. While awaiting word from his superior on the Allison incident, JfeCook proceeded to clarify the federal government's position with regard to the status of the Negro. Planters in Middle Florida and other portions of the interior -•^Edward M. McCook to E. B. Beaumont, Macon, June 1, I865, ibid . , pp. 9^3-9^5. •^TAbraham K. Allison, a native of Georgia, but long a z«sident of the state, became governor of Florida in April of I865, acceding to the position as president of the state Senate following the suicidal death of Confederate Gtovemor John iiilton. Patrick, Florida Under Five Flags. p. 55; Quincy Weekly Gadsden Democrat . July 21, I893. On May 13, Allison informed McCook that he had appointed five commissionei^ — David L. Yulee, J. Wayles Baker, Mariano D. Bapy, E. C. Love, and J. L. G. Baker— to proceed to V.'ashington "for the purpose of making known to the executive authorities of the United States the steps in progress for harmonizing the govenament of this State with the Constitution of the United States and of conferring generally with the public authorities of the Federal Government concerning our affairs. " Official Records of the Rebellion, Series I, Vol. XLIX, Pt. 2,p7i(6. Allison announced further particulars of his plan in a proclamation calling for an exti^iordinary session of the state legislature on June 5, and for an election of a governor on June 7. Philip D. Ackerman, "Florida Reconstruction fi-can Walker through Reed, 1865 to 1873" (unpublished ^Jaster»s thesis, Ifaiversity of Florida, 19^*8), p. 29-

PAGE 26

20 vhlch had not beon occi^ied by the federal military apparently had been startled by IfcCook's eraancipatioa order of May 20. It informed 'those vho seem to be ignorant of the fact, " that the Pzresldjent of the United States liad issued, in 1862, "a procLaaation changing the status of persons held as slaves, " and that the proclamation had been in effect since Jsmuary 1, 1863. Moreover steps were taken to notify the Negro of his freedon. Messenijers, says Long, "penetrated to our kitcliens and plantations, informing the negroes, vho in wondennent left hearth and field to han^s around the Yankee camp to know mace about 'dis here free15 dom. ' ' In Tallahassee a festival was held by the Negroes on the day of the proclamation. There \re£ a broad grin on every countenance, shaking of hands, and a general air of extr^ie satisfaction, but no outbreaks, no offensiveness; nothing to indicate a feeling •'^Long, Florida Breezes , pp. 381-382. long furnishes an explanation for the surprise in Middle Florida at the nevs of emancipation. "Although the emancipation of tlae slaves had been discussed as a probable result of the war, yet we in Middle Florida were so removed from the adVBuice or occupation of the Gouth by the ai-my, that we had not realized that this was an accomplished fact. " The news "siuprlsed many; as if there had never been a formal declaration of tlae same two years before by President Lincoln; though, truth to say, it had never reached us, and elsewhere, slb here 'freedom* laad followed in tlie wake of the army. " Ibid . , p. 38I. The Florida Ifal on corroborates Long' s swicount cf the situation with the statement that "up to that time [May 20j there had been a feeling of hope on the part of the planters that they would be allowed to retain their slaves and a gradual emancipation policy would be adopted. The receipt of this order put an end to all such hopes. " Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union , May 27, 1865. The abolition of slavery was not an avowed purpose of the Civil War. It emerged as a "war msaeure. " During the early years of war, slaves who entered the Uhlon lines were returned to their owners. One scheme followed another. At one point slaves were considered as "contraband. " Lincoln posed colonization and 'coopensated emanGii>ation" as possible solutions. Hence, southerners were confused by conflicting reports and proposals. For an historical treatment of the develcrptjent of the emancipation policy, see Gteorge R. Bentley, A History

PAGE 27

21 of triUEiph, or joy of escape from thraldom. Soae families were disturbed by the sudden departure of ioouse servants, but generally both white and black accepted the situation together, willing to wait and learn the duty required respectively. '" An observer for a Jacksonville newspaper reported that "the manner in which the negroes received the intelligence varied. Some received it in silence; these were the more intelligent portion who were not totally in ignorance of what hcwi been going on. Others were con1 17 siderably astonished, and scarcely comprehended its meaning. " While seme Negroes may have been confused, the social implications of the change were patent to the whites. In the absence of Negro servants Florida's women were urged "to scorn and scout all the vanities of pride and fashion, " and to remember "that woman' s glory consists in being useful as well as ornamental. ..." Young men accustomed to "living in ease" were praised for taking "the plough and the hoe" and going "to work in the field to save the crop. "^ Political changes required further adjustments. In reply to his query regarding Allison's authority, McCook received orders not to of the Freedmen's Bureau (Philadelphia, 1955)^ PPl-15j Randall, Ihe Civil War and Reconstruction , pp. i^77-511. ^^Long, Florida Breezes , p. 382. ^1^ "Report on the Interior, Tallahassee, May 23, 1865, " Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, f-iay 27, I865. For a thorough account of the Negro's passage from slavery to freedom, see Coulter, ghs South During Reconstruction 1865-1877 ^ PP1+7-69' ••Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, June 2i}and October 28, I865. Some planters refused to believe that the free Negro would be a successful laborer and determined to procure white laborers frcaa the North. See the Gainesville Weekly New Sra , November 11, I865.

PAGE 28

22 recognize the Governor or any state official purporting to act under his instructions. ^ On May 2l4-, the last vestiges of Florida's Confederate government were swept avay by a military order that proclaimed martial law to be "the only law" existing in Florida. Laywers, practicing physicians, and ministers of the gospel were required to take the oath of allegiance to the United States and were "eoQpected ... to aid the authoidties in preserving and bringing the people back to a cheerful and hearty obedience to the authority of the General Government. " All of the legal proceedings and acts "of the so-called Confederate Government, or of the State of Florida as one of the members of that OQ Government were declared null and void. Military rule replaced civil law. The state was reduced to the status of a military department, and 21 humiliated by the presence of "blacks in blue. " It became clear that ^Ackerman, "Florida Reconstruction from Walker through Reed, 1865 to 1873, " p. 31^^General Orders Nuiaber 22, issued at Jacksonville, May 2k, 1865. Official Records of the Rebellion , Series I, Vol, XLVII, Pt. 3 (Washington, 1895), 623. PI '^^By early June the disposition of troops was as follows: five companies at Tallahassee; one at Madison; one of the Third United States Colored at Monticello; two coirpanies, one wliite and one colored, at Lake City; at least five companies, some white and some colored, at Gainesville; one company at Newnansvllle; one at Mcanopy. Plans were made to occupy OccLLa, Waldo, and Paiatka. The scheme was to post troops "so that they may be easily united, if necessary, at the same time covering as large an extent of territory as possible. " Brigadier General Israel Vogdes to Major W. L. M. Burger, Jacksonville, June k, I865. Ibid ., p. 622. 022. In accordance with General Orders Number II8 of the War Department June 27, 1865, Major General John G. Foster was appointed to comnand the Department of Florida, a subdivision of the 'Military Division of the Gulf. " Ibid. , Series I, Vol. XLIX, Pt. 2, 1039-10^0. For information on the disposition of the military throughout I865, see Ackerman, "Florida Reconstruction from Walter through Reed, 1365 to 1873, " pp. 31-33;

PAGE 29

23 those vho had worn the mantle of Confederate authority vere not to be among those who would initiate the reconstruction of the state. Three of Florida's wartime leaders, David L. Yulee, Stephen R. Malloiy, and Abraham K. Allison were placed under f 3deral arrest and imprisoned.^ Chaos, sorrow, and frustration were the constant coo^ianions of defeated cmd demoralized Floridians. There arose a philosophy based on the realities of the moment. A Gainesville newspaper reflected the attemgpt to shape these impressions and emotions into an acceptable code of conduct for a "stateless" citizenry: It is true, alas.' too true, that the sword and torch have desolated much of our hitherto, happy land-that the ravages of war have left no ti-ace of i-emembrance of many once happy homes — that many of our people have been reduced from affluence and wealth to penurj-and want. . , . Let it be so — whether this should or should not be the case, we left to arbitration, and by the result of that arbitration, we are, in this, as in all otlier matters, forced to abide. Gainesville Weekly Uew Era. August 12, l865j Tallahassee Sani-Weeklv Floridian, November 3> 1865; Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union. December 2, 1865; New York Times , December 25, I865. xulee was "charged with treason while holding a seat in the Senate of the United States, and wit h plotting the capture of forts and arsenals of the United States, and with inciting war against the Government. " Mallory, wLto had served in the United States Senate and as secretary of the Confederate Wavy, was "charged with treason, and organizing and setting on foot piratical expeditions against the commerce and marine of the United States on the high seas. " Information does not sseem to be available on the reason for Allison's imprisonment. Talisihassee TriWeekly Florida Sentinel . January 20, 1866, All were confined in 1HS5. Yulee and Allison were imprisoned at Fort Pulaski, and Mallory at Fort Lafayette. Allison was released in September of 1865; Mallory and Yulee were released on parole in March of 1866. Jacksonville Weekly Florida ^^on» September 16, l865j Tallahassee TriWeekly Florida Sent inel. March 17 and April 7, 1866.

PAGE 30

2k It became the duty, then, of all "to submit quietly to the decree of fate, " and to rely "in5>licitly upon the mercy and bounteousness of a just God. . . . "23 Thus it was ttiat in May of 1865, the conquered lived in the presence of the conqueror and pondered their fate. When William Marvin, vho was appointed Florida's provisional governor on July I3, I865, recalled the significant events of his life, he included his impression of Florida's people in I865. I found the people very poor. Their seaports having been blockaded throughout the var, little or no cotton had been raised. Many families were in mourning for the loss of their sons. ... I found the whites everywhere ready to admit that they were a conquered people and willing to " "accept the situation ..." The negroes, . . . did not seem to have any very clear ideas touching their new condition of freedom. . . . They were generally greatly perplexed to know how they were to get a living, and who was to take care of them. . . . Nor, indeed, were the white people free from many cares and anxieties not only as regarded their present condition as to food and raiment, but also their future prospects. Their political and social relations were all broken up; their state was under martial lav, and some of the citizens threatened with pirosecution for treason. 2^ Oq May 29> Fz^sident Johnson issued an amnesty proclamation, and announcad the terms under which the southern states could be restored to their normal relations with the federal Union. ^5 Baaing his plan on ^^Gainesville Weekly New Era, August 12, I865. Kevin E. Kearney, "Autobiograpliy of William Marvin, " Florida Historical Quarterly , XXXVI (January, 1958), 2l6-2l8. 2^A11 those who participated in the rebellion, with the exception of certain specified classes, were granted pardon along with the "restoration of all rights of property, except as to slaves, and except in cases where legal proceedings under the laws of the United States providing for the confiscation of property of persons engaged in rebellion have been instituted. ..." In order to obt€d.n pardon, each Individual bad to

PAGE 31

25 Lincoln* 3 philosophy of Reconstruction, Johnson outlined his policy in a proclamation vhich named W. W, Holden provisional governor of North Carolina. The provisional governor was instructed to call a convention. The delegates to the convention, and those vho elected them, vere to take the amnesty oath and vere to qualify as voters in accordance vith the constitution and lavs of North Carolina in force prior to the secession of the state. The duties of the constitutional convention weire veil defined. It vas to prescribe "permanent voting and office-holding qualifications" for the citizens of the state, repeal the ordinance of secession, abolish slavery, and repudiate the Confederate war debts. After the convention completed its work, the loyal citizens might choose their state officials. The newly elected legislature would then meet, ratify the Thirteenth Amendaent to the fedeiral Constitution, and elect United States senators and representatives. Upon the completion of these steps, the Secretary of State, William H. Seward, would issue a pitjclamation retiring the provisional governor, and restoring the functions of the state to the regularly elected governor.^ take the amnesty oath, swearing that he would "henceforth faithfully support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Union of the States, ..." and that he would "abide by and faithfully support all laws and proclamations which have been made during the existing rebellion with reference to the emancipation of slaves. ..." Those excepted from the general amnesty were permitted to petition for a special pardon. A copy of the proclamation may be found in James D. Richardson, A Compilation of the Messages and Rapers of the Presidents, 1789-1897 , VI (Washington, I899), 31O-312. Cited hereafter as Ifessages and Papers of the Presidents . 26 Similar proclamations were issued for all the southern states. The Johnson plan, which was similar to that advanced by Lincoln, was premised on the belief that a loyal nucleus of citizens in each of the

PAGE 32

26 Tbis was the process Florida vas to follotr also^ a process that vas to begin vltb the Flozldlan's acceptance of defeat aitd vltb his acquiescence in the political settlonent proposed by the President. It is the stoxy of this beginning, or more specifically, the story of the speaking that vas an important peurb of this beginning, that ciwstitutes the subject matter of the remainder of this cheqpter. So far as the vriter knovs, thez« are three extant saznples of vhat speakers said to the vhite people of Florida during the pre-convention period in 1863: the speech of Alfred Sears, a Ibiioa officer, at King's Ferry on July 23, 1663, and two speeches by William Marvin, provisional governor, one in Jacksonville on August 3, 186^, and one in Qulncy on Seprtendber 5# I865. Both speakers, as ve shall see, dealt vith some of the major adjustments that the southerner had to accept as a consequence of var and defeat, vhen they pointed out that economic adjustment vould depend on the vhite people's villingness to recognize the Negro's capabilities as a free laborer and that social adjustment vould require mutual respect and aynqpathy on the part of both races. Ve shall see, moreover, that the principal speaker, the Provisional Govexnor, had the further req^onslbllity of telling the vhite people, particularly the revolutionistssouthern states could be oqpowered to reorganize the state and thus ready it for a reiwval of its proi>er relations vith the federal govemnsnt. A detailed account of the Lincoln and Johnson plans of Recoostruction may be found in Randall, The Civil Var and Reconstruction , pp. 699-717. 27 Marvin also vpdks to the vhite people in Marlanna on Ss^tanber 16, 1Q63, but so flar as the vriter knovs, the speech vas not pzvaerved. Tallahassee 3«ai-Weekly Floridian, September 26, 1865'

PAGE 33

27 the ex-Confederates and secessionists — about the President's plan of reunion and of convincing them that it vould be to their best interest to acquiesce in this settlement. Finally, we shall see that, aside from the specific ends of either speaker, both provided answers for some of the vital questions of the period. Would the federal government confiscate the property of those who had supported the Confederacy? Would Negro suffrage be forced upon the South? What were the presidential terms of reunion? Who were the pardoned and tlie unpardoned? Was Florida a state in the Ifaion or a political wasteland? If Florida was allowed to control its own politics, would the Loyalists— those who had not st^ported secession or the Confederacy— be given any advantage over the revolutionists 7 The Discourse Speech of Alfi-ed Sears at King's Ferry On July 23, the "loyal citizens" of Nassau County gathered at King's Ferry "to consider the subject of reorganizing the State. '"^^ The audience was said to contain 15O of the most respectable citizens of the county. ..." Some had ccme twelve miles or more to attend the meeting. There seemed to be "a deep interest in returning to the fold. ..." The citizens of Nassau were scaaewhat divided in their attitudes. "Among some of the citizens who had suffered by the war, an absurd bitterness toward Lincoln exists for the Snancipation Proclamation, but the feeling is by no means general; there is a considerable body of men in the county who refused to be honeyfugled or forced into Jeff Davis' armies, and who have been under national protection the greater part of the war; these men are determined to have their influence. " Port Royal New South, August I9, I865, in Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, Septoaber 9, I865.

PAGE 34

28 The meeting was organized with the election of E. D. Tracy, former president of the Florida Senate, as chairman. "After a few renarJcs by I4r. Tracy, he proceeded to raise the 'old flag,* for which three cheers were given; then the Rev. Mr. Unerson called igoon God for his blessing on this people, and his protection to the flag which he had so wonderfully preserved during the last four years of trouble. " Next came the report of a committee which submitted resolutions hailing "with patriotic enthusiasm the return of peace and good government, " and recognizing Andrew Johnson as "a true friend of Republican Government. ..." Following the adoption of the resolutions, S. B. Noyes, Collector at Femandina, was celled on to speak. Noyes praised President Johnson as a "true friend of republican liberty, in whose hands the interests of the whole people would be safe. " When Noyes finished speaking, the chairman introduced the speaker of the day. Major Alfred Sears, a federal officer in charge of construction at Fort Clinch in Femandina.^ Sears dealt with four principal topics: the status of Florida as a free state, the freedmen as laboz«rs, Negro sviffrage, and the need for education. Sears dwelled only briefly on Florida's future as a free state. The people, he said, would have to organize under a free state constitution. Such a condition had to be accepted, "if for no other reason, because it is inevitable. " He counseled acquiescence as a substitute 29 Sears was identified as an "Engineer of Conctructlon" at Fort Clinch in Femandina, and as a long-time citizen of Florida. " The context of the speech indicates that he was probably a former resident of Massachusetts. Ibid .; Jacksonville Weekly Florida Times, October ^, l86^.

PAGE 35

29 for demoralization and inactivity. "Let us not spend time in ©rumbling over what cannot be helped, but go to work, encourage the emigration of laborers to our beautiful State, and hire men to raise crops, to carryon arts and manufactures. " His experience with f reedmen "during the last three years, " Sears continued, convinced him that once they "learn that work is necessary . . to live, they become industrious and excellent laborers. " His contact with the whites, on the other hand, had taught hin that many questioned the exslave's potential as a salaried laborer. In an attempt to change the opinion of the King's Ferry audience on this point. Sears used empirical proof recounting how he had cured absenteeism, demanded punctuality, and earned the respect of the Negroes at Fort Clinch. Absenteeism was cured by withholding rations. If my Negro men absented themselves from the work a day for which a ration had been issued from my commissariat, I charged them with the price of that ration when I settled with them at the end of the month. They soon learned that the ration was not a gratuity, but a part of their wages to be paid for work. Once this lesson was learned, "they became more constant in duty . . . . " Those who had worked only eight or ten days a month soon worked the full twentysix. Another lesson was in punctuality. If a m[a]n failed to make his appearance while the roll was being called, he was docked for a quarter of a day. It was necessary to be absolute in this thing; they thought it was a great hardship that when they were only five minutes late they should not go to work immediately, but must wait till the end of the first quarter. — However, they learned finally to be punctioal.

PAGE 36

30 "Certain old notions about Saturday afternoon" were eradicated in the saioe fashion. "The negroes founds . . . that it paid to vork all the time. " The application of a conmon rule for black and white laborers also helped to bring the freedoen into industrious habits. They learned that "if I did certain things to the negroes that forced them to work more steadily than liad been their custom, I did the very same things by the white laborers. They observed what was going on; they said, 'It's mighty hard on us, but he serves all alike.' " Sears, as a I-Iassachusetts man, saw the free labor question as one of interest versus prejudice. The object of his discussion was to induce his auditors to lay aside their prejudices toward the Negro and devote their energies to procuring the best results from the freedman^s labor. Such a policy was better than "fretting because 'niggers put on airs.'" The speaker clarified his position by recounting a conversation with one of his white laborers. One of ray white laborers, a native of this county, Tmnting higher wages, cociplained that he didn't receive as much as a "nigger." "That's very true," I said, "but you are not worth as much. " "Well, " he replied, "I think a white man ought to be worth as much as a nigger any time. " I weis forced to say [t]hat I reckon a man's value to me as a laborer b[y] the amount of work he is able to accon^jlish; that I do not pay a premium on color; I pay for work. Sears concluded his analysis of the labor question by posing a series of rhetorical questions euid affirming his confidence in the good Judgment of his listeners. Now won't you agree with me in this p[r]oposition? Am I not correct Y And do you not feel that much of the trouble

PAGE 37

31 occurring among the black proceeds in no small degree from [o]ur own inipatience under the changes that h[av]e occurred in their mlations to us'.-' Let us [b]e honest vith ourselves and \d.th them. !Eh[e]y are among us; they make the labor of the co[un]try. . . . V/ill it not be soaewhat unreasonable in us — say a little cowardly — if [w]e penait ourselves to be vexed with thsa because they have been freed? I have no doubt you will agree with me on this subject; that you will approach the whole matter with the dignity beccaning your manhood. Passing on to the question of suffrage. Sears declared Negro suffrage was a doctrine proposed by "overzealoua and impractical men" who were "agitating" for it in "various parts of the land. ..." Although the subject was not worthy of argument, certain observations were in order. First, Sears noted that the President did not countenance the attempt to force Negro suffrage irpon the South. "He is determined to let the loyal citizens of this state settle the matter for themselves. "^ Next, he maintained that northern men had not actually applied the principle of Negro suffrage in their own section. "If negro suffrage is a good thing in Florida, it must be good in Maine. " Northerners ought to tiy it first themselves, and "then advise us of the result. " The suffrage policy of New York was an exairple of northern hypocrisy. While rendering lip service to the principle, the people of the state introduced safeguards against its liberal application. 30 In his proclamation regarding the reconstruction of North Carolina, Johnson stated definitely that the determination of suffrage qualifications was a power that rested with the people of the states. Richardson, Messages and P&pers of the Presidents, VI, 312-3114-. The Florida Union endorsed the President's position. It editorialized: "The people of Massaclmsetts or Connecticut have no more right to make our local laws or regulate them than we have to interfere with theirs. In that sentiment we are sustained by tlie Constitution of the United States as well as the policy of the President. The question of negro suffrage is one which we have the right to settle for ourselves, " Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union , July 29, I865.

PAGE 38

32 Scjnie of the nefwspapers of New York city [sic] talk of universal suffrage as if it existed in that State. From their tone one might infer that negro suffrage had received a fair trial, and they are giving us the benefit of their experience. Such, however, is not the fact. V/hen the question was submitted to the people of New York, they refused to allow negroes to vote; and so it remains to this day, except that few very specially favored individuals, who among other qualifications possess a certain amount of real estate, are permitted this right. The qualifications I refer to are demanded only of negroes. This is the "manhood suffrage" of New York. One could reason from this that "even when the laws permit negro suffrage, the popular prejudice against these people is so strong that they have rarely availed themselves of the privilege. " The speaker climaxed his point by declaring that although everyone could acquiesce in the belief that "the black laborer must be protected In all his rights, " no one "regarded the elective franchise to be one of those rights. ..." Before concluding. Sears made some suggestions relative to education. The political control of the state would soon be in the hands of the people. "The rolls of Lee and Johnson's armies, at the time of their surrender" revealed "that only one man in five was able to write his name ! " If the people did not want to be "bamboozled" by the "unprincipled men of the State" as they had been "in times pewt, " they ought to protect themselves by demanding constitutional provisos for an efficient school system and tecu^her training. Following Sears* speech, the King's Forry audience listeuad to "a few appropriate remarks" from a Dr. Smith of Georgia. "A cold dinner, with hot coffee" followed the speechmaklng and ended the meeting. There

PAGE 39

33 did not eeem to be any 'enthusiasm araong the people^ but there vas . . . profound attention and deep, quiet earnestness. ..." The Florida Times considered Sears* effort an "excellent address, " and regEO^ied the speaker as one of the most earnest and zealously patriotic of our citizens. ..." In his attempt "to arouse the people to their interests, " he labored for 'the good of the State, " and "not from motives 31 of self-aggrandizement. . . . ' Speech of William Marvin at Jacksonville On August 2, 1865, the residents of Jacksonville welcaned the newly appointed provisional governor, 'r/illiam I'feivin. Many of them anxiously awaited the moment when the state would be "put on the direct high road towards resuming . . . former relations with . . . the Federal government under the good flag of the Union. "^ Hence the next day "a ^"Taie speeches of Tracy, Ifoyes, and Smith were not reported. Only extracts of the Sears speech were published. For an account of the meeting, see Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, September 9, I865. Tlie Sears speech was published in Jacksonville Weel^ly Florida Times , October 3, I865. ^^Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union , July 22, I865. Silas Niblack, who was to serve as a delegate to the constitutional convention from Columbia County, wrote Yulee of the attitude of the people in August: "The people of the State iiave accepted in good faith their situation and very much desire law and order established by civil authority in the State. " Silas L. Nib lack to David L. Yulee, Jacksonville, August 18, 1865, Yulee Bapers. Stephen R. Mallory, writing from his prison cell, counseled a policy of acquiescence. 'Ve are prostrated and powerless. We drew the sword, and staked life, liberty and property upon it. . . . There is no dishonor in frankly accepting the result, and acknowledging defeat, while the obvious dictates of patriotism demand that we make all the sacrifices required for restoration to the Union. " Stephen R. Mallory to Charles E. Dyke, Fort Lafayette, Ilovember 1, I865, in Tallahassee Semi-Vteekly Floridian , November 21, I865. Whitelaw Reid reported that the people of Soutii Florida "were looking eagerly forward

PAGE 40

3^ large crowd gathered around the music stemd near Head Quarters, . . . and demanded ... a speech. "33 Marvin, accompRnled by General Israel Vogdes and others, appeared and "took the stand. " The Provisional Gtovemor was fif1;y-seven years old. He was beardless, almost six feet tall, and of moderate proportiMis. Many Floridians, including the "ex-slave-holders" who had petitioned Johnson for his appointment, recognized him as a devout Uhionist, who had served Florida for twenty-eight years as jurist and statesman. to re-organization. ..." Whitelaw Reid, After the V/ar: A Southern Tour. May 1» I863. to May 1, I866 (Cincinnati, 1866}, p. I87. Tpreamble and resolution passed at a public meeting held in Waldo on August 26, 1865, was a further indication that many desired change. The provisional governor was asiied to facilitate our transition frcm Martial to Civil Law. ..." It was resolved that '*we do solemnly declare that in our opinion the people of this portion of the State ore prepared for such a change, and do most earnestly solicit the Governor to call a Convention of the people of the State, at the earliest possible date. " For an account of the Waldo meeting, see Gainesville Weekly New Era, September 2, IO65. 33 Jacksonville had been a focal point of war and occupation. Its citizens suffered through four federal invasions: twice in 1862, and a(5ain in 1863 and 1864. Portions of tlie city were burned wiien the Confederates withdrew in I862. At least one-third of the city was reduced to ashes when the Federals withdrew in April of 1863Re-occupied on February "J, I86U, the area remained under Itoion control for the remainder of the VBX. Davis, ThB Civil War and Reconstruction in Florida , p. 158 et passim . A heart-rending sight confronted returning Confederates and their families. "The des lating effects of war and decay were apparent on every side. The streets were littered with the trunks of trees that had been felled as a barricade a.'jainst the Confederate cavalry. Ruins of buildings burned; broken-down fences and neglected yaixls; dilapidated appearance of once neatly painted dwellings — all were depressing to those who sought their former homes. And worst of all, the best and largest dwellings that had escaped the Federal burning in 1863, were occupied by United States officers and troops, in some instances by negro troops, and wlien the owners applied for possession, many of them laamed that their property had been confiscated and sold. ..." T. Frederick Davis, History of Jacl^sonville, Florida and Vicinity 1313 to 192Jf (Saint Augustine, 1925), p. ll+9.

PAGE 41

35 An opponent of secession in 1861, Marvin remained at his post as federal judge in Ifey West until IQ63, when he resigned because of ill health. On this third day of Axigust, 1865, he stood before Floridians as the representative of the President, a position he had sought and had been awarded on July 13.^ Marvin's opening remarks to his colored and white listeners embodied several rhetorical skills. He endeavored to gain attention and to identify himself with the audience; he employed personal proof to establish his right to spetik on the subject of reorganization; and he alluded to the significance of his topic. He began: Fellow Citizens: —I am happy to meet this large audience, and discuss the important subjects which are claiming the attention of every one. I have the right to address you, because I an one of the oldest citizens of Florida. I came here whilst we were yet a territory, and assisted in the organization of the State Government. Florida is my state by adoption and affection. Her prosperity and happiness are linlced with my ovm. I have a right, also, to address ^William Marvin, lawyer, author, and statesman, was uniquely fitted for the responsibilities of the provisional governorship. A native of New York, he had lived in Florida frcra I835 until I863. He was well known in many parts of the state because of his service as United States district attorney, and judge of the southern District of Florida at Key West; as a lopresentative of Monroe County in the territorial council, and as a delegate to the first constitutional convention at Saint Joseph in 1838-39. Defeated as a Ifciion candidate for the office of delegate to the secession convention in 1861, Ifervin served as federal judge in Key West until I863. Then he moved his family to New York City, where he established a law practice which was interrupted by his appointment to the provisional governorship in I865. His residence in Ne\r York during the \tsx years provided insight into northern attitudes. As a one-time slaveowner, Marvin could understand the adjustments required of exslaveowners and exslaves in a post-war, free society. Kearney, "Autobiography of William Ifervin, " pp. 179-222. For a narrative of the events leading to Marvin's appointment in 1865, see Davis, The Civil War and Reconstruction in Florida, pp. 35^356.

PAGE 42

36 you, because I have been appointed by the President of the United States to aid you in the reconstruction of your State govemaent. I shall make Isnown to you the plan of the President and call your attention to those subjects wliich are deeiaed most essential to your welfare. I trust therefore you will give me, on this occasion, your patient attention, -j? The subjects l^farvin deemed essential to the audience's xjelfare vere: the policy of the federal government, the sale of confiscated lands azid property, slavery, the power of the military, and race relations. The policy of the federal government was, said Marvin, a magnanimous one. Floridians m:iist acquiesce in the fact that they were "a conquered people, and at the mercy of the Government. " Speaking as one of them, Marvin characterized their plight. 'Ve are utterly helpless, and lie passive in the hands of the victors. " Will the government "press us with its armies? Glut its sword of vengenance with our blood? Or confiscate all our property?" Resuming his role as emissary of the President, Marvin answered: "Not at all, its majesty and might are no greater than its clemency and mercy. " 35Marvin disseminated Information on the presidential plan in a written "Address to the People of the State of Florida. " Dated August 3, 1865, the document contained a definitive stateiient of J Jinson's philosophy of ReconstzTaction, and a general outline of the plan's application to Florida. The civil authorities of Florida, "having engaged in an organized rebellion against the Government of the United Statec, have, with the overthrow of the rebellion, ceased to exist, and the State, though in the Union, is without a civil government. . . . The President of the United States lias appointed me Provisional Governor of the State, and made it ray duty, at the earliest practicable moment, to prescribe ouch rules and regulations as may be necessary and proper for coiive-x'.ng a convention, cocrposed of delegates to be chosen by that portion of the people of the Ctate, who are loyal to the United States and no others, for tlie purpose of altering or amending the constitution of the State; and with authority to exercise within the limits of the State, all the jKJwers necessary and proper to enable the loyal people of the State to

PAGE 43

37 In the light of this statement the federal government's policies of confiscation and acmesty exeinption required explaimtion. Confiscation was justified as a war measure. "At the outbreak of the rebellion the so-called Confederate Government confiscated the property of all Itoion people, and had the insurgents been successful . . . the property of such citizen [sic] would have been confiscated and lost to than. " Hence, the "United States, ... as a means of strengthening the government, and crippling the rebellion confiscated the property of its most guilty instigators and adherents. " This was "in accordance with the usual practice of nations under similar circumstances. " Why were "Generals, Judges, Governors, member of Congress, " "those who were worth over $20, OCX) of taxable prooperty, " and others exen5>ted from the Presi
PAGE 44

38 most of the eaoargrbed classes vould receive executive cleiaency.^o ^fervin concluded his discussion of the exeopted classes by eissuring bis listeners that he would "take pleasure in reconiaending to the favorable consideration of the President all vho [vere] truly penitent and [gave] good evidence of determination to be good citizens in the future. "^* The next topic, that of governmental policy regarding the scLLe of confiscated pix)perty, vas of vital interest to the Jacksonville audience, for a sizeable portion of the city vas eannaited for public auction within the next fourteen days. ^ Marvin developed the point by employing a problemsolution 8eg;uence. '^T'ourteen classes were cxeinpted fi^Mii the pardon extended in the presidential proclamation of ^5ay 2$, l365. See Richardson, Jtessaces and Papers of the Presidents, VI, 310-312. For an interesting accovmt of how special pardons were obtained, bog J. T. Dorrlc, "Pardoning the Leaders of the Confederacy, " Msslssippi VaJ.ley aistorical Review, XV (June, 1928), 3-21. 37 ~"I4arvln played a cicnificant part in helping to secure presidential pardon for severa.1 ex-Confederate leaders. "It was a part of my duties to advise the President touching his granting of pardons; he required petitions for i)ardonfl to be ajrproved by the Provisional Governors, before being presented to him. In this way, it turned out that I vas called upon to recommend and did recommend for pardon severeuL men who in their firey zeal for Secession before the war broke out, had threatened to hang me if they should catch me in the piney woods. . . . Governor Allison and exSenators Yulec Gs llallory were old friends and I very gladly reconmended to the President their peurdon. Allison was discharged from prison on my application. " Kearney, "Autobiography of William Ivlarvin, " p. 2l8. ^On August 5, l36l. Congress levied a direct tax on real estate in all the states. Of the total of $20,000,000, some $77,522 was apportioned to Florida. On June 7, 1362, a second law was passed authorizing the collection of tlie direct tax in insurrectionary districts. Tallahassee Trl-Weekly Florida Sentinel , January 20, I866. The I862 law provided "that the commissioners appointed under it should assess Southern lands, and through advertisement notify the absentee owners of the taxes due; should such payments not be forthcoming, the Connisslon might sell

PAGE 45

39 Beginning i/ith a review of tlae pi'oblem, he declared: While the war was still raging^ and many of the inhabitants of this part of the State were within the rebel lines, a District Court of the United States was held at St. Augustine, then and now occv^ied by Union troops, and a large number of decrees of confiscation of lands and houses were entered up in the absence of the owners and without their appearing. They \ieve, in many, and perhaps most instances, in the rebel country, where, perhaps, they ought not to have been, but where they, in fact, were. The owners of these lands and houses, in many instances, are now es well disposed to become loyal and good citizens as any in the state. Since these decrees were passed they have been embraced within the Amnesty Proclaaation. Under these cliMumstanceB, it appeared desirable, that they should have an opportunity to be heard— that the sales advertised for the 17th of A'ogust should be suspended, and the decrees opened, and the owners allowed to make such explanation, and set \xp such defences as they should be advised by their counsel are proper to be made — in other words, that they should have a full hearing on the merits — and plead their pardons, if such plea should be deemed admissible in their cases. Marvin, apparently cognizant of the situation while still in New York, had communicated with the Attorney General of the United States, and \ras prepared to announce the remedy offered by him. His answer was . . . prcxapt, so read, as to give full assurances that the Go"
PAGE 46

ko cast about, look up their testimony, take advice and counsel, and see what defence they can make. The action of the AttorneyGeneral, declared Marvin, vas proof of the government's policy of clemency. The audience was urged to accept the action "as an omen of good — the olive branch held out by the civil authorities to all persons who are . . . sincerely willing to do right, however much they may have erred in the past. " After thus strengthening his ethos with the audience the speaker was prepared to deal with an important condition of reunion, the abolition of slavery. "With the fetLl of the Confederacy, its comer stone crumbled to dust, and the winds have scattered it. The war which was commenced, among other reasons, for perpetuating the black man's bondage ... in the providence of God, brought him freedom. He can never be enslaved again. (A great shout among the colored pec^le)." The constitution which the people would be called upon to foim would have to "recog39 nize the order of things and secure freedom to all alike. ' "^ With this ^"Marvin's discussion of slavery was probably directed at both the immediate and remote audiences. The Jswiksonvllle audience had been aware of emancipation since February, l861»-, or earlier. While the speaker probably sought to stress the fact of freedom for the benefit of the remote, or general Florida audience, through the medium of the press. The very fact that slavery was a dead issue needed en^jhasis. Some ex-Confederates adamantly refused to recognize the validity of Lincoln's anancipation Proclamation. For example. Sears wrote Yulee: "I notice . . . one or two of the most intelligent men in this county proclaiming that the new constitution must not recognize the validity of the war Measures liberating slaves. "Judge Stewart is one of these; intensely bitter against Prest. Lincoln for the Eknancipation order and declaring that it is not to be submitted to. Such a man may do much harm by such a course, because he is an upright Intelligent citizen. But how worse than useless the combat! " Alfred L. Sears to David L. Yulee, Femandina, August 15, I865, Yulee fttpers.

PAGE 47

kl done there would be "nothing to hinder a restoration of our constitutional relationship vith the general government. ..." Actual restoration would be "through a convention to be called at no distant day to alter or amend the State constitution. " All were urged to lose no time "in becoming qualified to vote for members of the convention. " The next point clarified was that, until civil government was restored, the preservation of peace and order would "continue in the hands of [the] military authoritis" [sic]. Some would ask; "Why don't you assume control at once of the civil administration as we prefer civil rule?" Marvin answered that he had "no authority to resuscitate the civil authorities or to appoint any one to office beyond what is necessary to the calling of a convention. Ify business is to assist you in organizing a government. I trust you will cheerfully acquiesce in this arrangement. " In the exposition of his final point, the speaker strove for emphasis by addressing the races individually. Florida was entering upon ^fervin set forth the qualifications of voters in his written address of August 3> I865: "The persons qualified to vote at such election of delegates and the persons eligible as members of such convention, will be such persons as shall have previously taken and subscribed to the oath of amnesty as set forth in the President's Proclamation of May 29th, . . . and as are also qualified as prescribed by the constitution and laws of the State in force immediately before the 11th day of January I861, the date of the so called ordinance of secession. Where the person is excepted from the benefits of the amnesty proclamation, he must also have been previously specially pardoned by the President before he can become a qualified voter or eligible as a member of the Convention. This interpretation of the two proclamations of the President I received from himself in person, and also from the Attorney General. " For the text of the address, see Gainesville Weekly New Era , August 12, 1865, or Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, August 5* 1865.

PAGE 48

k2 a new career; her sticcess would depend on a 'good understanding" between the races. Marvin first exhorted his white audience to adopt a humanitarian attitude toward the Negro. "Some persons, " he affirmed, "disappointed and vexed, will not have any faith in the colored man. " They will not think of him with pleasure, now that he has become free. They have no anxiety to see him socially and morally elevated because they have no faith in his capabilities. Let me say in all plainess [sic] to such, try him. Give him a fair chance. Teach and encourage him. Your happiness and prosperity are now inseperably [ sic ] connected with the welfare of this people. . . . They cannot remain in a stationary condition. Their movement must be upwards or they will become, in many cases, the veriest vagabonds, and rest like an incubus upon the country. In many respects the white man is superior to the colored man [italics mine] and his responsibility is correspondingly increased. We want the colored people here. In their muscles and sinews the State has immense wealth; but that they may be made available we must treat them kindly. . . . The Negro audience, in turn, was called upon to play its part in adjusting to the new order of things and to recognize the difficult adjustments Incumbent upon the white people. The orator's admonitions to his colored listeners were clothed in simple language. And you, my colored friends, must not be idle or lazy. Labor is the law which God has imposed upon us all. I have been and expect to be one of the most laborious men in Florida. If you are respectful to all and industrious, you will be protected by the law in the enjoyment of all the rights of humanity. You must keep away from taverns cmd try to educate your children in tlie fear of the Lord. Send them to the Sunday school. The white man, too, must school himself to this new order of things. Ills responsibilities and duties are of the most imrious [sic] character. Be must meet them like a hero, or the worst of consequences will follow to himself and family. All bore a heavy burden of responsibility. "Schools must be established

PAGE 49

h3 over the land. " Missionaries and teachers must be sent out "from among yourselves. ..." Promotion of the "intelligence, virtue, and general elevation of all the people of the State" was a consaon task. Ministers of the Gospel, in particular, had an awful responsibility in atten5>ting to promote "peace on earth and good will to men. " Having urged the Negro, white man, minister, teacher, and statesman to accept their appointed tasks, Marvin was ready to close. In his peroration he again stressed the thane of acquiescence, counseling a willing acceptance of the decisions of Providence. The future of the state, he said, rested on the shoulders of the individual citizen. Let every man, wcman and child throughout the State cease to murmer [ sic ] or ccxnplain against the dispensations of Providence, but cheerfully and hopefully accept the new order of things, as coming from Him whose ways are not as man's thoughts. There is a bright prospect in the future for our beautiful State. The rainbow of promise is seen in the dissolving clouds. Let each man do his own duty and God will bless us.^1 Editorial reactions to the speech were cocgplimentary. The Hew Era regarded Marvin's "written address to the people, " of August 3^ and the Jacksonville speech as "two very ii]5)ortfiuat documents. " When studied together, they gave "a clear conception of the Governor's views upon the past, present, and future. "^^ The Florida Union said that the discourse ^^For an account of Marvin's speech, see Gainesville Weekly ITew Era , August 12, I865. Ibid . Following his evaluation of Marvin's speech, the editor urged all to take an active interest in the reorganization process. While it was generally agreed that the coming state convention would be an "important era, " theare were some who treated "the matter with great indifference. It is not . . . because they do not, in heart, feel a deep interest in the State and the welfare and happiness of the people, but

PAGE 50

hk made available "a full def Initicsn of the • CJoverxior* s policy' . " It hailed Ifervin as one who "Imows the condition and wants of the people. " The fact "that it was mainly through Ms efforts that the Govermnent . . ordered a suspension of all proceedings under the Confiscation Act, " would not lessen the respect and estimation in which be was held. In short, the Provisional Governor had ccMae to point the way and manner by which the people of Florida could "reestablish their civil govemiasnt and renew their constitutional relations with their sister States in the Union. " This gave the "press of Florida ... a community of interests, a cooanon end and object to labor foe . . . "^ The Ifeionists or Loyalists in East Florida also reacted favorably to Marvin's explemation of Johnson's policy. Iten of this persuasion had met several times during the war, under the x>rotection of the federal military, to organize a loyal state government, but tlieir efforts had been repeatedly thwarted by the frequent withdrawal of federal forces.^ Now that Florida was safely in the hands of the from the fact that they labor under mental desperation. They have given up all hopes for prosperity in the future. We should be up and doing. ..." ^3jackBonville Weekly Florida Union, August 5* 1865. Sears, the Itoion officer who had addressed the "Loyal citizens" at King's Ferry, wrote Yulee; "There are in town one or two copies of Marvin's address at Jacksonville on his way to Tallabtissee. All Uhionists like it much. " Alfred L. Secure to David L. Yulee, Femandina, August 15, IB65, Yulee Papers. ^In March of I862, a group of Jacksonville Unionists atteI^pted "loyal political reorganization. " In 1863, Unionist political rallies were held in Saint Augustine and Femandina. Perliaps the most formidable IMionlst attempt at political reorganization took place in Jacksonville

PAGE 51

1*5 federal military the IMionists could look forward to organizing a new state government. Jfarvin's Jacksonville speech, in short, marked for them the beginning of an era filled with the promise of public office. Speech of William Marvin at Qulncy Governor Ifervin performed many labors between speeches. He had to interview pardon seekers, confer with military authorities and agents of the Freedmen's Bureau, and draft proclamations to infozm the citizenry of the mechanics of presidential Reconstruction. Ee realised, however, the importjmce of supplementing actions and written instructions with the spoken word in areas where emancipation was still a novelty and southern mores a deeply ingrained pattern of thought. His extant speeches indicate that he concentrated on the "black arc" counties. Marvin visited Quincy early in S^>tember, and remained for a time as the guest of Charles H. DuPont. On September k, he consulted with the citizens to determine "for himself, the spirit suod temper of the people. ..." On the following morning an audience composed entirely of white persons assembled to hear him speak. ' in l86^. This movement allegedly stemmed from Lincoln's scheme to reconstruct Florida for the purpose of acquiring the state's electoral votes in lQ6k. The project, however, is said to have failed because the Unionists in Florida were few in number and divided politically. Davis, The Civil VJar and Reconstruction in Florida , pp. 250-255. k6 Quincy Semi-V/eekly Commonvealth , in Jacksonville v;eekly Florida Union, September l6, 1865. Quincy, located just north and west of Tallahassee in the "black arc" area, remained free from federal attack or occupation during the war, a fact which meant that southern customs, for the most part, had not been disturbed. This probably explains why I4arvin spoke to the white

PAGE 52

k6 "After being handscHnely introduced by Judge DoPbnt, the Governor stepped forward, dressed cap a pie in white, and certainly the personel [sic ] of His Excellency was inviting. " His opening remarks resembled those used at Jacksonville. Again, the aim was to establish coomon ground with his audience. He began: FELLCfW CITIZENS: I am happy to meet so many of ycu this morning, and, beneath the shade of this grove, discuss the great questions which at this time are of such overwhelming interest to the State. Though not a native of Florida, my youth and the pride of my manhood have been spent among you. I have sorrowed in your sorrow, and your happiness has been, and still is, mine. I am willing, in this emergency, to do my full share of labor to restore to our beautiful country more than its ancient pi^sperity. Some of the questions Marvin thought \rarthy of discussion were: the status of Florida as a state; the matters which must be recognized In the new state constitution; and the folly of resisteuice to federal domination. Florida's political status, he began, was a matter that required clarification. Was Florida a state, and if so, what was its relation to the Union? Two points were advanced in answering this question. First, as a consequence of the fall of the Confederacy, Florida's state government, "which had been identified with it, and supported it, . . . went down to ruin among the general ruin which overwhelmed the people on September ^, and to the freedmen on Sunday, September 10. Be did not wish to offend tlie sensibilities of the white people or interfere with plantation routine by calling the freedmen from the fields on a working day. The speaker's clioice of Sunday as the best time to spaak to the freedmen, moreover, is an integral part of the rhetoric of the freedom speech which is described in the next chapter.

PAGE 53

hi states of the South. " Floridians vere vithout "a government of any kind, " and ranained in a condition of "anarchy" and "confusion" until the general government "extended" martial law "over the State. " Second, although a state in the Ihiion, Florida could not reauiae its noimal relations with the general government until a new state government had been organized in accordance with "the new order of things. " IJIexvln* s explanaticsi of this point provided a sutonaxy of President Johnson's philosophy of Reconstruction, and a statement of its application to Florida. After much discussion by the best and soundest thinkers in the nation, the question has been settled with much unanimity, that the secession of a State is an impossibility. A rebellion cannot be a success, unless it amounts to a revolution, affecting alike all sections of the country. The very soil embraced within the American Republic scorns to receive the impress of but one government at the same time. It follows that Florida has never ceased to be a State in the Union — but she has been a State in rebellion, and, by her acts, has destroyed her State Government, and particularly the institution of slavery, which was nursed in its bosom and defended by it. She is now held by martial law in a state of tutelage, with her political rights in abeyance, and will be kept there till she organizes for herself, oa. a new basis, a new government. Of immediate significance was the fact that tlie responsibility for tlie organization of this "new government, " and the consequent rreestablishment of civil airthorlty, rested with the people, not the provisional governor. While thus delimiting his own authority, Marvin strove to motivate his listeners to play an active part in the business of Reconstruction. He declared: "I am here to open the way and assist you in this delicate and urgent business. I am not authorized to establish, by apopointment, civil authority myself— that is pre-eminently

PAGE 54

k6 your vork, and martial lav will prevail till y(»i take it in hand and accoiqpllsh it. " Such a declaration naturally led to a discussion of the work to be done. Marvin assumed that tlie audience had seen his "proclaination ordering an election on the 10th of October, and a meeting of delegates cm the 25th. . . . Although the subject might, perhaps, be left without further comment, Marvin, "being able ... to lock, over the whole ground, " felt duty bound "to call . . . attention to a few matters which must characterize the Constitution to be framed. " These were: (l) freedom for all; (2) the equality of the Negro before the lawj (3) the incorporation of the Ihirteenth Amendment into the state constitution; and (4) the admission of the Negro as a witness in the courts. Such revolutionary proposals required a careful explanation for the "black arc" audience. "The future Constitution of Florida must guarantee freedom alike to all; it must not be black or white, but FREE! " This guarantee, declared the speaker, was necessary for two reasons. First, the institution of slavery had ceased to exist. Any attec^pt to revive it would be fruitless. Second, if slavery continued, Floridians would live under a constant threat of Negro insurrection. It was well, in Marvin's judgment, that slavery had "passed away forever. " ^Issued on August 23, the proclamation set forth qualifications for voting emd membership in the convention; outlined the procedure for taking the amnesty oath; made provision for tlie conduct of the election; and directed that the convention provide, by a schedule, for the election of a Governor and General Assembly, and for the reorganization of a permanent State government. " Gednesville W eekly New Era , Septmber 2, 1865; Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, September 2, I865.

PAGE 55

49 Supposing the iiistitution remained, and the 150,000 colored troops, who have been thoroughly drilled in the use of anns, and instructed in the rights of freemen, and who have exhibited on many a bloody field, and in the storming of batteries, a steadiness and a courage equal to that of the white man, were turned loose among us, how long would that institution last, or vhose life or property would be secure? In that case, slavery would disappear in carnage and in rivers of blood. Thank CiOd, the thing is out of the way and we are safe! Next, "as citizens, before the law, the freedmen must be in all respects our equals. " Marvin did not believe "that as a race they are or can be made during many generations, if ever, the equals PERSONALLY of the Caucasian race, or can enjoy the same political or sociaLL position, " but this did not constitute a "reason why Constitution or low should discriminate against them. " To be sure, the rlgiht of suffrage did not "necessarily follow, for that is not a natural, but a political right, which may be granted or wlth-held, as sound policy may dictate. " The Negro, then, was to be the equal of the white, but this equality was restricted to the legal realm. "^ The third obligation was the Incorporation of the Thirteenth Amendment into the state constitution, and its ultimate adoption by the 1.Q '"Bae demand for legal equality probably seased reasonable, so long as the political and social supremacy of the whites received unqualified acJaiowledgtiient. iiarvin's stateaent of the issite differed only slightly from an editorial appearing in the Gainesville Weekly New Era of August 19, 1865. The New Era editorialized; "l-.'e are bound to treat the negroes as freemen. We are, and always will be the superior race. We shall continue to rule politically. They have and always will have, the protection of law. " After hearing, or reading, the Quincy speech, Mrs. Yulee wrote her husband: "How do you like Gov [sic] Marvin's speech at Quincy? I am satisfied with securing the Negroes their civil rights. They ought to be protected from injustice, but they are incapable of the right of suffrage. " Nannie C. Yulee to David L. Yulee, Wlckland, October 3, I865, Yulee Papers.

PAGE 56

50 50 legislatui«. If the people vere in earnest in recognizing the coo5)lete freedom of the blacix, and in perpetuating that freedom, public opinion would not be a detenr^nt to the incorporation of the aiaendaent. Of more importance, however, was the consideration "that the Govermaent ... be convinced that ve are acting in good faith in framing a Constitution. " Were there any objections to the amendment C' The speaker had heard two. Sooe believed its euioption would be "assenting to abolition, " and these persons preferred having that measure forced upon them. Marvin coimtered: "Very well, it is forced upon you by Government, and by acconplished facts and you must consent to it or you are a beligerent [sic]. " Florida's consent had to go "on record in the most formal, solemn and binding manner, 6is a condition precedent to peace and a restoration of State rights. " A second objection was: "We are unwilling to impose abolition upon others. " Again, the anstrer was direct; You do no such thing. Congress demands this of all the late insurgent States. Six of them have already complied with the demand. In so doing, they acted simply for themselves. Let Flozrida frame a free Constitution, adopt the amendment, and you £;ivc evidence to the world that you are taking steps which neith r you nor your posterity can retrace, and you prepare the way for admission into the great sisterhood of States. A final requirement was "that persons of color ... be admitted as witnesses in all our Courts of civil Jurisprudence. " Because of ^Marvin e^lalned tliat the Thirteenth Amexidmeztt "prohibits slavery or involuntary servitude, except when the party has been duly convicted of crime, by due process of law. ..." The amendment also granted the "United States the power to enforce tlois provision. " Foiraal ratification was a function of the state legislature, but Marvin was of the opinion that the incorporation of the language of the nmcndiieut into the state constitution would serve to demonstrate the good faith of the Florida convention.

PAGE 57

51 personal convlcticKi and a knowled^ of the audience's prejudices regarding Kegro testimony, Marvin was prepared to argue at length in favor of this policy. "I azn aware that this is a hard doctrine to many, " he said, "but it is not, and never vas such to me. " Sooe believed "the negro constitutionally a liar — that falsehood is marrow in his bones, and that it circulates in his blood. " This vas a slander on God and man. Thirty years in the South had convinced Marvin "that the slave. . . often told the truth, whilst the master . . . lied. " Some might perjui« themselves, but "who does not know that every Court room is the theatre of more or less false swearing?" A wise Rrovidence seldom pennits a perversion of Justice by false witnesses. "Perjury is such a monster — that the hissing of their tongues makes a sort of Babel of the witnesses' stand, warring with each other and with reason, and with a thousand circumstances which surround, reveal and guard the truth. " I-Iarvin next called on personal e^qoerience to prove that in the past some guilty persons had gone unpunished because the Negro was not able to testify. "Many are the instances in which I have known guilty parties to go unwhipped of justice because colored people could not come into the Court. ..." Their admission as witnesses "would have given the State's pilson or the gallows its due, and relieved society of . . . dangerous characters. " "I have, " said Marvin, "much feeling upon this subject, because the impressive and painful lessons of years crowd in upon my memory. " The proposal to admit Negroes as witnesses gained further

PAGE 58

52 justification from precedent. The audience knew "that the menial classes of all nations aire permitted to appear in Court and testify, and that in sotne instances Lords and nobles have been sent to the gallows on the evidence of house servBnts. " The Negroes were "as well qualified to testify as they, " If the Negroes wei^ barred from the courtroom, they would have little chance for justice. "The Gtovemment and the world are aware of this. " In all probability Congress would not regard Florida' s constitution "as republican in form, or calculated to secure the ends of justice to all citizens, unless the negro is pezmitted to come into Court as a witness. " If the convention denied the Ifegro this right, and CcxasreaB rejected the constitution on that account, the speaker would "acquiesce in the justice of the decision. " Marvin concluded his arguments on Negro testimoDy by urging his audience "to make a clean breast of this whole business, [to] do full justice to the negro, though he is of an inferior race, " and thereby "remove the whole subject growing out of his slavery, emancix>ation and status, from the theatre of politics. " Two years' residence in the North provided sufficient proof of the wisdom of such a course. While there was no "unkind feeling . . . among any class, a stem determination exists everywhere that slavery, in all its fonus and phases, shall be buried so eternally deep, that it will know no resurrection. " All were determined "that the elements which enter into the foundation of our Government shall be of universal application, making us a happy and powerful people. "

PAGE 59

53 Having told Ms listeners that a reorganization of the state government would be necessary and the constitution would have to reflect the changed condition of affairs, the speaJker depicted the might of the North and the nation as a means of paranipting them to acquiesce in defeat. What is our condition? Florida has suffered many losses. "Our property lies ruined and scattered in the wide sweeping and bloody paths of war. " The ruin wrought here was, however, but one view of the case. The suffering has not all fallen to yoiu* lot. The sacred remains of 200,090 Northnen [sic] lie buried in Southern graves!" Such heroism "touches the chivalrous feelings of the South, and teaches us that we were conquered, not by menials or cowards, but by f oemen worthy of our steel. " This was the lesson of the war, and it contained implications for the future. Although the conquered and the conqueror alilce sustained great losses, the muscle and fiber of northern men were not to be underestimated. Their wealth and resources have astonished the nations of the earth, as well as ourselves, and let me say to you that the North is so fiimly fixed in its position that the conflict of the last four years, calling to the field a million and a half of men and spending money in proportion, has had but the slightest effect upon either business or society; and the Government was never so strong in men, resources and the affections of the people, as when the war closed. — At the time of Lee's surrender. Grant had under his cc^nmand 800,000 men, and could have held every position he occupied, and concentrated at any given point 500,000 of his veteran troops. The wonder was "not that you were conquered, but that you were able to hold out so long against such fecurfui odds." Moreover, the implications

PAGE 60

vere clear. "The Southern pecfple are brave ae the bravest; but it is folly for than to think that one Is a natch for ten of the same blood, and each as brave as himself. " What was true of the North was true of the nation. "The United States was never so powerful. ..." Not even in the midst of war, "when you seemed to be a full match for the Great Republic, did France and England cooibined dare to insult the old flag. Their syu^pathies were with you, but they dared not make them of any practical value, and now both nations are ready to get down on their marrow-bones at her bidding! " Floridians fonned a part of a "great, powerful and honored Republic, " and could "share in its gloiy. " The Quincy a;adience heaixl Marvin climax his effort with the prediction that they would be numbered among the staunchest of Americans. "When a few years shall have passed away, and the exasperations of the present are healed, none will be prouder than yourselves to say, •! AM AN AMERICAN CITIZENf • "^"^ The Democratic Commonweeilth, Quincy* s only newspaper at the time, did not comoent on the Marvin speech itself, but Judging from its reaction to his visit to Quincy, the speech must have been well received. ^•'•For the complete text of Marvin's Quincy speech, see Jacksonville Weekly Herald , Septeubcr 15, 1865. The editor prefaced the speech text with some facts relative to its authenticity. He noted; "We have been kindly furnished by a gentleman who weis preocnt, with a copy of the speech delivered by Gtov. I-larvin, on the 5th inst. , at Quincy. It is proper for us to say that the Governor was not aware that the sjjeech was preserved, and that there has been no opportunity of presenting it to him for revision or correction. But we have no doubt that he will see in it a very correct likeness of himself as he appeared on that occasion, so far as the Living Orator can be transferred to print. "

PAGE 61

55 The CcMBnomrealth editorialized: 'His conciliatory and considerate policy commends hlja wamly to the people of Florida. "52 It Is this type of reaction that suggests that as Marvin paved the way for political reunion during the pre-conventlon period, he earned the respect of Loyalists and revolutionists alike. As the Jacksonville Times, a Republican paper tliat sig>ported Florida* s Loyalists, put It, Marvin had through "his good sense, his high character, [and] his ii5)artlallty not only made himself a favorite throughout the State, but by prudence and sldLll [had] exercised a happy, and ... a lasting Influence upon its welfare. . . . "^^ The Provisional Governor's preconverrfclon speeches to the white people also received a favorable press In the North. In the opinion of Benjamin C. Truman, a special correspondent for the New Yorfc Times, Marvin In his tour of the 'Vnost in^ortant places" In Middle and Eastern Florida had taken the "'bull by the horns, » to the great consternation of narrow-mindfid politicians, and to the disgust of the » crackers* and the ignorant masses generally. ..." He had effectively "explained to the people the policy of the President, and what was expected of them. "5^ 52 Quincy Semi-Weekly Commonwealth in Jacksonville Weekly F lorida Union , September 16, 1865 . ^^Jacksonville Weekly Florida Times, December 7, 1865. 54 -' Report of Benjamin C. Truman, dated at Tallahassee, December 7, 1865, in New York Times , December 25, I865.

PAGE 62

56 The Rhetoric Wben William Ilarvln acceprted his appointment as provisional governor, he accepted the responsibility of preparing Florida for a resuB^ption of its noroal relations with the federal goverrment. Political reunion under the President's plan became Marvin's personal goal and the goal of those who vere to Join him in producing a rhetoric of reunion. After considering the problems involved in accomplishing this objective, Marvin realized that reunion hinged on the attainment of three intermediate goals: (l) getting the people of Florida to euicept the President's terms of reunion, (2) creating a stable economic and social climate in vhich the political adjustments could take place, and (3) getting the people to carry out tlie necessary acts and procedures. The first end was the object of a rhetoric of acquiescence. The third goal vas the object of a rhetoric of adjustment, and the second goal was a coDsoon aim of both rhetorics. Because he vas familiar with oonditicms in the state, Marvin realized that the attainoent of the first go«a, getting Florldlans to accept the President's terms of reunion, vas a problem of persuasion. Had President Johnson vanted to iimpose a set of terms on a conquered people, he could have vrltten out a military order. Becauae he believed however, that neither the war nor the victory of the North had impaired or voided state rights, this was not the course he followed. His plan of Reconstruction called for acquiescence in certain demands, but, at the same time, provided that the actual process of adjustment be carried

PAGE 63

57 out by the people themselves within the framework of the danocratic process. If the people were willing to accept the settlement, they would co-operate by taking the amnesty oath, by electing delegates to a constitutional convention, and by electing officers for a new state government. If they were not willing to cooperate, they could reject the settlement siniply by staying away frcsn the polls. Knowing that the primary objective of the preconvention period would be to persuade the people to accept the President's terms of reunion was one thing; working out a rhetorical strategy that would accoo5>li8h this end was yet another. Who would favor the President's terms of reunion? V/ho would oppose them, and on what grounds? IIow many would be opposed, and vbait would be the extent of audience hostility? Was there anything about the terms of reunion that might appeal to certain audience desires, attitudes, or prejudices? Marvin recLLized, first of all, that the white people who were to be the agents of political adjustment made up two distinct classes, according to their background: Loyalists and revolutionists. The Loyalists, men who had not supported secession or the Confederacy, he believed, could be counted on to support the President's plan of reunion. But there were not enough such men to reconstruct the state, for most Floridians had been revolutionists who bad either supported secession or the Confederacy, or both. Insight enquired from personcLL contact with the revolutionists ruled out any false notions the speaker might have had regarding this class. Many of them, Marvin knew, harbored beliefs and attitudes that

PAGE 64

58 "were at odds vith liis purpose. In 1861, he had witnessed the fervor of the secessionists,'''' and during the first years of the var and on his return to Florida in I865, he had come face to face vith the bitterness resulting from the loss of loved ones killed in the conflict. Marvin also expected hostility from the planters and from property ortmers who had been iinpoverished by war and defeat. Further analysis, however, brought to light certain potential avenuos of persuasion. Marvin loiew, for exaniple, that southerners were a proud ^people, that they wanted civil rule restored as quickly as possible, and that perhaps loore than anything else, they were intfci'ested in the presezvation of white supremacy. It Tims this sort of analysis that provided basic clues that ultimately lead to the strategy c(£ hie rhetoric of acquiescence. Marvin used this strategy in his pre>convention speeches when he called for acquiescence in the President's terms of reunion on the grounds: (l) that what was demanded was nothing more than formal recognition of fait accong>li , (2) that equality for the freedmen was not requiired, and (3) that acquiescence was the only logical course for a conquered people. The Provisional Governor appealed to the logical Judgment of his •'•'in i860, Ilarvin had been elected as a Unionist delegate to the secession convention but was "counted out. " His opponents in Key West denounced him as a traitor to the sta'te, and two Marlon County delegates boasted to 'the convention in Tallahassee that they would bang Marvin if they caught him in the "pinoy woods. " "If I had gone into tlie interior of tlie State at that time," Marvin told a New York reporto
PAGE 65

59 listeners when he pointed out that what the President demanded was formal recognition of accomplished facts. \Jhat Ifervin said of slavery at Jacksonville, for exan^ple, also applied to the Confederate debt and to the whole history of secession. The cornerstone of slavery had "crumbled to dust" at Appaaattox and "the winds [had] scattered it. " Floridians would be forced to acknowledge this fact when they wrote a new state constitution. When Marvin told the people of Quincy that Florida would have to ratify the Thirteenth Amendiaent he carefully explained that they wouOd not be "assenting to abolition"; it was being forced on them by "acccmiplished facts. " Viewed in this light, the President's demands were not unreaUstic. In fact, under the circumstances, they were reasonable. What made them acceptable, however, stemmed from a full realization of what was not being demanded. :^ emphasizing that the President had not made Negro suffrage a condition of reunion, Marvin made the conditions that were being required appear more favorable. An appeal to the basic wants, beliefs, or prejudices of the audience— to the southerner's desire for white supremacy-became the "sugar coating" of the rhetoric of acquiescence. 56 In his Jacksonville speech, the Provisional Governor asked the white people to give the freedmen a fair chance. Because "the white man [was] superior to the colored man, " it was his responsibility to look to the welfare of the freedmen. His written address to the people of Flor5 For an historical interpretation of the significance of the theme of white supremacy in southern society, see Ulrich B. Phillips y^X^^TS^tlt^^ '^'^' " ^ ^rtoaa Historical HevU,

PAGE 66

60 Ida, released to the press the day befoi^, however, made clear that whether this responsibility included the conferring of suffrage was "an open question"— one that would he left to the decision of the constitutional convention. In the heart of the "black arc" at Quincy, Marvin left no margin for doubt regarding what was and what was not demanded. Slavery was dead. It had "passed away forever. " So far as law was concerned the freedmsm was now the equal of the white. Suffrage, on the other hand, did not "necessarily follow. " It was not a natural right, "but a political right, which may be granted or with-held [sic] as sound policy may dictate. " Leaving nothing to inference and making no attempt to shield the central appeal of acquiescence, I-larvin declared that he did not believe "that as a race L Negroes were or could] be made during many generations, if ever, the equals PERSON^ILLY of the Cauceisian race, or [could] enjoy the same political or social position. ..." After minimizing what was demanded and emgphasizing what was not demanded, Marvin clinched his appeal for acquiescence in the President's terms of reunion by fostering a general attitude of resignation. To refuse to acquiesce in defeat would be sheer folly. The Jacksonville audience was told not to "muzimir or complain against the dispensations of Providence, but [to] cheerfully exui hopefully accept the new order of things, as coming from Him whose ways are not as man' s thoughts. " The white people of Quincy wex'e tactfully but candidly told that acquiescence in defeat was their only logical course. 'The Southern people are [as] brave as the bravest," he had declared; "but it [would be] folly for them to think that one is a match for ten of the same blood.

PAGE 67

61 and each as bi^ve as himself. " If a revolutionist who had heard the Provisional Governor had to tell another what he had heard, he vould probably have e^qolained: (l) Actually the President only wants us to acknowledge what has already been acccmplished; (2) He is not asking us to accept the freedmen as political or social equals; (3) Since there is no doubt about the fact we l»ve been licked, resistemce is out of the question. The conclusion? The only logical thing to do is to acquiesce in the President's terms of reunion. This was the core of the strategy of acquiescence, but the rhetoric of acquiescence slb a whole embodied other chai^cteristics. Aside from the basic strategy evolved from an analysis of the subject and audience, and in addition to the persuasive effect of a general pattern of arrangement that placed a discussion of what had to be done first, and what did not have to be done second — a technique that was consistently used whenever the speaker took up the question of the Negro's status--the rtietoric of acquiescence was also made up of a judicious combination of ethical, logical, euid pathetic appeals, language that suggested impartiality yet reflected personal interest, and data that were exaggerated to carry a point. 14arvin*s use of logical and pathetic proofs was by no means limited to the basic strategy of acquiescence. Proofs of this type, along with ethical appeals, were often used to create positive audience attitudes and to gain belief on points that were subordinate to the basic strategy.

PAGE 68

€2 The ProvlsionaT Governor always began M.s talks to the revolutionists by establishing his ethos; that is, he vorked for the respect and good will of his audience. He told the people in Jacksonville that he had a right to speak to them because the President had appointed him to assist in the work of Reconstruction. A common ground appeal — a rhetorical device whereby a speaker identifies himself with a hostile audience through ixjsitive reference to their cherished attitudes or beliefs — was also used to win good will. At Jacksonville, Marvin explained that Florida's prosperity and happiness were insextarable from his own. At Quincy, he declared: "I have sorrowed in your sorrow, and your happiness has been, and still is mine. " Logical cmd pathetic ajipealB were combined to make the abolition of slavery appear less odious when the speaker pointed out that if the institution were to remain, it would ultimately be overthrown by the Negroes who had been trained in the skilb of war. Appealing to the sQ)uthemer*s feeir of Negro insurrection, Marvin told the revolutionists in Quincy tliat it was a good thing slavery was "out of the way. " This was preferable to having it "disappear in carnage and in rivers of blood. " Ethical and logical proofs were blended to create a favorable attitude toward the federal government. At Jacksonville, Marvin contended that the "majesty and might" of the federal government were no greater than its "clemency and mercy. " Some revolutionists whose property had been confiscated during the war might question such a statement, but confiscation was a war measure. The "so-called Confederate Government"

PAGE 69

63 had confiscated Union property during the war. Hence, there was nothing unreasonable about the federal government's policy of confiscating the property of revolutionists. Proof of the government's clemency, moreover, could be found in United States Attorney General James Speed's order that the sale of confiscated property be suspended until the owners had had an opportunity to establish their loyalty or prepare a proper defense. The Floridian's desire for self-rule was consistently e^^loited as an incentive for acquiescence in the presidential terms. This sort of appeal came at the beginning of the Quincy speech. After identifying himself with the audience and cliaracterizing the plight of the people, Marvin candidly announced that Florida wooJ-d remain "in a state of tutelage, with her political rights in abeyance, . . . till she organizes for herself, ... a new government. " The saiae 'spring of response" Tjas tapped at Jacksonville when Marvin made it clear that the military would continue to rule until the people had taken matters in hand and had worked out their own reden5)tion. Marvin's use of language was another important part of the rhetoric of acquiescence. His matter-of-fact statements regarding what had to be done £uid his candid declarations regarding the finality of defeat and the end of the Confederacy gave the revolutionists a clear picture of his position and, at the same time, made a favorable impression on the loyalists. I^arvin's style as a whole, rather than any particular thing he seiid, placed a premium on loyalty to the Union and yet possessed an undertone of respect for Confederate heroism.

PAGE 70

a Ifervln's use of personal pronouns was a technique that helped him stay on common ground with his listeners. He subordinated his status as provisional governor and created the inpresslon that one Floridian was talking over a problem with another when he spoke in terms of issstoring "our" constitntional relationship with the general government. We" are helpless, was one of the statements used to characterize the condition of Florida's people. At Jacksonville he csLLled upon each man to do his part in preparing Florida for reunion. "I^t each man do his own duty^ " he declared, "and Gkad will bless us. " On at least one occasion, Marvin's sincezre desire to persuade the revolutionists to accept defeat and acquiesce in the presidential terms of reunion caused him to commit the error of overstatement. While depicting the might of the North in order to foster an attitude of resignation, in his speech at Quincy he exaggerated when he credited General Grant with the almost incredible feat of being able in April of 1865 to concentrate 5OO, 000 of his troops 'at any given point. " Mstrvin's speeches to the revolutionists did not constitute the whole of the rhetoric of acquiescence. Circumstances were such that he found it necessary to spe&ik to the freedmen and, as we shall see, these speeches were not only linked with economic and social problems, but constituted an Integral part of the rhetoric of acquleBcence.

PAGE 71

CHAPTER III SPEAKING TO THE FREEEfilEN DURING THE PRBCOHVENTION PERIOD: A RHE^TORIC OF ACQUIESCENCE The Scene William Marvin realized that getting the revoluticmists to acquiesce in the President's terms of Reconstruction was only part of his job in preparing Florida for a resuniption of its normal relations with the federal govemnjent. He knew that the creation of a new state government, and for that matter reunion itself, could not be accomplished without the permissive atmosphere of a stable economy and a peaceful society. Firsthand experience with life as it had been in ante bellum Florida, moreover, had taught Marvin that the tranquility and the economic stability of Florida's new social order would depend on the degree of hairaony that could be established between a people 1 who had only recently been half-slave and half-free, and on the rapidity with which the ex-slave could adjust to his new status as a free laborer. huxe census of i860 listed Florida's population as lU0,U2l) — 77,7^7 white, 932 free colored, and 6l,7^5 slaves. Population of the United States in i860 (Washington, 1861^), p. 53. The New Era cited an 1863 census in reporting that the Negro population had increased to 63,000 in 1863, and used Freedmen's Bureau reports to support the claim that the number of Negroes had soared to 100,000 in I866, Gainesville Weekly New Era, January 27, I866. Benjamin C. Truman, a correspondent for the New York Times, estimated that Florida's Negro population had increased by about 20, 000. "Florida, " he reported, "had about sixty thousand colored men witliin her possessions before the war, which were . . , increased to eighty thousand, about twenty tiiousand slaves having been sold into or urged into the State during the war f ran neighboring states liable to fall into Federal hands. " Report of Benjamin C. Truman, dated at Tallahassee, December 9, I865, in New York Times , December 25, I865. 65

PAGE 72

^ The white people, accustcaned as they were to a society that had been regulated by one legal code for slaves, another for free Negroes, and a third for whites, were not ejcperienced in the give and take so essential to racial harmony; and what aggravated the situation even more, they lacked confidence in the ex-slave's ability to function as a free laborer. This, of course, explains why both Alfred Sears and William Marvin called on the white people to accept the freedom of the slave, to be i)atient with him until he had learned how to live with freedom, and not to let their prejudices stand in the way of his development as a free laborer. The freedmen, on the other hand, were ill-equipped to contribute to Florida's economic and social stability; in fact, there was a stirong possibility that they would unwittingly produce economic and social chaos. This stemmed from the fact that they constituted the backbone of a labor force that was essential to an agrarian economy, and from their heritage as slaves. The Florida Union pointed up the significeuice of the freedmen* s role in Florida's economy when it observed in May of l865> just after the planters had sowed the season's crop, that its cultivation would require the freedmen' s undivided attention and industry. V/hether the ex-slaves would stay on the plantations and tend to the crop, it continued, was a question that constituted a great "source of uneasiness, " for if they neglected their work for two weeks or more, the crop would

PAGE 73

67 2 be lost and entire counties impoverished. Contributing to this uneasiness vas the realization that a people vho had known no life but that of slavery might not believe they were free until they had had an opportunity to put that freedom to some sort of practical test. Many of the freedmon, it was feared, -vrould settle on freedom of movement as just such a test. From slavery days, the freedman toiew that if he left the plantation, he would have to have a pass. He knew that if he tried to escape, he would be pursued and, when captured, iretumed to his master. Accustomed as he was to the restraints of slavery, it seemed almost inevitable that he would experiment with freedom by leaving the plantation and by wanderizig off beyond the reach of the master to determine for himself how far he could get 3 without pass or pursuit. Another concept of freedom that was harbored in the minds of many ex-slaves— one that went hand in hand with freedom of movement— \reis that freedom meant freedom from work, that it was a sort of continuous jubilation.^ Again, this kind of thinking had been shaped by the freedman' s e3q)erience as a slave. His contact with free people had largely been limited to the plantation, and the thing that impressed him most about "free folks" was their leisure. Freedom in the mind of the exslave, explained the Florida Union, was a notion that involved ^Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, I^y 27, 1865. 3 Coulter, The South During Reconstruction, 1865-1877 . p. 50. k Ibid.

PAGE 74

66 freedom from want 'Hjlthout the necessity of unremitting labor, . . . the practice of economy, [or] the exercise of care or forethought for the future. "^ Ae ironic as it seemed; it was nonetheless tine that if enough exslaves wandered to test their freedcan, they would urwittingly strike a devastating blow against the economy that had profited frcan their slavery. Furthermore, because many harbored the notion that freedom was a sort of lazy man's paradise, it followed that many would become vagrants and thereby bring about even greater economic discord and compouml it with social chaos. Still another side of the freedman's nature that promised to undermine the economy, produce social unrest, and engender racial tension was his itsnorance — a carry-over from the slave codes of a bygone era. The particular facet of this ignorance that complicated the freedman's adjustment as a social man and a free laborer in 186^ was his credulity. It was this aspect of his nature that pronypted the Flor ida Union to take a dim view of the many stories that were circulating throughout Florida during the pre-conventlon period. "Some days, ' it related, "a report will travel about the country that the lands, crops and everthlng [sic] is to be given to the negroes; then a report tliat ''Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union , September 9, I805. Although some Negroes might have received private Instruction, most were illiterate. Prior to I865, it was illegal for Negroes to meet for any purpose other than work or religious services. Simkins, A History of the South , p. 126; Thelma Bates, "The Legal Status of the Negro In Florida, " Florida }Iistorical Quarterly , VI (January, 1928), 176.

PAGE 75

69 the emancipation proclamation is to be null and void. To [the] darkened minds [of the freedmen], " it warned, "such stories appear as credible as official orders. ""^ Tlie Hew Era made the same point, but added a touch of hmaor when it explained that the freedmen had lost whatever sense o they had the moment the freedcm horn blew. Not long after July h, I865, a resident of Leon County, one of 9 seven principal "cotton producing plantation counties in Florida,^ told of a warning that had come true. Negroes fxxm a circle of ti/enty or thirty miles assenft)led in Tallahassee on the l^th inst., with the avowed expectation of receiving a share of the property of the white people, which they had been informed would be divided among them. Though they walked this and shorter distejaces, they suppoeed they would drive home with their own carriages, or "a-horseback. " And thus the poor creatures are deluded by their own bewilderment. ^0 Incidents such as this constituted in a sense the humorous side of the ti«gic ccsnedy that evolved from the Negro's passage from slavery to freedom. The tragic part of the drama, on the other hand, stemmed from a realization of what could happen If the freedmen, who made up approximately half of the state's population, wandered to test freedom, languished in idleness, waited in ignorance for their share of the white people's property. Jacksonville Weekly Florida Ifaion , June 2l4-, I865. ^Gainesville Weekly New Era, Decaaber 16, 1865. Williams, "Negro Slavery in Florida, " p. I87. ^^ng, Florida Breezes , pp. 382-383'

PAGE 76

70 Under these clrcuiostances and in the interest of the social and economic adjustments that vere essential counterparts of political adjustment, it is little wonder that William Mar\'ln made the instruction of these children of freedom a part of the rhetoric of acquiescence. So far as the writer knows, there are two extant "freedom speeches, " but since both cover the same ground, we need exaniine only one of them. As we sliall see, Marvin's freedom speech in Marianna, located in the heart of Florida's plantation counties, provided some basic answers to some basic questions. Are we free? l^hat about "dis here freedom"? What is freedom? Where did it come from? Is the story about the President's plan to give us "forty acres and a mule" true, or is "[dis] a bad egc dat chicken won't hatch no how!" !Phe Discourse Speech of William Marvin to the Freedmen in Mariantia As Vllliam I4arvin moved from place to place in his pre-convention tour of the "black arc" counties, his activities began to take on a Of the two extant speeches to I'reedmen in I865, one at Quincy on September 10, I865, and one at Marianna on September VJ, I865, tloo Mariunna speech was selected because it was reported in detail. For an account of the Quincy speech, see Quincy Semi-WeekJy Commonwealth , September 16, 1865, in Jacksonville Weekly Florida UniMi , September 30, 1865. Chaplain H. H. Moore, later appointed superintendent of educction for freedmen, spoke to Negro audiences during the spring euid summer months. Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, June 24, IG65; Jacksonville Weekly Herald , August 31* I065. MEUvln t&Used to Monticello's Negroes in late November. Tlie Reverend L. M. Uobbs, later named state superintendent of Negro schools, addressed the sane audience a week earlier. Jacksonville Weekly Florida Times . Decanber 7, 1865. J. C. Gardner, a Gainesville attorney and later a Freedmen' s Bureau agent for Alachua County, spoke to Negroes in Gainesville on December 10, and in Micanopy on December 2U, I865. Gainesville Weekly New Era , December 16, 1865.

PAGE 77

71 meaningful pattern. After his arrivBl in a conmmnity he would spend some tlioe studying local conditions. A day or so later he vould address the white people of the area concerning the changes they had to accept and the political settlement that had been offered by the President. The "freedom speech" came last^ and for reasons connected with the exslave's duties as a field hand and his religious proclivities^ it always IP came on the Sabbath. Vflien Marvin visited Quincy, for exaraple, he arrived on Septonber k, spoke to the white people on the following day, and gave a "freedom speech" five days later on Sunday, September 10. The pattern at Marianna was the saioe. Marvin talked to the white people on September 16,-' and on the following day — Sunday, September 17, 1865 — spoke to the fi«edmen. 12 Marvin's choice of Sunday as the best time to talk to the f reedmen was influenced by two important considerations. The freedmen were needed in the cotton fields during the week, and Sunday, as had been the case in slavery days, was the customary time for leisure and Christian worship. In short, Sunday was the best day from, the planter's point of view because I-feirvin could talk to the freedmen without interfering with the cultivation of the C3rop. From the spealcer's point of view, Sunday was also ideal inasmuch as the ex-slave's experience with religion constituted a potential avenue of persuasion — a frame of reference which the speaker could use to clarify and support whatever ideas he wished to convey. For information on the slave's religious experience, see Ulrich B. Phillips and James D. Glunt (eds. ), Florida Plantation Records from the Papers of George Noble Jones (st. Louis, 192?), p. 31; Williams, "Negro Slavery in Florida, " pp. 189-19O. 13 The writer was not able to locate the speech of September 16. A Tallahassee newspaper reported that "the Governor addressed the people of Jackson at Marianna on the l6th inst. " A spectator related "that the speech iiad a happy effect, " Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian , September 26, 1865.

PAGE 78

72 At this town, wiien the appointed hour arrived, laore than a ill thousand Negroes had assembled to hear ^fe^rvln ^>eak. Before the Provisional Governor and his escort appeared, the Negroes sang "several hymns in Camp Meeting Stentorian style, " After "a very appropriate prayer, " by the Reverend I4r. West, pastor of the Marianna Methodist Church, Marvin began his speech, but vas interrupted by a sudden rain. The Negroes were "drenched to the skin, " and "their starch lost its stiffness and their s\rell collapsed. ..." l/hen the rain stopped, "the crowd gathered again, but naterially changed in the 'pcsiip and circumstance of* liberty. ..." Marvin began anew. In his opening remarks he traced the source of the Negro's freedcHii. To begin with, the colored people had not won their freedom on the battlefield. The "terrible war" had been between the white men of the North and the South. With this war you had nothing to do; you neither commenced it, nor did you end it, nor is the result attributable to you at all. It was a white man's war. It is true, that a few colored men were enlisted in the army of the U. 8., but Ik The Florldlan provided a vivid account of the Negro audience: "It was on tlie sabbath and they appeared in their best — starched, ruffled and gay — both sexes fully represented, and all ages, sizes, shapes, and complexions, firom the unadulterated, impenetrable black African, to the fed.r mixture that tells of an association of blood in which the Anglo Saxon is even or greatly lias the advantage. " Ibid . I-larianna was one of the "sore spots" in Florida's Interior. Less than a year before, on September 23, lQ6k, Marianna had been the scene of a federal raid, led by General A. Asboth. Some three hundred old men and boys, who tried to meet the attack, wore forced to retreat to a church. Asboth' s men set fire to the sti\icture and shot the defenders as they ran for cover into the churcliyard cemetery. The community had been plundered, and prisoners and booty carried off to a federal base at Pensacola. Davis, The Civil w'ar and Reconstruction in Florida, pp. 311-312.

PAGE 79

73 they fouGlit no battles; or if engaged at all in such, they vere trifling affairs; indeed, you had nothing to do with it. You reniained at home, worked, belmved yourselves, and the blood of no man is on your hands. Second, emancipation vas not a war aim. "At the beginning, the war was neither intended nor prosecuted ... to liberate you from slavery. Neither the Kbrthem white man nor the Southern white man eajpected nor intended such a result; neither, therefore, is entitled to your thanks or gratitude. " To whom, then, should thanks be offered for the boon of freedom? The answer siqjplied by the speaker was in keeping with the religious atmosphere of the occasion. He declared; To a higher power should you feel grateful for your f reedcMa today — to the Providence, and tender mercies of Almighty God. You are free; as free as the white man-(A voice— "Thank the Lordy, blessed Itoses Jesus! " followed by many pious ejaculations) — and never again so long as the U. S. exist . . . will you be reduced to slaveiy. Another question the colored people should be able to answer for themselves concerned the identity of their friends. Who were their true friends? To whom could they look for guidance and syi^pathy? Answering in favor of the Southern wMte people, I»iarvin said: If you ask me the question, whether the white man of the North or the wMte man of the South is your friend, I will answer you by saying tiiat I hope and believe both of them are; but if it comes to a question of certainty as to which of the two is yo'or better friend, I shall answer plainly and tell you, the white man of the South. I was bom in the Worth, raised and educated there, but I have spent the last thirty years of my life in the South, and I consider myself capable of jud^ng between the two people particularly in reference to yourselves. I know the Northern man, or Yankee, as you call him, from the crown of his head to the sole of his foot, and I tell you today as your friend, that the Southern white man, with whom you were raised and who is acquainted with your habits and customs, is the best friend you have.

PAGE 80

7k Ifeving on to the broader topic of the responsibilities of f reedcsn, Marvin explained that freedom could "prove a blessing . . . looking to . . . advancement and civilization, or a curse, involving a condition of vagabondism and ultimate destruction. " The outcome, of course, rested vith the colored people themselves. "It is with you, and you alone to determine, " he declared. liberation had cane "unexpectedly" and involved "a state of trial" for both fomer slaves and owners. VTaile the masters had to accept the financial losses involved in emaiacipation, the colored people had the obligation of demonstrating their appreciation of freedom through "good conduct. " The best way they could do this would be to measure up to their new roles as free laborers and social citizens. Instruction relative to the obligations of a fi^e laborer came first. Drawing on his knowledge as an exslaveholder, Marvin told the freedmen that he knew they would want to test their freedom. I know, that though I am here as the Governor of the State, and tell you that you are free, that you will not believe it. You arc prepared to say, that you remain on the same plantations and are controlled and directed by the same owners, for whom, as before, you have to work, and that you do not understand by such facts that you are free; and on and after the first of January next, I know as well as if I witnessed it now, what you will do. You will leave your old homes — drift about the country — float from plantation to plantation — hundreds of you will come to town, and everywhere you will be looking for freedom, and it will only be when your old masters and mistresses do not pursue you that you will be convinced that you are no longer slaves. And when you shall find as you will that you are free-find it with hungry stomachs and with nothing to eat, with the fact that none careB for you, and that you are driven more than ever to care for yourselves, you will then begin wiselLy to consider wliat is best to be done. -^5 -'Marvin's fears were well founded. In fact, IrLs prediction materialized before the first of the year. Editorials in a Tallahassee

PAGE 81

75 Following this atteanpt to talk the ex-slaves out of vaixderiiig to test freedom, Marvin raised another question: "After you shall have newspaper Indicated that the city had been transfozned into a camping ground for Negro vagrants. The Floridian of Ifoveniber 3, I865, editorialized: "We call the attention of the powers that be to the depredations catmaitted on the City Cometery. The fences and palings enclosing graves are being torn down and carried off, probably for fire-wood by the idle neg-or. [sic] who infest the city and its suburbs." On November 1, it reported that "every tenement, stable and outhouse is filled, and . . . that in some tenements they are so thick that men, women and children live together indiscriminately. ..." The November 28 issue recalled I'tirvin's prediction at Marianna, that hundreds of Negroes would come to the towns, and reported that "Tallahassee has already witnessed the evil. . . . Ever since their freedon, not only from the immediate neighborhood, but from the neighboring counties, they have been crowding into this place. " The situation was described as a "public disorder" which posed a threat to "health, morals and industry. " Tallahassee Semi-Weekly Flori dian , November 3^ 1> 28, 1865. For further inforiEation on Negro vagrancy in Florida, see Tallahassee Tri -Weekly Florida Sentinel, January 2, I866; Jacksonville Weekly Times , February 8, in Tallahassee Tri-Weekly Florida Sentinel, February 10, I866. Though enough Negroes wandered to produce public disorder and caused a great deal of anxiety on the part of the white people, the problem did not reach anticipated proportions. Military and civil officials joined forces to campaiga against idleness and inculcate habits of industry among the freedmen. Many freedmen, moreover, had an opportunity to test freedom during the Christmas holidays — a period that came between crops. EQt the end of January and the beginning of February, I866, the planters began to expi^ss their confidence in the ex-slave as a free laborer. The Ifew Era, the most extreme of Florida's Democratic papers, was among the first to praise the freedmen. Generalizing with respect to Alswjhua and Marion Counties, it announced "that the negroes [were] doing exceedingly well. ..." Gainesville Weekly New Era, Febiriary 17, 1866. A business associate who wrote David L. Yulee, one of Florida's former senators imprisoned at Fort Pulaski, of affairs on his plantation, i-eported: "I am truly glad to have it in my power to tell you that, . . . the negroes, . . . are working very well. ... I have been surprised to see such a great change for the better. " John S. Purviance to David L. Yulee, Cottonwood, March 6, I866. Yulee Papers. For further information on the freedmen* s successful adjustment as a free laborer, see Abraiiam K. Allison to David L. Yulee, Quincy, February 22, I866, ibid . ; Marianna Weekly Courier , February 1, I866, in Tallahassee Tri-Weekly Florida Sentinel, February 6, I866; Tallahassee Tri-Weekly Florida Sentinel, FebxTiary 13 and August 9, I866; Gainesville Weekly New Era , July 20, 1366.

PAGE 82

76 found your freedom, and driven by stem necessity to do something for yourselves, the question is. What is the best for you to do?" The answer vas couched in siniple language. My advice is to remain on the plantations where yx)u have been accustomed to work, with your former owners if they will make a contract with you. Make the best contract you can with them, and show to them that you are willing to work better, now that you are compensated for your work, than you ever have done before. Be faithful, be truthful, be honest, be interested in the affairs of the plantation; see that the mules are well fed, that the hogs get good attention and that the things entmsted to you be not neglected. The mention of contracts naturally led to some euivice concerning than. They might be made with former owners, if they were "kind, " but no member of the audience need "remain with such as are disposed to treat you cruelly and meanly. ..." The contract should be "for a part of the crop or so much money. ..." When making a contract, moreover, the freedmen should be sure "that the man with whom you make it has property-has lemd, or mules and wagons emd cattle out of which you may, if necessary, get your pay. ..." As everyone knew, "all you can get from a cat is his skin. ..." Making a contract was one matter; abiding by it another. The audience was counseled not to "break off" from an agreement, because . . . you will do great injustice alike to those who have employed you and to yourselves. " They imist develop "a character for faithfulness, truthfulness and industry. " Such was tlieir duty, "a duty which you owe to your God who has given . . . you freedom, to yourselves and to the great country that protects you. " Those who did not labor "would soon

PAGE 83

77 foim habits of great idleness and indolence— vould resort to stealing to keep from starving, and thus become a curse even to t themselves]. " What was true for the f reedmen also held true for the women. Freedom was not an excuse to "put on airs. "^^ Addressing the women directly, Marvin declared: "Do not think because you are free, that your husbands are to st^pport you, and that you are to sit all day in your houses and do nothing. " Able bodied women were to "go into the fields and work as . . . before. " This would be "ladylike. " There was "nothing more trifling, . . . than a good-for-nothing shiftless woman. " Everyone had to work. The destiny of the entire race was in the hands of each individual. The white man, continued Marvin— en^jhasing the freedman's need to establish a good record as a competent laborer— can care for himself "without you. " There is "no danger of his starving; if anybody is to starve, " he said, "it will be you and the fault will be yours. " As proof of the fact that the white was not dependent on the Negro, Marvin referred to the "thousands of white men in the North who have never owned a slave cmd scarcely have ever seen one, whose industrious pursuits and habits have secured to them a good living, and many of them fortunes. " The same would be true "with the white of the South if there was not one ^^Social aspirations seemed to be universal among the rfegro wc«nen. They "retired from the cotton fields, for no lady woilced in the fields, if, indeed, anywhere. Their first great ambition was to wear a veil and carry a parasol. " Coulter, The South During Reconstruction , 1865-1877 , pp. 52-53. The Hew Era revealed that the freedwcaaen in Florida were no exception. "In many instances, " it reported, "the negro women, as their co-workers say, 'have the devil in them* and will not voi'k. " Gainesville Weekly New Era , February 17, I866.

PAGE 84

78 of you to remain in the country. " With freedom "found, " then, the colored people could inprove themselves by remaining on the plantation, by making contracts vith their former masters, and by establishing proper habits of industry. Marvin introduced his next point — the social responsibilities that went vith freedom — by contrsiiting freedom with slavery. In telling his colored listeners of some of the differences between the two conditions, the speaker created a vivid comparison through his use of concrete, personalized examples and plain, direct language. You will have much to think about, great trials to encounter — difficulties to contend with never experienced before, and harder work ... to do than you have ever done before. Heretofore, comparatively, you have had no cares. Your masters, influenced by interest aside from human feelings, which none question many of them having, have fed you, clothed you, emd when sick have nursed you and when necessary have employed medical attendance; the raising of your children has received almost their exclusive care; they furnished the old women to watch over them during the absence of their mothers, who came two or three times to nurse them during the day. Now, as freed men and women, you are by your work to feed yourselves, clothe yourselves, employ medical attendance, [andj raise and educate your children. Would the children be raised properly? Meurvln was afraid some might suffer. Be knew of instances where "mothers . . . neglected their children to perish and to die. " They wished them dead "so that they no longer would be on their heinds. " These "abominable" and "unnatural" acts would, "in time, bring down on the heads of those base enough to coomlt them the awful punishment they deserve. " Education was one of the privileges of being firee. Some of the listeners who were "old or grown up to be men eoid women, " could not

PAGE 85

79 expect to e:5)erience "much of the benefits of freedom, " but they would have the privilege of sending their children to school, cutid "so preparing them that they will be greatly benefited by it. " Children should be reared "in the fear of the Lord, and when they shall be as old as you, they will know something about freedom and be far better calculated than you now are to get along in the world. " Another matter incident to freedom was natriinooy. ' Those who had "never been regularly married, " were ordered to "go at once and get a clergymen [sic], or a magistrate, and be so." Itoreover, the law of Gtod allowed the taking of "only one wife, or caie husband. " Saving and the ownership of property were also emphasized as important aspects of freedcm. Marvin suggested the proper policy by having his audience visualize the benefits of industry and thrift. Some of you will work hard, make a little money and save it, and so on, till you get one, or two, or three hundred dollars, and then you will buy a piece of land, and you go to some white man kindly disposed to the colored man and borrow money enough to buy a mule and a plough, &c., and you will set up for yourselves. Others will in time buy town lots and build on them, and so on; others will work and save till they will own considerable property and become good examples for emulation. The next bit of instruction concerned politeness, a subject which Marvin emphasized by identifying it with eiig>loyment. Again, the '-'^In the ante bellum South, marriages among slaves were "arrangements of convenience"; hence, many unions had to be le^lized and sanctified. Coulter, The South During Reconstruction, 186^-1877 , p. 53. Legislation requiring that Negroes living as husband and wife 'l)e regularly joined in the holy bands of matrimony" by October 11, I866, produced numerous marriage rites. An Alachua County judge, for example, "joined together in wedlock as many eis twenty coi;^ples in one day. " Gainesville Weekly New Lira, July 13^ I866.

PAGE 86

80 speaker's style was plain and direct. Do not think that, because you are free, you have a right to be impudent, uncivil, or iznpolite to white people. You have no such right. Impoliteness is not justifiable in any one. You should be as civil, as polite as you always have been. . . . You do not wish to make white people hate you. It is to them that you are to look for almost everytiiing; you want to be instructed by themj you want to learn from them a great many things you cannot possibly learn without them; so you must be polite and civil to them and don't put on airs and flaunt and look insolent at them, and don't as I have heard has been done in places, jostle, or rub, or shove up against them when passing them on the road. Such a course is highly wrong and will get you into trouble. Some of the most polite men I have ever seen were colored men who have been raised in good families. They were naturally polite and knew well how to be so, and it is so with you. You can be as polite as any one, and you ought not to be otheivise. It is a duty which is due to yourselves; it is gentlemanly and ladylike, and, now that you are free, you should try and be gentlemen and ladies. You have a greater inducement now than you ever had before, and if you wish to be esteemed as ladies and gentlemen, you must conduct yourselves accordingly. Call your old !4aster. Master, and your old Mistressi, Mistress. It is right that you should; it is proper, it is jKDlite. You do not mean by calling tliem so, that you belong to them, but that you wish to be respectful and polite, and to give no cause for offence, but rather desire to please. I don't say that you must call them Master or Mistress; but I say it is civil and polite in you to do it, and you ought, therefore, to do it. I have known memy white servants, and there are thousands in the North where I was raised, and it is so in England, too, who call those who employ them Master and Mistress. It is a term of resi)ect and deference, and they call them thus because this is so. Thei^e they, as I said before, are white servants, and they till the land, feed the stock and do other work that is done here, and they are respected and all of them find employment, as you may do if you will conduct yourselves properly. If the colored people reflected upon their status, they would have to conclude that the mantle of freedom did not make them the "equal" of the whites. To be equal, they would "have to be able to write a book, build a railroad, a steam engine, a steeunboat and thousands of other things. ..." The white people were far ahead of them, and it was

PAGE 87

81 fooliBh "to think they are not superior to you and will ever be. . . . " The whites, however, were willing to help them "rise, " on condition that the colored people try to "raise" themselves. It was to the advantage of the audience, then, to labor to make "fast friends" of the white people rather than bring scorn upon their race through "bad behavior. " Having told the ex-slaves that they were "as free as the white man, " and having instructed them in some of the responsibilities of freedom, Marvin next tried to discredit a rumor that had been spread among the colored population in various parts of the "black arc. " He referred to "a story circulated in Middle Florida that on the first of January. . . the land, mules, a«., will be taken from your former owners and divided among you. " He wondered if anyone in the audience had heard the story, "feve you? Speak out. If you have tell me so. ('Ise heam it, Ise heam it,' said all.) Well who told you so? (An answer, 'the soldiers.') What soldiers? These soldiers in town? ('No sir, the Confederate soldiers.')" The speaker went on to relate that he had atteaiipted to discredit the same story for "the colored people in Quincy"; they had not understood. He wanted the audience before him to "understand . . . and believe what I say. " The President had sent him to talk to them and to tell them the truth. "If he had thought I would not tell you the truth, " 18 e^^lained Marvin, "he would not have sent me. " The President did not '•A New York Times correspondent, writing from Tallahassee on October 26, reported: "The black population have a firmly established belief that the estates of the slaveholders are to be divided among the fonaer slaves— that they are to be provided with homes and means to live

PAGE 88

8e plan to give than 'one foot of land, nor a mule, nor hog, nor cow, not even a knife and fork or spoon. (A voice, 'Dar! . • . hear dati dat's a bad egg dat chicken vont hatch no how! • ) " The President had granted freedom and that vas "everything he intends to give you. ..." The reason for the President's decision was just; in fact, the President had received his instructions fron God. Before the war each one of you was worth in dollars and cents to your owners, eight hundred, or a thousand, or fifteen hundred dollars — worth more than fifty acres, or eighty acres of leuid and a mule thrown in. Well, the President has, in giving you your freedom, taken so manj'dollars and cents from your old masters, and he thinks, as I do, they have lost enough, and you by it have had enough given to you. If he were to give you more it would prove a curse to you. God has directed the President how much to give you emd he will give no moare. The Lord knew what vas best for them. If they were given land and mules, they would be proud and say, "I have land now and a mule and I am a gentleman, and I ain't agoing to work. " It was best for them to be content with their freedom, "and what else you have you will have to get by work. " They were at liberty to work for themselves. They had independently by the government. . . . V/hen Gov. Marvin, in a recent speech, undertook to undeceive them, they turned from him in disgust and believed laim in league with their old masters to deceive them. " New York Times , November 10, 1865. Perhaps, it was the fact that Marvin failed to convince the Quincy Negroes that prompted him to establish his ethos with the Marianna audience, before refuting the story of the land and mules. In his attempt to clarify the matter for the Quincy Negroes, Marvin had explained that the story of free land and mules had been started by General Edward M. ^fcCook's men. "These men said this because thyy did not know the war was over and were here amongst us endeavoring to use this as one of the means of stopping the war. " See I4arvin' s speech to the freedmen in Quincy, Quincy Weekly Commonwealth , September 16, 1865, in Jacksonville Weekly Florida Uhibon , September 30, I865.

PAGE 89

83 "none otlier to work for. " They belonged to "no man, " and had "ceased to be pinperty. " As he approached the conclusion of his speech, Marvin again exhorted the audience to "struggle hard and do right, " and to "live as good men and women. " They all appeared to be well equipped for work; they were "well fed, well clothed, healthy, strong, full of muscle and sinew, showing kind treatment. ..." Finally, Marvin said he believed he had "covered the whole ground. " If he had left "anything out" he wished to be informed "what it [was]. " After answering a few questions he again inquired if all were satisfied. "Are you? (We are, • by all. ) Will you promise me to do the best you can, be kindly disposed to all, to be good men and women? ('We will.* )" Itearvln, who had validated many of his pronouncements on this Sunday morning by relating them to "God" or the "Lord, " closed with a benediction: "God help you do it. "^ The probability is that this speech on freedom and its responsibilities both pleased and disappointed the Marianna Negroes. Writing of the reaction of Florida's Negroes to bis "freedom speeches," Marvin "'•^For the text of the l^iarianna speech, see Tallahassee Semi-Weekly Floridian, September 26, l865j Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union , October 7, 1665. When a portion of the speech became a source of controversy between the Jacksonville Herald , which was owned by a northerner, and the Florida Union , which supported Johnsonian Reconstruction, its authenticity came into question. The Florida Union affirmed: "until we see a contradiction or denial of that speech of the Governor, as reported, we . . . believe that the address was substantially reported in the language uttered by him on the occasion. ..." Jacksonville Weekly Flor ida Union, October 7, I865. No contradiction or denial appeared in subsequent issues of the Florida Union.

PAGE 90

&*. related: "Judging from the stolid and indifferent manner which they exMbited when spoken to on the subject, one would not si^pose that they on regfiuxled freedom as 'a thing of beauty and joy forever. * Scaae who had children by several women were hard put to choose a 21 wife. Others were infirm and aged, and now that they were no longer pp wards of their foxmer casters, feared for their survival. All who had heard the story of forty acres and a mule" were, no doubt, provoked by the speaker's denial of its truth. On the other hand, the prospects of freedom wei-^ pleasant and tlie speaker's es^i^ssionc of confidence in his listeners flattering. The Marianna speech had its effect both within the "black arc, " and outside. Charles E. Dyke, owner and editor of the Democratic Floridian , wrote: "We have read a number of addresses to similar audiences from several distinguished gentlemen, but none of them, in appropriateness, " equalled that of 14arvin.^3 jhe Jacksonville Herald , which had been purchased by a northerner, E. H. Reed of Wisconsin, did not sliaire the SOj^ecumey, "Autobiography of William Marvin, " p. 21721 For a report of a conversation on this subject reputedly held between I<^brvln cmd a freedman at Marianna, see Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian, September 26, I865. *^Sucli was the concern of an aged Negro who queried ibrvin after he had finished speaking to a colored audience in Jefferson County. For a report of the dialogue, see Kearney, "Autobiography of William f brvin, " p. 217. For infonaation on the problem of aged freedmen, see editorial: 'What will become of Old Pbmpey?" Monticello Weekly Family Friend , in Jacksonville Weekly Florida Ufalon , December 9, I865. ^^Tallahassee Semi-Weckl;/ Floridian, September 26, I865,

PAGE 91

85 enthusiasm of the Florldian. ^ ^ It took exception to Marvin's treatment of the Negro's role in the war; he Iiad asserted it was "a white man's i25 war. " Such a statement was "a falsehood and a slander. ' ^ The Florida Union, a staunch advocate of Johnsonian Iteconstruction, entered the skirmish by coming to Marvin's defense. "This language of the Governor is true, every word of it. " It had been a "white man's war, " and until "the promulgation of President Lincoln's emancipation proclamation it was prosecuted without any ultimate view of changing the status of the negro in the then slave States. " Colored soldiers had numbered only 150,000 and "were not enlisted to any great extent till near the close of the war. ..." The Herald was admonished to "try to hunt up modesty and decency enovjgh to prevent . . . calling Gov. Marvin, a liar and a slanderer. " The Jacksonville Times , a Radical Republican paper that supported the Itaionist element in Florida, did not restrict its connients to the During the short period of its existence, August to December of 1865, the Jacksonville Weekly Herald served both Deaaocrats and Republicans. The paper was started as a Democratic organ in August of I865* with Joseph F. Rogero as proprietor, and HblmeB Steele as editor. Gainesville Weekly Hew Era, August 19, I865. In its third issue, Rogero reported that he had sold the paper to E. H. Reed. The Hew Era , in its coverage of the sale, related that E. H. Reed was the son of Ifaxrison Reed, United States postal agent for Florida. Ibid ., September 2, I865. ^y December of 1865, the Herald Iiad been absorbed by the Jacksonville Times, a Radical Republican paper that supported the Unionists in Florida. See Jacksonville Weekly Florida Times , December ik, I865. ^^Jacksonville Weekly Iferald , September 29, in Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union , October Jj I865. 26rjjjQ Florida Union defended the position taken by Marvin concerning the Negro's role in the war, in its issues of October 7 and 21, 1865.

PAGE 92

86 Marlanna speech. Instead, it came out with a "tlanket editorial" covering the Provisional Governor's speechmaking to all classes during the preconvention period. Ignoring politics cmd the squabble over the Marianna speech, it editorialized: If it is difficult for tiie slave to fit liiraself at once for the exercise of the duties and responsibilities of a freedman, it is also difficult for the master to immediately shake off the lifelong habits of arbitrary power and at once regard his late chattel as changed to a full man and equal, before the law and before God, with himself. But Gov. I>5arvin has allayed the bitterness of prejudice by his frank, generous and manly bearing, and has coraoanded the respect of all classes by liis adherence to truth suid his undisguised utterance of the well-defined purposes of the federal Government. 2? The Rhetoric Vhat William Marvin said to the white people during the preconvention period was largely aimed at persuading them to Eu:quiesce in the President's terms of reunion. His remarks, and those of Alfred Sears concerning racial harmony and the Negroes as free laborers, concezned the related end of creating a stable economic and social atmosx>here for political Guijustment. As we analyze the rhetoric of the "freedom speeches, " we see that the Provisional Governor's remarks to the freedmen also constitute a rhetoric that served these same two ends. Marvin had to convince the ex-slaves they were free, and educate them regarding their econonlc and Bocl?^^ responsibilities without undermining the rhetoric of acquiescence. ^Jacksonville Weekly Florida Times , October 5* I865.

PAGE 93

87 Talking to thousands of illiterate exslaves on such intangible inatte3:*s as freedom and its responsibilities "was a difficult assignment, but not an iinposslble one for a speaker vho vas skilled in discovering and CTploylng the available means of persuasion, Marvin fashioned his rhetoric from proofs which he derived frcm his knowledge of the audience and his analysis of the occasion, and from rhetoric«LL techniques which he selected and used because of their appropriateness for his purpose and his audience. Proofs were needed to convince the ex-slave that he was free. These were found in his background as a Christian and in the atmosphere of the immediate occasion. I-Juch of Marvin's personal proof or ethos in the Iterianna speech stemmed from the fact that he ^poke on Sunday and that his speech was preceded by religious songs and by prayer. When he told the exslaves freedom had come from God, he, in effect, oodbined a religious identity with an appeal to the ex-slave's belief in God to establish or "prove" the reality of freedom. Restatonent was the rhetorical method chosen to reinforce belief in freedom. The theme "you are free" or "God has given you freedom, " or a ccanbination of the two ideas, was systematically emphasized throughout the speech. Marvin began with statements to this effect, worked them into transitions. Included them along with advice on a variety of subjects, and incorporated them into his peroration. One internal summary contained this statement: "I have told you that you are free, as free as the white man, that you never will agetln be slaves— that God himself has given this freedom to you. ..." In

PAGE 94

88 the course of advising the freediaen to make contracts with their escor ployers, Jfervln admonished them to be faithful. It was their duty to be so, "a duty which you owe to your God who has given you freedom. . . . " As he neared his conclusion, he restated the theme of freedom four different ways: "You now are at liberty to go to work for yourselves; you have none other to work for. You belong to no man; jrou have ceased to be property; you never will be sold again. ..." Proof was also needed to discredit thie rumors about gifts of lemd and mules. Here again, the speaker used religious identity and an appeal to the freedman's belief in God to carry his point. In addition, he strengthened his own status as an authority figure by identify* ing himself with President Johnson. The President had sent him to tell "the truth. " God had directed the President to give them freedcMi, and in keeping with God's wishes tMs was all the President intended to give thi^. Getting the ex-slaves to understand and to carry out the responsibilities of freedom inquired rhetorical techniques that would produce clear understanding and pathetic appeals that would supply the necessary motives. Clarity was achieved through rhetorical tactics typical of the rhetoric as a whole. The speaker's style was paternalistic. His language resembled that of a father speaking to his children. £xaQQ>les were numerous and specific. Explanations were single, lengthy, and sometimes rex>etitious. Parallel sentence structure provided a means of ec^phasis, and references to fam i liar objects were often employed for clarity. Bathetic proofs or the motives supplied to bring about the desired

PAGE 95

89 conduct, centered in the ex-slave's social aspirations, his moral convictions, and his physical needs, Freedwomen vere not to put on airs; they were not to sit in their houses all day and do nothing. It was perfectly "Isway-like" to work in the fields. Those who were not oarried were to be so, but there could only be one husband or one wife, "for such is the law of God. " Being polite was one way of being respected eis "ladies and gerxtlesaen. " Those who floated from plantation to plantation or drifted into town loolcing for freedom would find it with "hungry stooiachs and with nothing to eat. " Those who were honest, faithful, and industrious, those who fed the mules, took csu:^ of the hogs, and looked after the affairs of the plantation would enjoy the friendship and succor of the white people. For thoa, freedom would prove a blessing involving "advancement and civilization" rather than a curse "involving a condition of vagabondism and ultimate destruction. " This kind of information and advice, of course, was important because of its contribution to the economic and social stability so essential for political adjustment. But what of the affinity of the "freedom speech" with the rhetoric of acquiescence? The connection becomes clear if one recognizes that when Marvin talked to the freedn«n, he was also talking indirectly to the white people. Many white people listened to the freedom speeches, were told about them, or read them in their newspapers. Iflaat they heard or read reinforced the rhetoric of acquiescence. Thus Marvin's method of announcing freedon to the Negroes strengthened his status with the

PAGE 96

90 Bouthem white people, and tbe tenor of his remarks on the responsibilities of freedom reinforced the central theae of the strategy of acquiescence: White men shall rule! Itoreover, the Provisional Governor won the confidence of the southern white people by neutralizing the source of freedom — a technique which he was not able to carry off without doing violence to the facts. According to iiarvin, freedom had not been granted by the northerner or southerner; and what was even more to the point, the ex-slave had not himself earned freedom on the battlefield. To divest the northerner and southerner of any connection with emancipation by attributing freedom to God was one thing; but to wipe out the Negro's connection with the war by stsserting that the war had been "a white man's war" was another. Such a claim not only contradicted what Mazvin had said to tlie white people at Quincy less than two weeks before; it left him open to the charge of "falsehood" — a charge which was, in fact, made by the northern 28 owned Jacksonville Herald. Few, if any southerners, however, questioned I4Etrvin's assertion. No one, moreover, challenged his claim that tbe southern white man was tlie freedman's best friend. ^^*rhe BpoalcGr wae guilty of emphasizing the Negro's role in the war — he had exhibited courage on "many a bloody field" — to help the white people rationalize the abolition of slavery and to minimize it. The phrase colored men "fought no battles" sought to divest the f reedmen of any feelings of importance growing out of their connection with the war. The Herald was Justified in charging Marvin with falsehood, for when he told the freedmen at Marianna tliat tlie war had been "a white man' 3 war, " he went too far. Abraham Lincoln had authorized the use of colored troops in I863, emd by the end of the war there were 186,000 NegrooG in the Union service. Negroes recroited in Florida served as occupation forces in Jacksonville, were sent on raiding esqpeditions in

PAGE 97

91 In his speeches to the revxslutionists, Marvin had nurtiired the southern ego vlth statements about the superiority of the white people and had buttressed his appeal for acquiescence in the President's terns of reunion by emphasizing that Tfegro suffrage was not among then. Having told the white man he was si^perior, Marvin now proceeded to tell the Negro he -vms inferior. Ifc was not to be inrpolite to the white people. "It is to them that you sire to look for almost everything; . . . you want to lesim from them a great many things you cannot possibly learn without them. ..." Former masters ought to be called "master, " and mistresses, "mistress, " as a sign of respect. Freedom did not make the colored people the equal of the whites. "They are far ahead of you, and it is foolish for you to think th^ are net cupearior to you and will ever be. ..." Stataaents such as these were calculated to reduce racial tension by inculcating a spirit of submissiveness in the freedmen but, at the same time, they contained persuasive iinplications for the white people, iitgjlications that reinforced the face saving feature of the strategy of acquiescence. In sum, while the "freedom speeches" fell short of accomplishing one of their central puiposes inasmuch as great numbers of freedmen wandered and many became vagrants, the claim can be made that they contributed significantly to the economic and social stability tliat made political reorganization possible. East Florida from I863 to I865, participated in skirmishes at Marianna and Natural Bridge, and played a prominent part in the battle of Olustee. See Randall, The Civil VJar and Reconstruction j pp. 503-505; DaviSj !rhe Civil Vex and Reconstruction in Florida, pp. 2l8-2lt2.

PAGE 98

CHAPTER IV SPEAiCEWG AT TIE COKSTITUTIOML COIJVENTI(»J OF I865: A RHETORIC OF ADJUSTMENT The Scene Through the pre-conventlon speeches and proclamations of William Marvin, the provisional governor, Floridians had learned that they must be the agents of their own redengjtion. During September of 1865, attention vas focused on the nomination of delegates to a constitutional convention. With the election set for early October, candidates were noDinated at public meetings held during September. In at least three counties. Unionists vied \d.th ex-Confederates for seats in the convention. Such vas the case, for exainple, in Columbia County, located in north-central Florida. The "loyal citizens" met in Lake City on September 16, and nominated William M. Dukes and William H. Christ i as convention candidates. Before adjourning, they ec.opted a platform containing eight resolutions. Three were significant. One accepted the "overthrow of slavery"; it was "something of the past. " Another called for constitutional and legal guarantees for all in the protection of their person and property, "reo5u:xiless of color, religion In his testimony before a congressional committee in I866, Marvin explained that he did not believe "that there were any tickets run in any of the counties, . . . which could be called in opixjsition to the reconstruction of the Union. Tnere wer^ in some of the counties candidates running who claimed to be old Union men, and claim to be at present the Simon Puz-e Union men all through, who were opposed by men who went into the war and were in tlie confederate army. That was the case, I think, in three counties. " Report of the Joint Committee on Reconstruction (Washington, 1.Q66), 39th Cong., Ist Sess., Pt. k, p. 7.

PAGE 99

93 or birthplace. " The third vas an unqualified stand on debt repudiation: 'Ve are unalterably opposed to the recognition, directly or indirectly, of any debt or obligation whatever, incurred by the State vhile in rebellion. . . . "^ Six days later the ex-Confederates met in the same city and named their slate for the convention. Silas L. Niblack, vho became Democratic candidate for Congress in 1870,^ and Thomas T, Long, an ex-Confederate and secessionist, were nominated by acclamation.''^ A "large and spirited meeting of . . . colored soldie rs and citizens" held in Jacksonville on September I8 reflected an interest in the approaching convention that extended beyond the nomination of candidates. The group met in the Baptist Church "to take into consideration the ^For an account of the Union meeting, see Jacksonville Weekly Florida Times, October 5, I865. ^Quincy Weekly Journal, September 2, I87O. \ong was a politician who believed in casting his lot with the I)arty in power. In i860, he was an avid Democrat and one of the leaders in the movement for secession. During the war he served in the Confederate army. In I865 and 1866, he joined with the Conservatives to support presidential Reconstruction. When the Johnson government fell, he Joined forces with the Republicans and was rewarded with a political appointment from Republican Governor Harrison Reed. Testimony Taken by the Joint Select Committee to Inquire into the Conditior. of Affairs in the Late In surrectionaiy States (Vfashinfrfcon, 1872). XIII, x; Femandina Weekly ^t Floridian , January 19, l860j Tal3.ahassee Weekly Floridian , August 18, 1368. For Long's secession speaking, see iCeamey, "Pblitical Speaking in Florida frcxa 1859 to 1861, " pp. k6, 59, 72, 107. ^long was present at the meeting and, being called on for a speech, he expressed his views on the issues and accepted the nomination. For an account of the "ex-confederate" meeting, see Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, October 7, I865. For reports of other pre-election n^etings held at Jacksonville, Ifedison, and Gainesville, see Jacksonville Weekly Iferald , September 22, 1865> Tallahassee Semi-Weekly Floridian, September26, 1865; Gainesville Weekly New Era, October 7, I865.

PAGE 100

Interests of the colored population of the state and adopt such measures as the exigencies of the case seemed to require. " Addresses were given by "several soldiers and citizens, " and by a "Reverend Mr. Harris " of Beaufort, South Carolina. Before dispersing, the group appointed a committee to pr^are resolutions expressing the sense of the meeting, and "a petition to the Convention . . . asking for the right of suffi^ge. " At a subsequent meeting on September 26, the resolutions and petition were reported emd adopted. In its resolutions the group acknowledged "with gratitude the position taken by Gov. MARVIN, in his proclamation and in his recent speech at Quincy, in regard to the rights of colored men. ..." The governor was tendered "profound thanks" for his declaration "that the freedom proclaimed by the fedeiuL government is intended to be the full, ample and complete freedom of a citizen of the United States. " Further, it was resolved that the suffrage petition approved by the meeting be circulated throughout the state for signatures, and that copies of the resoluticMis and petition be given to Marvin, Major General John G. Foster, Brigadier General John Newton, Colonel Maxple, and the svibordinate officers of the district. Addressed to the convention, the petition read in part: "The undersigned, colored soldlei^ and citizens of , grateful to Almiglity God and to the federal government [italics mine] for our liberation from slavery and the acknowled^nent of our rights as freemen, . , . ask of your honorable body, that in framing the Constitution . . . you may make it in all respects to confonn to the principles of Republican govemzaent — doing away witli distinction on account of color and recognizing the rights of all. . . . "We respectfully, but earnestly, ask that we may be admitted to

PAGE 101

95 By election day it had become clear that in eooe counties the voters vould have to choose between Unionists and ex-Confederates. Of equal significance vas the fact that at least one group had openly advocated Negro enfranchisement. On October 10, Floridians chose their constitution makers. Otf the 8,512 qualified voters, 6,708 cast their ballots. "^^ Before the election there vere indications that only a small number vould go to the polls. E. J. Lutterloh, a native of North Carolina and a business and political leader in Cedar Key, informed Yulee that he did not believe that the people were very interested in the election, and predicted that very few would vote. The Florida Times, a Republican organ, scoffed at the event. On October 5, it reported: "Judging from present appearances not half a vote will be polled. There seems to be little interest or organization. ..." On October 12, it declared that the election "attracted little attention and passed off very quietly. " It was doubted "if there were 2, 500 votes cast in the entire State. " Representatives the privilege of suffrage, upon the same basis as others; and however high that basis may be, so that it is uniform, we will not coi:55lain, but we will ever cherish the privilege as a boon and a guaranty against injustice and oppi^ssion. ..." For an account of the meetings and a copy of the resolutions and petition, see Jacksonville Weekly Florida Times, October 5. 1865. 'Scjme 7,01*2 took the required oath before militaiy authorities; 1,470 oaths were taken before judges of election. Journal of Proceedings of the Convention of Florida, Begun and Held at the Capitol of the State , at Tallaliassee, October 25th, A. D. 1865 (Tallahassee. 1865). px>. l'=g-l^^. Cited hereafter as Journal of the Florida Constitutional Convention, 1865 . °E. J. Lutterloh to David L. Yulee, Cedar Key, September 20, 1865, Yulee Papers.

PAGE 102

96 of the paper at Tallahassee reported on election day that one vould "never have suspected an iE^Kjrtant election vas transpiring, f roa any thing that vas visihle. "^ Jiarvin, however, regarded the election "as full and fair an election, and as full and fair an expression of the vishee of the people as could possibly he had. " What had been the wishes of the people in their choice of delegates jT What clasG wotild control the convention. Unionists or ex-Confederates and secessionists? The available evidence indicates that although all three of these groups were represented, the ex-Confederates and secessionists uade up a laajority of the convention. One source relates that "the men elected . . . with but few exceptions, had supported 11 the Confederacy. " The Tallahassee Floridian , a Democratic paper, held that "men prominently connected with the rebellion . . . very generally, 12 and vezy prudently, . . . abstedjied from being candidates. ..." Marvin estimated tliat approximately one-half of the group "belonged to the confederate army during the rebellion. " The other half was almost evenly divided between those who "claimed to have been Union men all the ^Jacksonville Weekly Florida Times, October 5 and 12, I865. Report of the Joint Ccaamittee on Reconstruction, 39th Cong., Ist Seas., Pt. U, p. 7* The small vote may be attributed to many causes, one of which was tlie lack of proper facilities for taking the oath. A JacksonviLle paper reported that many ceuiie long distances to take the oath and were "disappointed for want of the proper blcuilcs. " The inconvenience vas felt "particularly by many of the poor class who can ill afford the time and meeuis bo make such frequent visits. " Jacksonville Weekly Flor ida Union, September 9^ IO65. '•^Davis, The Civil War and Reconstruction in Florida , p. 36I. '^Tallahassee Semi-Weekly Floridian, October 27, I865.

PAGE 103

97 1 a time, " and those vho "sympatMzed with the secession movement. " -^ A representative of the New York press felt that the membership was composed largely of "practical, " "e^fperienced" men. "None of the rabid fire-eating element [was] manifest, though there [might] be smothered brands only awaiting occasion to kindle into flame. " There seaned to be "an earnest desire on the part of nearly all the members to conform to the requisitions of the government and the necessities of freedom. " Whether they were willing to "surrender old theories and prejudices" Ik could only be determined by "practical tests. " The Jacksonville Florida Times , a Republican paper which had reporters at every session of the convention, expressed its suiprise "at the almost entire absence of frivolous or designing politicians, and the general exhibition of a spirit of true patriotism. ..." "We could hardly realize, " it editorialized, "that this sedate, peaceful, intelligent, and patriotic body of men were the representatives of a people so lately in revolt against their government. "^ The Florida Union, which supported Johnsonian Reconstruction in I865, was the only paper which endorsed the qualifications of the delegates before the convention met. Prior to the election. •'• ^Report of the Joint Ccamaittee on Reconstruction , 39th Cong., 1st Sess., Pt. k, p. 7. The convention roster contained the name of James Gettis, a Tampa attorney, who had served as a member of the secession convention in 186I. Ralph A. Wooster, "The Florida Secession Convention, " Florida Historical Quarterly, XXXVI (April, 1958), 383; Journal of the Florida Constitutional Convention, I865 , pp. 3-^. New York Times , November 10, I865. '•^Jacksonville Weekly Florida Times , November 23, I865.

PAGE 104

98 it had counseled the selection of "men of consistent but undoubted union sentiments and antecedents. ..." In the event that a sufficient number of "such men" could not be had, the people were advised to rely on n^n "who have held opposite views and sentiments [the exConfederates], but have been alike earnest and consistent in the advocation of them but are now convinced of their fiallacy, and are alive to the changes produced by the war . . . and fully 'accept the situation* in all its bearings. ..." In a post-election analysis, the Florida Union lauded the people's jud^nent. They had generally "chosen their best men — men all of then of fine practical abilities and good sense, while many of them are noted for their intellectuality. " This augured well, "for no body of men that ever assembled in the State had matters of so grave a nature to claim their deliberations. ..." The delegates were to spend twelve days voting, speaking, and listening to speeches on such questions as the invalidation of secession, the abolition of slavery, the repudiation of the state's Confederate debt, and the rights of the Negro. The extant speeches — all of which are reported here — provide a partial account of their experience. On the first day they heard \^5at was probably the most important alngle bit of discourse, the provisional governor's message. This document embodied mandates and suggestions calling for a constitution which would reflect the revolutionary changes brought about by the war. On the evening of the fifth day, the delegates Joined the residents of 1865. Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, September 9 and October 21,

PAGE 105

99 Tallalmssee to listen to another representative of the President, General Oliver 0. Howard, who used the occasion to discuss the questions of confiscation and Negro testimony. On the seventh and eighth days, they considered arguments on repudiation and the tabling of a communication from Florida's elder statement and former governor, Thomas Brown. On the final day, the constitution makers sat back and listened to Marvin's evaluation of their labors. The Discourse Speech of E. D. Tracy and Ifessage of i^feirvin At noon on October 25, the convention delegates assembled in Tallahassee and took their seats as the representatives of a x>eople vho sought to create a new state government in order to restore their state's relations with the federal government. After answering to their names and taking the oath prescribed for members, the group proceeded to organize by electing its officers. E. D. Tracy assumed the position of president after being selected on the third ballot. He was about fiftyfive years old, stood five feet six, and was of "stout" proportions. His hair and a beard were '^profusely sprinkled with grey. " His political background, combining a "large legislative e;xperience, " with opposition to secession and support for the Union, made him "a sound man and 17 a seife legislator. " Cto taking the chair, Tracy delivered what was ^'For a vivid description of Tracy, see Jacksonville Weekly Flor ida Times , November 23, 1865. The other nominees were Benjamin D. Wright of Pensacola, and Thomas Ealtzell of Tallahassee, Wright was regarded as one of the "strongest Union men in the State, " and Baltzell, although "known as a Secessionist, " was a "conservative and sound man, and no fire-eater. " New Yorlc Times, November 10, I865.

PAGE 106

100 l8 pix>bably the shortest speech of the con\rention. Ife thanked the delegates for the unexpected honor accorded him. It vas his belief that there were "many abler and better qualified for the position. " After pledging that he would discharge "the high responsibility" of his office with "unfeigned diligence, " he reminded his listeners that their "assistance and f orbeco^nce " would be essential for success. It would be their joint task "to lay anew the foundations of civil government" and "to establish them deep and broad upon the principles of eternal truth and justice. ..." They needed "to ei«ct a better, more magnificent and enduring structure than the old. " Before closing, Tracy again thanked the delegates for bestowing upon him such a "distinguislied honor. " " After Tracy finished speaking, a coosnlttee was appointed to inform the governor that the convention was organized and awaited "any communication he was pleased to make. " When the governor* s message was 20 received, it was ordered that the document be read aloud. '-'^he convention audience consisted of two groups, the convention delegates and those permitted to attend the sessions. Those admitted to the convention Included newspapermen end. military and civil dignitaries. Editors and reporters from Flcarlda and 'other States" were admitted to seats on the second day of the convention. The New York Times was probably represented by Benjamin C. Truman. See the Times, December 25* 1865. S. T. Bulkley represented the New York Herald . Tallahassee Semi Wcokly Floridian , October 27, I865. Invitations were extended to I-larvin and Foster on the third day. Journal of the Florida Constitutional Convention, l8b3 , pp. 27, 37. rFor the text of Tracy's speech, see Jacksonville Weekly Florida Times , November 23, I865. 20 Journal of the Florida Constitutional Convention, I865, p. 21.

PAGE 107

101 By the time the reader had conrpleted his task the delegates were aware tliat they had heea confronted with six propositions of policy. These were: (l) the fact of freedom" shcRild be written into the state constitution; (2) the civil rights and political privileges of the Negro should be defined in the constitution; (3) the colored people should not be enfranchised; {k) the Negro should be admitted as a witness in the courts in cases involving a colored person; (5) the colored people should be guaranteed legal protection in the exercise of their rights of freedom, and should enjoy equality of justice; and (6) the convention should declaire that the ordinance of secession pstssed in l86l "was and is null and void." Although some matters were to be decided by the delegates thanselves, the slavery question was not among them. Re-establishment of state government required unqualified recognition of the Negro's freedom. All the delegates In taking the amnesty oath had pledged thauselves "to support the fi«edom of the former slave. " Hence, the convention was expected to declare in the constitution "that neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as punishment for crime, . . . shall heireafter exist in this State. " Mississippi, Alabama, and "other Southeam States" had already Incorporated these words into their constitutions. The fact of freedom could not be left to "argument or inference. " The emancipation of the slave made it necessary. In Marvin's judgment, "to define, in the Constitution, . . . what his civil rights and political privileges shall be* " The presence of two races almost

PAGE 108

102 "equal in ntuabers" and so unlike each other, required that the rights of each be clearly defined by lav. Marvin suggested a definition based on the distinction between the rights of freedom and the privileges of citizenship. First came a statement of what freedcxn included. It may be scud, ... to consist, chiefly, in the right to be protected, by constitutional law, in the enjoyment of life, in the acquisition of property by honest industry, in its possession and transmission to heirs, in a right to i)ersonal security and loccaaotion, and generally, in a right to In^rove one's intellectual, moral and religious condition, and to pursue happiness according to one's own ideas of happiness, not interfering with the exercise of the same right on the part of others. Next came a declaration that freedon did not "necessarily include the idea of a participation in the affairs of government. " The privilege of voting at elections, the cai)acity to hold office, or to sit on juries, are not essential rights of freedom. They are privileges conferred or duties enjoined upon certain persons or classes of persons by the supreme power of the State, for and on account of the public good, and the i)ersons or classes of persons upon whom these privileges are conferred or these duties enjoined may be increased or diminished, with reasonable limits without impairing rights of freedom, according as that power may determine. Persons may be free without the capacity to hold office, to sit on a jxiry, or to vote at elections. Several specific exai^ples were furnished to support this doctrine. The Etaiglish people were free, but not "anis tenth of the adxxlt male population" were entitled "by law" to vote or to sit on juries. In Florida, "foreigners were not entitled to vote or to sit on juries until they have been naturalized"; yet they were "free. " Mceaen and children could not vote, hold office, or serve as jurors; yet they were "free. "

PAGE 109

103 This statemeot regarding "civil rights" and "political privileges" provided the background for a consideration of "the subject of the elective franchise. " The delegates vere undoubtedly pleased to learn that this vas a question that had not already been decided for them. Florida's "present" constitution barred the Negro from voting. "Whether you will add to or diminish the number of voters by changing the qualifications is a question for you to consider and decide. " Moreover, it vas a decision that would affect the people of "this" and other States, " for those who were qualified to vote for local officials would also be qualified "to vote for Presidential electors and members of the House of Representatives. " ActuGLLly the question facing the convention was this: "Shall the elective franchise be conferred upon the colored race, and if so, upon what terms and qualifications?" There was a hush in the convention ball as the reader rendered the governor's answer. I am not advised that the President has e^ressed his views or wishes on this subject, and I know no more of the views or wishes of the members of Congress than is generally known. I cannot think, however, that, if the Convention shall abolish slavery and provide proper guarantees for the protection and security of the persons and property of the f reednen, that Congi«ss will refuse to admit our Senators and Representatives to their seats, because the fr^edmen are not allowed to vote at the State and other elections. V/hen tlie question of their admission sliall arise, I think the main inquiry will be, not are the freedmen allowed to vote, but are they guaranteed, in the Constitution, protection and security for their persons and their property. It does not appear to me that the public good of this State or of the nation at large would be promoted by conferring, at the present time, upon the freedmen, the elective franchise. Neither the white people nor the colored people are prepared for so radical a change in their social relations. Nor have I any reason to believe that any considerable number of the freedmen desire to possess this

PAGE 110

lOl^ privilege, \flmt they desire aad what they have a right, in my judQaent, to require is, that they shall be guarantied [sic] protection in the enjoyment of all the rights vhich properly belong to their condition as freemen, and that this protection shall not be dependent upon the varying and uncertain action of the Legislature. It is protection, and not political privileges, that they need and desire; and the problem to be solved is, how to secure tliem this protection, without their participation in the business of the Govemiaent. The delegates must indeed have been pletised by the provisional governor's judgaent that they could withhold the vote from the Kegro without imperiling the process of reunion. After asserting that what the Negro needed was security of person and property rather than the privileges of citizenship, Marvin proposed that he be admitted as a witness in the courts as a means of Eiffording him this security. The arguments advanced under this head constituted a strong case for Negro testimony. The Congress had already demanded protection for the emancipated slave. Further, the Negro, by virtue of his change in status, was in need of protection. Finally, there was actually no valid recuson for not Gidmitting him into the courts. In recent months the legislatures of several states had ratified an amendment to the federal Constitution. Proposed by the Congress at its last session, this amendment proclaimed the abolition of slavery or involuntary servitude, "except as a punishment for crime. " Moreover, it gave Congress the '^power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. " Congress intended to protect the Negro. There could be no hedging on this matter. If the convention did not guarantee the freedman's basic rights of person and property, Florida's domestic

PAGE 111

105 affairs would in all probability be settled in the iialls of Congress. Ebqpediency also justified the measure. While a slave, the Negro had the "protection of his master, who felt an interest in his welfare, not only because he was a dependent and had been raised, periiaps, in his family, but because he was his property. " As a freeaan, the Negro had "no such protector. " Unless given protection in a court of justice he might become the victim of any evil man, "whose avarice may proopt him to refuse the payment of his just wages and whose angry and revengeful passions may excite him to abuse and maltreat the helpless being placed by his freedom beyond the pale of protection of any kind. " The "sensitiveness" felt on the subject in "this and other Southern States, " did not rest on sound principle. "For myself, " declared Ifervin, "now that the negro is free, I do not feel any such sensitiveness. I do not perceive the philosophy or expediency of any rule of evidence which shuts out the truth from the hearing of the jury. " If permitted to testify in a courtrocan, the Negro could not be said to have been granted a privilege. It was ultimately "the right of the State, in all criminal prosecutions, to have his testimony, in connection with other testimony, to assist to establish the guilt of the accused, and it ought, reciprocally, to be the right of the accused to ,21 have testimony to establish his innocence. \larvln was aware that there would be opposition to the admission of negro testimony; some members of the convention were honor bouncl to oppose the measure. Eenjamin C. Truman wrote of a conversation with Marvin on the progress of Reconstruction in Florida. "He [IlarvinJ infonaed me that there was some opposition of strength, at first, to his doctrine of admitting negro testimony in the courts, and that some of

PAGE 112

106 Since protection for the person and pi-operty of the Kegro vas so important to liim personally and to the state collectively, Marvin felt it^pelled to reconmend that the principle of security and protection for the rights of the colored people he written into the fundamental law of the state. I recoiimend, tiiat the Convention shall, by seme suitable provision to be inserted in the Constitution, protect the colored in coomon with the white race in their liberty and in their rights of person and property, and gusuxl the two races against discriniaations to be made between tlien by the courts or Legislature in any matter touching upon these rights, and not leave the subject to the uncertain and varying action of the Legislature. I think a clause may te so drawn as to accocrplish tliis object, suid at the same time exclude the colored people frcxa any participation in the affairs of the government. The benefits that would accrue froa such a declaration were potent. If the "colored race" felt that they were "fully and fairly protected in the exercise and enjoyment of their newly acquired rights of freedom, " they would be "a quiet and contented people, unambitious of any political privileges, or of any participation in the affairs of the government. " Such an atmosphere would stimulate the race "to be industrious and economical ... to educate themselves and their children, and improve their physical, moral and intellectual condition. " The Mogro might also "be stimulated to labor by making vagrancy an offence punisliable by tcgporary involuntary servitude . By "feeling the the members cane pledged to vote against the doctrine. The most prominent of tlaesc bilious gentlemen was Mr. Niblaclc of the Jacksonville and Lake City Railroeui, but after finding himself in an inglorious minority, he thought better of the matter and 'tool: in his horns,' and so did many otliers, time vanquishing the opposition almost entirely. " Report from Tallahassee, dated December 7, I865. Mew York Times, December 25, 1865.

PAGE 113

i-ur power of the State over them to protect them when they do right and to punish them whey they do wrong, " the race would learn "to venerate and respect the State's authority," and would "have a fair chance to work out their destiny, in a condition of freedom, as God in His wisdom may have appointed. " If the race were not afforded "this protection, this equality of justice, " they would "be deprived of the ordinary motives to industry and econoo^. " Labor would then be "no more profitable than idleness. " Discontent would prevail, and ultimately "the peace of society" would be disturbed and the 'Hrelfare of the State seriouslyaffected. " The governor's final proposition, dealing with secession, was not, on the other hand, a matter for the convention to determine. The delegates were singly informed "that the Convention shall pass an ordinance declaring that the . . . ordinance of secession, passed by a convention of the people on the 10th day of January, I861, was and is null and void. ..." As was his custom, Marvin closed his message by invoking a benediction on the audience. He asked that Almighty God enlighten the delegates' understandings and "incline" their "wills" so that they would do "whatever will advance His glory and prcanote the peace, the happiness 22 euid the welfare of all the people of our beloved State. " ^The text of the message may be found in the Journal of the Florida Constitutional Convention, 1865, pp. 8-15. See also Tallahassee Semi-Weekly Florldian, October 27, I865; Gainesville Weekly Hew Era , November k] 1865; Jacksonville V/eekly Florida Times , November 23, 1865; Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union, November k, 1865; Washington National Intelligencer, November 9, 1865; New York Herald, November 8, I865; New York Times , November 10, I865.

PAGE 114

106 Marvin's nessage appears to have been favorably received by the delegates. The reporter covering the convention for the New York Times wrote his editor: "There seems to be a £;eneral disposition to adopt the recommendations of the (jovemor, though it is ingxjssible now to say wbat may be dor». " There seoned to be "an earnest desire on the part of nearly all the members to conform to the requisitions of tlie government and 23 the necessities of freedom. " The Florida IMion, however, was somewhat critical. As a whole, the message was "a clear business-like document, fully covering the topics which it treats; and containing scoie wholesome suggestions to the Convention. " The governor had been "forcible enough" on the subject of Negro suffrage, but he had not given sufficient emphasis to the subject of Negro testimony. Furthermore, it was regrettable that Marvin f&iled "to say one word about the State War Debt. " Bepudiation was "a grave and deeply interesting question to the people of Florida, and suggestions from the Governor would doubtless have weight with the Convention. ..." Very "few questions of more practical ic^jortance" would come to the attention of the convention; hence "the Governor should ok have spoken out his views thereon. 23 Correspondent's report dated at Tallahassee, October 26, I865. New York Times, Novanber 10, I865. Jacksonville Weekly Florida Uhion , November h, 1865.

PAGE 115

109 Speech of Oliver 0. Howard After tlie convention had completed four days' work, the correspondent for the New York Times reported what seemed to be a change of heart among many of the delegates. The climate, he said, vas now "not the most favorable to the acceptance of the policy recommended by Gbv. Marvin. " The organization of the convention committees was such that Itoion men were literally silenced. The structure of all seventeen committees practically ruled out the pix>spect of obtaining a positive report on "controverted points. " It appeared that the delegates might dodge the "iniportant question of admitting the negro to the courts, and giving i^\rif legal protection in his rights of person and property. ' Within the pest few days a "hope" had come into being "that the Copperheads of the North were soon to have control of the govenamerrt, aisd if the South [could] tanporize awhile, [it would be able] to establish a sort of modified freedom or apprenticeship for the freedmen. " The "decisive verdict of Republican Connecticut" against Negro suffrage tended to intensify this feeling. Continuing, the reporter declared his belief that the "timely arrival" of General Howaixi, on October 29, might "check this spirit, and induce a more liberal view. " Howard, "of all men, " was well qualified to infona the convention of the policy of the government. It was hoped 25 that he would "be called upon to express himself. ..." 25 Correspondent's report dated at Tallahassee, October 29* I865. New York Times , November 10, I865.

PAGE 116

110 Oa the evening of the fifth day of the convention, October 30, Howard, a young military officer recently appointed crmni ssioner of the Freedmen's Bureau, did just this. lie spoke to "a large xamber of citizens and members of the Convention in the Hall of the House of Representatives, . . . for an hour. Because he vas "sent cwt expressly "by the President to restore the confiscated lands to their former owners, tie was listened to with attention. " General Howard covered several subjects, among them the purpose of the Freedmen's Bureau, the impoirfcance of ccaitracts between freedmen and tlieir white eciployers, and Negro education. OLs comments on freedmen* s rights and abandoned lands were more than lil:ely received with mixed emotions. A guarantee of the rights of "testimcMiy" and "suit, " decl£ired Howard, were essential if Florida e^cpected to resume its normal relations with the federal government. He took occasion to eajpress to the Convention the feeling of the President and his cabinet" in regard to these matters, and urged the delegates to confer these rights upon the freedmen before adjournment. '^"A man of thirty-five, Howard was no stranger to Florida. Educated at Bowdoin College and West Point, he had served as chief of ordnance of the Department of Florida during the ante-bellum period. Ids advancement during the war was rapid. By l365 he was a major general, and on May 12 of tliat year, he accepted tlie conrnii ssionership of tlie Freedmen* s Bureau. J. G. de Roulhac Hamilton, "Oliver 0. Howard, " Dictionary of American Biograpliy, ed. Allen Jolinson and Dumas Malone, DC (1932), 279-280. For an estimate of Howard* s qualificattons and the story of his appointment, see Bentley, A History of the Freedmen' s Bureau, pp. 50-56.

PAGE 117

Ill He said the President considered it a right which must be conferred upon them. * . . Every Provisional Governor and every lawyer he iiad conversed with, from V/ashin^on to this place, expressed the same opinion — that, now the protection of [tlie] master was gone, the law must afford it, and he knew of no other possible way but by suits and testimony in courts. The natter of abandoned lands, Howard continued, was being settled. The Freedmen's aireau had becooe "a sort of amnium gatherum of everything, " but he had "regulated the matter of restoration as the President had directed. " The law regarding abandjoned lands had, unfortunately, "led the negroes to think they would have land all over the country. " Althtxigh "wrong impressions, " had been made, they "were being corrected. "^ Howard concluded by urging that all should work together "without paying any at-cention to political action and wire pulling, for the solution of problems that now perplex and try everyman [sic] in the country. " This was a time "for sober, cala, deliberate thoughts and dispassionate and wise legislation. Speech of William R. Coulter On October 30, V7illian R. Coulter, a delegate from Levy County, submitted an ordinance calling for the repudiation of £ill state liabili^Earlier in the day Howard spoke to a meeting of freedmen at the Negro Methodist Church in Tallahassee. In addressing them he labored "to disabuse their minds of the widespread notion that the lands of their f owner owners were to be divided among then at the coming Chi'istmas. " For a report of this speech, see New York Herald , November 19* 1865. ^or an account of Howard's speech to the convention, see ibid .

PAGE 118

112 29 ties incurred between January 10, 1861, and October 27, I865. The following day the ordinance received its first reading. On Koveniber 1, the seventh day of the convention, the ordinance came up for its second reading, but was checked by the stalling tactics of the opposition. The fact that an atteinpt was made to postpone its consideration angered Coulter, and moved him to speak against postponement. He [Coulter] considered it [repudiation] one of the most iraportant measures that would come before the Convention. As for himself, he was anxious to have action taken upon it at once. The debt was contracted for an illegitimate object, to enable Jeff, Davis and Co. to carry on the war against the government of the United States, and he for one was in favor of repudiation. He was opposed to saddling upon the present and futxare generations a burden of debt which they could not and ought iiot to pay. He should vote against it now and for all time to come 75^ Coulter's effort, however, was to no avail. The second reading of the ordinance "was passed over informally,"^ ^9 Journal of the Florida Constitutional Convention, 186^ , p. 51. 3 For an account of the Coulter speech, see New York Herald , November I9, I865. ^"TPhe repudiation issue elicited marked controversy. Several substitute motions were offered to counter repudiation. James T. Magbee of Wakulla Cotinty, who had supported secession and the Confederacy, moved that the question be submitted to a popular vote and that the electorate mark their ballots "pay" or "repudiate." David P. Hogue, a l£on County attorney whose stand earned him the reputation of a compromiser, moved that a tax be levied to create a fxind to purchase the liabilities. At one point, Hovember k, Magbee 's substitute motion was passed by a vote of twenty-eight to twenty-one. For an account of the repudiation question, see Journal of the Florida Constitutional Conven tion, 1865 , pp. 51 J 73, 11, 81-87, 93-96, 101, 108. For biographical data on Magbee and Hogue, see Tampa Sunday Tribxine , July 21, 1957; Jacksonville Weekly Florida Tiroes, November 23, I865.

PAGE 119

113 Letter of Thomas Brown and Speeches of Thomas T. Long, Samuel Spencer, and Thomas Baltzell The proceedings of the eighth day began with the reading of a letter addressed "to the President and members of the Convention." Authored by Thomas Brown, a former Whig who had served as governor of 32 Florida, the communication was replete with advice.-" In Brown's opinion, the delegates had been elected to frame a constitution which would enable Florida "to be received back into the Union as a sovereign State. . . . This [was] the all absorbing question, and no obstacles should be allowed to interfere >rtiich would . . . impede her speedy reception." Martial law was "humiliating to all true patriots and statesmen," and made the "Immediate admission" of the state "paramount to all other considerations." TSie only obstacle was making "suitable provision for the protection of the emancipated slaves." Abolition was a settled question. The delegates had to accept it as such. They could protect the freedmen by passing an ordinance entitling them "to all the rights and protection of law . . . enjoyed by the v^ite citizens of the State," and by prohibiting the legislatxire from passing any law impairing those rights. The privileges of suffrage. S^Because of his age and experience. Brown was well qualified to advise the convention. A one-time resident of Virginia and a member of the Virginia House of Delegates, he and his family had moved to Florida and settled at Tallahassee in I826, He served as Judge of the county court diiring the territorial period and was a member of the state legislature in I8U5. Three years later he became the first Whig to be elected governor of the state, and served from l81*-9 to I853, "He opposed . . . secession, but vftien the Rubicon was crossed he was not backward in giving his sympathies and counsels in behalf of his struggling coxintrymen." Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian , August 27, I867.

PAGE 120

Uh of holding office, and searving on Jtiries were limited in "all constitutional governmsnts." "Sound State policy" demanded "that these rights, duties and privileges should not be granted to emancipated slaves under present circumstances." Giving the Negro the right to testify would not create any "great evil," A court and Jury would weigh the testimony and prosecute those convicted of perjury. What was of "great importance" to the people of Florida was that the constitution be "so framed as to leave no doiJbt of her speedy admission to her political privileges in the Union. ..." The document should be of such form and spirit "that our able and patriotic Provisional Governor could give it his cordial approval and recommendations," Following the reading of this letter "considerable feeling was manifested by some of the members. ..." Thomas T, Long, an exConfederate, and Samuel Spencer, a Gainesville attorney, 33 gave speeches "denouncing the conmunication as imcalled for aad insulting to the Convention," They were there "to perform certain things in accordance with the wishes of their constittxents, and wished for no advice from outside parties," Both men supported a motion that "the communication be laid on the table indefinitely," Thomas Baltzell, an ex-secessionist turned "conservative," rose to counter the efforts of Long and Spencer. He stood tall, six feet two, and "erect," belying his white hair and sixty years. Utilizing ^^Gainesville Weekly New Era , March l6, 186?,

PAGE 121

115 his "full, clear voice," he delivered a "very sensible, eloquent and earnest speech against the proposed disposition of the comnnmication, and paid a high tritiite to Governor Brown." After hearing Baltzell, the convention "decided to receive the ,,35 comaunication and place it on file. Speech of Marvin By four o'clock on the afternoon of Novemiber 1, the convention had completed its work. Before adjourning, the delegates appointed a committee to call on Marvin and "invite him to address Itliam] previous to their departure."^ The conmittee retvimed accompanied by the 3^^3altzell, a "distinguished lawyer" and the "clearest and ablest debater" of the convention was probablj closely allied with Brown, both personally and politically. A resident of Leon County, he was said to possess a "massive head with hair almost white; expansive forehead surmounting a face which though not inferior, hardly siistains the intellectual cast of head; a mild grey eye; broad shoulders and erect form; a full, clear voice, and an easy utterance, with volubility. ..." The ideas in his speeches were "well arranged and presented with force and effect." In his convention speeches "he took broad and high ground and had expansive views of state interests and state policy." Jacksonville Weekly Florida Times, November 23, I865; New York Times, Koveniber 10, 1865. ^^or a copy of the Brown letter and an account of the speeches of Long, Spencer, and Baltzell, see New York Herald , November 19, I865. 3^rwD committees waited on Marvin to request that he communicate with the convention. The first was sent to ask "if he [had] any communication to lay before the Convention." This committee reported that "the Provisional Governor had no communication to make." a second committee waited upon him with instructions to "invite him to give oral expression, ... of his approval or disapproval of the action of the Convention upon the topics contained in his communication to this body on its assembling." Journal of the Florida Constitutional Conven tion, 1865, pp. 119-120.

PAGE 122

ll6 provisional governor. His entrance was received "with cheers," After scnae "hesitation" and "with much embarrassment" Itervin began to speak. He thanked the aiadience for "this invitation," and indicated his speech would be informal and intproo^rbu in nature. He had not planned on speaking. Hence, his remarks would be some^at "unconnected," The first portion of the governor's speech contained an evaluation of the convention's labors. As a citizen of the state, there were "some things" which he "wished might have been done differently, , , ,"^' As provisional governor, hoirever, he was "entirely satisfied" with the resxilt, "You haare done everything, that, in ray official capacity, I asked you to do. You have done it all, and in the ri^t spirit,"^ The group received "especisJ. commendation" for its action on Negro testimony. This issue had been met "fairly and squarely," The conventions of "all the other Southern States" had evaded the question "by transferring it to their Legislatures." Florida's action in this respect was "fully in accordance with the wishes of the President" and would place her in a "better position" than the other states, Marvin felt "no hesitation" in declaring that "with such a Constitution , , . -^^The convention failed to follow through on one of Marvin's suggestions when it "side-stepped the issue of providing a 'bill of rights' for the freedmen within the framework of the constitution," See Ackerman, "Florida Reconstruction from Walker through Reed, I865 to I873," p. kB, ^ Slavery was abolished; the secession ordinance of I86I was annulled; and the state's confederate debt repudiated. The Negro was given the right to testify in cases involving other Negroes, but vna not given the privilege of suffrage. For an historical treatment of the convention's acts, see ibid ,, pp, k6~k^; Davis, The Civil Wor and Reconstruction in Florida, pp. 36I-365.

PAGE 123

117 the Florida delegation will be admitted to seats in the Congress of the United States, After this positive declaration, Marvin annoiinced that he had "a single remark to make, before concluding, in regard to our domestic affairs." His concern was for the preservation of peace and good order during the approaching holidays. The problem, as Marvin stated it, centered in the colored people's desire to test their freedom. As I have had the opportunity, I have conversed freely with the more intelligent colored people, and with others of less intelligence. Althoxigh I aaa an old citizen of the state, and all my life a slave-holder, yet, as I cane here from the North, and with ray appointment frcjsn the President of the United States, they talk more freely to me than they do to you. I find their minds are exercised with fears as to their treatment hereafter by their former owners. They fear that their old owners will love them less, and treat them with less respect and kindness than in time past. This is all very natiiral. They themselves formerly looked down upon free negro s , as beneath them; and now finding themselves free negros , t^.ey fear there will be little kindness and respect shown them by their former o^mers. . . . Nearly all of them, at the end of the j'-ear, will want to leave their old homes. CThclr feelings is that they will not be free unless they go off from vrtiere they have been living. This idea is in thejjr heads, and I find there is no xxse in talking to them on the subject. Since "talking" would fail to convey the fact of freedom to the Negro, other methods must be tried. Marvin staggested two alternatives. One wab to give tha Negroes a chance to "find freedom" by allowing them to roam at will during the holiday season, Marvin knew that his suggestion would not interfere with the agricxiltural cycle, for the Christmas holidays marked the interim between the harvesting of one crop and the initial preparations for another. •^-Tlaving been a Florida resident for twenty-eight years, Marvin was familiar with the patterns of plantation life. Hence, he was aware

PAGE 124

118 When Christmas comes, , . , give them full liberty to go where they please. Offer no objections, and attempt to interpose ao restraints ujxjn their movements. And I wl3J. say to you that the officer in charge of , , . the Freed men's Bureau, is novr, with my assistance, and guided very imich by my sxiggestions, preparing a Circular on this subject. They will be given from Christmas until the middle of January to roam where they please, and do what they please, provided they do not violate the laws. By the end of that time, it is hoped, they will have made arrangements for next year eilther] by retxmaing to their old homes and contracting with their former owners, or entering into engagements elsewhere. Sho^lM this plan fall, more drastic measures would have to be devised. If at the end of the roaming period the Negroes were "still wandering about the country, without homes, and with no visible means of support, they will be taken up and dealt with as vagrants, under the law."^*^ Marvin promised to exert his personal influence in solving this problem. "I shall make it my duty, . . . to go about and address them." He would tell them "that their real friends are not Northern but Southern people — their former masters." He would "point to what you have done for them. , . in the Constitution . . , adopted, to secure their rights, liberty, persons and property, by prohibiting the existence of slavery . . . and allowing them to sue and testify in the Courts of the countr:^." He urged the delegates to exert their peraonal influence to that the Christmas season, "between the gathering of one crop and the prejjarlng of ground for another, was a time of frolic for southern Negroes." Bentley, A History of the Freedroen's Bureau , p. 82. The convention passed an ordinance making vagrancy punishable by fine, imprisonment, or by "being sold for a term not exceeding twelve months, at the discretion of the court. ..." Ackerman, "Florida Reconstrviction from Walker through Reed, I865 to lG73j" p. U7.

PAGE 125

119 promote peace and good order in their respective communities. A "brief announcement regarding the disposition of colored troops was the speaker's final point. The audience would, no doubt, be pleased to hear that all the colored troops were to be removed from the interior and transferred to the seaboard. Further, there was no need to fear an "insurrection" or "outbreak" on the part of the colored people, for there were approximately a thousand white troops in the state. This force, properly distributed, would form a "nucleus for the militia in case of insurrection. ..." Marvin conclTJded as he had begun, by congratulating the convention on the result of its labors. Under the constitution adopted, Florida had before her "a future rich in its promise of prosperity and happiness to her people." Following the speech, vfliich "was concluded amid loud applause," the constitution makers adjovirned sine die . For the most part, the New York and Florida papers limited their reports of the speech to factual accounts of its contents and the circumstances surrounding its delivery. The Florida Union , however, praised it as "admirable," and vent\ared the impression that Marvin "was particularly happy in his suggestions of the policy to be pursued towards the negro. . . . marvin had been asked via a convention resolution to have the colored troops removed from the state. Ibid ., p. ^9. Their removal to the seaboard got them out of the "black arc," where their presence was a potential cause of trouble. T'or accounts of the Marvin speech, see Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian , November 10, 1865; Jacksonville Weekly Florida Times , November 23, 1865; Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union , November 18, IS65; New York Times, November 26, I8S5I E. D. Tracy, the president of the

PAGE 126

120 Editorial reactions to the work of the convention varied from critical analysis to vmqualified praise. The Florida Union , which championed unqualified acceptance of the presidential terms, criticized the body's vacillation on the question of repudiation. A telegram from President Johnson to Grovemor Holden of North Carolina, stating that repudiation was "a sine qua non to . . . restoration," had been required before the convention removed the "odious burden" of debt frcsn the shoulders of Florida's people. The oirdinance on Negro testimony was a half-way measure; Negroes could testify in "cases affecting the 'rights or remedies of colored persons' only. ..." At least the convention had not eliminated the possibility that future legislation might "extend the latitude" of this ri^t,"^ The Floridian , a Democratic paper, proclaimed that Floridians could "congratulate themselves on having had men of ken sufficient to accept the logic of events --to take facts as presented and act upon them in a frank and manly way."^ The Republican owned Florida Tines thought that at first there had been "a desire . . . to evade the issiies with the federal government; but after an interchange of opinion and mat\ire reflection, nearly all came manfully up, lilce honest citizens, and accepted the necessities of the situation gracefully and properly." An vmidentified correspondent for the New York convention, also delivered a farewell speech on November ?• Like Marvin he thousht the delegates had "perfected a Constitution that will restore Florida to her original position in the Union. ..." For the text of the Tracy speecli, see Jacksonville Weekly Florida Times , November 23, I865. ^Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union , November 11, IO65. Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian , November lU, 1865. ^Jacksonville Weekly Florida Times , November 23, I865,

PAGE 127

121 Tiiaes thought the Florida convention did "not go one hair's breadth further than they [thought ] necessary to satisfy the Administration." It seeiued that "the rights of the colored population [would] have to be guarded by direct action of the Federal Government. ... This correspondent's reports mellowed, however, as tlae delegates finished their labors, "The Constitutional Convention has, . . . consummated its work in a manner highly creditable to the State. ..." An opponent of "negro equality" and "rejection of the rebel debt" proposed on the last day that the constitution be submitted "to the people for ratification." Fortvinatelj he had been resisted by the "friends of the government." The "'sober second thought,' under the influence of Ctov. Marvin, . . . secured a fundamental law free from all objections. ..." Benjamin C. Truman, the Times correspondent, wrote his editor that Florida's constitution maimers "manifested no evasion or doubledealing"; in all "essential particulars," they "honorably and grace fully met the requisitions of the President of the United States," The Rhetoric As we have observed, William Marvin saw his mission as provisional governor as threefold: (l) to induce the people of the state to acquiesce in the President's plan of reunion; (2) to promote New York Times , November IT, I865. ^''' ibid ., November 26, I865. Ibid., December 25, I865.

PAGE 128

122 economic and social stability; emd (3) to persuade convention delegates and officials of the nevr state csovernment to comply with the requirements of presidential Reconstmction, The very fact that the convention net serves as a drainatic indication that Narvin succeeded in accomplishing his first goal. The primary objective of the speaking done at the convention was to persuade the delegates to frame a state constitution in keeping with the President's terms of rexinion, Marvin, who was charged with the responsibility of supeirvising Reconstruction in Florida, natxirally played the lead role In inspiring and directing the convention's work. As he prepared for this eissignment he adapted his rhetoric to meet the requirements of the audience and the occasion. Owing to the Negro's exclusion from politics, the membership of the convention was restricted to representatives of the white population. Most of the delegates were revolutionists. Men v;ho had not seen Confederate service or had not supported secession were in a decided minority. The occasion, the meeting of the convention, did not present new or unique problems. The delegates, like the pre -convention audience, had to be persuaded to complj'with the terms of reunion because President Johnson had prescribed the democratic process as the method of Reconstruction. If, for one reason or another, the delegates decided not to make the adjustments required by the President, they co'Ud reject his plan by voting against any one or all of the terms contained therein. On the other hand, persuading the delegates to comply with the presidential terms of reunion did not require the same caliber of persuasion that had been

PAGE 129

123 necessary to get the people of the state to acquiesce in the plan as a whole. In the light of these facts, Marvin designed a rhetoric which was appropriate for the purpose of persxiading delegates to make political adjustments which had already been approved by the people of the state. Acting in accord with the custom of the day, he sent a message to the convention in which he set forth the terms which that body woiild have to ratify, and supplied pathetic and logical appeals to effect such ratification. He so arranged his points, and so worded and supported them that instruction was skillfully blended with persuasion. The hardest doctrine of all — the abolition of slavery — ^was taken up first. Recognizing the Negro's freedom was, he declared, a matter of logic and honor. Abolition was an accomplished fact and in taking the amnesty oath, all the metribers of the convention had sworn to support the freedom of the slave. Further, formal acknowledgment of abolition was a necessary stepping stone to reunion. After identifying abolition as a non -controversial proposition, Marvin reiterated the core of the strategy of acquiescence by emphasizing \iftiat was not required: "Persons may be free without the capacity to hold office, . . , sit on a Jury, or . . . vote at elections." Special emphasis was the method iised to play up this face-saving appeal. A third of the message was given over to distinguishing between the rights of freedom and the privileges of citizenship. By placing this theme second, the provisional governer softened the demand for abolition. His method of arrangement, moreover, rendered

PAGE 130

lA the mandates that followed — the recognition of the Negro's rights as a freedman and the reniinciation of secession — less odious. The President's request that the people protect the freediaen hy making than the equal of the whites before the law and by gtiaranteeing their right to sue and to testify, did not appear unreasonable so long as the \diite people were assixred of political supremacy. In addition to rendering this mandate less objectionable through rhetorical arrangement, Marvin stressed the benefits that would result from its adoption. Combining cause to effect reasoning with appeals to the sovrthemer's desire for self-rule, racial supremacy, and economic security, he predicted that if the convention ratified the mandate, along with the other terms. Congress would probably recognize Florida's senators and representative. Moreover, the freedmen would be content, "unambitious of any political privileges," and wo\ild, through their industry, contribute to the state's prosperity. Instructions regarding the secession ordinance were placed at the end of the message. Marvin sinply advised the delegates to renounce the ordinance of 1861, and did not provide any reasons or motives for doing so. The style of the provisional governor's message contributed to his persxiasive effect, for it suggested that nothing less than prompt and con5)lete ratification of the President's terms of reunion would suffice. Explanations were straight -forward and, in some cases, abrupt. Short declaratory sentences were frequently employed for emphasis. A factor contributing to an impression of formality was Marvin's heavy

PAGE 131

125 x^llance on logical aiid pathetic proofs. Ethical appeals were seldom used. He ec^jloyed the personal pronoians "we" and "our" sparingly. He made little or no effort to establish his authority to advise the convention, nor did he attempt to identify himself with Florida and her people. Neither did he try to create a favorable attitude toward the /ederal government. Its "majesty and might" were no longer compared with its "clemency and mercy." There were other "voices" in the convention, but they were little more than echoes of Marvin's persuasion or outbursts on the part of recalcitrant "rebels." A federal official, Oliver 0. Howard, and one of Florida's elder statesmen, Thomas Brown, supported the provisional governor by emphasizing the finality of abolition and by urging that the freedmen be given proper protection, Bie delegates were allowed to speaJs freely, but there was little they could say on matters that had already been settled by war. A debate did break out over the repudiation of the state's war debt, but this was a rhetorical accident precipitated by the democratic atmosphere of the convention and by Marvin's failure to declare repudiation "a settled question." In fact, so far as the writer Icnows, Marvin did not mention repudiation in any of his pre -convention speeches. Thus while conquered "rebels" could and did speak out, their speaking was limited to a debate over an issue that was not debatable, to a dispute over the propriety of receiving a communication from a former Whig governor, and to ceremonial discourse.

PAGE 132

126 Marvin's speech caa the final day of the convention reveals that despite these outbursts, the delegates brought Florida one step closer to re\inion. The process of political adjustment, however, did not end with the work of the convent icai. Three more steps remained; (1) The people had to create a new state governnent by electing state officers. (2) The new legislature had to ratify •Uae proposed Thirteenth Aiaendment to the federal Constitution. (3) The legislators had to pass laws guaranteeing the freedmen equality under the law. In siiiveying the convention rhetoric, we have noted sonie of the characteristics of tlie broader rhetoric of adjustioent. Final generalizations regarding this rhetoric must, however, be reserved until we have had an opportunity to analyze the speaking that was an integral part of the inauguration of Florida's Conservative govemiaent. To this subject we now turn.

PAGE 133

CHAPTER V SPEAKDC AND THE INAUGURATION OF CONSERVATIVE GOVERIWENT! A RHETORIC OF ADJUSTMENT The Scene On November 8, the day following the adjournment of the Constitutional Convention, Marvin, acting vinder the instructions of the Convention, issued a proclamation ordering an election of state officers on November 29, I865. Before any pre-election activities could be planned, another proclamation announced a pairtial restoration of civil authority on the municipal and county levels. "Civil officers . . . who were discharging the duties of their respective offices prior to, or during the month of May A. D. 1865," could now "resume the function of their offices," with the iinder standing that certain powers re2 mained under the exclusive jiirisdiction of the military. This kind of 'The Marvin proclamation stipulated that the November 29 election was for the selection of a governor, a lieutenant-governor, secretary of state, treasurer, comptroller, attorney-general; a circuit Judge and a solicitor for each judicial circuit; a judge of probate, sheriff, clerk of the Circuit Court, tax assessor and collector, county connnissioners, coroners, justices of the peace, and county surveyors for each county; members of the state legislatvire, and one representative to the United States Congress. Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian, November 17, I865. 2 According to the proclamation of November 10: "Exclusive jurisdiction and authority" were reserved to the military in cases involving "offences committed by their own troops and in the trial of qii cases of rape, murder, man-slaughter, arson, burning of cotton, gin -houses, or other outhouses, assaults and battery with an intent to kill or to commit rape, robbery, biirglary and unlawful riotous assemblages requiring military force to suppress them. ..." Further, the authority conferred upon the Freedmen»s Bureau "by an Act of Congress and by General Orders issued by the War Department," was reserved to the Assistant Commissioner and the "Agent of the Freedmen's Bureau" in the state. For a copy of the 127

PAGE 134

128 nevs> no doubt, encoioraged a conquered people laboring for self government. In the twenty-one days that followed Marvin's proclamation of November 8, preparations were made for the election. Many would-be voters and office holders occupied themselves with the chorea of pardon seeking and electioneering.-' The press played an important role throughout this period by supplying information on the candidates* In fact, same groups nominated their candidates by writing a letter to the editor recommending a particular individual, and signing themselves "A VOTER* and "MANY FRIENDS. '''^ Some office seekers \ised the press to announce their proclamation, see Jacksonville Weekly Florida Times , December 7, I865. The Tallahassee City Council held its first meeting within a weelc of the proclamation appearance, Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Bjorldian , November 17, 1865. ^The qualifications for voters in the November election were the same as those prescribed for the election of convention delegates. Some prospective voters and candidates for office \^o had not qualified for the October 10 election, because they were yet unpardoned, sought to qualify for the November contest. For Instance, A. M. Reed, a Florida plantation owner, reported the receipt of his pardon in his diary, the entry being under the date of November 20, I865, "Carae down from Mulberry Grove to Jacksonville in small boat. Received Pres. Johnson's pardon this morning dated September 18, I865, and acknowledged receipt to W. H. Seward, Secy, of State, Washington." Diary of A. M. Reed 18U8-1399, and a Portion of I900 by Others" (typescript copy prepared by the Historical Records Survey Works Progress Administration, 1939), in P. K. Yonge Library of Florida History, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida. Reed probably learned of his pardon from a newspaper announcement. The Tallahassee Floridlan listed the pardons in "the Governor's hands, ready to be delivered upon application of the parties interested," Among the sixty-seven names listed were those of A, M, Reed, J, F, McClellan, Paul Amau, and E. J< Vann. McClellan, Arnau, and Vann were candidates for the 1865 legislature. Tallahassee SemiWeeliLLy Floridlan , November 10, 1865. I865. TFor examples of write-in nominations, see ibid ., November lU,

PAGE 135

129 ovm candidacy.^ Others, of course, were the choice of local political 6 groups. •7 The only ncxalaee for governor was David S. Walker.' A native of Kentucky, Walker had been a popular politician even before Florida became a state. He served in the territorial House of Delegates, and after 131*5, in both branches of the state legislature. After falling in his bid for the governorship in I856, as the candidate of the American party, he was elected associate Justice of the Florida Supreoe Court Q in IS59, serving in that position throughout the war. A former Whig ^ Ibid ., November 10, 17, 21, and 23, I865. A Gainesville politician informed Yulee: "We had much tarouble for a time on the question of getting a suitable person to run for the Senate. This we arranged satisfactorily at the last moment by centering upon 0, H. Roper, v^o like [Robert H.] Hall and myself was duly elected. ..." Frederick C, Barrett to David L, Yulee, Gainesville, December 4, 1365, Yulee Papers. The Alachua Coianty nominees were naaaed at a county convention, Gainesville Weekly New Era , October 'r, I865. 'As early as September, David S. Walker sensed that the political climate favored his candidacy for the governorship. He wrote Yulee: "I sincerely thank you for the interest you take in my election to the office of Govr. Public opinion still seems to point to me as the next incumbent of tnat office and the chances are that I shall be a candidate." David S. Walker to David L. Yulee, Tallahassee, September 12, I865, Yulee Papers, Franklin C. Barrett, later elected to the legislature, informed Yulee; "Walker will have no opposition for Governor." Franklin C. Barrett to David L, Yulee, Gainesville, November 13, I865, ibid . ^avid S. Walker was born in Logan County, Kentucky, in I815, and received his ediication in the private schools of Kentucky and Tennessee. A cousin of Richard K. Call, territorial governor of Florida, Walker moved to the state in I037, During the years l337-l81i-5, he practiced law and served in the territorial House of Delegates. In I8U5, he was elected to the state Senate j in l8kQ, he became mayor of Tallahassee; in 18^9, he represented Leon County in the House of Representatives; in I850, I854, and again in I858, he was elected registrar of state lands, an office which carried with it the super intendency of schools; in I859, he was elected to the bench as associate justice of the state Supreme Court for

PAGE 136

130 and Constitutional Unionist, Walker opposed secession in i860, and therefore qualified as a spolcesman for cone ilic;t ion in I865. At the same tine, despite his opposition to disunion, he stood with his state under the Confederacy and could, therefore, appeal tc tlie sjinpathies of southern voters. Ihis nade Walker a losical candidate for the leadership of tlie "Conservative" party, a party composed of old antagonists— former Vvhi^s, Constitutional Unionists, and Deaocrat8--nov united in 9 political brotherhood. Charles E. Dyke, editor of the Floridian and a staunch Donocrat, hailed the former Whig's candidacy with unqualified enthusiasm: Walker was "the man of all others for Governor," Circumstances required that those given "the management of affairs of State must be men capable of original thought, firm, vigorous, and possessing moreO. courage of the first quality." All of these attributes could be fou d in the character a term of six years. Elected governor in I865, Walker served untJJ. June of IO6S, when he was succeeded by the newly elected Republican governor, Harrison Reed. In 1879, V/all:er accepted on appointment as judge of the second judicial district and served until hie death on Julj* 2, 1891. "David S. 'Walker," Dictionary of American Eiopraphy , XIX (I936), 341-3^1-2; "David S. Walker," Kational Cyclopaedia of American Eio£;raphy , XI (19'^9), 379-380 ; R. S. Cotterill, "David Shelby Wallvcr," Tallahos 'e Historical Gocicty Annual, I (Februar^^, 193^+), 56-6O; Gainesville Wfceldy New Era , November 18, I865. ^After the war Florida's Democrats joined with former Whigs and Constitutional Unionists in what came to be known as the "Conservative" Party. The differences between this party and the old Democratic pairty were tlioce of a changed membership and tlie fact that Democrats, who were temporarily silenced because of their sjonsorship of an ill-f^ted war, endorsed the leadership of moderate men like David S. Walker. William T. Cash, History of the Democratic Party jn Florida (Tallahassee, 193^), pp. h6-k^; C. Vann Woodward, Reunion and Reaction (New York, 1956),p. xiv; Buck, The Road to Reunion , 186^-1900, pp. 35-36,

PAGE 137

131 of "Judge Walker." Dyke also recognized William W. J, Kellj^, candidate for lieutenant -governor, and former member of the Confederate Navy Department, as "a man of . . . sterling character and principles." He believed that Kellj' wovild have no opposition in being elected Florida's first lieutenant -governor. The Gainesville and Jacksonville press echoed Dyke's endorseiasnt of Walker and Kelly. As the day of the election approac}ied the press gave increased attention to the character and qualifications of those seeking seats in Congress and the Florida legislature. Some of the aspirants for the lone congressional seat were viewed with suspicion. The Floridian believed "that among the half dozen candidates who have presented tliemselves, there are at least some . , . whose presumption „12 is as sublime as it is ridiculous in seeking such a position. ... ^Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian , Ifovember 10, I865. Kelly had been a delegate from Escambia County to the constitutional, convention. Journal of the Florida Constitutional Convention, lo6^ , pp. 3-ir. He had also been a major in the federal aiTnic before joining the Confederate service. Repor t of the Joint Coaaaittee Oxi Reconstruction , 39^" Cong ., 1st Sess., Pt. h, pp. 1-6. The office of lieutenant governor had been created by the convention. Tiie constitution maicers, mindful of Governor John Milton's death in April of loo?, end wary of any future political crisis, no dovibt considered legal provision for gubernatorial sviccession essential to political stability. Kelly was a man of "age, talent, gallantry, and experience." Walker possessed "consnanding talents and courteous dcijeaaor." Gainesville Weekly Mew £a ra, Iloveiaber 13, 25, 1865. Gee also Jacksonville V.'eeltl:,' Flor ida Union , November io, I865; Jacksonville Weekly Florida Tiirfes , IJovcsibor 23, Ji365. "Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian , November 21, I865. The candidates for Congress were: Ferdinand McLeod, David P. Hogue, William H, I'Anson, W. H. Ives, J. W. Culpeper, James F, P. Johnson, and John V.'. Price. Gainesville Weekly New Era , January 20, I866.

PAGE 138

132 Those elected to the legislature would be participants in a session which, in terms of importance, could not be compared with any "in our history." The people were urged to give their utmost consideration to "a matter which so deeply concerns them, and . . . put forward and elect , not the cleverest fellows of their acquaintance in the American sense of that 13 epithet, but those most competent to serve them." After the ballots had been counted, it was discovered that only about fo\u: thousand persons had voted. The aggregate vote was less than that cast for convention delegates on October 10, and reflected Ik the Judgment of only about half the number of persons registered. Those who did vote, however, made it clear that they considered the exConfederates and secessionists as "those most competent to serve them." Walker was elected governor without opposition. Kelly, an exConfederate officer, became the state's first lieutenant-governor. Benjamin F. Allen, who served in Confederate ranks, was made secretary of state, ' Charles H. Austin, treasurer of Florida's Confederate 13Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian , November 21, I865. Davis, The Civil War and Reconstruction in Florida , pp. 365-366, •^ Ibid . One witness observed that there irere not "three hundred Union votes in the whole State of Florida," Testimony of John W. Recks. Report of the Joint Coianittee on Reconstruction , 39th Cong., 1st Sess,, Pt. kf p, 3, Colonel T, A, McDonnell of Alachua County seems to have been a last-minute entry in the contest for the lieutenant-governorship. Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian , November 21, I865. 17 'Allen, who was called from Confederate airoy service and appointed secretary of state by Governor John Milton in 186*1, was elected over James T. Magbee, Samuel R. Sessions, William Scott, and L. T. Deshong, Ibid ., November 10, I865; Gainesville Weekly New Era , January 20, I866.

PAGE 139

133 government, was re-elected to the seone position. John B. Galbraith, 19 an avid supporter of secession in l86o,tecame attorney general, and Ferdinand McLeod, a Lake City attorney who could not take the federal test oath, was elected as representative to Congress. ^Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian , November 10, I865. ^%albraith succeeded himself as attorney-general, defeating A. L. Voodward. He had held the position for a number of years and was "unanimously re-elected to it at the last session of the General Assembly. . . ." Ibid .; Gainesville Weekly New Era , January 20, I066. As speaker of the Florida House of Representatives in i860, Galbraith delivered a speech that would have pleased any secessionist. He declared: "The Southern mind is indignant at the resxilt, [Lincoln's election] and the Southern sovil is in arms. The people of Florida cannot, must not, will not submit tamely to these insults and wrongs." For an account of the speech, see Kearney, "Political Speaking in Florida from I859 to 1861," pp. 116-117. ^^McLeod, a native of North Carolina, was educated at Laurel Hill Academy and received a degree from Hampden Sydney College in l81i-l+. After several years of teaching and farming in his native state, he moved to Florida and settled in Lake City about I856. In subsequent years he formed a law partnership with James M. Baker, later associate justice of the Florida Supreme Coxirt, and in I866 formed another partnership with the famed ex -Confederate, General Jesse J, Finley. It was felt that McLeod "had congressional blood in his veins" because his grandfather, Ihmcan McFarland, had represented North Carolina in Congress during Jefferson's administration.^ Lake City Press in Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian , Februar;^ 16, I866. The test oath was a wartime measure passed by Congress in loo2. The law required a loyalty oath of "every person elected or appointed to any office of honor or emolument, civil, military, or naval, or any other department of the public service, except the President of the United States. ..." The individual had to swear that he had "never voluntarily borne arms against the United States since ... a citizen thereof"; that he had "voluntarily given no aid, countenance, counsel or encoiiragement to persons engaged in armed hostility thereto"; that he had "neither sought nor accepted, nor attempted to exercise the functions of any office whatever under any authority or pretended auliiority in hostility to the United States"; that he had not "yielded a voluntary support to any pretended government, authority, power, or constitution within the United States hostile or iaimical thereto . . ."and that he would "support and defend the constitution of the United States. ..." Southern senators and representatives exi>ecting to take their seats in Congress would be required to take the oath. Jacksonville Weekly Florida Times , October 12, 1865.

PAGE 140

I3h Reactions to the outcome of the election varied. The Republican Florida Times hailed Walker's election aa a "peculiarly fortimate" event "at this important period in [Florida's] history." The new Governor's "purity of character and long tried integrity [gave] full assurance that her interests vill he safe, while his ability and experience afford suf21 ficient guarantee against errors and executive entanglements." Viewing the election as a whole, however, the Florida Tiroes declared that there was "an ill-concealed feeling to proscribe from office and public position all who have not fully identified themselves with the rebellion." If a candidate made the claim "that he [had] always been true to the Union" he insured his own defeat. On the other hand, if a candidate had "borne arms against the government," he possessed "a passport to honor and distinction."^ Benjamin C. Truman, a correspondent for the New York Times , was more fecvoxaibXy impressed with Wallcer's political backgrovind than with his qualities as a leader. The governor -elect was "a very moderate, upright man, but not a very strong one. . , . He was an Old Line Whig, and was extremely opposed to secession." The people, continued Truman, had not acted wisely in their selection of a representative to Congress. "The strai£^t-out Union candidates for Congress were all defeated, and a man . . . [McLeod] elected \riio cannot take the test oath," It was "a pity that a conquered people [persisted] in acting awkwardly." Ultimate blame for these resxiLLts, however, rightfully belonged with "those mountebanks \Aio held office before the war. ^• ^Ibid ., January k, 1866. ^ Ibld ., December 1, 1865.

PAGE 141

135 and v*io went into the war ... to get more office, and \rtio now pitch in for the President's policy, with the ardent hope of recovering their old positions in office." -^ A confederate majority was also evident in the new legislature, Charles Sumner, leader of the Radical Republicans in the United States Senate, declared in a speech before that body on January 19, 1866, that "the [Florida] Legislature [was] fovur fifth rebel officers, fron Brigadier General Joseph Finnegan down to a corporal. "25 a federal appointee in Florida testified that the members of the legislature, most of ^rtiom were ex -Confederates, were still rebels at heart, ^" The Republican Florida Tines, as noted above, held that identification with the ^^Reports of Benjamin C. Trtunan, dated at Tallahassee, December 7 and 11, in New York Times , Deceniber 25, IC65, One of the defeated Unionist candidates for Congress was John W, Price, Price represented Florida at the National Convention of Southem Unionists, which vast in Philadelphia in September of I866 to support Congress in its struggle with President Johnson, Ibid ,, September 5, 1866. 2k For a list of the members of the Florida Senate and House of Representatives, see Journal of the Proceedings of the Senate of the General Assenibly of the State of Florida (Tallahassee, 156$), 14th General Assemblj^, 1st Sess., pp. 3, 9. Cited hereafMier as Florida Senate Journal; Journal of the Proceedings of the House of Representative s of the General Assembly of the otate of Florida (Tallahassee, 1065), 14th General Assembly, 1st Sess., pp. kh-h^. Cited hereafter as Florida House Journal. 25 "^ Congressional Globe (Washington, I866), 39th Cong., 1st Sess., Pb, 1, pp, 312-313. ^/hen Senator George H. Williams of Oregon asked John W, Recks, collector of customs at Pensacola, about the membership of the Florida legislature. Recks replied: "They were rebels diuring the war in the confederate service; some of them, , , , with the rank of captain, and at heart to-day they are as good rebels as they ever were," Report of the Joint Committee on Reconstruction , 39th Cong,, 1st Sess,, Pt. k, p, 3,

PAGE 142

136 Codfederaxiy constituted a ixissport to office. The Tallahassee Floridi an, on the other hand, denied that "successful candidates oved their election as a general thing to eay other fact than their character and qualifications." In Gadsden County j, for exan^jle, a Confederate officer vho had lost an arm in battle was an unsuccessful candidate for toe legislature. Further, the senator elected from Madison County was "a gentleman who vas at no time in the military service of the Confederacy."^ Information on the legislators \diose identity is known supports tlie chcrge of rebel rule. There were three notable examples. Leon County was represented in the Senate by Theodore W. Brevard, a former Confederate lieutenant colonel who had seen action at Jacksonville and Olustee in Florida, and at Cold Has^^or in Virginia.^*^ One of three representatives from Gadsden County in the House was none other than Colonel John J. Dlcklson, better known as "the war eagle of Florida,"^ ^'^Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian , December 15, IO65. "As a member of the Florida Senate in I859, Brevard delivered a speech upholding Governor Madison S, Perrj.-'6 declaration that Florida VDuld be justified in seceding from the Union, He also gave several speeches in support of the Democratic party in the campaign of l36o. For an account of his ante-bellum speaking, see Kearney, "Political Speaking in Florida from I859 to l36l," pp. 19-22, 66, 70, 95-96, 102, For a resume of Brevard^s military career, see Soldiers of Florida in the Semi nole Indian, Civil and Spotilsh -Amor icon V/ars (Live Oak, 1903)/ P« 335» Cited hereafter as Soldiers of Florida, "in reporting Dlcklson 's election, one newspaper declared: "Col. J, J, DicklGon, the wax eagle of Florida, has been elected to the Leglslatiire, , , ," Gainesville Weekly Hew Era , December 9, I865, Residents of Gainesville hail reason to salute him as a "vox eagle," for Dlcklson had redeemed the city from federal occupation on two occasions in 186U, He served as a .:apt»-'Jji In the Confederate arra^and Afas an active participant

PAGE 143

137 Ironically enough, Nassau County , a supposed Unionist stronghold , was represented in the Senate by the former Confederate Brigadier General Joseph Finnegan."^ An editorial in the Florida Union , \^ich supported presidential Reconstsruction, perhaps best interpreted the will of the people regarding their choice of lawmakers. Floridians, said the Florida Union , had "manifested good Judgnent in the character and qualifications of the Representatives . . . chosen to become their law givers." Their choice had been crucial, for "some of the legislation, frcra the very nature of sxirrounding circvunstances, must be in obedience to the terms of dictation, yet . . . much of it is still left to the free . . . will of the Representatives of the people."^ In other words, the people were prepared to accept the "terms of dictation," but at the same time demanded appropriate action on matters left to the free will of their representatives . in numeroxis skirmishes in the state. For a review of his military service see Davis, The Civil War and Reconstruction in Florida , pp. 28U-313J Mary E. Dickison, Dickison and His Men. Reminiscences of the VJar in Florida (Louisville, 1590); John J. Dickison, Military History of Florida (Atlanta, 1899), p. 252. Vol. XI of Confederate Military History , ed. Clement A. Evans. 30 Althoxogh opposed by a "miserable clique," Finnegan was a successful candidate for the legislatiire . Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union , December I6, I865. A native of Ireland, he was acclaimed as the hero of Olustee. At the time of his election, Finnegan was living "with a friend" at Fernandina, his plantation home and lands having been confiscated and "converted into a Freedmen's Asyliim." Before the war Finnegan was engaged in legal practice and was a business associate of David L. Yulee in railroad matters. New York Times , December 25, I865. For an account of his military career, see Soldiers of Florida , pp. 328-329, 31 -" Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union , December I6, I865.

PAGE 144

138 Ten days before the meeting of the legislature, Benjamin C. Trximan described the spirit of the people of Florida— a spirit that provided a favorable climate for a rhetoric of adjustment. He wrote; The calm, dignified and intelligent manner in uhich the stem logic of events has been accepted and acted upon by the convention, has been infused into the thinking and intelligent portion of the people, and is perfectly electrifying in its effects. On the general results of the issue I find but few murmurs; not that the people are stupified into &j>a.Va.y or stoical indifference, but because they are determined to adapt themselves to circumstances — to be up and doing, "with a heart for any fate" . . . thus exemplifying themselves, as they claim to be, a noble people. . . .32 Assembled as representatives of these people, the legislators were charged with two principal responsibilities: (1) meeting the final requirement of the presidential plan of reunion by ratifying the Thirteenth Amendment, and (2) adapting Florida law to the new constitution and the changed condition of the Negro. On these tasks they spent many hours during their session on December 18, I865 to January I6, I866, On December I9, the Senate heard Lieutenant Governor William W.J. Kelly deliver his inaugural address, in which he cautioned against "imwise and haaty" legislation. On the following day, the members of the House and Senate witnessed the inauguration of David S. Walker. They heard the provisional governor, William Marvin, introduce Walker, review •30 -''-Report of Benjamin C, Truman, dated at Tallahassee, December 7, 1865, in New York Times , December 25, I865. Truman also credited Florida's ne^/spaper editors with an attitude of acceptance: "They seem to understand the situation fully, and they also seem to understand that their course is productive of either good or evil. All of them endorse the acts of the late convention, and are in favor of a Legislative ratification of the Constitutional Amendment, a con5)lete restoration of oivil law and a home in the Union, and the protection of the stars and stripes."

PAGE 145

139 Florida's acceptance of the presidential terms of reunion, urge the ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment, make recommendations for remedial legislation in the realm of internal affairs, and say farewell. They also listened to advice from V/alker, vho used the occasion to ask for political reconciliation among vhite Floridians, for legislation that would promote the prosperity and happiness of the colored population, and for the ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment. On December 21, the legislators received the recommendations cf a three-man committee, appointed by Marvin at the request of the convention, to study how to make Florida's laws conform to the chanced condition of the Negro, Five days before adjournment most of the lawmakers, some state officials, and the general public assembled in the hall of the House to hear a speech by Wilkinson Call, one of Florida's senators-elect. Those who attended heard him defend the President's policy of Reconstruction and predict that Congress could never make the Negro the equal of the irtiite. The Discourse Speech of William W. J. Kelly The Florida legislature assembled in Tallahassee on December l8, 1865.33 Both houses spent their first day, in opposite ends of the 33The legislative audience consisted of two groups, the legislators and those allowed to attend their meetings. Major General John G. Foster, military commander of Florida, was authorized to attend by virtue of a resolution passed by the House and Senate in January of I866. The Acts and Resolutions Adopted by the General Assembly of Florida ax Its Fourteenth Session. Begun and Held at the Capitol, in the City of Tallahassee, on Monday, December 18, I865 (Tallahassee, l866i p. 115. Cited hereafter as Laws of Florida . State officials and the public were allowed to attend an unofficial meeting of the

PAGE 146

ikO capitol, answering to their names at roll call., and participating in the preliminary tasks of organization. On the second day, Decendber 19 > both groups were prepared to Install their presiding officers. Late in the afternoon the niembers of the Senate witnessed the inauguration of Florida's first lieutenant governor, William W. J. Kelly. After taking the oath of office from J. Wayles Baker, circviit judge of Leon County, and being seated as chairman of the Senate, Kelly delivered his inaugural address. After the customary professions of gratitude and humility, the speaker approached his central theme and established comnon ground with his audience by eiilogizlng Florida's war heroes. History would tell the "story of their manly deeds," The battlegroiinds of Kentucky, Tennessee, Georgia, Virginia, and Florida provided "honorable testimony" to their courage. Yet, in the midst of this glory, admiration had to be mixed with sorrow, for "\rtiilst we admire, we must mourn our brave, our noble dead." The purpooe of Kelly's opening remarks became clear when he declared legislature on January 11, 1666, Tallahassee Tri-weekly Florida Geutinel , January I3, I866. It is not known whether representatives of the press and the public were admitted during the regular meetings of the legislature, 3^ Florida Senate Journsil , l4th General Assembly, 1st Sess,, pp. 3-5; Florida House Journal , JTui General Assembly, Ist Sess,, pp. 3-4. The House chose Joseph John Williams sls their speaJcer, 'when Williams took the chair, he delivered a "brief address" in whlcli he "returned his thanks to the members of the House for the honor conferred upon him," Florida House Journal , ll^th General Asseidbly, 1st Sess., p. k, ^^As lieutenant governor, Kelly became ex -officio presiding officer of the Senate,

PAGE 147

lUl that caution should be the keynote of the session. Both he and his audience had been hcaiored with the confidence of a noble people. They had "come together to build a superstrxicture on the foundation laid down by the Convention. ..." 2he future of Florida depended on their wisdom. In the performance of their duties they could not be influenced by the "bitter past," but must "consider the present with its all-inrportant effects in the future," The passage of unwise and hasty legislation would oaaly "throw around [their] constituents eEtbarrassments much to be regretted." The speaker "ventured to say thus much, in view of the very important subjects" that would come before the legislature, and concluded by asking his auditors to give him their coimsel so that the session would be harmonious and its business "conducted with dispatch and regularity." After hearing Kelly speak, the Senate adjourned until the following day. 3° Farewell Speech of William Marvin and Inaugural Address of David S. Walker At 11:30 a.m. on December 20 a committee from the House appeared at the bar of the Senate and invited its members to participate in the inauguration of the Governor elect. The senators proceeded to the hall of the House, where "the Joint Meeting was organized by the President of the Senate taking the Chair."^' 36 For the text of Kelly's Bi>eech, see Florida Senate Journal , Ikih General Assembly, 1st Sess., pp. 7-8. ^^Ibid., p. 12.

PAGE 148

lU2 The first speaker to address the assenibled legislators was William Marvin, provisional governor. Under normal circiimstances, a "brief speech of introductic»i describing Governor -elect Walker's character and qualifications for office wovild have sufficed. But these were not normal circianstances. A provisional governor, appointed to supervise the political capitulation of a conquered people, was about to surrender the leadership of the state to an elected representative of vrtiat was now a quasi -autonomous citizenry. Marvin, therefore, adapted his remarks to the occasion by presenting a deliberative address. He opened with a review of the events that had preceded the present occasion. An action that received special emphasis was Florida's acceptance of President Johnson's "terms." A convention, representing "the mass of the people," had incorporated the spirit of the Thirteenth Amendment into the new state constitution. "It opened the courts of justice alike to all persons," repudiated the state Confederate debt, and "annxilled the ordinance of secession." These acts had proved "satisfactory" to him, and he had reason to believe they had also proved so to the President. It was "under this Constitution" that the present legislature had assembled. It was "this Constitution" that the legislators had sworn to support. After the convention adjourned, continued Marvin, several changes had been authorized in response to requests made by that body. The "civil officers of the government" had been allowed "to resume the exercise of the functions of their respective offices. ..." Authority had also been given for the organization of the state militia, and "nearly all"

PAGE 149

lU3 the colored troops had been transferred from the interior of the state to the seaboard. 3" It was under these circinnstances and "at this point in the progress of the reconstruction of the State govemajent," that Marvin had "the honor ... to present . . . the Honorable David S. Walker, lately elected [as] constitutional Ciovemor for the next four years." His "admirable qualifications . . . had been recognized by the people by his imanimous election." Hence, the speaker did not feel that he could "say anything which would reconmend him more fully to the respect and confidence of the GenersuL Assembly or the people," Had it been Marvin's intention to give a simple speech of introduction, he might have conclvided at this point and yielded the platform to Walker. As provisional governor, however, he thoiight it Inadvisable to let the occasion pass without rendering some timely advice. He, therefore, moved directly into the deliberative phase of his address. He began with an analysis of the state's "true condition," as a means of motivating his audience to attend to the proposals he was about to make, Florida was entering "upon its new career under circimstances of very great difficulty and embarrassment." War had left the people greatly impoverished and they were, therefore, ill prepared to pay taxes. Florida's treasury was enrpty. Labor was "disorganized and demoralized. pft In a proclamation dated November 17^ I865, Marvin authorized the organization of the state militia by reviving the militia law of I859, All militia companies vrere placed londer the command of the provisional governor or the constitutional governor elected to succeed him. For the complete text of the proclamation, see Jacksonville Weekly Florida Times , December 7* I665.

PAGE 150

Ikk and the whole fabric of society more or less disturbed, ..." Martial law continued to exist "for the punishment of . , . higher crimes," and might at any time he extended. The relationship between the new state government acd the federal government also seemed uncertain. The State has not resumed its normal and constitutionELL relations with the general government, and it depends upon the action of Congress whether it may immediately he permitted to do so or not. This Congress was elected at a time when the civil war was raging, and whether its members are prepared to believe in the sincerity of our avowed declarations when we declare our desires to be represented on the floor of Congress and to abide hereafter, for weal or woe, whatever fate may befall the nation, is more than I can say. These conditions, however, could not be improved "by folding our hands and sitting down in idle despair." Floridians needed "to look calmly, dispassionately and earnestly" at their "real and true condition and realize it in all its force." Then they should "patiently, endxirIngly and faithfully labor to improve it," What could they do to Improve their condition? The answer constituted the body of Marvin's speech, and was organized under two heads: (l) the legislators, by means of wise laws, could help to solve some of Florida's internal problems, and (2) the state's officials and the people, by Judicious conduct, could insure the resumption of normal relations between the state and federal governments. In developing the first point, the speaker dealt with problems concerning lahor, the old and infirm, the orphaned, the stimulation of industry, and the raising of revenue. These, he said, required remedial legislation, Florida needed a stable labor force, but this could not be reed.ized

PAGE 151

Ik^ imless the proper incentives were sui)plied to the Isiborer end the planter. The laborer recpiired protection "against impositions upon his ignorance in making his contract," and a "cheap reiaedy in the Courts of law for the recovery of his wages if they should be unjustly withheld from him. ..." The planter; on the other hand, needed assurance that "a sufficient number of hands" would be "in his service to make and gather the crop. ..." This security might be provided by laws prohibiting and pimishing the breaking of labor contracts and vagrancy. Passing on to the problem of the old and infirm, particularly those who were "destitute and incapable of sxjpporting thenselves by labor," Marvin described them as the "gift or legacy" of the Saviour, and stiggested that they "be supported at the public expense." Florida's orphaned and destitute children, both black and white, in many instances were legacies of the war. Here again wise legislation could provide the necessary remedy, Itorvin recommended that svich children be apprenticed until they were twenty-one years of age. Further, he urged that the law on this subject be written with care "so as to protect the apprentice against injxxstice or oppression." The "material wealth and prosperity" of Florida was another important concern, and one related to the problem of employment. The speaker believed that the economic condition of the state coiild be improved "by the introduction of money capital from abroad," and by the diversification of industry. The establishment of some manufacturing industries would provide additional employment and be of profit to the

PAGE 152

lite state, Alldaou^ the people were "not prepared by any meaas end all at once, to engage in an extensive system of manufacturing," Florida had natural resources that coiild be utilized in the maniifactijre of leatlier, coarser cotton and woolen fabrics, plout^s, harrows, cultivators, carts and wagons, cabinet wares, mattresses, and lumber. Another problem was that of financing the new state government. Taxation was one way to replenish "the ejdiausted treasury." Yet an impoverished citizenry could not pay taxes without money. It was hoped that "congress \ro\xld. authorize the postponement of the collection of the direct tax due the United States, for a year or t\ro, and allow tlae State in the raeantiiae to assume the debt, and collect it through its own tax collectors," Another immediate remedy might be to negotiate "a temporary loan for a small amount, ... at home or in the northern cities." These, then, were some of the problems and possible remedies relative to the improvement of Florida's internal affairs. Marvin moved Into his second main point with the statement that "the re -establishment of . . . constitutional and normal relations with the general government, at an early day," was a matter that depended on "the action of the present legislature, and upon the spirit and temper of the people [in] the State," "The legislature," he declared, "must ratify the proposed amendment to the constitution of the United States for the abolition of

PAGE 153

ikl slavery througbout the country."^^ Since slavery was "a dead issue" there could be "no reasonable objection" to ratifying the amendment. The speaker said that he would "be glad to see it done, not because the President desires it, though he ardently does, but because in the present condition of the country, it is ri^t and proper in itself, and necessary to the general pacification of the country." If this final requirement of presidential Reconstruction were accepted in good faith, I4arvin felt reasonably sure that "the President [would] permit the State government to go on and exercise its proper powers. ..." vmat congress would do was less certain. Whether it wouOd permit Florida's senators and representatives "to take their seats, without some discussion and delay," Marvin had no means of knowing. "Much may depend," he cautioned, "upon the opinions that body may form on the subject of the wiUingness and the ability of the State govemDen+. to protect all the inhabitants of the State in the enjoyment of their just rights, without distinction of class or color, and without regard to the part each may have taken in the late civil wax." Florida's lawmakers and 39president Johnson required ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment in his proclamation of May 29, appointing W. W. Holden provisional governor of North Carolina. The provisional governor of Florida, William Marvin, was reminded of this requirement before the Florida legislature net in December of I865. The reminder wa^ channeled to ^^ through William H. Seward, Secretary of State, who wrote He iJohnsonJ is gratified with the favorable progress toward reorganization in Florida, and directs me to say that he regards the constitution of the United States as indispensible to a successful restoration of the true loyal relations between Florida and the other States, and equally,, ^i^pensable to the return of peace and harmony throughout the republic. V.illiam li. S^wSd to Slliam Marvin, Washington, November 1, I865, in New York Times, November 2, I865.

PAGE 154

llid citizens had to bear in mind "that the faith of the nation [was] pledged for the protection of the freedmen in all their proper rights of freedom." It was also "pledged for the protection of that class of oiir fellow -citizens who remained loyal to the Union during the war, and particularly to those who entered into the military service of the United States." Reunion, then, v;as everybody's business. The legislature must ratify tlae proposed amendment and enact "wise laws." The "spirit and temper of the people" and the action of justices of the peace, sheriffs and jurors, must be such as to assure Congress that "Unionists," Floridians who had joined the federal airmy^ and freedmen would "receive equal and fair inrotection with others." If the people conducted themselves so as to give these assurances, they could "look forward hopefully to the early admission of [their] Senators and Representative on the floor of Congress." Marvin told his audience that he believed it was "the sincere desire of the people of Florida to settle the controversy pending with the Government ... of the United States. ..." "Let us therefore," he enJoined, "do everything which we honorably can to settle it upon a solid and durable basis." The speaker, carried on by the momentum of his appeal, urged conciliation by asking his listeners to "make friends of their enemies" and cultivate a love for the Union. Let us cultivate . . . sentiments of nationsility and love of the whole coxmtry, from Maine to Texas, and from the Atlantic to the Pacific. We are Floridians, and we oiight to be thankful that our lots have fallen to us in so pleasant a land. But are we not Americans also, and have we not an

PAGE 155

1^9 interest in the whole country? . . . Peace has its victories as well as war. The bravery and gallantry of our troops in war is known and acknowledged by the whole American people. But a brave people is also a generous people. The war over; they forget the causes of the vrar and the war itself, and make friends of their enemies. Let us do our part to reestablish kind and friendly relations. At least, let us not indulge the idle fancy of loving or hating one man rather than another, fo'J no other reason than because he happened to be born in one section of the country rather than another. V-tiat matters it to you or to me, whether his infant ears first opened to the sound of the whistling, freezing winds on the granite hills of New Hampshire, or to the sound of the Aeolian harp playing in the warm s\inshine among the tops of our beautiful pines in Florida? It is the man himself, not the place where he was born, which concerns us, . . . Following this appeal, the Provisional Governor was ready to say farewell. He prefaced his peroration with a formal statement of the conditions under which he would retire. A new Constitution in harmony with the existing older of things having been adopted, and an election held under it for a Governor, members of the GenereuL Assembly, and most of the civil officers of the Government, upon the completion of the inauguration now going on and the passage of a resolution ratifying the proposed amendment to the Constitution of the United States, the objects of my appointment will have been mainly, if not wholly accomplished and I shall expect to receive in a few days, if the ratification passes, the formal leave of the President to retire from the post assigned me.^^0 ^^Marvin remained in Florida until January 3) 1866. David B. Walker to David L. Yiilee, Tallahassee, January 2, 1866, Yulee Papers. The Florida Legislature adopted a joint resolution ratifying the Thirteenth Amendment; the resolution received Governor Walker's signature on DeceiQber 30, I865. Laws of Florida , l4th General Assembly, 1st Sess., p. 101. Elected United States senator by the Florida legislature, Marvin arrived in Washington on January I5, I866, and had an interview with President Johnson the following day. "He [Johnson] received me very kindly, but asked me if I had not received a telegram directing me to remain in the discharge of my duties as Provisional Governor until relieved by him? I answered I had, but that having gone on and inaugurated a State Government, according to the original design, and got it in good

PAGE 156

150 The duties of his position had been "very severe." Almost "everybody seemed to be in trouble," and many thought the provisional governor "could do evesrything, though he possessed really little or no power." He felt indebted to the military authorities and to the Commissioner of the Freedmen's Bureau for their cheerful response "to the claims of humanity and justice whenever it was in their power." Marvin concluded by expressing his pleasure at the prospect of reunion and pronouncing a benediction on the state azid its future generations . In all my labors, I have constantly been cheered by manifest signs among the people of a returning sense of attachment to the old Union, and by the prospect of soon seeing the State of my adoption and of my affection restored to her true position among her sister States, resjjected as an equal, and cherished as a friend. Taught wisdom by experience, may she find in the Union, for unnumbered ages yet to come, that security, contentment and reixDse \rtiich she in vain sought for elsewhere. And may her children and children's children yet unborn, as they read the instructive lessons of this day, learn to avoid the rock on which she split, and cling to the Union of these States as the sheet anchor of our peace and safety at home, and of our character and respectability abroad.^ Jworking order, I could not discover that I had any more duties to perform; and tliat inasmuch as the telegraph was not in a good condition, so that I could readily corannmicate with him, I trusted to his good nature to pardon roe for leaving the State without his formal leave. He said, 'It is all right — but I will have you regularly relieved as in the cases of tlae other Governors.'" V/illiam Marvin to [Charles E. Dyke?], Waahington, January 22, 1866, in Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian , February 9) 1866. Marvin was officially relieved as provisional governor on January 18, 1866. For a copy of the official dociunent retiring Marvin, see Tallahaissee Tri-Weekly Florida Sentinel , January 30* 1866. "For the conqplete text of Marvin's speech, see Florida Senate Journal, lUth General Assembly, 1st Sess., pp. 12-23; Florida House Journal , l^^th General Assembly, 1st Sess., pp. lG-28; Report of tlie Joint Committee on Reconstruction , 39th Cong., Ist Sess., Pt, k, pp. H-lit. Portions of tlie speech were quoted on the floor of the United

PAGE 157

151 As soon as Marvin finished speaking, the ai»iience witnessed the inauguration of their new governor, David S. Walker. ^^ After being duly sworn into office by CSaarles H. DuPont, chief Justice of the Florida Supreme Court, Walker, who was fifty years of age, about six feet tall, and of "sli^t form," took the stand and delivered his inaugural address. -" Walker opened by referring to the occasion of his speech, at the same time providing a preview of its contents. "From the beginning," he said, "it has been the custom in the States of otir Union for the Governor elect to improve the occasion of his inatiguration by making such remarks as existing circumstances might siiggest, and by recommending . . . such measures as the good of the country might require." In complying with this "time-honored custom," Walker dealt with three principal topics: (l) the ending of political differences among the white people of the state, (2) the policy that oxif^t to be pursued toward the colored population, and (3) Florida's relationship with the federal government. In order to renew "relaticxis of friendship and union with the States of the North," the people of Florida would first have to "abolish all points of difference" among themselves. The recent "unhappy conflict" had stennned from differences among "Union men," "Constitutional States Senate by James R. Doolittle, senator from Wisconsin, Congressional Globe , 39th Cong., 1st Sess., Pfc. 1, pp. 312-313. ^^Although Walker was inaugvirated on December 20, I865, he was not officially recognized as governor of Florida until January I8, I866. For a copy of the official document recognizins him as a constitutional governor, see Tallahassee Tri-Weekly Florida Sentinel , January 30* I866. ^3 Jacksonville Weekly Florida Times , January U, I866.

PAGE 158

152 Secessionists," and "Revolutionists." Each of these classes had been guided by "different luminaries." The "best men" in the land had beai "arrayed in opposine ranks." It vas little wonder that Ansericans had been bewildered, and under the "stress of events" had taken sides with the Union or their own state. A "glorious opportunity" was now afforded, however, "to fling away" these past political differences, and "to meet, as brethren ought to meet, upon the platform of the Constitution which our fathers made for us in I787." V.'alker emphasized his theme by promising to know "no distinction between citizens on accovmt of past political differences." If "permitted to administer the Ck)vemment," he would "take it for granted that all [had] done what they conceived to be their duty under the circumstances. ..." All would "have the equal benefit of the laws. . . . Law and order would prevail." He believed that this declaration would meet the general approbation of the people, for he had already witnessed gratifyinig indicatiano of harmonious conduct. At the recent convention, he had seen "gentlemen who had served in the arn^y of the Confederate States . . . consulting only for the good of the Union, and the State as one of its members." ^Jalker defined each of those political classes. The "Union man" was one who had a love for the federal Union and, therefore, opposed secession. The "Constitutional Secessionists" held that a state "might secede from the Union without an infraction of the Federal Constitution. ..." Those who argued the "right of revolution quoted the remarlc of Mr. V.'EBSTER that 'a bargain broken on one side was broken on all sides, and that if the North shouM not obey the Constitution in regard to tlie rendition of fugitive slaves, the South would no longer be bound by the compact .'" For Walker's charocterir^atlon of these politiccLL groups and their arguments, see the text of his speech. Florida Senate Journal , Iktti General Assembly, Ist Sess., pp. 23-28.

PAGE 159

153 "Having spoken of the relation vhich ought to exist, and which, for the most part [did] exist among the white people," Walker announced that he would speak next "of the feelings which ought to be cherished, and the policy which ou^t to be pursued, towards our colored population." He knew that he was dealing with a delicate subject. The Negro accounted for many of the state's troubles. His emancipation had inflicted a heavy economic loss on fonner slaveholders and had at the same time created new economic, social, and political problems. Walker, therefore, utilized a common -ground appeal, and a description of the freedmen*s plight to gain a fair hearing for his piraposals. Floridians were bound by every consideration to make these people "as enlightened, prosperous and happy as their new situation" would allow; for. Walker declared, "they have been our faithful, contented, and happy slaves, and have been attached to our persons and our fortunes." Most important, however, was the fact that they had been faithful "not only in peace, but in war." Diu-ing much of the time of the late unhappy difficulties, Florida had a greater nuntoer of men in the army, beyond her limits, than constituted her entire voting population. This of course stripped many districts of their entire arms-bearing inhabitants, and left our females and infant children aljnost exclusively to the protection of our slaves. They proved true to their trust. Not one instance of insult, outrage, or indignity, has ever come to my knowledge. Hey remained at home and made jjrovision for our aray. Many of than went with our sons to the amor, and there, too, proved their fidelity, attending them \ihen well, nursing and caring for them when sick and wounded. We all know that many of them were willing, and some of them anxious, to take up arms in our cause. Although, for several years, within sound of the guns of the vessels of the United States, for six hundred miles along our seaboard, yet scarcely one in a thousand

PAGE 160

154 vol\antarily left our agricultural service to take shelter and freedom under the flag of the Union. ^5 But now the colored people were in tro^ible. "The results and operations of the war" had made them free. They are no longer our contented and happy slaves, with an abundant supply of food and clothing for themselves and families, and the intelligence of a superior race to look ahead and make all necessary arrangements for their comfort. They are now a discontented and unhappy people, many of them houseless and homeless, roaming about in gangs over the land, not knowing one day where the supplies for the next are to come from — exposed to the ravages of disease and famine — exposed to the temptations of theft and robbery, by which they are too often overcome — without the intelligence to provide for themselves when well, or to care for themselves >^iien sick, and doomed to untold sufferings and ultimate extinction, unless we intervene for their protection and preservation. "Will we do it?" asked Walker. Answering his own question, he replied: "I repeat, we are bound to do it, by every consideration of duty. ..." Having paved the way for his proposals, the speaker proceeded to present them. Many were virging "the Ijnportation of white labor from Germany, Ireland, Italy and other countries," but Walker asked the legislature to "remember that we have a laboring class of our own which ^^5 A student of the legal status of the Florida Negro has remarked that special tribunals created to deal with the lawlessness of the slave during the Civil War in Florida were generally not needed, for tiie loysilty of the Florida slave was "remarkable." "In many instances plantations were coxed for as well as though the owners had not been away." Bates, "The Legal Status of the Negro in Florida," p. 172.

PAGE 161

155 is entitled to preference." With certain "limitations and restrictions" he could approve of the importation of labor, but it was to Florida's time interest "to give these [colored] people enqployment, and enable them to support themselves, . . . for here they are, and here, for weal or woe, they are obliged to stay." Further, the colored people must be protected "in all their rights, both of person and property, as fully as , . . the whites." The legislators were asked to "take great care, not only not to discriminate in your legislation against the colored race, but that you will so shape yovx enactments as to promote their welfare ajid happiness to the fullest possible extent." Before leaving this topic. Walker repeated the siiggestions made by the provisional governor, William Marvin, regarding protection for the laborer and planter in matters of contracts. He txurned nejct to the vital topic of reunion, and spoke at length ^°In Noveinber, I865, the following statement appeared in the New Era : "The majority of oiir citizens have come to the conclusion that the negroes will not work on the plantations in a manner that will pay for the necessary investment of capital, and many have determined not to have any 'gentlemen of color,' about them. . . . VJe understand that several planters of this county, . * . acting under this . . . idea, will start for New York in a short time to secure \rtiite laborers for next year. Among the nuniber who have declared their intentions of so doing, Hon. E. L. King, Col. Ed. Lewis, Mr. Daniel Scott, Mr. John Lewis, and Mr. H. Graddick are mentioned. These gentlemen will bring back upwards of three hundred laborers, if they can be procured." Gainesville V?eekly New Era , November 11, I865. The Florida Union , in its issue of December I6, reported that when Lewis, Scott, and Graddick passed through Palatka enroute "for the Interior [with] several Irish men and women," the Negroes "tolled the town -bell, called a meeting and promulgated the inminent danger threatened to the industrial pursuits of the country by the *Fumers' interfering with our loyal citizens." Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union , December 16, 1865.

PAGE 162

156 on two aspects of the problem: what had been done, and what remained to be done. He reviewed Florida's acceptance of the presidential terms of Reconstruction, and concluded that thus far Floridians had "manifested their loyalty and desire to return to the Union, by doing all that the government was understood to desire," They had left nothing undone; their provisional governor had said as much \ihen he infozToed the convention that he was entirely satisfied with its work. "Yes, gentlemen," said Walker, passing on to his next point, "the Convention did all that it could do. And now one thing remains for the Legislature to do . . . and that is to ratify the piroposed amendment to the Constitution of the United States. ..." Marvin had told the legislators they must ratify the amendment, but Walker went further. He read the text of the amendment, explaining the meaning of its second clause, and refuted the argument that its ratification would provide an avenue for further demands. A reading of the proposed amendment revealed that it consisted of two clauses. It provided: First. Neither slavery nor involuntary sejrvritiide, except OB a punishment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any plewe subject to their Jurisdiction. Second. And Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation . In order to make clear the "true meaning of the second clause," which some feared might give Congress too much power. Walker quoted from several telegraphic dispatches that had passed between President Johnson, Secretary of State William H. Seward and Benjamin F. Perry, provisional

PAGE 163

157 governor of South Carolina. On October 28, I865, the President had wired Perry instructing him that the legislature of South Carolina must adopt the amendment abolishing slavery. The provisional governor replied that there was "no objection to the adoption of the amendment . . . except an apprehension that Congress might, under the second section of that amendment, claim the right to legislate for the negro after slavery was abolished." To this Secretary of State Seward replied on November 6: "The objection which you mention ... is regarded as querulous and vmreasonable, because that clause is really restraining in its effects instead of enlarging the power of Congress." From this evidence Walker concluded that Congress could "only enforce, . . . the non-existence of slavery," and "with this understanding* he was able to recommend that Florida adopt the amendment. Some also argued, he continued, that "the adoption of this amendment [might] only be opening the door to a demand for new concessions." To this he answered: We have no reason to believe that this will be so. It is unfair and ungenerous to suppose that the Government is endeavoring to inveigle us into the adoption of certain measures, with a promise of a restoration of oux rights in the Union, when in fact it does not mean to admit us upon the adoption of those measures, but intends to make further demands after the first shall have been acquiesced in. Such a suspicion is entirely unworthy of the course which the President of the United States has pursued towards us since the cessation of hostilities. He told us frankly from the beginning what would be required of us. I know that he told me in July last the adoption of this amendment would be expected. Our I'rovisional Governor told us so in his speech at Quincy, and on other occasions. All tiie action of the Convention was had with full knowledge of that expectation, and in the adoption of

PAGE 164

158 the amendment you will but be con^leting a series of measures ^rtiich they knew must be ccanpleted to secxire to the State all her rights as a member of the Union. ^7 Becoming more specific. Walker related that some feared ratification of the amendment would pave the way for Negro suffrage. He met this objection by arguing that such a demand "would never be made by the President." If there is any one thing that he is more pledged to than another, it is that of allowing each State to "prescribe the qualifications of electors and eligibility of persons to hold office under the Constitution and laws of the State -a power (which he says) the people of the several States composing the Federal Union have rigiit fully exercised from the origin of the Government to the present time." This is the language used and the position taken by him in his proclamation organizing the first Provisional Government in North Carolina. On the third of October last, he said, "Our only safety lies in allowing each State to control the right of voting by its own laws," and in his message to Congress, vrtiich we have Just received, he stands firmly, fairly and squarely up to his original position. Further, the speaker was satisfied that such an "unjust demand" would not be made by Congress. He said: I think the position of the President will be sustained. The recent vote in Connecticut and Wisconsin, expressly repudiating negro suffrage --together with the fact that it is allowed in only a few States of the Union, and in those few only with qualifications, renders it highly improbable that a Congress of Northern men will compel us to admit it while they reject it themselves. To do so would be to assert that many generations of freedom have not qualified the few negroes, in their midst, to vote, while as many generations of slavery have qualified our millions. ^^Early in Jvily, I865, Walker had been sent to Washington "to pray for a 'provisional government.'" While there, he had conferred with President Johnson. Davis, The Civil War and Reconstruction in Florida, pp. 355-356. " —

PAGE 165

159 Even if Congress should make this demand. Walker believed Florida would "-be in a better position by having adopted the amendment." This act would put the people of Florida in the position of having "done all that the President desired. . . ." After all, it was the President's wish "to restore the blessings of the Union, and tie up and heal every bleeding wound which has been caused by the fraticidal war." Under these conditions Floridians could "reasonably hope that ere long martial law [would] cease, . . . that civil law [would] be fully restored and the lift authority and jurisdiction of the State Government entirely reinstated." ^Scivil law, however, never reigned supreme under Walker's administration. Ibid ., p. 1+30. Caught "between the Freedmen's Bureau, charged with'the paternal care of the negroes, and the military authorities exercising a supervisory control over the general conduct of af^ fairs, [Walker's] administration was little more than quasi-civil. . . . "Reconstruction in Florida," Legislative Blue Book (T allahassee, 191?)* p. 11. On December 1, I865, President Johnson issued a proclamation restoring the privilege of habeas corpus , but did not include the South. On April 2, 1866, he issued a proclamation declaring insurrection to be "at an end" in Georgia, South Carolina, Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Florida. In a proclamation of August 20, 1866, he declared that insurrection was at an end, and that "peace, order, tranquility and civil authority now exist in and throxighout the whole of the United States of America." Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents , VI, 333, »*-29-^32, U3l^-l+38. General John G. Foster, military commander of the Department of Florida, held that Johnson's proclamation of April 2, I866, declaring insurrection at an end, did not remove martial law in Florida. See General Orders No. 28, dated April 2?, 1866, in Femandina Weelcly Courier , May 16, 1866, For examples of co-operation and conflict between military and civil authorities in Florida, see Jacksonville V.'eekly Florida "p^op ^ J\ily 7, 1866; Tallahassee Tri-Weekly Florida Sentinel , October 20, 1866; Saint Augustine Weekly Examiner , October 27, 1066. With the passage of the Reconstruction Acts of I867, the civil authorities elected in Florida under the Johnson plan held their offices at the pleasure of the military. Davis, The Civil War and Reconstruction in Florida, pp. khS, k^k-k^^.

PAGE 166

160 If Congress should "unexpectedly refuse to admit our Senators and Representative, because we have not allowed negro suffrage," Walker reasoned, Florida could "wait until Congress [should] think better of the matter." "The jxistice of our cause, the influence of the President, and the good sense and patriotism of the nation cannot fail to give us our representation in the end." Walker concluded this part of his address by declaring that Florida would "never accede to the demand for negro suffrage, should it be made." We have manifested that our loyalty and desire to renew our relations with the Union are so great that to do so we are willing to yield everything but our honor and our consciences. We have all lost much--many of us our an — all but our honor. Let us preserve that, though we lose everything else. We have been able to give an honest and conscientious consent to all that has been done, but each one of us knows that we could not give either an honest or a conscientious assent to negro s\;iffrage. There is not one of us that would not feel that he was doing wrong, and bartering his self-respect, his conscience, and his duty to his coxmtry and to the Union itself, for the benefits he might hope to obtain by getting back into the Union. Much as I have worshipped the Union, and much as I would rejoice to see my State once more a recognized member thereof, yet it is better, a thousand times better, that she should remain out of the Union, even as one of her subjugated provinces, than go back "eviscerated of her manhood," despoiled of her honor, recreant to her duty-without her self -respect. '^9 ^%egro suffrage was recognized as a potential source of power for the northern politician and as a threat to the political supremacy of the southern white. For instance, the New Era editorieaized: "(^uite a number of sainted philosophers . . . are . . . using every possible effort to produce an extraordinary excitement on the negro suffrage question. ... It does not require the experience of a mind that can blend the knowledge of the past and present ages to disoover that the preservation of the Black Republican party depends chiefly upon the agitation of the negro question in some form. — The negro is as essential to the perpetuation of that party as the rays of the sun are necessary to preserve

PAGE 167

161 Having covered the important questions raised by the process of reunion j Walker was ready to close. He mentioned that he would make existing financial, educational, and social problems the "subjects of si>ecial messages," and promised that ais governor, he would work for a "good understanding" with the legislature and with the "gentlemen of the army of the United States, \^o are stationed amongst us." After expressing his appreciation for the honor conferred upon him. Walker concluded by asking "all the pious people of the State" to pray to Almighty Crod that He convert the "weakness" of the speaker "into strength," and that He "bless our State and our vrtiole land. . . ."^ Having witnessed the inauguration and having heard the speechmaking that accompanied it, the joint meeting of the legislature adjotirned, and its members returned to their chambers. The Florida press received the speeches of Marvin and Walker warmly. Walker's inaugurtil, however, was given more attention. The Jacksonvills Florida Union regarded it as "admirable in tone and temper, elegant and forcible in diction, [and] perspicuous and practical in thought and suggestion." Such a speech would "commend itself to the vegetation. They are like odd halves of scissors, 'useless each without the other.'" Gainesville Weekly New Era , August 5, I865. ^^For complete text of VJalker's inaugurcLL address, see Florida Senate Journal , lli-th General Assembly, 1st Gess., pp. 23-38; Florida House Journal , lUth General Assembly, 1st Sess., pp. 28-^3; Gainesville Weekly Hew 2ra , January I3, I866; Jacksonville V/eekly Florida Times , December 28, 1365; Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union , December 30, I865; Report of the Joint Committee oa Reconstruction , 39th Cong., 1st Sess., Ft. k, pp. 15-20. Portions of the speech were quoted on the floor of the United States Senate by James R. Doolittle, senator from Wisconsin. Congressional Globe , 39th Cong., 1st Sess., Pt. 1, pp. 312-313.

PAGE 168

162 ^ole people of the State, ... as well suited to the time and occasion, and as worthy of the man. . . ."^ Ihe Tallahassee Florida Sentinel thought the address was a "celebrated composition,'* "In matter, it twas] vrtiat the times demanded — calm, disi)assionate, firm."^^ The Jacksonville Florida Times regarded Marvin's effort as an 53 "able and practical address," The Jacksonville Florida Union considered it "worthy of commendation. "5^ George D. Prentice, editor of the Louisville Journal , congjlimented Floridians on their election of Walker, a native of Kentucky, as governor, and praised President Johnson's judgment "in appointing such a man as William Marvin Provisional Governor. ..." The spirit of both their addresses was "frank, manly, patriotic." Ho one could read them "without being iiqpressed with the conviction of the profound earnestness of the loyalty and truthfulness of these distinguished gentlemen, and their devotion to the best Interests of the whole country. "^^ Report of Charles H. DuPont, Anderson J. Peeler, and Mariano D. Papy On the day following the inaugural ceremonies, the lawmakers received more advice on matters that would come within the province of ^^Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union , December 30, I865, ^Tlallahassee Tri-Weekly Florida Sentinel , January 11, 1866. 53 Jacksonville Weekly Florida Tiroes , December 28, I865. •^ Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union , December 30, I865. ^^Louisville (Kentucky) Journal , January 12, I866, in Tallahassee Tri-Weekly Florida Sentinel , February 6, I866.

PAGE 169

163 their deliberations. Charles H. DiiPont, Anderson J. Peeler, and Mariano D. Papy, members of a special committee appointed by Marvin, submitted a written report to the legislature outlining the legal changes required by the "amended constitution," with special reference "to the altered .,56 condition of the colored race. The committee's recommendations supplemented the counsel given by Marvin and Walker, and in essence constituted a framework for the "Black Code," a series of laws applicable to Florida's Negro 5^uPont, chief justice of the Florida Supreme Court and former slaveholder, was well qualified to serve on the conmlttee. A native of South Carolina, he was reared in Ohio and educated at Franklin College in Georgia. Graduating in l826,he settled in Quincy, Florida, the following year. Here he mixed the "cares of plantation oversight with the studies and maiden efforts of a young lawyer." Prior to his appointment as chief justice by Governor Walker, DuPont had served as a county judge, a member of both houses of the legislature, a genersLL in the militia d\aring the Seminole War, and as chief justice for a term begi nnin g in I859. Roland H. Rerick, Memoirs of Florida; Embracing a General History of the Province, Territory and State; and Special Chapters Devoted to Finance and Banking, the Bench and Bar, Medical Profession, Railvays and Navigation , and IMustrial Interests , ed. Francis P. Fleming (Atlanta, 1902)^ Hj 89-9O. Cited hereafter as Memoirs of Florida . The Democratic press described Anderson J. Peeler as an expert on "the machinery of legislation and Parliamentary usage." A Democrat in his politics. Peeler had twice served as chief clerk of the House of Representatives and had been secretary for the convention. Tallaiiassee Semi -Weekly Floridian , November l^i-, I865. Papy, a native of Saint Augustine, moved to Tallahassee as a child. In 18M*, he was admitted to the bar by special act of the territorial council before he reached the age of twenty-one. In 18^5, he became the first clerk of the Florida Supreme Court and served until I8U9, In I852, he was elected to the Florida House from Leon County. Appointed to fill the vacant post of attorney-general in I652, he was elected to the office in 1853, and again appointed to settle the Florida-Georgia boundary line. Papy was also one of five commissioners, appointed by Governor Abraham K. Allison in I865, to confer with President Johnson on Florida's political relation to the Union. Fleming, Memoirs of Florida , II, 91; Willard E. Wight, "Horace Greeley, Presidential Candidate: A Floridian' s View," Florida Historical Quarterly , XXXV (January, 1957)* 271-273.

PAGE 170

i£h 57 population.'^' In making their siiggestions, the committee members clarified two concepts for the guidance of the General Assembly, First, they maintained, a state had the authority to "discriminate" between the colored and \rh±te races, so long as this power was limited to "the granting or restricting of what is usually denominated mere 'privileges," in contradistinction to the absolute 'rights' of Individiials." The truth of this statement, they said, could be confimed by examining the statute books of New England. A second and related concept was the Interpretation given the act of emancipation. "A certain class of radical theorists [insisted] that the act of emancipation . . . operated ... to exalt the entire [colored] race and place them upon terms of perfect equality with the white man." It was the opinion of the committee, however, that the act of emancipation merely severed "the relation of Master and Slave. ..." Some of the recommendations made in the form of specific proposals included suggestions to the effect that the legislators create a County Criminal Court, restrict the use of firearms among the fjreedmen, change the state's marriage laws, extend the benefits and processes of the courts to all inhabitants regardless of color, postpone consideration of an educational system for freedmen, draft one code of law for both races, and provide a latitude of penaltiss for crime to allow for discrimination 5 'Florida's "Black Code" Included "an act concerning ordinary crime; an act concerning sexual moralltyj acts concerning indigency, vagrancy, and apprenticeship; an act concerning labor contracts; and an act establishing schools for negroes," For an historical analysis of the origiii and operation of the code in Florida, see Davis, The Civil War and Reconstruction in Florida, pp. ';11-1*25.

PAGE 171

165 between rswes Trtienever such discrimination would be in the interest of the state. ^ After being transmitted by 'Walker, the report was referred to the senate canmittee "On All Subjects Connected with the Colored Population," and one hundred copies of the document were printed for the use of the 59 General Assembly, -^-^ Speech of Wilkinson Call During the remaining weeks of the session, which lasted until January l6, the legislators acted on the recanmendations given them by Marvin, Walker, DuPont, Peeler, and Papy. TSiey ratified the Thirteenth Amendment in a Joint resolution passed on December 27 and 28,"" After electing, on December 29, two United States senators, Wilkinson Call, an ex -Confederate, and William Marvin, still officially the provisional governor, they spent the balance of the session revising the state *s statutes to conform with the new constitution and the "altered condition 61 of the colored race," 5"A copy of the ccarmittee's report may be found in Florida Senate Joiumal , lUth General Assembly, 1st Sess., pp. li-9-6l. ^%he senate committee "On All Subjects Connected with the Colored Population'consisted of E. J. Vann, chainnan, Thomas M. VJhite, Samuel H. Owens, D. L, Kenan, and Holmes Steele, Ibid., p. 11. ^The Florida legislature ratified the Thirteenth Amendment "with the understanding that it does not confer upon Congress the power to leGislate upon the political status of the Freedmen in this State," The Senate passed the resolution on December 27, and the House adopted it on December 23. Walker signed it on December 30, I865. Laws of Florida , iktYi General Assembly, 1st Sess., p. 101. 61 Wilkinson Call was elected on the first ballot for the long term

PAGE 172

166 On the evenljig of January 11, 1866, the House, in compliance with its own resolution, interrupted its deliberations to hear a speech by 62 Call, A committee appointed to wait on him entered the hall of the House and conducted him to the stand. VJhen Call reached the spealier's ending on March 3> 1369. The only other nominee was J. Patton Anderson of Jefferson County, who had been elected Democratic presidential elector for Middle Florida in i860. Kearney, "Political Speaking in Florida from IO59 to 1861," p. 43. William Marvin was elected on the thirteenth ballot for the short term ending on March 3, 1367, against such contenders as Benjamin D. Wright, Edward Hopkins, Jesse J. Finley, Augustus £. Maxwell, James A. Wiggins, and Thomas Randall. Wright, a "Union man," had been an unsuccessful nominee for president of the constitutional convention of I865. Hoplcins of Duval County liad been the Constitutional Unionist candidate for governor in the campaign of i860. For a sample of his canrpaign speaking, see Kearney, "Political Spealcing in Florida fraa 1859 to I06I," pp. 88-90. Finley had served Gis Judge of the circuit court of the Western District of Florida, and was a popular war hero. A brigadier general in the Confederate array, he had been "severely wounded in the Atlanta campaign." Hew York Times , December 25, l865j Tallahassee Semi-Weel'J.y Flor idian , October 27, I865. Maxwell, a native of Georgia and a Pensacola resident, had arrived in Florida in I8I+5. His political background made him a likely candidate for the United States Senate in 1865. He had served Florida as Secretary of State, attorney -general, as a member of the Florida House and Senate, eu3 a member of Congress from 1852 to IS56, and as a senator from Florida to the Confederate States Senate from I862 to 1865. Rerick, Manoirs of Florida , II, 102. Wiggins was named as candidate for presidentieuL elector to represent East Flx)rida by the Constitutional Unionists in i860. Kearney, "Political Speaking in Florida from 1859 to IS6I," p. &+, Randall had been a speaker at the Constitutional Unionist state convention held on June 27, i860, in Quincy. Ibid ., pp. 81-83. Information on the election may be found in Florida Senate Joinmal , 2hth General Assembly, 1st Sess., pp. 8U-87. Marvin's election was in pert, at least, brought about by the political friends of David L. Yulee, who supported Marvin "on the {ground that he would use his immediate and utmost exertions to procure [Yvilee's] release." See I. C. Wakliffe to David L. Yulee, Gainesville, December 2k, I865, Frederick C. Barrett to David L. Yulee, Tallahassee, December 3I, I865, and Frederick C. Barrett to David L. Yulee, Gainesville, January 22, 1866, Yulee Papers. "'-'willcinson Call, a nejiiew of former territorial Governor Richard K. Call, was a native of Kentucliy. lie was bom in Russellviiie, LogeuQ County, in iQjk, Educated in his native state, he later moved to Jacksonville where he began the study of law. In the caoipaign of i860, he

PAGE 173

167 platform-a tall young raan about thirty-two years old, with "brown hair and full grey eyes-\e observed that the "Governor and State officers were present," and that "there was a good attendance of the Mesnibers of the General Assembly and citizens." In the course of his address. Call emphasized the themes of Confederate heroism, acceptance of the President's policy, and defiance of Congress, After thanking the General Assembly for the "honor conferred upon him," he spoke "with feeling and touching eloquence, of the changes that had occurred within the past five years-since this Hall had been the scene of debate on questions now settled by the strong arm of military power." Southerners had believed "they were right in asserting their independence of a power they apprehended was encroaching upon and would destroy their institutions." Although they were "defeated in their attempt at Independence, they had no cause for shame." Actiially, the was an avid supporter of the Constitutional Union party and was named as their candidate for presidential e3.ector from Middle Florida. V;"hen Florida seceded in I86I, however, he went with his state and served in the Confederate army. Elected to the United States Senate in 1365, he was not permitted to take his seat. When the Democrats regained political control of the state. Call was again elected to the United States Senate in 1879, and was re-elected in I685 and I89I, serving from March k, I879, to March 3, I097. Biographical Directojyof the American Congress, 177^19tt9 (Washington, 1950), p. 93S. For Call's speaking on behalf of the Constitutional Union Party in l56o, see Kearney, "Political Speaking in Florida from I859 to I66I," pp. 78, 85-86, 90, 99-100. %'allahassee Tri-W eek ly Florida Sentinel , January 20, I866. 6k After appointing a committee to wait on Call and conduct him to the hall, the House adjourned and opened its doors to the general public* Ibid., January 13, 1366.

PAGE 174

168 "eichibition of Southern character in the war was great cause for pride," Every southern man could delight in the military record of those "immortal chieftains, » STONEWALL* JACKSON and ROBHOT E. LEE," The speaker "was himself a Southern man by biirbh, . , . and he thanked God that it was so," Passing to the "the political questions" that were agitating the country. Call warned that a "powerful party at the North" was striving to thwart the presidential plan of reunion, and eisked his audience to support the President. "He considered it the duty of every Southern man to support President JOHNSON," for in his policy toward the South Johnson "had taken a firm and manly stand to maintain the Constitution by upholding the Integrity of the States." Call continued: The President desires to maintain this principle. But there is another numerous and powerful party at the North, led on by the fanatical STEVENS, who are endeavoring to frustrate the plans of the President in his reconstruction policy, which looks to the preservation of the integrity of the States. Bie aims of this party, if carried out, must overthrow the present system by centralizing power in the General Govenuaent. If this party succeeds, the whole structure of our government is changed. It is no longer a Republican Government, but a consolidated, democratic despotism. "5 ''call referred to Thaddeus Stevens of Pennsylvania, a Radical Republican in the national House of Representatives. On December 18, 1865, the day on which the Florida legislature first met, Stevens had delivered a speech in which he challenged the President's authority to reconstruct the South. It required "the action of Congress to enable them tthe southern states] to form a State government and send representatives to Congress." Hence, the Johnson governments were not legeLL. "I take no account of the aggregation of \riiite -washed rebels," said Stevens, "vrfio without any legal authority have assembled in the capitals of the late rebel States and simulated legislative bodies." For an account of Steven's speech, see Congressional Globe , 39th Cong., Ist Sess.,

PAGE 175

169 There couM not be "any difference of opinion among Southern men" on this matter; they mast "sustain the President." Another iinportant issue was the "elevation" of the freedmen. The speaker "believed their advancement "would be due to their former masters — to the Southern people, vho knew them," and whose kindness and sympathy equipped them to deal with the Negro's weakness and ignorance. One thing was certain, declared Call. "No legislation of Congress, nor of the Northern States [could] ever put the negro upon an equality with the white race. As well might you attempt to turn the current of the •great father of waters' from the Gulf to the Falls of St, Anthony." The speaker did not discuss the effect of the President's policy on the "future sphere" of the Negro. His audience knew that so long as the integrity of a state was upheld, control of the Negro would remain in the hands of the southern lawmakers. Call concluded by ass\iring his constituents "that he would soon leave for Washington, and lay his claims to his seat in the Senate before the President." If allowed to represent the state in Congress, "he [would] meet Northern Senators with respect, with deference and courtesy. Pt. 1, pp. 72-75. The Tallahassee Sentinel refused to take the Stevens speech seriously. "Old Thad. intends that it shall not be the fa\ilt of himself and his followers," it editorialized, "if the Southern people do not find the next four years a harder road to travel than the four years of the rebellion." The South, however, need not be fearful "of the success of his plans beyond the expiration of the present Congress." "Justice" would eventually be done, and the South would be "restored." "Until that time we can wait, if necessary, and shall ask no favors of Thad. Stevens and his tools and pimps in or out of Congress." Tallahassee Tri -Weekly Florida Sentinel, Januarj'l6, 1866.

PAGE 176

170 56 but with no feeling of shaae or hiomiliation!" "Southern men [had] no cause for humiliaticm or shame." He closed by admonishing his audience not to be "despondent," but to labor with "hoi>e and energy" to improve their condition. The "power of truth" was great, and in the end, he predicted, it would "triumtph over the political factions of the North." ' Boe reporter who recorded Call's speech supplemented his accovmt of it with a number of personsLL reactions. "The short notice given the speaker allowed him little time for preparation; but his address was able and well adapted to the present condition of things." Although Call appeared "before a public body for the first time in five years, he delivered himself with grace and equanimity." He was "not so eloquent as ... on former occasions," but succeeded in presenting "the great ques..68 tions that agitate the country, in a clear and masterly manner. 66 A month earlier Congress had met for the first time since Lincoln's death, and being confronted with the Johnson governments in the South, had established a Joint conmittee to investigate conditions in ex-Confederate states to determine whether or not they were entitled to representation in Congress. Meanwhile the newly elected senators and representatives from the South were not permitted to take their seats. Sliokins, A History of the South , pp. 261* -265. 'For an account of Call's speech, see Tallahassee Tri -Weekly Florida Sentinel , January I3, 1866, The reporter who wrote the synopsis of the speech did so "from memory." °^A search of four extant newspapers, the Tallahassee Sentinel end Floridian , the Gainesville New Era , and the Jacksonville Florida Times , for the month of January, 1866, revealed that the Ta l l a hassee Sentinel was the only paper that rejorted or made any editorial ccMnnent on Calif's speech.

PAGE 177

171 69 Five days after Call spoke, the legislators finished their work. Before adjourning, the House and Senate passed a joint resolution that jmarked the ciilmination of the rhetoric of adjustment, The resolution, in effect, annovmced that the people of Florida had completed the process of political adjustnent in keeping with the terms set forth by the President and that they looked forward to the moment when their state woiild he restored to "her former peaceful political relations with the government of the United States. . . .""^^ The Rhetoric Once the convention had ccwnpleted its work, it was up to the legislatiire (l) to pass whatever measures it could to ameliorate economic and social problems, (2) to aclaiowledge abolition by ratifying the proposed Thirteenth An^ndment, and (3) to provide for the protection of the freedmen. The rhetoric which played a part in effecting these ends was composed of deliberative discourse and persuasive direction. The deliberative character of the rhetoric stenmed fJrom the fact "%Ihe legislators passed laws which took into account all of the suggestions made by Marvin, Walker, DuPont, Papy, and Peeler, ^toreover, they reflected the wishes of their constituents. The "terms of dictation" were met, A joint resolution provided for the adoption of the TOiirteenth Amendment. The Negro was guaranteed equality before the law and was admitted to the courts as a witness. In dealing with matters left to their discretion, the lawmalcers remained within the letter of the new state constitution aM produced a legal code which they hoped would (l) stabilize the state's labor force, (2) conform to the changed conditions of the Negro and in a sense take the place cf his former master, and (3) assure the supremacy of the white race. For a copy of the General Assemba^'s acts and resolutions, see Laws of Florida , lli-th General Assembly, 1st Sess., pp. 9-122. 70 Ibid., p, 109.

PAGE 178

172 tlaat the new government, ^ich was jxist "beginning to function, was faced with many pressing problems. Something had to be done to discourage vagrancy. With slavery defunct, new methods had to be devised for the regulation of labor, A niore comprehenoive court syst^a was required to deal wildi the petty crimes that were formerly tried by slave tribunals. An appropriate tax plan was needed to provide revenue for the new government. Some provision had to be made for the old, the Infirm, and the orphaned. The relief a£ disabled soldiers and of the widows of the Confederacy reijaired funds. Marvin, who was well acquainted with the immediate problems of the postwar period in Florida, spent a considerable portion of his farewell speech discussing how these problems could best be solved. What he said with respect to the solution of the labor problem may be taken as a representative sample. Having talked with a great many freedmen during the pre -convention period, Marvin was \fell aware of their confusion and their false notions regarding freedom. He had tried to convince them they were free and that they did not have to wander to test their ft-eedom. As he had told the convention, however, he had found there was no use in talking to them on the subject. He, therefore, advised the convention to discourage vagrancy by making it an offence "punishable by temporary involuntary servitude," Bie legislature, he believed, could promote industry and provide for the regulation of labor through the enactment of laws that would protect the Interests of planter and laborer alike. The laborer could be encouraged by protecting his rights of person and property, and by providing

PAGE 179

17: "an easy and cheap remedy . . . for the collection of his wages." The planter could be assured of a stable work force if contract violation was made a punishable offence. To provide the proper assurances, the covurts woiild have to be opened to all-to both laborer and planter. Punishment for a contract violation on the part of the laborer, aoreover, would have to be adapted to the condition of the 3aborer. The freediaen had no "goods or chattels" that could be assigned as settlelaent. They could, however, be required to labor without paj' to satisfy the unexpired term of a violated contract. Governor -elect David S. Walker also contributed to the deliberative phase of the legislative rhetoric, repeating Marvin's advice on the labor question and re-enforcing it with a moving appeal on behalf of the freedman. The freednen, he said, had been faithful sesrvants in time of peace and diiring the war. Now that they were bewildered by their sudden freedom, it was the vdiite man's duty to "intervene for their protection and preservation." 15ie three ex-slaveovmers and legal experts, Charles H. DuPont, Anderson J. Peeler, and Mariano D, Papy, served as an inqportant link between the convention and the legislature. Appointed by Marvin at the request of the convention, they advised the legislature on natters connected with "the prevention of crime, . , , the enforcement of . . . domestic relations," and the promotion of "a well regulated labor system." To clarify its position and sustain its Judgment, the committee in many instances supported its proposals with an impressive array of legal precedents and detailed explanations. In recommending that the freedmen

PAGE 180

17^ be restricted in the use of fireaxms, for exaanple, the conmxttee cited legal precedent when it pointed out that its proposal was practically "a literal transcript of the law of Indiana upon that subject," Revisions for discriminatory punishment were explained on the grovmds that the punishment mist fit the offender. The courts needed the authority to substitute whipping or the pillory for all crimes punishable by fine or inprisonment because of the difference that existed in the social and political status of the two races. If the courts degraded a white man by such punishments, they wovQd turn him against society. On the other hand, "to fine and imprison a colored man in his present pecuniary condition [would be] to punish the State instead of the individual." The penalty for vagrancy, which the committee believed should be the same for all persons regardless of color, had to be such as would deter the indlvldiial from the "commission of the offence" and, at the same time, -would not "impose a pecuniary charge i^pon the public." Productive labor on the part of an offender, under the supervision of local authority, appeared to be the most desirable solution, inasmucli as tiie state had no penitentiaries or local "work -houses," nor the funds needed to establish thera. When dealing with Florida's internal problems, Marviz^ Walker, and the advisory conmittec were in effect saying: If you want to solve these problems, this is what you might do. When they took up the quest lou of revmlon, however, they in effect said: If you want Florida to resume her normal relations with the federal government, this Is what you must

PAGE 181

175 do. The discourse devoted to securing the co-operation of the legislators in carrying out the President's terras of reunion, necessarily assumed the character of persuasive direction. Fortunately the situation favored compliance. The members of the legislature and the Gove jmor -elect owed their authority to the convention's coQipliance with the directions of the Provisional Goveimor. Further J these officials were aware that the teniire of -Uieir positions would depend on their willingness to complete the process of political adjustment. The means which Marvin employed to win over the legislature offer a striking contrast to the rhetoric he en5)loyed before the convention, Bae message he sent to the convention had been almost entirely devoted to explaining the terms of reimion, and his speech before that body had been based on the same theme, along with scms advice on the problems of vagrancy. His legislative address, on the other hand, included a resvune of the progress of Reconstrviction, advice respecting the resolution of domestic problems, and appeals for nationalism and conciliation. The order in which Marvin dealt with these siibjects also offers an interesting contrast to his convention rhetoric. The unfulfilled terms of reunion were not discussed. They were preceded by a progress report on Reconstruction and by suggestions relative to econoanic and social adjustment. Moreover, they were followed by an appeal for conciliation. The speaker's style bears little resemblance to that of his convention rhetoric. Althoxjgh there were patches of formality for the

PAGE 182

176 most part his lancuage displayed the personal quality typical of his pre -convention speaking. V/hen reporting on the progress of Reccaistjruction and when introducing VJalker, Marvin assumed the role of provisional governor, but when dealing with other subjects, he spoke as a Floridian. These changes reflect the spealcer's adaptation to a modified purpose, Persuasive direction was necessary, but not to the same degree as during the convention. The legislators, like the convention delegates, had the privilege of ftee speech and the power of choice, but the nattire of their responsibility was different. Most of the terms of reunion had already been ratified. Marvin, therefore, adapted his speeches to persuading the legislatiire to act on terms and conditions that had already been acknowledged by the convention. Put another way, Marvin in effect s€d.d: (1) This is what the convention has done, (2) This is irtiat I have done, (3) It is up to you to complete the process of political adjustment. If you do, the President will support your government and Congress will admit ^T^ur senators and representatives, Marvin's report on the progress of Reconstruction was thorough. His review of the conventicwi's compliance clarified the nature of the legislature's responsibility. Since the convention had framed a new constitution, acknowledging the freedom of the slaves and proclaiming that all of the inhabitants of the state were to enjoy' "the ri^ts of person and property without . , , distinction of color," the legislature's acknowledgment of such matters was little more than a formality. "It is this Constitution," Marvin remijaded the legislators, "that you have sworn to support."

PAGE 183

177 The convention had asked that civil officers on -the crunicipal and county levels be authorized to resume the functions of their offices, that a state militia be organized to support the civil authority, and that colored troops be transferred from the interior to the coastal areas. In each case, said Marvin, I have complied. "I directed the civil officers ... to resume the exercise of the functions of their . . . offices. ... I issued a proclamation . . . directing the militia . . . to be organized," Most of the colored troops had been transferred to the seaboard, and "I am assured that the remainder will be jvist as soon as the interest of the public service will permit it." The convention had done its work and Marvin had co-operated with the requests of that body whenever it had been within his power to do so. Before telling the legislators that they must complete the work of re\mion, Marvin further earned their good will and respect by referring to Florida's internal problems as if they were his own, and by making suggestions for their resolution, "Our condition," he had declared, "cannot be iEiproved by folding our hands and sitting down in idle despair . " When Marvin came to the subject of reunion, his instructions were concise and straightforward. "The Legislatvire," he said, "must ratify the proposed amendment to the constitution of the XJhited States for the abolition of slavery throughout the country." Once this was accomplished, he predicted, "I think, so far as I can Judge, that the President will permit the state government to go on and exercise its proper powers." Another undebatable demand was that all the inhabitants of the

PAGE 184

178 state, without distinction of class or color, be afforded equal protection uMer the law, "The faith of the nation," declared Marvin, "is pledged for the protection of the freediaen in all their proper rights of freedom." It was "also pledged for the protection [of those] who remained loyal to the Union dioring the war. ..." If the legislature passed wise laws and the state government looked to their impartial execution, predicted Marvin, "I think we may look forward hopefully to the early admission of our Senators and Representatives [sic] on the floor of Congress." This second phase of Marvin's persuasion — that of direction and prediction — owed its effectiveness to logical suasion in the form of causal reasoning and pathetic appeals aimed at the southerner's desire for self-rule and a position of equality in the Union, Marvin received strong support from Florida's governor -elect, David S. Walker. Ualrier, too, reviewed -Uie progress of Reconstniction, emphasized the accomplishnients of the convention, and urged the legislators to comply with the terms of reunion by ratifying the proposed Thirteenth Amendment and by passing appropriate laws for the protection of the freednen. In addition to echoing Marvin, however, Wallcer strengthened the rhetoric of persxiaslve direction with a number of original arguments. He assured the legislators that ratification of the amendment would not give Congress "the ri^t to legislate for the negro" in any matters other than the enforcement of "the non-existence of slavery," and he discredited the belief that ratification would open the way for new demands.

PAGE 185

179 Negro stiffrage, WaHcer declared, had not "been one of the terms of reunion, nor would the demand ever be made by the President or Congress. Speaking for Florida, the Governor -elect went so far as to announce: "We couM never accede to the demand for negro suffrage, should it be made," The report submitted to the legislature by the special advisory committee of DuPont, Peeler, and Papy also contributed to the rhetoric of persuasive direction. No mention vms made of the proposed Thirteenth Amendment. But the reconmendation that the legislature recognize the legal rights of the Negro echoed a significant segment of Marvin's and WaHcer's persuasion. The legislature, as \Te have already seen, responded to both phases of the rhetoric of adjustment. It passed laws in the interest of economic azid social adjxistment, and it completed the work of political reorsanization. Vfliat can be said of the rhetoric of adjustment as a whole? At least three major patterns are worthy of note. First, in some ways the rhetoric of adjustment appears related to the rhetoric of acquiescence. Vftiereas one was designed to get the people to acquiesce in defeat and in the presidential plan of reunion, the other sovight to persuade the representatives of the people to carry out the specific steps of Reconstruction. A second generalization concerns tlie style of the rhetoric of adjustment. There does not seem to be an appreciable difference between the style of the Provisional Governor and of the conquered "rebels." The style of the Floridians was that of free Americans rather than of a

PAGE 186

180 conquered people. As ve noted in our analysis of the convention rhetoric, however, presidential Reconstruction was premised on d«aocratic processes. Insofar as the style of the discourse is an indicator, the democratic atnosphere appears to have served as an equalizer between conqueror and conquered. A theme ccoroon to both the rhetoric of acquiescence and the rhetoric of adjustment — white men shall rule — explains the basic unity of the two rhetorics. For Marvin, it vbs a powerful tool of persviasion. For the conquered it was a face-saving theme, southern tradition that would remain xmchansed. The placation of the white supremlst, the primary moving force of the rhetoric of acquiescence, iras equally suited to the work of adjustment. As the southerner capitulated, he conceded what he had to concede, end, at the same time, nurtured his pride by ejuphasizlng the privileges he was not required to give up. Having made the necessary concessions, the Southerner consistently repeated that the Negro was not a citizen and was, therefore, not entitled to any of the privileges of citizenship. As WaUier put it: "Ve have been able to give an honest and conscientious consent to all that has been done, but each of us knows that we could not give either an honest or a conscientious assent to negro suffrage," The advisory committee reported: The "act of emancipation" merelj' severed the "relation of master and slave," It did not exalt the colored race to a position of "perfect equality with the white man," Senator -elect V/ilkinson Call was even more emphatic: "No legislation of Congress nor of the Northern

PAGE 187

181 States [can] ever put the negro upon an equality with the white race. As vrell might you attenrpt to turn the current of the 'great father of waters* from the Gulf to the Falls of St. Anthony." ^c rhetoric of adjustsocnt, then, can be susmed up as the story of a conquered people who took the provisional governor at his word. Inasmuch as the core of l<]arvin's persuasion was in close accord with the workings of the southern mind, the conquered responded to his appeals by ratifying the terms of reunion; and in the course of doing so, they reiterated \^at was and xihet was not required, by writing it into their discourse, their constitution, and their laws.

PAGE 188

CHAPTER VI SPEAKHC IN FLORIDA IN 1866: A RHETORIC OF VINDICATION Prologue to the Rhetoric of Vindication The collapse of the Confederacy in the spring of I865 brought on end to Florida's Confederate govenunent. By the close of that year, a new political structure, designed by the President and organized by the people of Florida under the guidance of their provisional governor, William Marvin, had emerged in its place. While enjoying the quasiautonomy that came with this new state government, Floridiaos looked forward to the complete self-rule that would resiilt from reunion-a process that would not be accomplished until the newly elected senators and representative had been seated in Cangrese. William Marvin, now one of Florida's senators -elect, arrived in Washington on January I5, I866, prepared to represent the state in Congress. On the following day, he called on President Johnson and gave an account of his administration as provisional governor. Three days later, on January I9, James R, Doolittle, a Republican senator from Wisconsin, presented Marvin's credentials to the Senate.^ Doolittle William Marvin to [Charles E. Dyke], Washington, Janiiary 22, 1866, in Tallahassee Semi-WeelOy Floridian , February 9, I866. 2 James Rood Doolittle served as a Republican in the United States Senate from I857 to I869. He had been a Democrat prior to the repeal of the Missouri Compromise and returned to Democratic ranks following his terra in Congress. As a moderate Republican, a long-time friend of Marvin, and a supjxjrter of Presidential Reconstruction, Doolittle was prepared to favor Marvin's admission to the Senate. For a sunmiary of Doolittle 's political career, see Biographical Director^'^ of the American Congress , I774-I9I19 , p. IO96. 182

PAGE 189

183 said that, in his opinion, Marvin shoxild be sworn in at once. The senator -elect's political 'backgroirad had been characterized by constant loyalty to the Union. Further, by reading selected passages from Marvin's farewell speech as provisional governor and from Wallcer's inaugural address, Doolittle showed that the people of Florida had accepted the results of the war in good faith and were willing to respect the Negro's rights of person and property. The speaker concluded by repeating that he believed Marvin shovQd be seated. In deference, however, to those of his colleagues who wanted more time to investigate the South 's "condition to choose representatives," Doolittle declared that he would "not make this motion now." He therefore moved that Maarvin's credentials be tabled "for the present."^ When Doolittle had finished speaking, CSiarles Sumner, Republican senator from Massachusetts and leader of the Radicals in the Senate, k arose to answer Doolittle 's speech. He stated at the outset that he did not wish to discuss the broader issvie involved in the presentation of Marvin's credentials. His concern was with "the actual condition of things in Florida." Sunmer's interpretation of these conditions took the form of an attack on Marvin, a description of the political plight of Florida's Unionists, and an evaluation of the Florida constitution. MajTvin's record as provisicaial governor, Sumner agreed, was in some respects a conanendable one. But, he continued, no one could "read ^For a report of Doolittle *s speech, see Congressional Globe , 39th Cong., 1st Sess,, Pt. 1, p. 312. Biographical Directory of the American Congress 1775-19^9j p.ll83«

PAGE 190

lek his speeches and say that in all respects he has done vhat a governor of one of those States . . . should have done." Utilizing testimony supplied by "conrpetent witnesses" from Florida^ Sumner pointed out that Johnsonian Reconstruction had operated to the detriment of the Unionists. The rebels had been enfranchised and Union loen had virtually been disfranchised. One witness reported that four-fifths of the new Florida legislature were "rebel officers." Another ccniplained that proscription of those who had been 2xyjal to the Union was so intense that if federal troops were withdrawn from the state, "it would not be safe for a Yankee or deserter to travel throu^ the coimtry." Finally, Sumner asserted, the Senate would have to consider the constitution drawn up by Florida's "pretended" convention. "After recognizing the abolition of slavery and therefore the citizenship of those who were once slaves, [the convention proceeded] to decree their disfranchisement. ..." This was the constitution that senators were expected to recognize — a cooatltutbn •hich proclaimed "the denial of equality to nearly one-half of [Florida's] citizens!" The speaker was prepared to insist, and at the proper time would argue, "that no State aiix>ng these States where the governments have lapsed can be recognized as republican in form \riiich disfranchises any considerable portion of the citizens." The Massachusetts senator closed by agreeing that Marvin's credentials should be tabled.^ The Senate supported the motion and the -^Por a report of Sumner's reply to Doolittle, see Congressional

PAGE 191

Ifi5 credentials were tabled, never to be acted upon agsdn." The credentials on Florida's Senator -elect Wilkinson Call met a similar fate on June 6, 1866J What had happened? Why was Florida daiied representation in Congress after having; laet all the requirements of PresidentistL Reconstruction. Sumner's reply to Doolittle supplies a partial answer. The Sumner speech was one of several incidents which marked the Inception of a political movement opposing Johnsonian Reconstruction — a movement which ran its course from Deceidber, I865 to March, IB^J, During this period, the people of Florida became observers of a political conflict between the President and the Radicals, the outcome of \rtiich wouM determine the political fate of their state. Soon they would learn of the Radical opposition to Presidential Reconstruction as it arose in Congress in the session of December, 1865-July, I866. Later, in the fall of I866, they wovild anxiously watch and wait while the President and his Radical opponents took the Issues to the people of the No:rth and West in the congressional cacrpaign of that year. If the voters sustained the President, Florida would be represented in Cosogress, and Globe , 39th Cong., 1st Sess., it. 1, p. 313. Sumner believed that "no duty of clemency [could] justify injustice." Federal leaders were honor bound to make certain that "belligerent traitors" were not allowed to rule "constant loyalists" and to require that southern rebels "sustain the Equal Rights, civil and political, of all men, according to the principles of the Declaration of Independence. ..." For a sunmary of Simmer's philosophy of reunion, see Charles Sumner, "Clemency and Ccnmon Sense," Atlantic Monthly , XVI (December, I865), 745-760. "Kearney, "Autobiography of William Marvin," p. 218, ' Cgggressional Globe , 39th Cong., 1st Sess., Ft. 4, p. 2980,

PAGE 192

186 thereby restored to the Union, If, on the other hand, the voters sustained Johnson^s opponents, Florida's fate vould rest with a Radical Republican Congress. Both phases of this conflict — the struggle between Johnson and the Radicals vrtaile Congress was in session, and the debate between the two factions in the congressional campaign of 1866 — produced speaking on the part of Floridians which may appropriately be called a rhetoric of vindication. One aspect of this rhetoric, the spealcing of Florida's senatorselect in New York state, is part of the story of the congressional campaign of 1866, and is described in Chapter VII. The speaking done in Florida in 1866, which was largely a defensive reaction to the initial phase of the national conflict, constitutes the subject matter of this chapter . The Scene The struggle between the President and the Radicals began when Congress met for its first postwar session in December, I865. At first it seemed that Johnson had the upper hand. He had acted swiftly in the seven months following the surrender, and vhen Congress asseiii>led it was confronted with those tAk) soxight admission as representatives of the reorganized states of the South, In addition to the advantage of time, Johnson had the support of the Northern Democrats as well as of a number of moderate Republicans who favored early reunion. In fact, in Randall's Judgment, had the moderates exerted their leadership when Congress first met, "reconstruction could have been effected at once."° ^landall, the Civil War and Reconstruction, p. 7I8.

PAGE 193

187 To the chagrin of the President and -;:he Ekmthj however. It vaa the Radical group that took ihe initiative and ultimately controlled Congress. The success of the Radical strategists was in part due to their ability to discover "the available means of persuasion." The endorseiaent of Presidential Reconstruction rested on the odious assumption that Reconstruction was an executive function — one that lay outside the authority of Concress. Still njore ajnportant, southern restoration ixjsed a threat to continued Republican ascendency. Since the South had ratified the Thirteenth Acendiaent, it was entitled to Increased representation in the House of Representatives.^ A restored South would malce it possible for a reunited Democratic party to control Coneress and elect a president. The conqueror could be said to be rewarding southern revolutionists with political control of the Union they had tried to disxa ari ber. Finally, a rationalization for delaying restoratlcai was found in the character of the reorganized govemiiients of the South. The political supremacy of ex-Confederates over the freediaen and Unicmists could be weighed against such idealistic concepts as equality, justice, and patriotism. •'• By capitalizing caa these appeals, the Radicals were able to check Presidential Reconstruction early in the session. Under their leadership 9 ^Followins the ratification of the Thirteenth itoiendiasnt, "the constitutional provision which excluded two -fifths of the slaves from the popvaation by which the nunibcr of representatives in Concress for any state was determined became of no effect. ..." Dxonning, Reconstruc tion PoliticaL and Econonic, 186^-1877 , p. 53. °For an analysis of Radical motives and appeals, see Randall, The Civil War and Reconstruction , pp. 718-725.

PAGE 194

188 Coagress exercicod its constitu-tional prerocative "by refusing to seat the representatives of the Johnson sovenments vntll it could be determined •vfliether conditions in the southern states warranted sxxch representation, A Jboixt CkJumittee oa Reconstruction was appoints to determine conditions In the South and to riaiic recomaendatlons regarding the fitness of these states for readMssion. This committee conrjposed of three Desaocrats and ten Reiublicans and led by QSiaddeiis Stevens served its creators well by seizine upon ^rtiatever evidence was necessary to convey the liapression that southerners generallywere inpenitent rebels dedicated 11 to the oppression of freednen and Unionists. Althouch Johnson's attempt to produce a fait accoigpli \ms thwarted it was still possible for Congress and the President to work out a canpromise proaram. As yet, the Radicals did not control Caneress, and there was an appreciable number of moderates who earnestlj' soucht to meet Jdlinson half way.^ The passatje of the Freedmen*s Bureau bill in February' of 1G66 marlujd the point at which a caapromise was no longer possible between the two departments of govemmsnt. This bill, which was Congress* answer to the blacl: codes of the Johnson sovemments, authorized the indefinite continuance of the Freedmen's Bureau and eiapowered federal militaryofficers to protect frecdnen aeainst discriminatory state lawn.^ • ^Ibid ., p. 72k; Dunning, Reconstruction Political and Economic , 106^-137T j P» ^; Coulter, The South Dxirlng Reconstruction, l36p-lo777 p. 115. "uunnine. Reconstruction Political and Economic, 106^-1877 , p. 6l. 13 Die Freedmen's Bureau had originally been created by Congress on March 3* l'^5, to ixiQ)ire one jcar following the end of the war. An account of the passage of the extension bill of Febmary, 1866, together

PAGE 195

189 Johnson himself had been irritated by some of the provisions of the black codes and hai not expressed disapproval of the existing Bureau's function as the protector of the freedmen. Congress, therefore, "anticipated that he mi^t assent to such qualification of his plan for iximediate restoration as vould be involved in an enlargement of the Ik bxireau's functions." Johnson, however, had also been annoyed by Congress' refusal to recognize his reconstructed governments and was convinced that the proposed bill was unconstitutional. For these reasons he blocked the Bureau bill with a veto on Febniary I9. Within eleven days, Coaagress retaliated by passing a joint resolution which provided "that no senator or representative should be admitted from any insurrectionary state until Congress should have declared the state entitled 15 to representation." The nooent for compromise had passed and re\mion was made to wait upon the resolution of the political conflict that ensued.^^ Once the lines had been drawn, a bitter struggle dragged on throughout the balance of the congressional session. Congress became the defender of the freedmen, and Johnson stood firm as the defender of the Constitution. On April 9, Congress overrode a presidential veto to with a summary of Johnson's objections to the measure, may be fovmd in Bentley, A History of the Freedmen 's Bureau , pp. II6-II9, Ik Dunning, Reconstruction Political and Economic, 1S6$-1877 , p. 60. Ibid ., pp. 60-62. ^or an acco\uit of the initial clash between the President and Congress, see ibid., pp. 51-62.

PAGE 196

190 pass the Civil Rights bill which conferred citizenship on the ftreedmen and made it a federal offense to deny equal rights to any citizens of 17 any state. On June 13, it passed the Fourteenth Amendment and sent it to the states for ratification. This amendment formalized vhat Congress considered the most important results of the war. Of the four sections of the amendment, two pertained to the freedmen. The first contained the major features of the Civil Rights Act, ^Al±ch. Congress hoped to sustain by making it a part of the Constitutiorr. The second contained the Radicals* answer to the problem of increased southern representation resulting from emancipation. It provided that a state denying sxiffrage to any of its citizens would suffer "a proportionate reduction of representatives in the lower house." The third section precluded the possibility of "rebel nile" by calling for the disqualification for federal or state office of anyone who had taken an oath to support the federal Constitution and had then participated in the rebellion. Finally, on July l6, the Radicals shoved their growing strength and added iiBvilt to injury by passing a new Preedmen's Bureau bill over Johnson's veto. " •^'Dvumlng, Essays on the Civil War and Reconstruction and Related Topics, pp. 91-99. ^The fourth section of the amendment called for a formal repudiation of all Confederate debts, the renunciation of elLI c3.aims for compensation arising from emancipation, and for formal recognition of the validity of the national debt. For an historical analysis of the Fourteenth Amendment, see Randall, The Civil War and Reconstruction , pp. 735-7'^0. 19 For a detailed account of Johnson's attempt to discredit the Bureau and the Radical success in securing the passage of the July Bureau bill, see Dentley, A Histoiy of the Freedmen *s Bureau , pp. 121-135.

PAGE 197

191 V/hen Congress adjourned In July of 1866, it was apparent that this body and the President could not agree on a program of reunion. Since neither side would conipromise its position, both prepared to win the support of the voters of the North and West in the approaching congressional elections. This was the situation described by senator-elect William Marvin when he informed the people of Florida that the deadlock between the President and Congress over reunion could "only be settled by an appeal to the people at the next elections."^ With the exception of a disgruntled minority made up of Unionists and Republicans, the people of Florida were anbittered by the Radical Republican attack on Presidential Reconstruction, The Democratic Floridian assailed Siamier's reply to Doolittle as a slander on the state. It was, the paper declared, a "long tirade" full of "stale and sii:^ falsehoods" 21 about disloyalty and the ill treatment of freedmsn, Sxich "vile slaaders" provided by so-called "reliable witnesses" from Florida were "the means relied on to prolong bitterness and strife and defeat the President's 22 noble efforts to heal the bleeding wounds of a distracted country," Florida's Unionists showed themselves to be a sorry lot when they appealed "to such a man as Sumner , , , to consumate the work of 'reconstruction.»" -' Moreover, the Senate had made a tactical error in 'William Marvin to [Charles E. Dyke], Washington, April 7, 1866, in Tallahassee Semi -VJeekly Floridian , April 20, 1866, 21„ Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian j January 30, 1866. 22, 23g Ibid ,, February 9, 1366, alnesville Weekly New Era , February 3, 1866,

PAGE 198

192 slamming the dcxjr in Marvin's face, for Andrew Johnson wDvild regard this as a personal affront and would treat it accordingly. In late February when the telegrajh brought the news that the President had vetoed the Ereedmen's B-oreau bill, the Danocratlc Sentinel 25 hailed Johnson for his "firmness and detersilnation to do ri^t «" After Congress ansirered the veto with its concurrent resolution declaring that no southern representatives would be admitted to that body until Congress should have declared a state entitled to representation, Floridians began to realize that immediate reunion was unlikely — that they would remain in jxjlitical limbo until the issioes were resolved in Washington, The Sentinel thought the southern states had beccane "the sport of political thiirible riggers — 'now you see 'em and now you. don't*. . .' The New Era , xrtiich was probably the most radical Democratic organ in the state, philosophized: "If the Union is a political Heaven and the State of Florida is a 'political Hell,' then we must be in a kind of political 27 territorial Purgatory, for we are neither in nor out." The speaking done in Florida during this period of tmcertalnty reflected the divisiveness on the national scene. A minority group composed of Uhlonists or Loyalists, who had suppoirted Presidential Reconstruction in 1865* only to be virtually excluded from office in the 2U Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian , February 6, I866. ^Tallahassee Tri-Weekly Florida Sentinel , February 2U, 1866, 26, Ibid ,, March 10, 1866, ^Gainesville Weekly New Era , March 10, I866,

PAGE 199

193 reorganized govemment, now joined a growing nucleus of Republicans in 28 the state and supported the Radicals in Washington, The relatively'feeble efforts of this minority were overshadowed, however, by the speaking of Florida's Conservatives. The addresses of the ex-Whigs and Democrats who controlled the politics of Florida's Johnson government constitute the rhetoric of vindication in Florida. Of the fourteen speeches located for the year 1866, seven tell 20 the story of this rhetoric. ' On March 19, Lieutenant-Governor Kelly and Dillon Jordan, a prcoiinent attorney, spoke at a meeting in Pensacola that had been called to discredit testimony given before the Joint Committee on Reconstruction by a federal officeholder in that city. On May 5, Governor Walker, in a speech at Quincy, called on the people of the state to suppress any "lawless act" or "indiscreet expression" that could be used to sustain the Radicals and disarm the President. On June ^^r a bibliography of the movement opposing Presidential Reconstruction in Florida in 1366, see fn. 12, Chapter I. ^^seven of the fovirteen extant speeches, although not directly related to the rhetoric of vindication, laay be of interest to students of the period. They are (l) speech of Liberty Billings and (2) speech of Daniel Richards at Unionist meetings in Fernandina in February and July, 1366. See ibid . (3) Speech of Robert Bullock, agent of the Freedmen's Bureau on labor contracts, to the freedmen at Long Swanrp, September 20, 1366. Ocala Weekly Banner in Tallahassee Tri-Weekly Florida Sentinel , October 9, 18S5^ ipTJ Speech of Charles H. Pearce (Negro), Methodist minister from Canada, and (5) Speech of Thomas Harley (Negro) at a meeting called to discuss freedruen's rights xinder the Hon^stead Act, African Methodist Episcopal Church, Tallahassee, October 13, 1866. Ibid ., October l6, 1866; Tampa W eeklyF lo rida Peninsular , November 10, 1866T ^6) Speech of Judge J. Wayles Baker to the Grand Jury of the Leon County Circuit Court, March 26, 1866. Tallaliassee Tri-Weekly Florida Sentinel , March 27, 1866. (7) Speech of Samuel Spencer, a Gainesville attorney, on the occasion of the organization of the Gainesville Literary Association, Gainesville, May 25, 1866. Gainesville Weekly New Era , June 1 and 8, 1866.

PAGE 200

19** Ho, Wilkinson Call, one of Florida's senators -elect, who had just returned to the state after spending several months in the Hbrth, gave the citizens of Fernandina an optimistic report of northern public opinion regarding the readmission of the South, On June 25, in Gainesville, E. W. Perry digressed ftrom his theme of the inmortality of Masonry to point up the instability of Republican leadership in Washington. Sometloe in the fall of I865, Thomas T. Long, in delivering a charge to the Grand Jury of Levy County, expanded his theme of civil responsibility to include a eulogy of the President and a scathing denunciation of the Radicals. Finally, in an address read before the Florida legislature. Governor Walker on November I6 called for the rejection of the proposed Fourteenth Amendment and presented \ttia.t was probably the last apology for Presidential Reconstruction in Florida. The Discourse Speeches of William W. J. Kelly and Dillon Jordan On the evening of March I9, the citizens of Pensacola met in their courthouse in response to a notice that a meeting would be held to talce action on evidence given before the Reconstiruction Conmittee by one John W. Recks, a federal office holder of that city, A crowd began to collect at an early hour, and by the time Mayor George W. Hutton rapped 30 for order the chamber was "filled to repletion.' 3^nsacola Tri-Weekly Observer , March ^, I866, in Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridlan, April I3, 1866. The people of Pensacola were deeply concerned with the fate of Johnson's plan of early restoration, Pensacola had been beseiged earlj*^ in the war, and its citizens had long suffered the consequences of

PAGE 201

195 ATter the appointment of Sewall C. Cobb as chairman, a oooDlttee was elected to formulate resolutions for the action of the assembly, MhUe the ccaanittee retired to discharge this function, Cobb, at the recpoest of those present, read Recks' testimony. Recks, a ciistoms official vrtio had been assigned to Pensacola at the end of the war, had told the Reconstruction Coraniittee that the people of Florida felt that though they had been overcome," they had not been conquered. That military force was necessary to secxire the legal, political, and physical well-being of all citizens was beyond question. The whites were deceitful, and if they had the power "they would use it to destroy Unicm men," It was Reeks' opinion that the only way to deal with the people of Florida was to "pin them down at the point of the bayonet so close .,31 that they would not have room to wiggle. ... After hearing this report of Reeks' testimony, the meeting was ready to consider the resolutions prepared by the conanittee. The committee's report, \^ich received imanimous approval, was for the most part a rebuttal of Recks' charges. His assertions were "untrue in every feature and [inflicted] great injustice not only on the citizens of Pensacola, but also on the citizens of Florida in general." The people military occupation. As early as May 9, 1862, the Confederates had been forced to evacuate, and as a part of this operation most of Pensacola was burned to the ground. Those who remained became wards of the federal government when the city was siirrendered on K&y 10, 1862, For an account of the Civil War in Pensacola, see Davis, The Civil War and Reconstruction in Florida, pp. I65-I68, •^ aeport of the Joint Coimnittee on Reconstiniction , 39th Cong., 1st Sess., Pt. hf pp. 1-5, For biographical data on John W. Recks, see ibid ; Pensacola Tri-Weekly West Florida Compercial , January 22, 1863,

PAGE 202

196 of Florida had taken the President's oath of allegiance "in good faith," and did so with an honest determination "to fulfill its obligations, and to deport themselves eis time and loyal citizens of the United States, ..." Their reverence for law and order was such that military force was not necessary for the protection of any citizen, "irrespective of color." The committee also deemed it proper that the people express their "profoundest gratitude" to President Johnson for his defense of the Ccxistitution "against its enemies" and for providing the hope of "a speedy restoration of [Florida] to the Union," T^ro final resolutions provided for the promulgation of these declarations. The officers of the federal array and navy stationed in Pensacola were asked to add their testimony to counter Reeks' charges of disloyalty. All local citizens \Aio approved the resolutions were also asked to sign them; and a committee was to be appointed to fonrard these petitions, along with a copy of the proceedings of the meeting, to President Johnson, Thaddeus Stevens, chedrman of the Reconstruction Comnittee, and to the Associated Press. Following the cciiimittee's report, two of its members, William W, J. Kelly and Dillon Jordan, spoke In support of the resolutions, Kelly, who was lieutenant-governor of Florida, sustained them by pledging the endorsement of the people throughout the state, and with "great feeling and sincerity" gave personal testimony of the "good faith" that had been manifested by the Florida convention and legislature in accepting the provisions the President had deemed necessary for "our restoration to

PAGE 203

197 the Union." Jordan, a prominent criminal lawyer and Democratic leader in Escambia County, appealed to southern pride and vouched for the loyalty of Floridians when he argued "that the man who fights bravely and surrenders in good faith is most to be trusted as a loyal, reliable citizen," He also appealed to northern sympathy, and at the same time supported the resolutions, by greeting "those of our Northern brethren who [have] settled among us, and [by thanking] them for the interest they [had] manifested in getting up the meeting and in having justice done. ..." Jordan's remarks moved George J. Alden, a nosrbhemer who had served on the resolutions ccMntdttee, to deliver a response. His address, ^ich was given in a "spirit of fraternity" and contained further testimony of the "loyalty and manhood" of Floridians, provided a fitting climax for a mass meeting that had been called to "set Florida right" before the judgment seat of the North in general and the Reconstruction Committee in particular. The Pensacola press reported the meeting and satisfied the pride of Pensacola' s citizenry by publishing a formal account of the proceedings. Pensacola had taken the lead! It oould claim that its protest 32 Jordan, a native of North Carolina, was educated at Mount Saint Mary's College in Eraciittsbm:g, Maryland, and returned to his native state to study law. After passing the bar and serving a term in the North Carolina legislature, Jordan was appointed United States District Jiodge of the Territory of Florida by Martin Van Buren in IO37, and served until lc545. During James K. Polk's administration he was a ciistoms official for the Port of Pensacola. From 18^9, until his death in I872, Jordan r em a in ed in Escambia County where he was recognized as an outstanding crirlncil la'.-^rer ahd leadej; cf the Democratic party. Pensacola Weekly Mail, January 30, 1672.

PAGE 204

198 meeting had beea the first to send "rebutting testimony" to the Reconstruction Committee. In the Observer's opinion, "the President [had "been] sustained. "-^-^ Speech of David S. Walker Reeks' charges of disloyalty and impending disorder in Florida produced a reaction in the state that extended beyond Pensacola. llie fact that the Reconstruction Committee solicited such testimony served as a vaming that any indiscreet act or expression by a Floridian would be used by the Radicals to discredit Florida's Johnson government. La April of 1866, an event took place which gave Governor David S. Walker an opportunity to convey this warning to the people of Florida. On April 27, 1866, General John G. Foster, Florida's military consnander, acting on the orders of the President and the Secretary of War, authorized provisional restoration of civil law throughout the state. 3^ On the same day. Walker issued a lengthy proclamation in which he hailed the restoration of Florida's civil coiirts, cedling upon the people to avert the 33For an accoimt of the Pensacola meeting, tlie resolutions, and the speeches, see Pensacol a Tri-Weekly Observer , March 24, 1866, in Tallahassee Semi-Weekly Floridian , April 13* l<-'66. 3^In a proclamation issued on April 2, 1866, President Johnson declared that the "insurrection" whicli had existed was "at an end" in Florida and nine other southern states. Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents , VI, 1^29-^32. On April 27, 1866, General John G. Foster informed the people of Florida in General Orders Twenty-Eight, that the Secretary of War, with the approval of the President, had ruled that althougli the President's proclamation of April 2 had not removed martial law, it would not be expedient "to resort to military tribimals in any case where justice Lcould] be attained through the medium of civil authority. ..." Fbr n copy of Foster's order, see Fernandina Weekly Courier, May l6, 1866.

PAGE 205

199 necessity of military intervention by demonstrating their respect for law and order, and warning that an;yconduct suggestive of disloyalty or disorder would strengthen the Radicals in their f i^t against the 95 President. '^ One week later, on May 5* the people of Quincy held a festival to celebrate the restoration of civil law— a festival that included drilling, tilting, and speechmaking, all of which were climaxed with a "bountiful dinner." The drilling and tilting by the Dragoons under the direction of Florida's War Eagle, Jesse J. Dicklson, was judiciously selected as a means of beginning the day's festivities, for the chivalric spectacle both thrilled and unified the spectators, preparing them for the speechmaking which followed. Vfalker, the featured speaker of the day, no doiabt welcomed an opportunity to speak on the exigencies of tlie moment. He began his address by identifying himself with his audience. He was gratified, he said, to meet with so many citizens of Gadsden County.^ Although he did not loiow many of the young people in the audience personally, he had known "their ^^Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian , May k, I866; Tallahassee Triweekly Florida Sentinel , May '6, liib(:); Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union , May 12, lt366. ^Gadsden County, located in the "black arc" area, constituted a likely trouble spot. Here, as well as in the surrounding "black arc" covmties, one-time masters lived in the midst of an overwhelming number of their former slaves. Neither race had yet become fully accustomed to its new status. The freedmen, who had suddenly been released from restraint, were bent on testing their rights; and the whites, who had once exercised coBiplete and direct control over the slave, now feared for their lives and property. The situation, in short, was such that even a minor Incident could precipitate widespread racial conflict. The nature of affairs in this area helps to explain why Marvin visited Quincy in I865 to speak on the relations that oioght to exist

PAGE 206

200 fathers before them, ... and felt he could speak to them as an old acquaintance . " T3ie Conservative leader had come to Qnlncy with words of coofort and of counsel. Almost a year before, the military had occupied Tallahassee, Federal soldiers had been "stationed in every to^m and neighborhood, and their will was tiie only law we knew," But "Look at the scene to-day!" Martial law had been provisionally removed and was to be resorted to "only in cases where justice [couM not] be had before . . . civil tribunals," Florida's capitol was again occupied by civil officials "chosen by the people," Floridians had once again become a free people. Approaching his second point — the linportance of peace and quiet in Florida — ^Walker inquired: "To whom are we indebted for this great change?" The ans^/er, which he tho^-ght shoulii be known by all, was that "next to God, oxir thanlis are due to the President of the United States," Througli "his wise reconstruction policy he has led us step by step, , , . until by almost insensible desrees he has conducted us out of the •Slough of Despondency' and placed our feet upon the high ground of Hope." "But, fellow-citizens," Wallcer continued, "I am pained to be obliged to say to you that the President finds himself on account of what he has done for us, under great difficulties." These diffictilties between the races, and ^Axy Walker accepted the Quincy invitation to talk of the need for peace and quiet in 1366. For accounts of inter-racial skirmishes in Gadsden in 1866, see Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union , June 2, 1(366; Quincy Weekly Comnonwealth , July 31, lc>66, in Gainesville Weekly New Era , August 10, 1666.

PAGE 207

201 stenmed from a conflict v^ich had only recently developed between the President and a Radical party in Coogress. The entire Southern delegation being excliided, there is in Congress a majority of two-thirds against him. He stands aimost alone on the ramparts of the constitution, but thank God, he has an tondaunted heart and a stalwart arm with which he wields the flaming sword of justice and truth. His enemies pay no attention to his warning voice against their inf^acticms of the constitution, but seem madly resolved to rush into consolidation and centralism, \riaich he pronounces as dangerous a heresy as secession itself. They say that what he has done for us makes him a usurper. They say that we are disloyal and rebellious and unfit for the enjoyment of civil liberty. He says that we "are well and loyally disposed" and that all the laws, both State and Federal, may be enforced by the civil tribxmals. They denounce him as a traitor, and if we may regard the utterances of their newspapers, they are gathering strength to impeach and remove him from his hi^ office. Having told his listeners of Johnson's fight for the preservation of the Constitxrtion and of the liberties of southerners. Walker presented what was probably the keynote of the rhetoric of vindication in Florida. He said: Floridians were never loiown to turn their backs on friend or foe, and therefore you ask what can we do for the magnanimous man who thus bares his breast in our behalf against such fearful odds? JJIy answer is that the best way in which we can assist him and serve the cause of truth, justice and the constitution of our country is to keep cool and quiet, obey the laws, and by the daily beauty of oior lives, force conviction on the minds of all that we are not tmworthy of freedom. Each citizen was asked to "remember that every lawless act , . . and every indiscreet expression that [might] be uttered [would] Immediately [be] exaggerated and published broad cast over the Northern States with the view of making it appear that the President is wrong and his enemies right." If Florida was to survive this "fearful ordeal," her citizens

PAGE 208

202 would have to be as "wise as serpents, and las] harmless as doves." Walker climaxed his appeal for law and order by asking that every man in the state exercise faithfully "all of his duties as a loyal citizen of the United otates, to see that all crime [is] instantly punished, and that all the 3aws, . . . particularly those for the protection of the freedmen, [are] duly executed," The people of Quincy received the Governor's admonitions with 37 "prolongued applause and cheers." His proclamation, vrtiich may be regarded as the written counterpart of his Quincy speech, had likewise met with a favorable response. The Conservative Floridian thought that it contained "timely cautions." The Monticello Family Friend regarded the docTiment as "a fine paper" both in "style and tone."^° Several weeks after the proclamation's appearance, the Tallahassee Sentinel related that "leading conservative Jouamals throu^out the North" had published it in its entirety and predicted that "such a dociiment [would] go far towards satisfying our enemies of the sincerity of our professions of loyal ko ty, and of a desire for our restoration to the Union. 37 -"Walker's Quincy speech, described above, was reconstrxicted from a reporter's sketch and from Walker's proclamation of April 27. The reporter's account of the speech was published in the Quincy V/eekly Common wealth , and was copied by the Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian, May 11, lti6b. For a copy of Walker's proclamation, see ibid .. May k, 1^66. Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian , May k, I866. 39 Monticello Weekly Family Friend , May 12, I866, in ibid .. May 15, 1866. "Tallahassee Tri -Weekly Florida Sentinel , May 31, I866. The New York Times gave the proclamation front page coverage. See New York Times , May 2l7~i566.

PAGE 209

203 Speech of Wilkinson Call While Walker strove to promote law ajod order within the state as the best means of supporting the President's contention that Florida was ready for reimion, her senators -elect, William Marvin and Wilkinson Call looked to the state's interests in Washington, Although barred fron their seats in the Senate, they were able to serve Florida outside of Congress by consulting with the President, by calling on various departments of the federal government, by keeping a close watch on the activities of the Radicals, and by creating good will for their state through their contacts with politicians and northerners generally. When caie of these senators -elect, Wilkinson Call, returned to Femandina for a brief visit in June of 1366, he found local citizens anxious to learn of the state of affairs in the North. On the evening V For information on the activities of Florida's senators-elect in Washington in 1366, see WiUiajn T-larvin to [Charles E. Dyke], Washington, D. C, January 22, 1866, in Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian , February 9, 1866; letter from an unidentified correspondent to the Maxianna Weekly Courier , Washington, D, C, February l6, 1866, in Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian , March 27, 1866; David L. Yulee to David S. Walker, Fort Pulaski, February 21, 1866; Wilkinson Call to David L. Yulee, Washington, February 25 and March k, 1866, in Yulee Papers; William Marvin to [Charles S. Dyke], Washington, D. C, April 7, 1866, in Tallahassee Seml Weekly Floridian , April 20, 1866; correspondence of "Dallas," special Florida correspondent in Washington, D. C, in Tallahassee Tri-Weekly Florida Sentinel , April 7, 1866; Wilkinson Call to the Governor of Florida and the Members of the General Assembly, Washington. D. C, May 27, 1866, in ibid ., June 30, 1866. An editorial in the Tallahassee Floridian furnished an explanation of ^;hy the people of Femandina were anxious concerning affairs in Washington in 1866. "Surely," reported the Floridian , "Femandina has more than its share of annoyances of one sort or another. It is not enc-ugh tlia-;; the sentiments, feelings, and actions of its people shall be misrepresented by scribblers for northern papers; that negro-worshippers shall come among her people and embitter the feelings of the negroes

PAGE 210

2fA of June 16, he responded to their solicitations by giving a short speech. Call carefiilly avoided any conment that would demoralize or in any way discourage his listeners. In fact, he made no attempt to give an accurate account of the Radicals* success or to reveal their unswejrving determination to overthrow the Johnson governments. l^hat he did say was designed to bolster southern morale, "He had found nothing in his experiences in the North in the last three months to make him think less highly of his oxra people, or to induce them to feel humiliated or despondent." While in New York and Washington he had come upon "many proofs of respectful appreciation and kind feeling" toward the southern people. They were respected because of their "great qualities of character" and their "fidelity to their conviction of right," Furthermore, the speaker had had an opportunity to assure the northern people that Floridians co\ild be counted on to demonstrate these against the whites; that men holding official positions shall write letters to the highest military authority denouncing them as 'disloyal* and larging that they should be still further humbled and kept in subjection by the exercise of military authority; but their property is fraudulently vrithheld from them after having complied with every requirement of the law for its recovery. No other portion of the State has been so sorely tried," Tallahassee Serai -Weeiay iOoridian , July 23, I866. In addition to these problems, Johnson's sympathizers in Fernandina were antagonized by the presence of a large number of northern political adventurers and local Unionists and by the intermittent reigns of civil and martial law. See Tallahassee Tri-Weeklp^ Florida Sentinel , April 5, 1866; report of a New York World correspondent who accompanied Generals James B, Steedman and Joseph S. Fullerton on tlieir tour of Fernandina in 1866, in Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian , June 8, I866; letter of "X" to Gainesville New Era , Fernandina, September 2U, I866, in Gainesville Weekly New Era, October 12, I866,

PAGE 211

205 same qualities as citizens of a restored Union. ^ In short, his contact with northerners generally had convinced him that "the public mind of the North was rapidly tending toirards the admission of the Sovrthem States to their ri(^t of representation x/ithout restriction." In addition to a favorable nortdtiem piibllc opinion, Call continued, there were other signs that justified a confident view of Florida's future. It was evident that the President was a friend of the South. Another national figure. General Ulysses S. Grant, had on a number of occasions dejaonstrated a magnanimous attitude toward the southern people. It appeared, moreover, that even the Radicals had made "great concessions." ^3call probably referred to a speech he had made at the Manhattan Club on Fifth Avenue in New York City, on April l6, 1366. He, along with others, spoke at a banquet held to honor James Brooks, a Democrat who had been seated as congrossnan from Hew York, but who \ms expelled to make way for William E. Dodge, a Itepublican contender from Brooks' district. On this occasion. Call testified that the South had accepted "the invitation to return to the Union." The battlefields of the past had found the South "manly, brave and heroic; but now and in all future time," he declared, "she [would] shed her blood as freely for the flag of the United States as in the past she has misguldedly shed her blood against it," For the text of Call's speech and an account of the New York meetjjig, see How York World , April 1?, 1366. Se e also Tallahassee Semi 1-Jeekly Floridian , April 27, 1866; Tallahassee Tri-WeekljFlorida Sentinel , May 12, 1566; Gainesville WeelOy Mew Era , May 11, 1566. In a letter to Governor V.alker and the General Assembly, Call praised Grant as a friend of the South. To General Grant, he ^^-ote, "special acknowledgment is due for giving the great weight of his official recommendation in favor of the release of our citizens in confinement and the relief of oiir people in other respects. Upon all occasions, when I have had such applications to make to him, they have received a kind and prompt attention." Wilkinson Call to the Governor of Florida and the Members of the General Asseniblj^, l.'ashington, D. C, May 27, 1366, in TaJJLaiiassee Tri-t^eekly Florida Sentinel , June 30, 1866.

PAGE 212

206 They had practlcsilly "abandoned all of the substantial points" which they had originally suijported, -^ Call concluded as he had begun-by telling his listeners that the people of the South had no cause for sharae. Their noble deed had left them a "heritage of honor and glory," and neither "the true people of the North" nor the federal government would cause them to dishonour sioch a memory. A reporter who heard Coll spealc concltided his account of the address with a terse but revealing comment. "Mr. C's speech," he wrote, "made us all bright and hopeful. . . ." TSiose who were conversant with national affairs more than likely realized that Call had overstated his theme of optimism-even to the point of misrepresentation. At the ''nliB remark, of course, was contrary to fact. Call knew that the Radicals had no intention of abandoning their campaign against Presidential Reconstruction. Eighteen days before his Fernandina speech. Call \rrote Governor Walker and the General Assembly that Johnson, members of his cabinet, and GeneraLL Grant were laboring to "lighten our burdens and rectore permanently the relations of peace and friendship." Congress, on the other hand, had, prior to his arrival in v;ashington, "adopted xacaGures" to exclude tl:ie South from representation. "!niese measures," he reported, "have not since been in any degree modified, and all hope of their change, until the elections . . . has disappeared." Call had probably assumed that his letter would not be released for publication. See ibid. Ten days before the Fernandina speech. Call was barred from his seat in the Senate. Congressional Globe , 39tli Cong., 1st Sess., Pt. k, p. 2980. ^°For an account of Call's Fernandina speech, see Fernandina Weekly Courier , June 20, 1366, in Gainesville Weekly New Era , June 29, 1566. So far as the writer Imows, Call's speech is the only extant speech of Florida's senator-elect in Florida in 1866. Both Call and Marvin spoke before tlie Florida legislatvire on November 23, 1666, but the writer was unable to locate any account of what they said. See Tallahassee Tri-Weekly Florida Sentinel , November 26, IG66; Tallahassee ScmiWeekly Floridian, November 23, 1866.

PAGE 213

207 GBine time, however, they probably also agreed that an anxious people needed a measure of hope in order to abide a period of political uncertainty. Speech of E. W. Perry On July Ik, 1866, less than a month after Call's Femandina speech, the Tallahassee Sentinel published an editorial that contrasted sharply with Call's theme of optimism. "The most hopeful eye that gazes upon the political horizon of our country to-day," reported the Sentinel , "must admit that it is dark. ..." Much that [has] been done by the President's single arm, has been tmdone by the Senators and Representatives now in Washington; they have withheld legislation where it was needed, pressed sectional measures wholly unnecessary, denied recognition not merely of our rights, but of our having any claim upon the forbearance or magnanimity of our conquerors. In short they have reopened the wound that was healing. . . .^' The Sentinel's pessimism stemmed from the latest Radical attack on presidential Reconstruction, the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment— an amendment which promised protection and privilege for the freedmen and LA political disability for the whites. Two days after the appearance of ^"''Norfolk Vir ginian , in Tallahassee Tri -Weekly Florida Sentinel , July Ik, 1866. See "Our Prospects," in Tampa Vfeekly Florida Peninsular , June l6, 1866. The third section of the amendment barred from federal and state office all who as officeholders before the war had taken an oath to support the federal Constitution and had then joined the rebellion. Those who were affected by the clause were to suffer political disability indefinitely or until redeemed by a two-thirds vote of Congress. The amendment actually struck at "the experienced and intelligent leadership of the Southern states, for there were very few prominent rebels \ftio had not been officeholders before l86l." William A. Russ, Jr., "Disfranchisement in

PAGE 214

206 the Sentinel editorial, and shortly before Congress adjotimed, the Radicals climaxed their attack on presidential Reconstruction by seciiring the passage of the Preedman's Bureau bill — a measxire which gave federal officials sweeping military and Judicial authority to safeguard the legal rights of the freedmen throughout the South, These measures , which made the Radical philosojdiy more apparent and \rtiich provided convincing evidence of the emerging power of the Radical party in Congress, precipitated the final phase of the rhetoric of vindication in Florida--a rhetoric which was now marked by bitterness, vituperation, and militant defense. On June 25, I865, twelve days after Congress passed the Fourteenth Amendment, E. W. Perry, a civil engineer by occupation and senior warden kg of the Hayward Masonic Lodge, ^ spoke to the members of his fraternity and the general public in the Presbyterian Church in Gainesville.^'^ Florida during Radical Reconstruction," Susquehanna University Studies , IV (March, 1950), 166. ^9perry advertised as a "County surveyor and Civil Engineer." Gainesville Weekly Mew Era , July 20, I866. For information on Perry's activities as a Mason, see The First Century of Gainesville Lodge No. kl F. and A. M., Gainesville, Florida, 1331-1931 (Gainesville, 1957h P. 26. 5%ainesville, located in one of the "black arc" counties, was another of Florida's likely trouble spots. The city had been invaded and liberated several times during the last years of the war. Davis, The Civil War and Reconstruction in Florida , pp. 28U, 305. In I865, its citizens had been outraged when the city was garrisoned by "blacks in blue." Gainesville Weekly New Bra , December I6 and 23, I865. Gainesville's free press was challenged when the local military commander exercised censorship over the New Era until ordered to desist by General John G. Foster. See "A Free Press Again," in ibid., November I8, I865. In June of 1866, there was a slight disagreement between the races regarding the ownership of the Methodist Church which had been in the possession of freedmen since the close of the war. Ibid ., June I5, I866. In Jxily of that year all of Alachua County was remanded to martial law because the

PAGE 215

209 Althou^ Perry's central theme was the inmortality of Masonry, he spent nost of his time discussing the condition of Christendom. "While the Mohanmedan and Pagan nations of the world are getting en peacefully and quietly enough," the speaker contended, "the Christian powers in both continents are in a ferment of war and war's worst passions." In order to illustrate this observation. Perry took his audience on a tour of the world. Beginning with the New World, the speaker declared: In the new world. Christian Canada is arming against the Christian Fenians; Christian Mexico is in a blaze of danestic conflict; Christian Brazil and her republican allies of Eastern South America are thundering away at the gates of Christian Paraguay; Christian Chile and Peru are battling for dear life with the fleets of Her Most Catholic Majesty of Spain; and in our own model Christian republic of the United States, a great political party, professedly devoted to progress and philanthropy, is making the most persistent and furious efforts to keep alive and intensify nil the hatreds, rancors, and spites engendered by the greatest and most terrible civil war on record. In Europe, the scene was much the same. Christian nations were at each other's throats, while pagan nations lived at peace with one another . Events in Washington alone were sufficient to demonstrate that "the Crescent just now sheds a milder and less baleful light on m a nkin d than the Cross." Here "the worst ravings of a cruel and remorseless fanaticism under the conquering Islamite Caliphs of old are daily civil authorities had not "acted properly, in bringing offenders against the law, to justice." Ibid., July 29, 1866.

PAGE 216

210 paralleled by the way in which men claiming to be Christian and repiiblican legislators talk of their fellow citizens, lately their enemies, but now lying defeated in the power of the government," The speaker drove home the point that Radical leaders had little love for their southern brethren by employing two rhetorical questions. "What dervish or cadi," he asked, "ever transcended Mr. Thaddeus Stevens' atrocious exclamation on the floor of the American Congress that the •people of the South ought to be coofined by bayonets in the penitentiary of hell?'" "And is it not enoiigh to try one's faith in the reality of himian progress," he inquired, "that a temper such as this shovild, ai^r eighteen centuries of Christianity, be the outcome of the greet American experiment of government by the people?" Altho\igh Ferry concluded his speech by pointing to the fact that Masonry lived "unchanged with changing time," it is Interesting to note that he had not been able to do this without pointing with bitterness to \rtiat he believed to be the un-Christian attitxide of the Radical party 51 in Washington, Speech of Thomas T. Lung Within a month aTter his political antagonists left V.'ashington, President Johnson, undaunted by the Radical refusal to recognize the reconstructed states of the South, acted to strengthen them. On August 20, 1866, he issued a proclamation in which he declared that the ins\irrection had ended and that peace and civil authority once more existed 5%or the full text of Perry's speech, see ibid., July 13, 1866,

PAGE 217

211 throughout the nation. In effect, this proclaaiation announced the imconditional restoration of civil law in the reconstructed states of the South. ^^ Accordingly, officials in Florida set about the business of restoring the agencies of civil law on all levels of government. In s(»bs parts of the state the courts had been re-established uhen civil lav was provisionally restored in April, 1866. Some coxinties, however, had been remanded to oartial lav and had yet to complete the re -organization of their court systems. ^3 One aspect of this process vas the selection and Instrviction of grand juries. Sometiioe during the fall of 1666, the grand jury of Levy County assembled to be instructed by the recently appointed jiidge of the Suwannee Circuit. The man v^o took the bench to deliver the charge was Thomas T. Long, a Democrat, a former secessionist, and an ex -Confederate. Under ordinary circumstances, a judge would probably have done no more than given the jury a formal charge. But Long went beyond this. He used the occasion to praise the President as a defender of civil liberty, to denounce Congress as the oppressor of a conquered people, and to counsel Floridians to moderation and respect for law as the best means of demonstrating that they were worthy of freedom. Through the "indomitable will and patriotism of our virtuous and inflexible Chief Magistrate," Long began, the state coiirts were now able ^Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents , VI, 431^-438. CO ''-'Such vas the case in Escambia, Santa Rosa, Madison, Alachua, and Le-vy counties. Gainesville Weelily Mew Era , July 29, I865.

PAGE 218

212 to re -assume "their origiual power and duties." The President's act would take its proper place in history and would be "transmitted to grateful generations." Civil law had again ocaas to a people who had heen sorely tried and who deeply appreciated the efforts of the President "to shield them from oppression and preserve their Constitutional Liberty.'' Turning his attention to the President's antagonists > Long attacked Congress in a direct statement, "The Legislative branch of Government," he declared, "has usurped or at least tried to usurp, the entire Government, . . . and attempted to provoke the South into acts of criifilty, violence, and disloyalty." The Radicals specifically had allowed sectional hatred and personal animosity to become luajor stuiubling blocks to reiuiion. Juch men, in Long's opinion, were not fit to legislate for the nation. I fear that the time is not fax distant \4ien the American people shall have cause to believe that it is far better that our country should be ruled by a despot with a glittering tiara on his head, than by the authors of the Civil Rights bill, whose animosities seem eabittered by our attempts for separate independence in the late conflict , . . and who have not the magnanimity to be either generous or just to a fallen foe, vmwilling to award us credit for the man liness we have displayed, or to our soldiery any other position than that of vassals; and who now insult us by torturing our integrity and the purity of our motives into sycophancy and hypocritical professions. These politicians, he continued, were "so debased and confirmed in their views, so wedded to power, so blinded by a wretched adherence to sectional prejudices, that they have forgotten all the precepts of enlightened nations, and that canonized maxim, 'that to be trvily great is to be tnily good'."

PAGE 219

213 After attacking the Radicals fear their lack of statesmanship, Long consoled his listeners by predicting that the "continuation of such unwarrantahle abuse and oppression upon a minority" would arouse the patriotism of the nation. "An indignant people," he asserted, would surely strip these politicians of the power they had "so grossly abused.' "So rose the Danite strong Herculean Sampson from the harlot lap of Fhilistian Delilah and walked shorn of strength," Taking up the first of the charges he had made in his opening statement— that Congress had usvirped the entire Government— Long declared: "A corrupt Congress snatches the reins of government, dictates to the other departments, and threatens to decapitate the Executive under the form of impeachment. ..." Such tactics put Radical politicians in a position "to carry out an unbridled wax upon the Constitution," to annihilate "State sovereignty," and to restrain "the liberties of the people." The trade and commerce of the South were already in a state of decay because of "the ill-advised and unhappy interference with the labor of the country, by the Freedmen's Bureau and CivU Rights Bill. ..." Yet, despite all of these "political trials," continued Long, despite the fact that the southern people had even been "goaded by the oppressor," they had been steadfast in their fealty to the Constitution and the laws of the country. Ihey had pursvied and would continue to follow the proper course— that of biding their time and "relying upon the integrity and wisdom of those who hold out to us equality in, and perpetuation of the Government as we originally received it from the

PAGE 220

2U framers, and not as it could or would he administered by a sectional party." How far the Radicals irould ultimately go was a question Long hesitated to answer. It was "beyond the limits of the most capacious im a g i n a t ion to say how far the [Radical] lust for power and gain [would] carry them, and, as we have no back stairs knight in the Castle, we fear to express ovir apprehensions." Having heralded the return of civil law with praise fbr the President and an attack on Congress, Long conclxided his address by presenting a charge which was directed both to the grand Jury before him and to the people throughout Florida. None would want it said that the restoration of civil authority was a farce or that "we are unworthy of the trust or unwilling to execute it." All were advised to be moderate and prudent, "to bear with becoming manliness the evils we cannot avoid, and to faithfully do and perform the several duties encumbent upon [us] as officers of the law and citizens of the State." Although Long had spoken in a different county and on a completely different sort of occasion than had Perry, he became the second speaker in Florida who digressed from a specific theme to comment on the fanaticism of the Radical party in Washington. An estimate of the reception given his remarks may be gleaned from the fact that they were published at the request of those who heard them. 5Vor the complete text of Long's speech, see Tallahassee Semi Weekly Floridian , November 9, 1066.

PAGE 221

215 Message of David S» Walker Throughout 1866, a year of vmcertalnty, the people of Florida could do little more than await the outcome of the conflict which had developed between the President and Congress over Reconstruction, Their one opportunity to have a direct voice in national affairs carae in the fall of that year when the Fourteenth Amendment, which had "been proposed hy Congress, was subnltted to the Florida legislatiire for ratification. On Noveiriber Ik, 1866, the General Assembly convened in Tallahassee. Two days later, on the aTtemoon of November l6, Ctovemor David S, Walker sent both houses a message on the state of the government. As soon as Walker's ''onnaunlcation was received, it was ordered that «1? business be suspended and that the message be read aloud. ^^ Even before the clerk began to read, the legislators knew that the goveimor's principal theme would be the Fourteenth Amexidment. Walker had written a message to convince; his proposition was one of policy, and might well have been phrased: "Resolved? that the proposed Fourteenth Amendment should be rejected." Walker prefaced his address with a statement of Florida's political condition. The situation was of a "most gloomy character — far more gloomy than any of us anticipated it would be when I addressed you at the conmencement of your last session." At that time the President . . . representing, as we supposed, the Government of the United States, indicated a line of policy, the adoption of which we were assured would secure a ^i^ Florida Senate Jottmal , l^i-th General Assembly, 2nd Seas., p. k; Florida House Jotirnal , l^th General Assembly, 2nd Sess., p. 8.

PAGE 222

216 full recognition of oux civil rights and also our representation in Congress, V/e adopted the line of policy . . . to the fullest extent. ... We left nothing undone that the Government, acting through the President, demanded of lis. What had been the restilt? The people of Florida had been denied "Constitutional representation" and did not fully enjoy their civil rights. "Though we pay all taxes and obey all lavs and are ready to give our lives in defence of the Constitution," declared Walker, "we do not enJoy the protection of that sacred instrument." "No part of the blame" for this violation of "the pledged faith of the nation [was] iiaputable to the President," He had done all he coixld to ccmply with "our reasonable expectations," A powerful group of politicians who feared "that the admission of the Southern members might transfer the balance of power from themselves to their opponents" had blocked revinion. They had barred ten states from Congress "without even Indicating any terms on which they will be admitted."^ It was true. Walker continued, that Congress had passed a Joint resolution proposing the Fourteenth Amendment, but it had given no indication "that upon the adoption of this amendment ovir members will be admitted," Even if Congress had made such a promise, contended Wall:er, "I can scarcely think our people va\ild purchase a right, already clearly their own under the Constitution, at so terrible a price," V.licn Congress convened in December of I865, eleven ex-Confederate states were not represented in that body. In July of 1866, the nifflober of unreconstructed states was reduced to ten when Tennessee was admitted following her "ratification" of the Fourteenth Amendment. Randall, The Civil War and Reconstruction, pp. 7J+I-7U2,

PAGE 223

217 Havinc thus approached the major thsme of his message, VJalker stated his proposition eaid proceeded to prove it, "I recomaend," he declared, "that [the proposed Poiorteenth ; jnenaiaent ] be rejected. ..." Six specific arguiaents were offered in support. (1) L'aHier did not believe that the amendnient was legal, because it had not been proposed by a Congress representative of all of the states. (2) The federal Constitution provided that every Joint resolution of the Congress excepting resolutions for adjournment "shall be presented to the President." The proposed amendment was a Joint resolution requiring the conctirrence of the two houses, but "was never submitted to the President*" (3) Tlie first and fifth sections of the proposed amendr^nt, which defined citiz^enship and gave Congress authority to insvire that no state would "abridge the privileges or imnunities" of a citizen, wovild revolutionize the national government by rendering state governments impotent, {h) The second section of the amendment, which called for reduced representation for any state denying suffrage to citizens of the United States, wouM operate to the detriment of the South by changing the basis of representation from that of total population to that of voting population, (5) Ihe fifth section, which called for the disqualification of ex-confederates iiftio had held office before the war, actually provided for the dissolution of Florida^s Johnson goveimment. (6) Finally, the fourth section of the amendment deeuLing with the repudiation of the Confederate debt and the validity of the federal debt was needless and redundant. "All that it proposes to secure is secured already beyond question,"

PAGE 224

218 Of these six axguments, the fifth, pertaining to the political disability of a certain class of ex-Confederates — received the greatest emphasis. Walker thought this section of the proposed amendment especially objectionable. (1) He did not believe that any "power on earth [could] Justly go behind the President's pardon. ..." (2) The amendment would "punish men whose labors for years had been devoted to the preservation of the Union, and leave unpunished those whose lives had been devoted to its destruction." (3) The pardoning power which the am e nd me nt vested in Congress would be a corrupting influence. "A man who is elected to an office will be received or rejected, not because of his constitutional rights or merits, but from the favor or disfavor of the dcMninant party." {k) A final objection— and a most striking onewas that this fifth section of the propoced amendment provided for the dissolution of Florida's Johnson government; the Conservative officials were being asked to vote themselves out of office. Baploying irony. Walker rendered the proposed amendment odious throu(^ the tise of rhetorical questions. Look around you and see how few persons will be left in office aiter this amendment is adopted, and you will see that to vote for it is to vote for the destruction of your State government. After talcing out all the proscribed officers, there will not be enough left to order elections to fill the vacancies, and a military government will become a necessity. And ^Ai.o are those vrtiom we ore asked thus to disgrace with official disfranchisement? Are they not those whose experience and abilities are most necessary to the State in this her hour of trouble? Are they not those whom we have always regarded as the very best men in our land? Are they not those whom we have loved and trusted above all other men in the State? Are they not those, in thousands of

PAGE 225

219 instances, ^o witnessed the act of secession with bleeding hearts, and engaged in the rebellion only out of deference to the will of their State? Are they not those who sacrificed themselves to serve their Ctate? And will their State now turn round and repay their devotion by putting a mark of infamy upon them? Perish forever so base a thoxightl If they are to be disfranchised, let it be by no act of ours. Following his attack on the proposed amendment, the Governor called the legislators' attention to other problems that would face 57 them during the session,"^' In his conclxading observations. Walker praised the people of Florida for their patience and fortitude vrtiile citizens without a coimtry. There had been much for them to endure — the Interference of the Preedmen's Bureau Coxirts in \rtu.ch "the white man expects to receive nothing but oppression, and the black man nothing but partiality," the hardship of the burdensome cotton tax, 5" 'H;h,e slanders published concerning us," and, of course, the denial of "our representation in Congress." Ploridians had, indeed, learned to appreciate the proverb that "hope deferred maketh the heart sick." Yet they had remained "true and loyal to the Constitution and the Union," The closing sentences of Walker's message expressed the pessimism 5'7ualker recommended that the law prohibiting freedmen from carrying firearms be repealed and that the "marriage lav;for freedmen" be revised to allow the freedc^n who had not been informed of the law adequate time to "perform the marriage ceremony." He also made recoraaendations concerning Florida's judicial system. S8 "^ Congress had levied an internal revenue tax of three cents a pound on cotton. See Dunning, Reconstruction Political and Economic , 1665-1877, pp. 26-27; Walter L. Fleming, Documentary History of Recon struction, Political, Military, Social, Religious, Educational, and Indxistrial, I (Cleveland, 1906), 3^.

PAGE 226

220 and resignation that steinmed from a realization that loj-alty and forbearance were not to "be the sole requisites of reunion. Ive are passing throvigh our political wilderness and being bitten by fiery serpents. If we cannot rest our anxious gajze upon the Constitution of our countryand be healed, then must we conclude that God in His wisdom has delivered us over to utter destriiction, and submit with resignation to His divine will, wiiatever it may be.^° The message was well received. The Conservative Floridian considered it "a straight -forward, . . . welL written paper. ..." The governor had called for the rejection of the proposed amendment "with great cogency, yet with perfect fairness and good temper. "°^ Another Conservative organ, the Sentinel , hailed the conmunication as an "unusually dignified and able document," vaien the clerk had finished reading the message before the Senate, one of its members moved that five hundred copies be made available for 62 Senate use, A similar motion in the House called for the printing of one thousand copies — fifteen copies to be "placed on the desk of each member for distribution to his constituents," •^ 59For the complete text of Walker's msssage, see Florida Senate Journal, l4th General Assembly, 2nd Sess,, pp. 5-20. Portions of the message were also pubi^-ished in the New York Times , November 22, I666. Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Pi^rldlan, November I6, 1/366. "TTallahassee Trl-Weekly Florida Sentinel , November 26, 1866, f lor Ida Senate Journal , lUth General Assembly, 2nd Sess., p. 20. ••Tlorida House Journal, lUth General Assembly, 2nd Sess., p. 2k,

PAGE 227

221 The reaction that probably pleased Walker most came on December 1 and 3, when the House and Senate voted to a man to reject the proposed ibxirteenth Amendment. The Rhetoric If events had developed as the proponents of presidential Reconstruction believed they would, the story of the rhetoric of reunion would have ended with the rhetoric of adjustment. Such, however, did not prove to be the case. An opposition movement, which started with the objections of a handful of Radical leaders in Congress and developed into a full fledged counter -movement in 1866, caused the proponents of presidential Reconstruction in Florida to work for the attainment of an unanticipated end; the vindication of presidential Reconstruction. What speakers said in Florida early in 1866 was largely determined by events both past and present. Having accepted the presidential plan of revmion, and having organized a new state government under this plan, Floridians naturally defended it when it came under attack. After the Inception of the Radical movement, however, this movement governed the invention of the southerners* rhetoric so that the progress of the Radicals in Washiiigton can easily be charted in terms of the major themes of the rhetoric of vindication in Florida. Vftien the Radicals first launched their attack on presidential Reconstruction, and especially dxiring the period when the Reconstruction 64, Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian , December k, 1866.

PAGE 228

222 Ccanmlttee was gattiering evidence on conditions in the South, the Johnson men evolved a rhetoric based cai a defensive strategy. Those who niet in Pensacola to refute the testimony of a federal custoias official vho had charged that Floridians were "deceitful" and disloyal, did so because they believed they could influence the opinions of the Reconstruction Committee. John W. Recks' testimony, they declared, had been false, Florida had accepted the results of the war in good faith. Making no attempt to deny the charge of rebel rule or Negro disfranchisement, the people of Pensacola emphasized that their respect for law and order ruled out the allegation that military force was needed for the protection of life and property. Governor David S. Walker likewise took steps to vindicate presidential Reconstruction, In his proclamation of April 2? and in his Quincy speech, he called on the people to prove throu^ the beauty of their lives that the President was right and his enemies wrong. By appealing to tlis people to support Florida's claims of loyalty and good fcdth, the governor hoped to ward off any act of violence or any indiscreet utterance that might provide grist for the Radical propaganda mill. Ignoring professions of loyalty and conditions that belied their position, the Radicals in Congress pressed their attacks on the Johnson govermaents and continued to check reunion In order to discredit the President's plan of reunion and svibstltute their ovm. As these facts became known, the invention of the rhetoric of vindication ran dry, and Floridians resorted to rationalization, derision, and protest.

PAGE 229

223 Called upon to report on conditions in the rtorth. Senator -elect Wilkinson Call played the role of morale speaker. To encoura^ an anxious people in the midst of political uncertsdJity, he turned his hack on reality and combined deception with speculation to assure them that all would be well. The people, no doubt, were heartened by his assurances that the Radicals in Washington had backed down from their original position and that public opinion in the North favored southern representation without restriction. In addition, the speaker believed that the South could count on the sympathy, magnanimity, aod leadership of Andrew Johnson and Ulysses S, Grant, It was not the purpose of the federal government or the "true people of the North" to make the people of the South do anirthing "craven or mean," VJhen Congress passed the Fourteenth Amendment, Floridians not only recognized the futility of professing their loyalty and good faith; they were no longer deluded by illtisions of moderation on the part of the Radicals, Ignoring Governor Walker's appeal for peace and quiet, two speakers broke silence to voice their contempt for the Radicals. E, W. Perry digressed from his oration on the immortality of Masonry to discredit the methods of Radical politicians. One could not respect a political party that was "making the most persistent and furious efforts to keep alive and intensify all the hatreds, rancors, and spites engendered by the greatest and most terrible civil v/ar on record." In the course of instructing a newly appointed grand jxiry, Ihomas T. Long also departed fr
PAGE 230

z^ and sectionalism, Tliat body had seized the reins oH government, had denied the South its rights of representation and petition, and was engaged in the process of carrying out "an iinbr idled wax upon the Constitution." Dominated by a sectional party. Congress had disgraced itself by mixing political differences with personal hatred, Giovernor Walker did not deviate from his policy of prudence and moderation, but when he called for the rejection of the proposed Fourteenth Aiaendment, there was a significant change in the tone of his rhetoric. Demoralized by the Radical victories in the North, he praised the President for being faithful to the South and the Constitution, and cens\ired the Radicals for placing party politics above the cause of reunion. Even as he wrote his message he realized that little suasion would be needed to conviuce his colleagues that they must not approve a measure vrtiich called for the destruction of Florida's Johnson govejmment and the Constitution of 17^7 . The force of his reasoning, however, was not complemented by the usual undertones of confidence or optimism. He knew he wouli carry his point with southern legislators, but was depressed by the realization that his arguments would carry little weight in the North, Moved by these reflections, the Governor concluded his advice on national affairs by asking Floridians to accept whatever the future might hold witli a spirit of Christian resignation, Tlie change from a defensive strategy to a strategy of reaction did not constitute tlie total effect of the Radical movement on the Floridiono* invention. As Radical strength increased and the southerner fo\XD& himself pressed to the wall, he voiced what he believed to be the

PAGE 231

225 ininibierable premise of his rhetoric. The vindication of presidential Reconstruction was more than a vindication of the President or the South. It ^ms a vindication of the Constitution of 178? • Inasmuch as the President had tried to restore the Union on the basis of that Constitution, the Radicals vho opposed him would ultimately be checked by -Oae sober second thou^t and patriotism of the nation. Style, like invention, was influenced by events both past and present. The inflvience of the past was patent. Conquered rebels who had been treated as Americans in I865, spoke as outraged Americans in IS66. The impact of the Radical movement, on the other hand, caused speakers to choose their words with some regard to how their rhetoric wDiQd be evaluated by northerners as well as southerners, The rhetoric of vindication in Florida was at once a sviccess and a failure. Barring a few minor outbursts, the people responded to the appeals of their leaders by exercising prudence and moderation in word and action, and defended their government by rejecting the proposed Fourteenth Amendment. The rhetoric of vindication was a failure in the sense that Florldians were not able to exert a direct or material influence CM! events in Washington, i\fter Congress adjourned, the President and his opponents took the issue of revinion to the people of the North and West in the campaign of 1866. As we visit scKne of the scenes of that campaign in Chapter VII, we shall see that t;ro Floridians went North to vindicate the cause of presidential Reconstruction in Florida,

PAGE 232

CHAPTER VII THE SIEAKIWG OF FUDBIDk'S SENATORSEI£CT 11^ THE CAMEAIGN OF 1866: A RHETORIC OF VINDICATION Tbe Scene When the Thirty-ninth Congress adjourned on July 28, the first and indecisive phase of the struggle between the President and Congress over Reconstruction ended, and the second and more intensive phase of that conflict — the congressional caispaign of 1866 — began. Since the President and Congress had not been cible to agree on a program of reunion, both now resolved to vin support for their policies by taking them to the voters. As the cazqpaign opened the Tallahassee Floridian sunnarized the situation in a single sentence. "The political questions of the country, " it editorialized, "have resolved themselves into a support of the President, or of the Radical party in Congress. " A few weeks later it offered a more dramatic analysis. "If President Johnson's friends triumph in the approaching Northern elections, " it predicted, "the South will be heard through her representatives in Congress. ... On the other hand, should there be no reflux of the tide which . . . carried into power the present Congress, we shall see . . . the Southern State governments all overthrown, and martial law re-established until new State governments can be established on the bcusis of universal suffrage T?allahEis8ee 3emi-V/eekly Floridian, July 23, 1866. 226

PAGE 233

227 to the blade race and very limited suffrage to the white. "^ If tlie people of Florida, or for that matter southerners generally, vere troubled over this second ciltemative, their frustration ims heightened by the realization that for the first time in American history a national question was to be decided by voters in a limited number of states. Though the Union consisted of thirty-six states, voters in twenty-five states in the North and West in electing members to Congress held the power to determine the political destiny of the ten states wMch were unrepresented. 3 These ten southern states, however, did not follow a completely passive role in the can^aign. Southerners utilized every opportunity to Td.n northern and western voters over to presidential Reconstruction. When the President's supporters in Washington issued a call for the National Union convention to meet in Philadelphia on August ik, the Gainesville New Era answered for Florida, hailing the meeting as the only national forum from which "the voice of the South [could] be heard. "^ "From that Convention, " proclaimed the Democratic organ, "the just cause of our people will be sounded in the ear of eveiy thinking man, and of ^Ibid . , August 30, 1866. ^nnessee was not involved— that is, she did not have to elect senators and representatives or wonder whether they would be admitted to Congress. Her senators and representatives had already been elected as part of the reorganization process under presidential Reconstruction and had been seated following the state's ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment. T'or a copy of the formal call for the convention, see Tallaliassee Tri-Weekly Florida Sentinel. July 12, 1866.

PAGE 234

226 every magoaoliaous enemy throtishout the nation. "^ Acting in accordance with thiis sentiment, David S. Wallcer, governor of Florida and leader of the Johnson syn^wthizers in the state, issued a proclamation on July 23, appointing delegates to the Philadelphia meeting. Among tliose named were Florida's two senatorselect, William Marvin and Wilkinson Call; her representative-elect, Ferdinand McLeod; and two ex-colonels who had served on opposite sides during the war, George W. Scott who had been in the Confederate axmy and Joseph C. McKibbin, who had represented California in the Thirty7 fifth Congress and liad served in the Union anay. At Philadelphia, Florida's delegates, who represented southern Democrats and Whigs, joined Conservative Republicans, northern and border-state Whigs, and both varieties of northern Democrats — those who had supported the war and those who were known as "Copperheads" or "Peace Democrats "—in defending presidential Reconstruction.® The 5 Gainesville Weekly Hew Era . August 17, 1866. "For Wallcer* s proclamation, see Jacksonville Weekly Florida Times, July 26, 1866; Pensacola gri-Weekly Observer, August k, 1866. 7 'Tallahassee Semi-Weekly Floridian , July 23, 1866. For biographical data on McKibbin, see Biographical Directory of the AmericcL:: Congress, 177'^-19^9» p. 15^+1. It seems that all who were named in Walker's proclamation did not attend, and that some like Confederate Governor Abi>,'.>an K. Allison and former Confederate Congressman John P. Sanderson went without an official invitation. See William MBurvin to Editors of the Floridian, Philadelpliia, August l6, 1866, in Tallahassee Semi-Weekly Floridian, August 27, 1866. ^Ehe Florida delegation received a fair share of appointments to the convention offices and conmittees. Thomas Reuidall was ajppoi^ted a vice president and Benjamin D. Wright, secretary. The committee

PAGE 235

229 9 speaking of these men, along with their "Declaration of Principles, " and their "Address to the People of the Itoited States, " constituted the Johnson party's platfona of vindication. In order to clarify their position, the President's apologies prefsMied their arguments with a narrative of the events of the previous eight months. The President, they recounted, had reorganized the southern states so they could resume normal relations with the federal government. Congress, however, had refused to recognize these Johnson governments until it could investigate them. Then, after reviewing the constitutions and laws of these states, and after investigating the temper of the southern i)epple. Congress had alleged that the personal and civil rights of the freedmen were not being respected and that the Johnson governments were basically disloyal. VMle continuing to withhold representatioa. Congress had passed a constitutional amendment defining citizenship, guaranteeing the privileges and immunities of all citizens, disqualifying ex-Confederates from public office, and guaranteeing the national debt. Until the menibers from Tennessee h ^y^ been appointments were: George \h Scott and W. C. Maloney, Ccomittee on Finance; William Marvin and WilMnson Call, Ccamittee on Resolutions and Address; and John P. Sanderson and Joseph C. McKibben, Cocanittee to Wait on the President. The Proceediy^ of the national Ifaion Convention Held at Riiladelphia, August 14, 1866 (Washington. 1866). p-. 2. 6. 15. A corpy of the proceedings was procured for the writer's use by the Library of Congress from the Princeton Italversity Library'. 9 '^The convention's "Declaration of Principles" was, for the most part, a fonaal endorsonent of the presidential terms of Reconstruction. The National Unionists pledged themselves to support the Constitution and the Union, declared the illegality of secession, acimowledged tljat slavery was dead and that the freedmen should receive equal protecticm in their rights of person and property, repudiated the Confederate debt, and recognized the national debt.

PAGE 236

230 admitted to Congress a few short weeks before, a Ihiion of thirty-six states had been ruled by twenty-five. Mow thirtysix states were under the rule of twentysix. In the light of these events it appeared to the President's supporters that the Ameirican people were confronted with a revolutionary proposition: "Resolved, that Congress should withhold representation from the South until such tisie sis it shall have cotnplied with whatever conditions Congress may deem necessary or es^iedlent. " As disputants on the negative side of this question, the Johnson men maintained: (l) the arguuents supplied to support the Radical Republican policy were not true; (2) the Radical Republican plan of Reconstruction was unconstitutional and Is^nractical. The Radicals had claimed that reunion sliould be delayed for two reasons, (l) Xhe new citizens of the South, the freedmen, were not secure in their personal and civil rights, and needed protection against the discriminatoiy constitutions and black codes" of the Johnson governments. (2) Since the southern pepple were still dlsloyeLL, "neither the honor, the credit, nor the Interests of the nation would be safe if they re-admitted to share in its councils. " These conditions, they claimed, necessitated changes in the Constitution — changes tliat would guarantee the personal cud civil liberties of all loyal citizens and impose political disability on ex-Confederates. The President's supporters replied to the first argument by pointing out that the South had formally recognized the freedom of the exclave, and that it had pledged itself to give him the same protection

PAGE 237

231 as the whites "in every right of person and property. ' To the second charge— that the southern people were disloyal— the Johnson laen replied: Not so. Although there had been some "local disturbances" in the South, these were not typical of the area and were not indicative of a hostile attitude on the part of the southern people. "lastory, " declared the President's defenders, "affords no instance where a people so powerful in numbers . . . and in public spirit, after a war so long in its duration, . . . have accepted defeat . . . with so much of good faith as . . the people lately in insurrection against tlie Ifaited States. " Having thus answered the "arguments or excuses" offered by the Radicals as reasons for delaying reunion, the Johnson men challenged the Radical Republican plan of Reconstruction by contending that what Congress had done was unconstitutional and what it proposed to do was impractical. The first or accon5)lished plank of this Radical plan, the exclusion of the southern states, they claimed was nothing short of usurpation, for the Ccmstitution did not provide for the denial of represen10 tation. Instead, that instrument, which had not been changed by the war or the victory, guaranteed "the right of representation" to every state "without restriction, qualification, or condition of any kind. " "What is there,' asked the friends of the President, "to distinguish ^e Johnson men also contended that Congress could not claim such power as part of its riglit to pass on the qualifications of its members; that it could not draw such authority from the forfeited rights theory; and that it could not lay claim to any power under the laws of war. For detailed arguments on these points, see ibid. . dtj. 1-2, 10-15.

PAGE 238

232 tlie power thus asserted . . . from the most sibsolute and intolerant tyranny?" Furtbermorej this faction contended, the second proposed part of the Radical plan, the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment as a condition of representation, vas impractical because the terms contained therein would never be accepted by the people of the South. One of the proposed demands virtually called for the surrender of a state's right to determine the suffrage qualifications of its own citizens. Since the southern states would prefer to remain outside of the lAiion rather than accede to the surrender of rights guaranteed by the Constitution, this aspect of the Radical plan would only produce an indefinite postponanent of reunion. For these reasons — that there was no need to adopt the Radical Republican plan, and that this plan was both unconstitutional and impractical—the Johnson men concluded that the people of the United States should reject the Radical Republican proposition by electing members to Congress who would "complete the work of restoration eu^ peace which the President . . . [had] so well begun. " After the Johnson convention had adjourned, William Marvin went to his room at the St. Lawrence Hotel and wrote the editors of the (Tallahassee Floridian . "The most intelligent statesmen, Noarth and South, " he reported, "consider the constitutional rights and liberty of the See the speeches of John A. Dix and James Rood Doolittle, "Declaration of Principles, " and "Address to tlie People of the Iftiited States." Ibid ., pp. 1-15.

PAGE 239

233 of the people to be in great danger, and everytliing should be dons that can be done to preserve them. " In his opinion, the South should support the appeals of its friends in the North by formally i^atifying the proceedings of the National Itoion convention.-^ The Democratic press in Florida endorsed i'faivin's suggestion and gave full support to a state-wide ratification movement. The Tallahassee Sentinel , in calling for the ratification of the action of the Ihiladelphia meeting, declared: Remember that every Southern Interest woirth preserving, £uad every Southern right worth enjoying depends upon the movement inaugui'ated in Hailadelphia. Remember that if the Radicals should succeed in the approaching elections, and at the Presidential election of 1360, the South will, at no distant day, be rendei^d an unfit place of abode for any but dogs of tlie lowest degree. 13 In response to Marvin's Hailadelphia letter and the appeals of the Democratic press, public meetings ratifying the proceedings of the National Union Convention were held throughout the state. ^^ As this ratification movement gained momentum, a minority group of "unconditional Unionists" or southern Loyalists— "slmon pure" unionists "William I^arvin to Editors of Floridian , Philadelphia, August 16, 1866, in Tallahassee Semi-Weekly Floridian , August 27, l866. •-^Tallahassee TriLWeekly Florida Sentinel . September 8, 1866. Tor the piwieedings of ratification meetings held in Femandina on August 29, in Apalachicola on September k, and in Jasper and Tallahassee on September 8, l866, see Saint Augustine Weekly Examiner. September 15, 1866; Tallahassee Semi-Weekly Floridian , S^tember Ih, 1866; Tallahassee Tri-Weekly Florida Sentinel . September 8, 13, 1866. The Sentinel of August 30 cai-ried a notice of a ratification meeting for September 8, in Quincy, but did not provide an account of the event in subsequent issues.

PAGE 240

23^ who had remained loyal to the Union throughout the wax — met in Tallahassee on August 22, to name delegates to a pro-Congress convention scheduled to meet in Philadelphia on September 3. The men chosen to represent Florida at this convention left for Philadelphia with editorial salvoes ringing in their ears. When it first became known that Florida's Loyalists planned to send delegates to the Southern Lcryalist convention, the Sentinel assailed them as "miserable fools, •boot-lickers* of THAD. STEVENS L CO." These "traitors," continued the Democratic organ, were suitable instruments for the "Jacobins at Washington"; they were willing to "fall down and worship the 'powers that be,' in hopes of getting a few . . . crumbs 17 of office. ..." The Floridian thought "the impudence of these socalled 'Union men of Florida' [was] sublimely ridiculous," At best, they ^^Ossian B, Hart's call for a state convention of Florida's Loyalists was published in the Jacksonville Times . See Tallahassee Tri -Weekly Florida Sentinel , August "J, 1666. The convention did not come off as planned. A handful of Loyalists met in Tallahassee, wrote up an address to the people of the state, and named delegates for the Philadelphia convention. Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian , September 4, 7, 1566. The Democratic press in Florida claimed that the convention had not materialized because only four men showed up at Tallahassee. The Radical press outside of the state, however, played up the incident as a manifestation of rebel rule. For the Conservative side of the story, see ibid ., August 23, October 5, 1566; New York World , September h, 1866. For the Radical version, see New York Tribune , September 3, 1866, in Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Flor id ian , October 5^ 1866; Syracuse Daily Journal , September 12, 1866. 16 For a list of Florida's Loyalist delegates, see TaUahassee Semi Weekly Floridian , September k, 1866. Some, after learning of their appointment, isstied public disclaimers. See ibid ., September 18, 21, 28, 1866. 17 Tallahassee Tri -Weekly Florida Sentinel , August 7* 1866.

PAGE 241

235 were but a handful of outcasts with "scarcely a roan among them with 1 o brains enough to make a fifth-rate cross-roads lawyer." Though they were but a handful, Florida's Loyalists"*"^ added their voices to those of Loyalist delegates from ten other southern states. Republic delegates from the border states, and Republican leaders from the North and West at the Union -Republican meeting in Philadelphia.^*^ At this meeting, the case for imnediate reunion that had been made by the presidential convention a few weeks earlier was ignored. The Radicals did not attempt to reply to the Johnson party's contention that delayed reunion was unconstitutional and impractical. What they did say was practically a restatement of what they had already offered as reasons for delaying reunion: (l) The freedmen throughout the South needed the protection that constitutional guarantees and federal power could afford. (2) The state governments that had been organized under the direction of the President were disloyal. Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian . September k, 1866. Ossian B. Hart, a native of Florida, agent of the Freedmen »s Bureau, and later Republican governor of Florida, was one of the Philadelphia convention's vice-presidents and a member of the Committee on Resolutions. John W. Price of Jacksonville was appointed secretary. Philip Fraser, a federal judge ;*io had moved to Jacksonville from Pennsylvania, served as a member of the Committee on Address. Calvin L. Robinson, a real estate man from Jacksonville, introduced a motion from the convention floor to the effect that "impartial suffrage" was the only security for Union men in Florida." See the proceedings of the convention. New Yprk WorM, September 5, 3, 1866; New York Times , September k. 5> 0, 7, 8, 1866^ 20 Two units, the "simon-pure Unionists" from the South and the border-state men, made up the official convention. Union-Republican leaders met separately and served as an advisory body for their southern cohorts. Dunning, Reconstruction Political and Economic . I865-I877, pp.

PAGE 242

236 One novel aspect of these Radical axsuments, however, was that instead of being repeated by Radical Republican congressional leaders, they were being repeated by Union men fron the South. In their address and resolutions, the Loyalists warned that recognition of the Jcdinson goveamments in the South would enable disloyal southerners "to punish us for our devotion to otir country, and to entrench themselves in the official fortifications of the Crovemment." In reorganizing the goveamments of the South, President Johnson had vested "four millions of traitors with the power to impoverish and degrade eight millions of loyal men," Althoiigh he had preached "that none but the loyal should govern the reconstructed South, he had practiced . . , the wftvim that none but traitors shall rule. ..." That sxich a system "should have culminated in the frightful riot of Memphis, and the . . . massacres of New Orleans, was as natural as that a bloody war should flow from the teachings of 21 John C. Calhoun and Jefferson Davis." The South was not loyal. "A reign of terror through all these ten States [made] loyalty stand silent in the presence of treason, or vrtiisper in bated breath." Union men, declared the Loyalists, were not the only ones being mistreated in the South, Those who had only^ recently been freed had been "The Memphis riot of May, 1866, began id.th a skirmish between local police and negro troops and ended with forty-six Negroes dead and eighty or more wounded. The New Orleans riot, which took place on July 30, stemmed from an attempt by local Radicals to sanction Negro suffrage and resulted in forty-one deaths and approximately l6o injured. Both riots were cited by the Radicals as dramatic proof that the South was disloyal and that freedmen needed all the protection that federal power could give. Ibid ,, pp, 79-^1; Coulter, The South During Reconstruction , 186^-1877 * pp7To-4l.

PAGE 243

237 placed iinder a neu form of slavery. After "professing" the abolition of this institution, the Johnson governments had taken steps to ccntinue 22 '*its detestable power by legislative acts against pretezuied vagrants." Because the freedmen required protection and because the Johnson govemiaents were controlled by disloyal southerners, the people should support Congress* policy of delayed reunion. "Our last and only hope," the southern Loyalists proclaimed, "is in the unity and fortitxide of the loyal people of America in the support and vindication of the Thirtyninth Congress, ..." Before adjourning, the Loyalists recognized the Fourteenth Aoendment as "the "best present remedy" and called on their political friends in the North and West to make it the "watchword" of 23 the caarpaign," This convention and its political counterpart, the National Union convention, established a pattern of argument for \^at promised to be the ^-Those who supported congressional Reconstruction contended that the vagrancy law— one of several statutes contained in the "black codes" enacted by the Johnson legislatiires — was a means of remanding freedmen to slavery. This, however, was a gross misinterpretation and prod;iced much misunderstanding throughout the North, The law in question was designed to sti m ulate indiostry and maintain order in a changing society. It provided "that any person without means of support should be required to give bond to the state, , , , Failure to give bond involved a penalty of a term of labor for the county or for any one v*io mi^/ht hire the offender from the county." Davis, The Civil War and Recouotruction in Florida , p. 419. See also pp. if21-i4-25. 23 For the address and resolutions of the Southern Loyalist convention, see Cincinnati Daily Gazette , September 7, 1G66. The convention delegates received an invitation from the Union League of New York to visit the state and to attend a railly in New York City following adjournment. See proceedings of the second day. New York Times , September 5, 1866.

PAGE 244

238 ok most intensive congressional campaign in American history. Appeals to the traditions of 178? ^ and counter appeals for the safety of the nation and the protection of its new citizens were heard thro-ughout the states of the North and West from the latter part of August xantil the eve of the election. The President himself, in his travels to and from Chicago, \rtiere he was scheduled to lay the comer stone for a laonumsnt to Stephen A. Douglas, campaigned in Pennsylvania, New York, Ohio, Illinois, Missouri, 25 Indiana, and Kentucky. Before he h£d completed his "swing around the circle," his opponents in Philadelphia had worked out arrangements for a band of southern Loyalists to make a political pilgrimage to Lincoln's tomb in Illiaoic, going by way of New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, 26 Massachusetts, Indiana, and CBxlo, Both parties, it seemed, vere aware that of the twenty-five states vrtiere rhetoric could bear fruit, Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Now York were the political plums of the campaign,^ oh '^^"No more serious debate, no more serious problem," ^vxote Dunning, "had engaged the attention of the American d«nocracy since ths memorable days of 1787 and 170c., ..." Reconstnicticn Political and EconCTnic, IS651Q77 . p. 70. ^ Ibid ., p. 81; Randall, The Civil War and Reconstruction , p. 'Jk6, 27, 26 Cincinnati Daily Gazette , September 7* 1366. "Ihese states, controlling a total of ei^ty-ei(^t seats in the House of Representatives, were understandably critical areas. In Illinois, fourteen seats \rere at stake; in Ohio, nineteen; in Penn3ylvarJ.a, t^^entyfour; and in New York, thirty -one. Each of the twenty -five states, of course, had to fill one seat in the Senate, thereby malting the total number available seats in Congress in these critical states alone as hi^ as ninety -two. For a sunmary of the number of representatives apportioned to the states in 1866, see Biographical Directory of the American Congress 177^-19^9 . p. h%

PAGE 245

239 Of these four states. New York— with thirty-one seats available in the House and one in the Senate--was the biggest single prize, and constituted a logical place for Florida^s senators -elect to embark on their vindication of Presidential Reccnstruction.^° In their attempt to achieve recognition for Florida's Johnson government and at the same time validate their credentials as senators elect, William Marvin and Wilkinson Call campaigned in various parts of 29 New York state, ^ Marvin, a native of New York, spoke in Rochester, Syracuse, Brooklyn, Peekskill, Saugerties, and Poughkeepsie.30 His colleague. Call, campaigned in New York City. 3^ So far as the writer knows, five of these speeches are extant, and in this chapter, we sheOl °One Radical paper in the state made this clear \ftiexi it warned its followers: "Johnson and his supporters ... see that they may have one chance ... to save themselves ... and that is by carrying New York." Poughkeepsie Weekly Eaf;le , October 27, 1866. ^Another reason that helps account for Marvin's and Call's participation in the canqpaign is that while they were at the Philadelphia convention in August, Janes R. Doollttle, President of the National Union convention, had appointed them members of the Ifetional Union Executive Committee for Florida. Gainesville Weekly New Sra » August 31, 1866. 30 Rochester Daily Union and Advertiser , September Ik, l866j SjTa°^® Daily Courier and Unbn , October 17. 1866; New York World, October 19f 1866. "Tall gave two speeches at a campaign rally on September 17, in New York City. For his "center stand" speech, see "National Union Celebration at Union Square, September 17, 1866." Pamphlet No. 13, in a bound volume containing a number of campaign documents. The volxome is catalogued under the title of one of the pamphlets contained therein: J^ T. Hofftaan, "The Cause of Ireland and Adopted Citizens" (New York, 1867). History Room, New York Public Library. Cited hereafter as "National Union Party Pamphlet No. I3." See also New York World, September 866"'' ^^ ^^"^^ "northwest stand" speech, see ibid.7"siiteraber 18,

PAGE 246

2U0 •?2 analyze four of them. On September 13, Maxvin told the people of Rochester that the denial of a state's right to representation was vinconstitutional and that there was no need for dela^'^ed reunion. In addition he predicted that if Congress insisted that the Johnson governments ratify the terms proposed in the Fourteenth Amendment, reunion would not be accomplished. Four days later. Call utilized a National Union ratification meeting in New York City to denounce the southern Loyalists and refute their charges against the South. Remaining in the contest to the finish, Marvin visited Syracuse on October 11, and Brooklyn on October 19 . At Syracuse he concentrated on the "need" issiies, denying th&t southerners were disloyal or that ftreedmen were in need of protection, and speaking at length on the futility of conditional reunion. At Brooklyn, he used essentially the same pattern of argument employed at Syracuse and Rochester but altered his pattern of emphasis to single out the Radicals as enemies of the Constitution and polce fun at their proposed scheme of conditional reunion. The Discourse Speech of William Marvin at Rochester On the evening of Septeniber 13, 1866, the "solid thinking people" of Rochester went to their city hall to hear two speakers who were to 32 The extant speeches Include those of Marvin at Rochester, Syracxxae, and Brooltlyn, and Call's two New York City speeches. Since Call spoke twice on the same day and his speeches were very much alike, only one of them, the "center stand" speech, is described in this chapter.

PAGE 247

2lH open the fall campaign at seven -thirty o'clock. Those who arrived early were treated to lively naasic and by the appointed horn: the audience had become an enthusiastic and iinified grovq). The appointed time, however, found no speaker on the platform. More than hsiif an hour passed before word finally spread that the two speakers had arrived. When laals E. Parsons, former provisicmal governor and now selator -elect from Alabama, and William Marvin of Florida entered the hall, they were received with "loud cheers." John M. French called the people to order and moved that M, S, Newton preside over the meeting. Since the hour was late, Newton proceeded directly to the business of introducing the speakers. The careers of Parsons and Marvin, said Newton, were almost identical. Both were northeim men by birth and education; both had opposed secession and had remained loyal to the cause of the Union. Both had been provisional ^•JRochester was located in a section of the state that was regarded as a "stron^old of radicalism." When it becante known that Marvin planned to canvass in western New York, the Floridian editorialized: "We rejoice to know that Senator Marvin has determined to beard the lion in his den. His strong sense, unquestioned loyalty to the Government, and his high character, will not fail ... to make an impression upon the benighted and besotted minds in the 'dark comer* of the Empire State." Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian ^ September 4, 1866. 34 A native of New York, a lawyer by profession, and an ardent Unicaiist, Parsons was appointed provisional governor of Alabama on June 21, 1865. Follov^ing the reorganization of the state, he retired from this position on Deceniber 20, I865, and was elected to the United States Senate without opposition, but was denied his seat. In IS66 he, as had Marvin, served as a delegate to the National Union convention. Within his own state. Parsons was the acknowledged leader of an ant i -ratification movement that brought about the rejection of the Fourteenth Amendment. Hallie Farmer, "Loiiis Eliphalet Parsons," Dictionary of American Biography , XIV (193^), 260-269.

PAGE 248

2k2 governors of their states, and having merited the confidence of the people, had been elected to the United States Senate. And finally, the two, with their "loyalty unstained and [their] patriotism undoubted," had been denied their seats in Congress. "As loyal men of the Soirth," said Newton, "they are entitled to a hear ins." Parsons spoke first. In his opening remarks he strove to capture audience interest by showing that the questions of the canrpaign weire not the concern of a single state. They were questions that wovild affect the -ifholje Union. Then he made a striking appeal for reunion by asking: "How shall we steady the good old ship of state . . . ?" Supplying the answer himself, he replied: "\le shall never do it by falling out with each other." As he tallied on. Parsons made it clear that there was no Justification for keeping North and South apart, that the people of Alabama were not disloyal, and that they had sincerely acknowledged the freedom of approximately 440,000 slaves. A touching appeal, designed to convince the audience of the South 's good fed-th, was reserved for the close of the speech. "I wish you could go there and see for yourselves," said Parsons. "I do not say that we feel happy at the way we were irtilpped. It is your consolation that your sons did fight for the old flag. What consolation have they whose sons have gone down to gory graves fighting against the stars and stripes?" Then he concluded: "Our comrnon sufferings ought to bind us together. "^^ 35 -''^For a report of Newton's speech of Introduction, see Rochester Dail;^^ Union and Advertiser , Gepteniber lU, 1866. "^T'or the text of Parsons' speech, see ibid.

PAGE 249

2lf3 Vlhen Parsons had finished speaking and the applause had subsided, William Marvin took his turn at tlie stand. As was his custom, he identified himself with his audience at the outset of his speech, comhining a personal appeal with an attack on the accomplished part of the Radical policy --the denial of representation. Utilizing the enthusiasm which Parsons had arotased in the audience, Marvin began : Born '1 tlie top of the hill In Fairfield in the old county of Herkimer — brought up in TompkinG--bred to the bar in Ontario cotmty — having eiiiigrated '^c Florida thirty years ago, I appear here to-night, my countrymen, to inquire of the people as the depository of all political po\7er, if I am a citizen, entitled to all the ri^ts and privileges of citizenship in tlie United States? If you agree tliat I am, then I ask shall I be governed by laws in which I have no voice in the making? Shall I be taxed irilthout representation? I am in just this predicament. ... My condition is the same as that of all Union men in the ten States of the South not admitted to fellowship in the Union. Is this state of things to continue? Are those ten States to be governed by the other twenty-six in perpetuity? If not, when do you propose to apply the remedy? Replying to these questions, the audience shouted, "This fall," and punctuated their verdict with applause and cheers for the speaker. Having elicited audience agreement on the Illegality of denying representation, Marvin devoted the remainder of his address to (l) refuting the Radical Republican contention that delayed reunion was necessary and (2) establishing the inrpractlcallty of conditional reunion. The issue of delay came first. What of the Radical charge that southerners were not loyal — that they could not be trusted to share in the control of national affairs? What of the freedmen? Were they safe? Were they secvire in their rights?

PAGE 250

2)»4 Taking up the loyalty question, Maxvin declared: "It is said that the people of the South are disloyal and have taken the oath in bad faith. "•^' His answer was striking because of its conciseness and sarcasm: "If those who say this niean by loyal only those who agree with them in all matters about which men have a right to think — if they mean that orthodoxy is mj-doxy and he-terodoxy is your doxy— then perhaps those people are not loyal. If they mean by loyalty, to stand to and abide by the Constitution of the United States, then I affirm no more loyal people live to-day than those of Florida." Florida was also used as the basis for a generalization concerning the freedmen. "In Florida," explained the speaker, "all is quiet and orderly and nothing has occurred as stated in some of the Northern papers," Contrary to the contention of the Radicals, the freedmen in Florida were not being mistreated. The people of Florida had formally recognized the freedom of the slave by changing their constitution and lavrs. Tixey had done more than this. They had passed laws allowing the freedmen to testify in court. Biey had made it possible for them to trade and to own property. In fact, they had made it possible for them "to do everything but vote and sit upon Juries." The people were not the enemies of their former slaves. They had demonstrated that they sincerely wished "to come back and live in peace and amity with the rest of the country." 3 'The oath to vAilch Marvin referred was the amnesty oath prescribed by President Johnson as one of the qualifications that had to be met by those who wished to participate in the reorganization of the southern state Governments.

PAGE 251

2U5 What Congress had done was unconstitutional, toreover, the reasons used to Justify delaying reunion were invalid. A powerful party, continued Marvin introducing his final point, arose in the North and proclaimed that the Union should not be restored, but that they woiild make "a new Bargain." They proposed "to dictate terras by amending and altering the Constitution." If this was their plan, contended the speaker, it wouM only result in postponing reunion. If the terms were those contained in the proposed Fourteenth Amendment, the South would never accept them as the price of representation. One reasai why the ten lanrepresented states would not ratify this amendment was that they had no assurance that ratification would bring representation. The Radicals had proposed the amendment, but they had not been explicit. They had not said, "Do this and you shall be admitted." They had demanded acceptance of certain conditions without indicating whether more might not be imposed. Two additional reasons why the South would not ratify the amendment stenmed from two of its five provisions. One stipulated "that every person bom in the United States shall be a citizen," that all were to enjoy the privileges and immunities of citizens, and that these privileges were not to be abridged. Such a proviso was too vague— vague enough to include even Negro suffrage. If the Radicals include the vote among the Negroes' privileges, predicted Marvin, "I do not believe the people of New York will adopt such an amendment." To do so would give Congress authority to interfere "in matters that solely concern the States." The speaker, furthermore, did not believe that the Radicals had a legitimate

PAGE 252

2k6 reason to stir up political tinrest in the South. It was hatred for southern whites that had brought Negro suffrage to the fore. Ihe North had not given the Negro the vote. Voting was a restricted privilege in many states. The southern Negroes, moreover, did not danand sviffrage. "If they are let alone they will be contented," predicted Marvin. "To invest them with full political ri^ts now woiold cause a perfect Pandemonium. ..." Another provision of the proposed amendment that made ratification improbable was the clause calling for the political disqualification of southern leaders. This provision would mean that a^ii persons who had ever held office and had subsequently participated in the rebellion, would not be eligible to hold a federal or state office. It would mean that the governments of the southern states would pass "into the hands of persons wholly incompetent to administer them." A southern leader like Alexander H, Stephens could not be made as much as a conStable in his own village.-^ "The South cannot accept this as a condition of admission," Marvin declared. "If they did, they would not be worthy of being represented." Marvin concluded his address in a simple and forthright manner by calling on the audience to stand by the political system of 178? , supporting the constitutional rights of the southern people. "Let bygones Stephens had been vice president of the Confederacy. In I865, he had been a raeinber of a three-man coianission that met with Lincoln and Seward to work out an armistice agreement, and at the time of Marvin's speech was senator-elect from Georgia. Ulrich Bl Hilllips, "Alexander Hamilton Stephens," Dictionary of Acierlcan Biograpt^, XVII (1935), 569-575.

PAGE 253

2U7 be bygones," he said, "and let us enter upon a new career of prosperity and glory." iN^ien he had finished speaking, the audience responded with a solid round of applause. On the following day, both speakers received a similar response from the Democratic press. The meetine of the previous evening, reported the Union and Advertiser , had given the people of Rochester an opportunity "to hear from the South through true Union men of that section, ..." That speech content had been conplemented by effective delivery was shown by the remark that both speeches "were made with an earnestness, candor, dignity and elotjience that compelled every listener to accept what was said as the tnrth." Speech of Wilkinson Call in New York City While Marvin campaigned in western New York, his political colleagues were at work in other parts of the state vindicating Presidential Reconstruct ion . This macBnoth meeting, which had been called by party strategists to endorse the nominees of the Danocratic state convention,^^ to ratify 39For the text of Marvin's Rochester speech and the ccaaraents of the Democratic press, see Rochester Daily Union and Advertiser , September 14, I066, The Rochester speech also received praise in Florida. The Floridian thought it was "in the Governor's best style— calm, logical and convincing," Tallahassee Semi-Weeiay Floridian , October 5, lc^6. The Sentinel hailed it as a credit "to the head and heart of the speaker." Tallahassee Tri-Weeigy Florida Sentinel . September 29, IG66. New York's Republicans met in Syracuse on September 5, 1866, and endorsed the Fourteenth Amendment, defended Ccaigress on the ground that the South had forfeited its constitutional rij^ts and privileges through rebellion against the Union, and naaed Reuben E. Fenton and Stewart L. Woodford as their nominees for governor and lieutenant-governor. Syraciise

PAGE 254

2k& the prcxieedings of the National Union convention, and — mixing history vrlth politics — to celebrate the seventy-ninth anniversary of the sisoing of the federal Constitution, took up the whole of Union Square, In fact, the oeeting was so large that the people vftio attended had their ciioice of listening to spealsers at any one of seven separate spealcing sites. jHiose v4io were fortunate enough to get close to the center stand heard Douglas Taylor, chalmian of the CooxQittee on Arrangements, coll the meeting to order and introduce J(din A» Dix, prominent military leader and statesman, as presiding officer. When Dlx had finished spealcing, he called on Sasuel J. Tilden, idio had been chairman of Nev York's delegation at the Philadelphia convention and who vas to become the Democratic Daily Joiimal , September 6, 1866, Six days later, the Democrats held their state convention in Albany. John T. Hoffoon of Hew York City and Robert H, Pruyn of Albany, the party's candidates for governor and lieutenant-governor, accepted their nominations by pledging their support for the Hiiladelpliia platform. For the proceedings of the convention and the acceptance speeches of Hoffman and Pruyn, see Syracuse Deiil^^ Coxurier and Union , September 12, 15, 17, 1366. In all, there were seven speaking sites — the center, west main, northeast. University Place, German, east main, and the northwest stand — and no less than fifty-eight speakers. Some of them spoke at more than one stand. Call, for example, moved on to the northwest stand after spealting ftom the center stand, "National Union Party Pangihlet No, 13," For a description of tlie occasion, see New York World , September 18, 1866. Up As a veteran of two wars, the War of loI2 and the Civil War, a political veteran of a term in the United States Senate and a cabinet post as secretary of the treasury, and a prominent citizen of New York, Dix had whatever distinction was necessary to hold the position of presldix}g officer, Allan Nevins, "John Adams Dix," Dictionary of Ameri can Biography, V (1930), 325-327.

PAGE 255

2k9 nominee for president in 1876,^ to Give an account of the Philadelphia convention, TiMen cor^plled, and then as chairman of the "center stand," introduced the next five spealcera. Two of these, John T. Hofftaan and Robert H. Pniim, were the Democratic noninees for governor and lieutenantgovernor, and two others, Louis E, Parsons of Mahama and V.'ilkinson Call of Florida, appeared as spoliesnen for the South. ^ All of the speakers, from Dix through Parsons, placed emphasis on the sanctity of the Constitution and eulogized President Johnson as the ^^Tiiaen, a New York City corporation lawyer, political reformer, and later governor of Hew Yorlc (in loT^), was in li366 a staunch supporter of President Johnson's liberal reconstruction policy. Alexander C. Flick, "Saciuel Jones Tilden," ibid ., XVIII (1^36), 537-5^1. Hoffman, a lifelong Democrat, was mayor of New York City at the time of his ncanination for governor. A native of New York, he had passed the bar in lc49, and prior to his election as mayor in I865, had served as city recorder for two successive terms. Although he was not elected governor in I066, he served in that capacity for two successive terms from 1869 to 1873. Charles Itorris (ed.). Makers of Hew York, an His torical Work Giving Portraits and Sketches of the I-bst aiilnent Citizens of Hew York (Philadelphia, 1595), P. 311« Hoffman's running mate, Robert H. Pruya, a former Conservative Republican who had been driven into the Democratic camp by the Radicals in his party, had a strong political record on both state and national levels. He had served in the New York legislature, had been spealcer of the House, and had served as minister to Japan during Lincoln's administration. Syracuse Daily Courier and Union , September 17, 1866. ^^e fifth speaker was John G. Saxe, attorney, politician, editor, poet, and lecturer. A graduate of Middlebury College, Saxe passed the bar in l8ij-3 and edited the Sentinel in Burlington, Vermont, from I85O to 1856. After he sold the paper, Saxe moved to Albany, He^;York, where he lived off his newspaper earnings and his income as a t/riter and lecturer. Although he had run for governor in Vermont and had owned aad edited his own newspaper, Saxe was best loiown for his verse. According to his biographer, he was "one of the most widely read and frequently quoted of American poets." George H* Genziaer, John Godfrey Saxe," Dictionary of American Biography , XVI (1935)* 399-^00.

PAGE 256

250 k6 defender of constitutional government. Wilkinson Call, however, concentrated on two related yet different topics— the character of those who claimed to be southern Loyalists and the charges made against the South. One of the questions dividing the people of the Horth, explained Call, was vriiether the South ^ould be restored to the Union under the leadership of ex-Confederates or under those vdio called themselves "southern Loyalists." Since this question stenmed from the statements of so-called southern Loyalists, the speaker thought the audience should be informed of the true Identity of these men. There were, indeed, a few men, "a very few,* in the South who had never tainted themselves with secession or rebellion. The nimber of such men was small because, with few exceptions, those who had been ardent Union men opposing secession to the last had identified themselves with the Confederacy when the war began. Hence, those who were now going aibout denouncing their fellow southerners were not true Union xasn, but "pretended •Southern Loyalists.'" These "ministers of vengeance," declared Call, were not "the best apostles of reconciliation." Instead they were men unworthy of public confidence. Southern loyalists now-but in the time antecedent to the war, extremists in opinion — earnest promoters of strife — teachers of secession— detractors of Northern people — now pretended friends of the colored man, then and always hitherto pro-slavery men of the most violent character; opposing every effort for his amelioration, and denouncing with extreme bitterness all \i\io favored it, now claiming as their great merit that r'or the center stand speeches, see "National Uoion Party Pamliilet No. 13."

PAGE 257

251 they have always been loyal to the Union — ^but then volunteers in the first troops that were raised, now favorinc punishment and confiscation and exile of all -vto were for the South-then favoring the same . . . for those who were for the Union. No reasonable end, contended Call, could be served '*by confining the representation of the South to a class of men who claim openly but falsely that they are so obnoxious to their \ih.o2je people that their lives are not safe amongst them," The day wovild come, he predicted, vdien the people of the North, as well as the entire world, would look with scorn and loathing upon "the Southern men vrtio, in the hour of [their] people's sorrow [had] gone about seeking their further htaniliation . . . under a pretence . . , they [knew] to be false." In his short but telling address, the speaker also took issue with some of the reasons that had been advanced to delay re\mion. One contention was that the freedmen and the Loyalists were not safe in the South. Muich had been seiid of the danger that "Loyalists" faced in the southern states. "I can assvire you," declared Call, "that in my own State, and in the other States in i^ich I have been since the war, the statement is wholly untrue." The statTjis of the freedmen in the South had also been grossly misreprasantad* Using Florida as an exaznple. Call testified: Vfe have given the sanction of the State to the freedom of the slave — and have ourselves surrounded him in his new status with all the protection and all the assistance ^ich laws can give when aided by the consenting voice of the people. We have neither the purpose nor the desire to retard the colored man in any advancement he may accomplish, but, on the contrary, recognize the fact that our interests lay in aiding him in his progress; neither have we any desire to withhold

PAGE 258

252 frcan him ri^ts of any description whidi he nay prove himself capable of exercisine* We are his friends, and if prejudice and passion could be stilled for a moment, the people of the llorth would see that, dependent as we are to a great extent upon his labor, with his freedcm sectored, it would be impossible for us to be otherwise than friendly to him. ^k)ving into the related subject of Negro suffrage. Call concliided his testimony with a strai^tfojrward declaration. "It is true," he said, "that we do not think it is either for his interest or our own that he should be withdrawn flrom industry to the excitement of politics; to this there is the strongest feeling of opposition, perhaps an insxirmoxintable one." Another Radical exc\ise for delaying reunion was that the interests of the Union would not be safe in southern hands — that "southern Loyalists" alone could be trusted. Ihls, the spealzer assetted, was untrue and would be denied by anyone conversant with "the temper and condition of the Southern people." As he told of the spirit of the southerner. Call's style reflected the intensity of his desire to cosmunicate . He declared : We . . . have a pride, and a Just one, in the manly and heroic characteristics of the struggle. We have a respect for the great men who led us in the struggle, and who shored our dangers and privations. And we have a most tender reverence and love for the dead --the brothers and sons — tlie dear ones of otir homes — our comrades, ^lo, wrapped in their bloody robes, [sleep] the soldiers' sleep of death— these are the only trophies of that four years' bloody work that we have Icept. "Surely," he concluded, "a generous people would not wish to rob us of them." Not only were southerners loyal, but they did not seek, as some northerners claimed, to gain control of the Union. Kiey only sou^^t to

PAGE 259

253 renev their citizenship as Americans. "Ve have no coimtry but America," said Call, "no Government but that of the United States; and vdiile ve ask nothing, solicit nothins, we are anxious to rebuild our shattered fortunes — if permitted— beneath its pjrotection, in quiet and peace." After his attack on the southern Loyalists and his refutation of the charges made against the South, Call was ready to conclude. He did so by ccmtrasting the anxiety of the moment xfith what he hoped would be the tranquility of the future. It seemed that the more southerners had sought to conciliate, the more they had been misunderstood. "Let us hope," declared Call, "that the day of . . . coiaplete harmonj'is at last approaching, and that with mutual forbearance we Rhall come to recognize and respect ... the honorable charsjcteristics and the ri^ts of each other. "'^'^ The Democratic campaign dociiment in \rtiich the Call speech was published contains the notation that the audience received the speech with cheers. The probability is that it was overshadowed by the addresses of more prominent speakers, but that its sincerity and earnestness stimulated those who ware interested in promoting the presidential policy of early reunion. hi 'For the text of Call's sx>eech see ibid ; New York World , September 19, 1866. ^Ihe Democratic Floridian thoxight Call had said the right thing at the right time. "The address," it editorialized, "was in most admirable ten2)er throtighout— bold and manly — nothing cringing— just the speech for the occasion," Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian , October 2, 1866,

PAGE 260

2^ Speech of Ulllian Marvin in S;^Tacuse The day after Call's Hew York City speecli, the people of Hew York heard the other side of the storj'^ from the veiry men whcxn Call had dubbed "pretended southern Loyalists," as on that day, September 18, delegations firom the Southern Loyalist convention caaiipaigned in such places as Syracuse, Hudson, Pou^ceepsie, Watertown, Oswego, Auburn, Canandaigua, and Buffalo.^^ Speaking as the allies of the Radical Republicans, the southern Loyalists dwelled aa the reasons why they thought rexmion should be delayed— the same reasons that Call had attenpted to refute. Thus, on September 18, the people of Syracuse heard William B, Stokes, a southern loyalist and a Repub3J.can member of Congress from Tennessee,^ denounce southerners for their disloyalty and their scheme to re -enslave the freedmen. ^^Included amonc those who visited New York on this political mission were" George Tucker and J, W. Hunnicutt of Virginia; William G. (Poxson) Brownlow, William B, Stokes, W. A, Patterson, V/, J. Smith, and Horace Mcynard of Tennessee; A, J. Hamilton and Jesse Stancil of Texas; H. C. Warmoth, P. B. Randolph, and J. P. Newman of Louisiana; Albert Gi?iffln of Alabama; P,A, Finnerty of Arltansas; Hope Bain of North Carolina; arl J. J. Stewart of Maryland. Syracuse Dall:>^ Journal , September 18, 1866. 50 Stolies* record was that of a bonafide southern Loyalist. Tlaough he was a native of North Carolina, Stokes got his political start in Tennessee. Ehiring tiie l050's, he began his political career with service ia both brandies of the legislature. On the eve of the war, he was elected as a tfliig to the Thirty-sixth Congress, and acted with the Ftepublicans . In 1861, he retiimed to Tennessee to speak against secession. During the period following the state's secession in l86l, and his entrance into tlie Union army in lS62, Stokes kept silent and at one jxjint had to hide in the mountains to avoid imprisonment by the Confederates. In the course of the state's reorganization, Stokes was elected as a Republican to the Thirty-ninth Congress and was allowed to tal«; his seat in the House on July 2U, 1366, following Tennessee's ratification of the Fourteenth

PAGE 261

255 One of the questions before the people, declared Stokes, was whether loyal men shoixld rule in the South or whether they should be "displaced and over -ruled by disloyal sympathizers and Rebels," Moreover, important to Union men everywhere was the fact that if southerners got hold of the federal government, they would repijdiate the national debt and make the American people pay the Confederate debt. Another question concenaed the future of the freedmen. The Johnson men at Riiladelphia had denied that there was any party in the Soiith that desired the revival of slavery. Admitting that there might not be svich a party, Stokes countered: "If they in the South knew that Johnson could carry his policy by carrying the North, . . . they would throw back the negroes into the most degrading bondage, or else get pay for them." The people should not be "misled"; this was "the understanding" in the South. In the course of his address, Stokes strengthened his case against revmion by skillfully combining these appeals to justice and fear with a "bloody shirt" appeal. After telling of his own persecution at the hands of "rebels," he declaimed: "To permit these r«n who tried for four years to take the life of the nation, to drench the land in blood, ... to forgive than, let them hold office and participate in the Crovemment . . . Is it not monstrous?"^ Amendment. Stokes gave a detailed description of his own background in his Syracuse speech. See ibid ., September 20, 1866. See also Biographi cal Directory of the American Congress, 177^^-19^9 , p. I870. 51 William B. Stokes, P. B. Randolph of Louisiana, and P. A. Finnerty of Arkansas were the speakers assigned to Syracuse on September I8. For the text of the Stokes speech, see Syracuse Daily Journal, September 20, 1866. '^

PAGE 262

2^6 When William Marvin visited Syractise on October 11, in company with John T, Hofftaan and Robert H. Pruioi, the Democratic state nominees, he used a pattern of argument that stiggested he was in close touch with 52 what Radical speakers had been saying."^ He did not begin, aa he had at Rochester, by discussing the legality of denying representation to a state. Instead, he spent the first half of his speech giving a detailed account of what the people of Florida and the other southern states had done in reorganizing their state governments. In this way he countered the Radical need contentions — the disloyalty of ex-Confederates and their plot against the freedmen— by presenting what he believed to be consimmate evidence of the South 's loyalty and good faith. After refuting the Radical claim that there was a need to delay reunion, Marvin spent the rest of his time attacking the Radical Republican plan of conditional reiinion. Seizing \ipon the impracticability of such a scheme, Marvin contended: (l) It would be futile to require the Johnson governments to ratify the proposed Fourteenth Amendment as a condition of reunion. (2) It would be even more futile to try to secure ^^Located in north central New York, Syracuse was a critical area in the caii5>aign. It ves selected by the Republicans as their convention site in September, and later that month was visited by the southern Loyalists. On October 11, tl-e Johnson men held their demonstration in Syracuse's Shakespeare Hall, Ttie next evening, on October 12, the Radicals staged a counter demonstration in Wieting Hall. Ibid ., October 12, 1866. The audience that gathered to hear the Johnson men on October 11 was said to have been the largest seen "at any politiceil gathering . . . for many years." Long before the program got underway, Sliakespeare Hall was filled to capacity. By the time the speakers appeared at seventhirty p.m., thousands of people, ;dio couM not gain admission to the hall, had collected in the street outside, Syracuse Daily Courier and Union, October 12, 1866,

PAGE 263

257 ratification of -Uie amendment through an agency other than the Johnson governments. His first argument was largely a restatement of lAat he had already said in his Rochester speech— that it would be useless to base reunion on the ratification of the terms of the Fourteenth Amendment because the Johnson govejmments would not accept them. They would not accept them because: (l) Congress had iK>t stipulated that a state would be admitted to representation vten it ratified the terms and, hence, ratification could pave the way for still further demands. (2) One of the proposed terms virtxially called for the surrender of a state's ri^t to determine the aiiffrage qualifications of its own citizens. (3) Southerners were not prepared to disqualify their best men and surrender the leadership of their state governments to men they considered incompetent. On these grovmds, the people could see that if ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment was to be the price of revinion, the Johnson governmsnts wcMild remain unrepresented. It would be even more futile for the Radicals to base rermion on the creation of new state governments that wotild ratify the terms of the BJi^ndment because they could not create such governments. Some Radical Republicans had claimed, said Marvin, that if the Johnson governments refused to ratify the Fourteenth Amendment, Congress covild create loyal governments that would do so. Congress could do this, they had claimed, by passing a law that would overthorow the Johnson governments, disfranchise the "rebels" and enfranchise the freedmen, and establish a procedure for the organization of state goverximents based on the votes of Loyalists and freedmen.

PAGE 264

258 But, coxmtered Marvin, such a scheme was corapletely linreeuListic because: (l) In following such a course. Congress woviM have to violate the Constitution by manipulating the qualifications of voters to s\iit its own designs— that is, disfranchise "rebels" and enfranchise freedmen. (2) There were not enough southern Loyalists to taice over the leadership of these governments. To support tlie fii'st of these reasons why Congress could not create new state governments in the oouth, Marvin explained that one of the rights reserved to the states by the federal Constitution was that of determining the qualifications of its own voters. Should Congress pass such a law, he warned, "we need not talk any more about amending the Constitution, for when this law is passed and enforced there will be an end of the Constitution," A more basic reason why the creation of new state governments wotild not be possible was that there would not be enough southern Loyalists to fill the offices of the proposed governments. "How many Southern loyalists as you term them — men vrtio have never given [aid] or support to the Confederate Government— do you suppose there are in the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Mississippi, and the other states?" asked Marvin. Almost all of the southern people had given their wholehearted support to the Confederacy. "The few who did not are not sufficient in numbers and do not possess [the] abilities necessary to carry on State governments, and at the same time fill Federal offices." Would the creation of new state governments for the purpose of securing ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment bring remiion? MBorvin

PAGE 265

259 thought not. To clarify this point he spelled out ^That he helieved wouM happen. Base the State Governments upon the votes of the fev Southern loyalists and the negroes, and disfranchise the rest of the \-rtiites, and how lar^e a military force do j-ou think would be necessary to preserve order and quiet among the people and give the necessary protection to those govemnents? It is a large country. Wo\ild a military force of tvro hundred thousand men, to act as support of the civil authorities be sufficient? ... In short, the experiment would result in the reestablishment of martial law. Marvin closed his argument against the formation of new state governments by using a rhetorical question designed to reduce the scheme to an absurdity. He asked the people of New York if they wouM be willing to tax themselves in order to maintain a standing axaiy in the South for an indefinite period of time "in the vain hope of getting the Constitution amended, which you have already overthrown; or in the still vainer hope of getting impartial suffrage before the proper time comes?" Should Congress demand ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment as a condition of representation, said the speaker, concluding his discussion of the futility of conditional reunion, it appeared that reunion would be hopelessly delayed. The Johnson governments would not ratify the terms, and uo agency other than these governments could be created to do so. "But v/hat, you axe ready to ask me," said Marvin as he began his peroration, "shovild be done in the present condition of the country?" His answer provided for the eventualities of the inmediate future, as well as for tliose of the years to come. As a long term policy, Mairvin counseled moderation on the part of

PAGE 266

260 the people, the press, and of leaders both Ubrth and South. If necessarj--, the Johnson governments could wait for representation. They could wait until the people of the North had recuperated from tlaeir "war -feeling." There \tos also the possibility that the Sv^ireiae Court would "interpose its authority to protect the rights and liberties of the people, and to save the Constitution." The most inmediate remedy, of course, was in the hands of the people of the North in the coming elections, and the spealcer hoped that they would use their power to elect men who wouli vote for imraedlate reunion, ^^ The people of Syracuse a3so heard from John T. Hofftaan and Robert H, Pruyn, Both of these men, \fhc were the Democratic state nominees, identified themselves with Marvin by calling for reconciliation and the 5k recognition of the Johnson govemments,'^ Reactions to these speeches were, of course, influenced by politics. The Republican press seemed Impressed with the size of the "Copperhead" demonstration. IVhile it dismissed the speeches with the observation that they were "in the most approved Copperhead style," tlie Radical Journal admonished its readers to "bestir themselves" on behalf of their own candidates,-''' The Democratic Courier and Union thotight the Shakespeare Hall maeting had struck a blow against "radicalism." All of 53For the text of Marvin's Syracuse speech, see ibid,, October 17, 1866. A. N, Ludlngton of Syracuse, vftio may have been related to Marvin's son-in-law, W. I, Ludlngton, spolce after Pruyn. For the speeches of Hofftaan, Pruyn, and Ludingtou, seeJbid,, October 13, 15, 22, 1866, 55 '^Syracuse Dally Journal , October 12, 1866,

PAGE 267

261 the spealiers had strengthened the cause of their party, and one of them, William Marvin, senator -elect tron Florida, had given a "clear and forcible speech" in \^idi he had described Consress* crime against the South and the Constitution,^ Speech of William Marvin at Brookl^ After campaigning in northwestern and northcentral New York during September and early October, William Marvin spent the last precious weeks of the contest in the southern part of the state, speaking in such 57 places as Brooklyn, Peekskill, Saugerties, and Poughkeepsie. On the evening of October 19 > 1866, in Brooklyn, before a large meeting of the Tenth V.'ard Andirew Jdbnson Association, Marvin made one of his final appeals for early reimion. His arguments were essentially the same as they had been throughout the campaign: (1) Uhat Congress had done was unconstitutional. (2) There was no need to delay reunion. (3) What Congress proposed to do was impractical. One of the vmtisual aspects of the Brooklyn speech was that the first of these issues was approached in a new way. t4arvln conveyed the idea that the South was illegally being denied representation, by denouncing the Radicals as perpetrators of disunion. The essence of this attack was that the Radical Republican party, in view of its origin and conduct, posed a threat to the Constitution and the Union, The Abolition party, ^idi was the forenanner of the Radical Republican party, had 56 Sjoracuse Dail^'Courier and Union , October 12, 1366, 57 "^ Niarvin spoke in Peekskill on October 22, in Saugerties on October 23, and in Poughkeepsie on October 2^*. New York World, October I9, 1566.

PAGE 268

262 opposed tiiG Constitution because that document protected slavery. For tills reason Abolitionist leaders had gone so far as to denounce the 58 Ccaastitution "as a covenant with death and a bond vath hell." In recent aontlis, contended Maarvin, their Radical Republican successors had found fault witli the Constitutiozi because it prevented them from carrying out "their peculiar views and notions." While the Abolitionists had been a minority party, the Radical Republicans were in the majority, and therefore posed a threat to the countrj^, "They seen . , , determined," warned I'farvin, "to perpetuate their power by keeping i^ a broken Union," Mention of a "broken Union" led 1-larvin to take up the second issue and repeat tlie stori-of the loyalty and good faith that had been eadxibited by southerners when they reorganized their state goverriEients in keeping with the plan outlined by the President. The third major issue--the practicality of the purported Radical scheme of basing reunion on the acceptance of the Fourteenth Amendment — was handled as It had been at Syracuse. Such a scheme, Marvin contended, would be impractical because the Johnson govemments would not ratif^-^ the amend m ent and because no new agency could be created to do so, The 5'-*J!he expression "covenant with death and aereement with hell" originated with Wendell Hiillips, faiaxis anti-slavery orator, in his "Lesson of the Hour" speech, given in Broolclyn in IS59. Like other abolitionists, Hiillips denounced tlie Constitution and the Union because of his belief that both sanctioned slavery. As early as I8U2, Hiillips had placed his "curse" on the Constitution. In I859, following the arrest of John Brown at Harper's Ferry, in a speech given from the pulpit of Henrj' Wajd Beecher's churcli, Hiillips liad denounced the Union as a "covenant with death and [an] oereement with hell." V.iHord H, Yeager, "Wendell Riillips," A History and Criticism of American Public Address , ed. William Norwood Brigance, I (New York, 19*^3), 339-342.

PAGE 269

263 first objection, however, weus sharpened through the skillful use of ridicule and the second was strengthened with the addition of a siibordinate argument. Marvin introduced the first objection by relating that some Republicans thought the Johnson governments should be required to ratify the Fourteenth Amendment as a condition of representation. In the opinion of the speaker, this proposal was not at all realistic, because Congress would ultimately find itself in a qoandry over vrtiat it should do with ten unrepresented states. To illustrate this point and reduce it to an absiordity, Marvin depicted the dilemma Congress would create for itself. On the one hand, it could not leave ten states unrepresented indefinitely because they refused to ratify the amendment. It would not be practical to postpone reunion for five years or for twenty years, A government with ten unrepresented states could not masqurade as a "Republican form of Government." On the other hand. Congress could not force reunion by compelling the Johnson governments to accept the amendment, "How will you make them do it?" asked Marvin, You cannot fight them any more, for they won't fight you. (Laughter,) You cannot cram this amendnKnt down the throat of each individual and say he must accept it. They must do it by the Legislature, and when they get together you cannot open the mouth of each man and make him say yes, when he intends to say no. (Laughter.) Should the Radicals require the Johnson governments to ratify the Fourteenth Amendment, Marvin declared, they will have "an ele^iiant on hand." Taking up the second objection— that new state govemnKnts could not be created to ratify the amendment— Marvin repeated the supporting

PAGE 270

z6k arguments he had used at Syracuse, First, he contended that it was illegal to tainper with a state's rigbt to determine the qualifications of its own voters. A new electorate could not be established without violating the federal Constitution. Second, he argued, new governments coiild not be created in the South because there would not be enough southern Loyalists to lead them. Adding a third supporting argutaent, Marvin contended that a new state govemiaent based on the votes of Loyalists and freedmen could not be created because, aside from the consideration that the Loyalists throughout the South coiild be counted on one*s fingers, the ftreedmen would more than likely vote with their 59 former masters. After he had charged the Radicals with usurpation, established the fitness of the South for representation, and refuted the purported Radical plan of conditional reunion, Marvin closed his speech by esqiressIng the hope that evexy Congressional District in Broolclyn would elect men who movHA vote for the admission of southerners to Congress. 59 '^^It was probably this type of refutation — if not this very argument — that touched off the Radical press in Poughlieepsie . Commenting on Marvin's Poxighkeepsie speech of October 24, and that of his colleague E. 0. Perrin, a New Yorker who had been secretary of the National Union Convention, the Poughkeepsie Eagle rejKjrted: "Both speeches were an insult to an intelligent audience, as there was not a liberal sentiment uttered, a liberal principle advocated, or a liberal measure approved. Denimciatioas of the negro were made in a spirit mean and contemptible in the hi^iast degree, which negroes woxild scorn." Marvin's speech was denoimced as a typical example of southern oratory. It was "full of swagger and threats that the south would never submit, and that if southern demands were not acceded to there would be no peace, but another war." Poughkeepsie Daily Eagle, October 26, 1866. ^^or the text of Marvin's Brooklyn speech see New York World , October 20, 1866; Tv^llahassee Semi-WeelOy Florldian , November 6, 1866.

PAGE 271

265 Although the Democratic press in Brooklyn praised Ifexvin for his eloquence, the senator-elect prohalily had reached his peak as a spokesman for reconciliation in his address at Syracuse. On that occasion, in answer to his own question regarding how the crisis of 1866 might best be resolved, he had replied: The ship of State, which has just rode out the hurricane of a four years war, is not safe without all of her crew. ... I would not enquire how or why a part of the cre\tr had been absent during those four years, \*hether they had deserted in a fit of anger or not. It is sufficient to laiow that the ship is not safe without her full crew on board. I vrould taJce them on board; and when the billows vftiich the storm had raised shall have a little more subsided, I wovild consider what repairs or amendoents it is desirable to mal^e in the Constitution—freighted as it is with all that is dear or precious to man. 61 The President, the Constitution of 1787* the Union, the South— none had a more loyal supporter than William Marvin. This declaration was truly his most eloquent appeal. The Rhetoric The specific end of the rhetoric of vindication in Florida was to convince Congress that the people of the state were loyal and had accepted the President's terms of reunion in good faith. Unimpressed by these professions, however, the Radicals continued to press their case for delayed reimion. At the same time, the President refused to con^aromise his position. When the President and the Radicals took the isstie to the people of the North and West in the congressional elections of 1866, the specific °-'^yracuse Daily Courier and Union , October 17 * 1366.

PAGE 272

266 purpose of the Johnson men was to convince the voters that they shoxild support the presidential program of Reconstruction, To aid in the accomplishment of this end, Florida's senators -elect William Marvin and V/ilkinson Cell set out to answer the Radical arguments in New York state. The essence of the Radical position was that Congress should be en^owered to withhold representation from the South until such time as that region should have complied with whatever conditions Congress might deem necessary or expedient. The Radical apologists in Congress and in the campaign of 1866 offered two .major arguments to support this proposition. First, they contended, the Johnson governments were disloyal. As Charles Simmer told his colleagues in the Senate, the rebels had been enfranchised and the Union men had been virtually disfranchised. The southern Loyalists testified at their Hiiladelphia meeting that President Johnson had in effect vested "four millions of traitors with the power to impoverish and degrade eight millions of loyal men." William B. Stokes, a Tennessee Loyalist, suppoirtcd the same contention when he warned that if disloyal southerners got a foothold in federal councils, they would repudiate the national debt and make the American people pay the Confederate war debt. To give disloyal southerners authority in national councils, contended the Radicals, would be to Jeopardize the safety of the nation. The second reason advanced to support delayed rexinion derived much of its strength from the first, but was handled as a separate argument. To recognize the "whitewashed rebel governments" of the South would be to abandon the southern Loyalists and the freedmen to persecution and abuse at the hands of rebels. Under the Johnson governments.

PAGE 273

267 Loyalists were forced to "stand silent in the presence of treason, or \rtiisper in bated breath," It wt^s contrary to any concept of honor or patriotism to allow these men to suffer at the hands of rebels. The conscience of the nation was particularly troubled over the destiny of its new citizens in the South, the freedmen, A "pretended" convention of the people, charged Charles Sumner as he spoke against Marvin's admission to the Senate, had recognized the freedom of the slaves only "to decree their disfranchisement." Floridians had written a constitution which denied equality to approximately half of the state's citizens. Emancipation meant more than freedom, he declared; it meant citizenship. According to the testimony of Loyalists in Philadelphia and New York, moreover, the Johnson governments constituted a threat to the freedom of the ex-slave. While giving lip service to abolition, southerners plotted the perpetxiation of slavery by passing "legislative acts against pretended vagrants." Make no mistake about it, declared William B. Stokes in S;^Tacuse, the South plans to throw the Negroes back into "degrading bondage, or else get pay for them." In the interest of justice and republican government, contended the Radicals, federal protection was required to guarantee the ri^ts and privileges of these new citizens. Shortly before Congress adjourned. Radical leaders Introduced a third issue. In securing passage of the proposed Fourteenth Amendment, they called for formal recognition of the validity of the national debt, the disqualification of a certain class of ex-Confederates, and citizenship for the Negro. They did not, however, prescribe ratification of

PAGE 274

266 this amendment as a condition of reunion, Radical strategists postponed action on a bill to this effect so they could determine how the Johnson governments woiild receive the proposed amendnent, and so they could evaliiate the temper of public opinion in the North and West in the im62 pending con(pressional elections. In attacking the Radical position, William Marvin arranged his arguments so as to parallel \rtiat he believed to be the pattern of usurpa — tion, (1) What Congress had done was unconstitutional. (2) The reasons offered to justify the denial of representation were not true. (3) IVhat Congress proposed doing was impractical. At Rochester and Brooklyn, Marvin dwelled on the accomplished phase of the Radical program. The federal Constitution guaranteed the ri^t of every state to representation without restriction. In denying representation to the southern states. Congress had overstepped its authority and had violated the Constitution. Both senators -elect contested the "argumsnts or excuses" supplied by the Radicals as reasons for delaying reunion. Call denied the validity of the arguments by discrediting the character of the southern Loyalists. Southerners were not disloyal. They had "no country but America, and no Government but that of the United States. ..." They did not seek control of the government. ITaey simply wanted to renew their citizenship as Americans. If the southern people retained any feeling for the Confederacy, it was confined to the memorj' of their sacred dead. Further, "^ee Dunning, Reconstruction Political and Economic, 186^-1377 , pp. 65-69.

PAGE 275

269 the Loyalists and freedmen did not require protection frcsn their countrymen. Replying to the charge that Loyalists were not safe in Florida, he declared: "Kie statement is Tjfaolly untrue," .^though it was true that freednen hsd not been given the vote, the people of Florida had no desire to withhold rij^ts "which he [the Negro] may prove himself capable of exercising." Esving established his own ethos . Call tried to discredit the character of his Loyalist opponents. These "pretended •Southern Loyalists,*" he charged, were not interested in reconciliation. They came to the Itorth as "ministers of vengeance," Wherever he spoke, Marvin offered Florida's record of acquiescence and adjustment as testimony of the southerner's loyalty and good faith. As he related his experience as provisional governor, he consistently and emphatically denied the Radical accusations. "I affirm no more loyal people live to-day than those of Florida" --this was his answer to the Radical allegation of disloyalty. His reply to the second argument was no less emphatic, "I deny," he declared, "that Union men are unsafe at the South — or that negroes are not protected." The people of Florida had recognized the freedom of the slave. They had recorded this change in their constitution and in their laws. They had made provision for the freedmen to testify in court, to trade, and to own property. The freedmen in Florida covild do everything hut vote and sit on juries. While Call limited himself to replying to the Radicals* argiiiaents and to challenging the integrity of his Loyalist opponents, Marvin charged that the Radicals planned to make ratification of the proposed

PAGE 276

27C Fourteenth Anendment a condition of reunion. The jist of Marvin's argumentation on this point was that if Congress planned to make ratification of the amendment a condition of reunion, their proposal would fail because of its impracticality. The proposal was impractical for two reasons. (1) The Johnson governments wo\ild not ratify the amendment, and Congress could not force them to do so, (2) Congress could not create "loyal governments" to effect such ratification. Ifee Johnson governments would not ratify the amendment becaiise: (l) they had not been ass\ired that ratification wovLld bring reunion; (2) they did not believe that the Negro possessed adequate c[ualifications for suffrage, and were not willing to comprcxnise a state's right to determine the suffrage qualifications of its own citizens; (3) they would not consent to the disqualification of their ovm leaders, nor would they turn their governments over to men whom they considered "wholly incompetent." To support the contention that Congress could not create new state governments to ratify the amendment, Marvin presented three arguments. (1) Congress did not have the authority to tanqper with state rights, hence it could not authorize a new voting body in the South to create a new state governmenti. (2) There were not enough Loyalists in the South to administer these governments even if they were created. (3) A new state government could not be created from the votes of Loyalists and freedmen because most of the freedmen would vote with their old masters. In Brooklyn it appeared that Marvin hed placed the Radicals on the horns of a dilemma. If Congress insisted on its plan of conditioncLL

PAGE 277

271 reunion, it vouM. find that it could neither keep the South out of the Union indefinitely nor could it force the South back into the Union by demanding ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Radical usurpers voiQd find themselves with 'bn elephant on hand." In their attempt to vindicate presidential Reconstruction, Florida's senators -elect not only matched argument for argument, they pitted Conservatism against Radicalism. The "bloody shirt appeal" was matched with appeals for peace and reconciliation. The Radical concern for the safety of the nation and the equality of men was compared with the preservation of the Constitution and the Union. "I would xK>t enquire how or \diy a part of the crew had been absent during those foror years, whether they had deserted in a fit of anger or not. It is siifflcient to know that the ship is not safe without her full crew on board." Other elements of the rhetoric of the senators -elect also deserve note. What factors influenced their invention? What was the calibre of their argumentation? How did they prove their contentions? What of their arrangement and style? What the senators -elect said in the campaign was in large part influenced by what the Radicals contended and by the premises of the individual orators. The Radicals had an advantage inasmuch as they initiated the arguments. Once they had "invented" reasons for delaying reunion, the senators -elect were obliged to do one of three things: (l) deny the arguments; (2) by remaining silent, risk the assumption that the arguments were true; (3) contend that regardless of the reasons. Congress had no

PAGE 278

272 authority to deny representation to a state. Had they settled upon the third— or dialectical — argument, they might have forced their opponents to admit that the Radical policy was one of revolution. As we have seen, however. Call did not deal with the constitutionality of the Radical plan. He chose instead to concentrate his attack on the "need" or "reasons" issue. Marvin on the other hand used a "shotgun approach," organizing his refutation around the entire pattern of xisurpation — what the Radicals had done, the reasons they had found for doing it, and what they proposed doing. The result of this strategy was that while both speakers "answered" the Radical contentions, they did not succeed in forcing the opposition to admit that their plan was based on revolution. The selection of the issues used by Call and Marvin was in part determined by beliefs \^ich they held as individuals. Call assumed that if northerners could be convinced that the reasons advanced for delaying reunion were not true, they would support the {Resident. Marvin argued from the broader premise that the Constitution of I787 was inviolable, and was regarded as such by the people generally. Granting that Americans were unwilling to underwrite political revolution in 1866, Marvin's refutation of the Radical plan was more effective. Both he and Call, however, did a relatively poor Job of answering the arguments advanced by the Radicals. While they denied the charges of disloyalty, they did not adequately refute Radical allegations concerning treatrjeuc of Loyalists and freedmen. Thus they candidly' admitted that they believed the Negro was not qualified as a voter. Moreover, they

PAGE 279

273 acknowledged that ex-Confederates controlled Florida's Jctonson governjnent. What was most daiaaging was that neither speaker made any atteinpt to explain why the people had passed a vagrancy law, and why that law applied equally to mend&ers of both races. Both speakers supported their arguments with personal proofs, and logical and pathetic appeals. Call relied heavily on personal and patlietic appeals. Marvin xxsed all three modes, combining personal and pathetic appeals with logical suasion. When charging the Radicals with usiirpation, Marvin reasoned dedvictively, establishing the South 's ri^t to representation and then applying the principle to Congress • refusal to admit southern representatives. He reasoned from the specific to the general, when he reviewed the steps that Floridians had taken to reorganize their government, and concluded from this that the people had proved their loyalty. In addition to these general proofs. Call supported his statements with personal testimony. Mirvin drew support material from his experience as provisional governor of Florida. When attacking the Republican party as enemies of the Constitution or when describing their violations of the Constitution or state rights, he drew many of his examples and quotations from his personal knowledge of history and constitutional law. Marvin did not arrange his arguments effectively, their order being influenced by the chronology of events rather than by rhetorical considerations. By following the pattern of iisiirpation — this is what the Radicals have done; these are the reasons offered to justify delaying rexmion; this is what they plan to do— Marvin weakened his argunjents by

PAGE 280

21k dispersing related points. Ilis attack on the Radical program would have been more effective had he combined his "plan arguments," Had he done this, his sequence would have been: (l) the reasons vAiich the Radicals offer to delay reunion are not true; (2) the Radical plan is unconstitutional and iii^ractical. The style of the senators -elect contributed to their persuasive appeal. When Call spoke to the Florida legislatxire , he vised language that he knew Floridians wanted to hear. The southerner, he said, had nothing to be ashamed of, and the North coiild never force Negro suffrage on the South, He had gone to New York "hat in hand" to talk of the loyalty and good faith of the southern people, Without selling Confederate heroism shoirt. Coll left the impression that he spoke as a representative of the conquered in the presence of the ccaaqueror. His style was suggestive of pride and sincerity. This latter quality, combined with an undertone of humility and occasional "flights of oratory," gained him a fair hearing and the good will of his audience. Marvin's style set him apart from Call, His use of invective, irony, ridicule, dilemmas, and rhetorical questions, his short declaratory sentences, and his close-knit arguments identified him as a militant defender of presidential Reconstruction. He had not come to his native state as a conquered rebel "hat in hand." His arguments, his evidence, and his style marked him as a statesman who had been angered by the crimes which a power hungry Congress sought to perpetrate against the South, the Constitution, and the Union. After listening to the arguments and appeals of both sides, the

PAGE 281

275 people of the llortli aad ^.'est rendered a decision whioh testified to the failure of the rhetoric of vindication and pirt an end to the President's attecrpt to reconstruct the South. A decisive victory at the polls gave the Radicals the power to delay reunion until such tine as the South complied witii whatever conditions Congress mi^t deem necessary or expedient. By March 2, lOOj, that body passed the first of a series of reconstruction acts which inaugurated a period in American history iAiich one historian has appropriately entitled "the tragic era." Exe passage of this act not only signaled the "beginning of a new era, it marked the termination of the rhetorical movement favoring presidential Reconstruction in Florida.

PAGE 282

CHAi=TER VIII SPEAKHrc IN FLORIDA ON THE ISSUES OF PRESIDENTIAL RECONSTRUCTION: A RHETORIC OF REUI^ION OR AN ORATORY OF FAILURE? Having traced the movement favoring presidential Reconstruction in Florida in Chapters II through VII, let us in this chapter attempt to; (l) characterize the structure of the movaaent, (2) evaluate its rhetoric, and (3) describe seme of its characteristics, with an eye to appi^ising the movement study ets an approach to rhetorical criticism. The inception of the movement for reunion in Florida may be ascribed to two major factors: (l) The people of the state were dissatisfied with martial law and desired a change. (2) The President's plan of Reconstruction constituted a means for effecting the desired change — from martial law to civil rule and a position of equality within the IMion. Not long after the President announced his policy of Reconstruction, a group of Loyalists in Nassau County expressed their determination to lead the movement for reunion. Several weeks later, the peqple of Waldo peissed resolutions aff inning their loyalty to the federal government and indicating their desire to co-operate in the reorganization of the state. Shortly after William Marvin's eunrival in Florida, newspaper editors representing both ex-Confederate and Unionist elements in the state urged their fellow editors and the people to Join with them in making reunion a common end. The development of the movement which followed, beginning in 276

PAGE 283

277 August 186^ and lasting until Meuxb l867> can be described in terns of three major phases. The first phase^ encoii3)assing vhat has here been called the rhetoric of acquiescence^ encoiopassed the months of August, September, and October 1865. Most of the speaking of this period was done by the provisional governor. MEurvin needed at least three months to pave the vay for politiceil reorganization. He had to persuade the vhite people to accept defeat and acquiesce in the President's plan of reunion, and he had to speak to members of both races on matters connected vith economic and social adjustment. So far as the participants were concerned, the second phase of the movement, which lasted frcan October 1865 to Januaiy 1866, vas to be a period of consummation. Floridians vho had been empowered to act as the agents of their own redejiiption now shared the speaker's platform with the provisional governor. In the process of carrying out the work of political adjustment during this period, William Marvin, convention delegates, legislators, and other Conservative leaders produced a rhetoric of adjustment. The third and final phase of the movement was the longest in point of time — JanuaryNovember I866— suad constituted a period of rhetoilcal crisis. When several Radical leaders In Congress organized a movement against presidential Reconstruction, speakers in Florida and other southern states, along with their allies in the North, responded with a defense of themselves and their actions— a rhetoric of vindication. Congress, however, was not influenced by their arguments. The fate of presidential Reconstruction was placed in the hands of the people

PAGE 284

278 of the North and West in the congressional elections of 1866. The rejection of the arguments of the Johnson men by voters in these areeus signaled the end of the movement on behalf of presidential Reconstruction. This came on March 2, I867, when Congress set aside the Johnson governments and inaugurated its own policy of Reconstruction. VJhen the people of Florida accepted the President's terms of reunion in 186^, they did so in good faith, but the tragedy vas that in this acceptance they provided Radical politicians vith reasons to justify delaying reunion in 1866. Put another way, the rhetoric that brought acquiescence and adjustment in 1863 made it possible for Radical persuaders to discredit presidential Reconstruction in 1866. This, it may be said, was the txagic flaw in the rhetoric of reunion. Using this thesis as a basis for analysis, one can evaluate the wecUmesses of the rhetoric of reunion under two headings: (l) the weatoesses which resulted from the "mistakes" of acquiescence and adjustment, and (2) the weaknesses which vere responsible for the "mistakes" of acquiescence and adjustment. Bow damaging were the "mistakes" of l86^ to the cause of reunion in 1866? When Radical strategists reviewed what had been said in Florida and other southern states in I865, they found two major reasons for delaying reunion. The exclusion of Loyalists from the Johnson governments, the southerner's reluctance to repudiate the Confederate war debt, and the belligerent style of his speaking gave rise to the cliarge that he was disloyal. The central theme of the rhetoric of acquiescence and adjustment— white men shall rule— euad the Black Codes, especially the law dealing with vagrancy, produced the charge tliat southerners were not

PAGE 285

279 willing to accept the fjpeedom of the ex-slave. The damage wrought by these two charges in the campaign of 1866 was irreparable. This becomes clear when (me considers the dynamics of the argument, the lack of adequate communication between North and South, and the ethos of the campaigners. The true position of the Jolmson apologists is made evident when their "answers" or counter arguments are placed side by side with the arguments of their opponents. The intei-change centered in three contentions. The Radicals chiarged; "Yo'or governments are disloyEtl. " The Johnson men countered: "Our govexTments are not disloyal. " The Bewlicals coDtended: "You have refused to recognize the citizenship of the Negro. " The Johnson men replied: "It is the constitutional prerogative of a state to deteimine the qualifications of its own citizens. " "To protect the interests of the nation and to guarantee the jrights of all of its citizens, " the Radicals concluded, "we must delay reunion. " To this, the Johnson apologists replied: "You cannot dolay reunion. Your proposal is unconstitutional," So far as the writer laiows, the first issue was the on3;y one on which the contestants actually clashed. Were the Johnson governments loyal or disloyal? Crucial to this argument was a qiiestion of evidence. The Johnson apologists supported their position with testimony of good faith: the people of the Scwth, they said, had accepted defeat and their loyalty was genuine. The evidence supplied by the RadicsLls, however, was far more convincing: the South had not acted in good faith; the Johnson governments were in fact controlled by "rebels. " True Union

PAGE 286

280 men, the Radicals said, had been barred from office and had little or no voice in government. If there vas any doubt concerning this matter, the people had only to listen to the testimony of southern Loyalists vho had come North to speak of the true conditions in the South, or to read of "rebel" atrocities in iiemphis and New Orleans. There i/as no doubt about it. Southerners, especially those who controlled the Johnson governments, were not to be trusted. Neither side, however, clashed on the two remaining issues. The Johnson men evaded the civil riglits question with diatribes on state's rights. The Radicals ignored the question of constitutionality. While the Radical charges vere exaggerated, they were partially grounded in fact. Poor coimiiunications between North and South and conflictit]g reports from "Investigators" in the South clouded the issues, maldng it difficult for voters to distinguish between what was true and what was alleged to be true. Those who were interested in learning "the facts, " moreover, found it easier to believe the testimony of UnionRepublicans and southern Loyalists than of peace Democrats and southern Conservatives. The political character of those who had consistently supported the Union throughout the war was beyond question. The integrity of those who supported the President, on the other hand, was not above suspicion. In most cases, these were men who had either opposed the war or had supported the Confederacy. Radical persuaders, then, possessed a political character (ethos ) which matched the pz^Judices of their audiences. Moreover, they fashioned the core of their rhetoric — a blend of pathetic and logical

PAGE 287

281 appeals — from feelings of hate engendered by the var and from the "mistakes" of acquiescence and adjiistment. Those vho tried to vindicate the President's plan of reunion, on the other hand, lacked the ethos and evidence needed to discredit reasons which they themselves had supplied for delaying reunion. Further, their eulogies on the sanctity of the Constitution and their earnest appeals for reconciliation carried little weight with a people who were convinced that there was a need for revolutionary measures. A full realization of the ruin wrought by the "mistakes" of 1865, naturally, causes one to wonder why the Johnson men said what they did during that fateful year. How are we to account for the mistakes that mark the rhetoric of acquiescence and adjuslaaent? The first and principal cause of these "mistakes" was the presidential plan itself. Blinded by an ambition to produce a fait accompli. President Johnson shaped the terms of Reconstruction to fit a bygone era, and ignored the political exigencies of his day. The terms of reunion, he believed, should be consistent with the avowed purpose and results of the war. The sole purpose of the war had been that of preserving the Union. The abolition of slavery had evolved, hew ever, as a war measure and therefore had to be recognized, along with the renunciation of secession and the repudiation of the Confederate debt. Moreover, the method of Reconstruction must correspond, insofar as possible, with constitutional procedures. Such a philosophy appeared sound, but it did not reflect Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase's reccanmendation that the freedmen be given the vote, the Thirty-eighUi Congress's position on the disqualifica-

PAGE 288

282 tion of ex-Confederates, or Charles Sumner's theory of "state suicide. " Bav specifically did the Johnson plan lead to the "mistakes" of acquiescence and euyustauent ? Two aspects of the plan had a fatal effect on the "invention" of tlie rhetoric of this period. First, a plan of Reconstruction premised on democratic processes, made it necessary for William Marvin to invent reasons that would motivate conquered "rebels" to accept the President's plan of reunion and cany out tlie provisions contained therein. The emphasis irtiich he placed on the fact that white men could and would rule was a natural result — one, however, which gave the Radicals their civil rigiits argument. Presidential amnesty, which placed rank and file revolutionists on an equal political footing with Loyalists as "agents of redaaption, " also had a dama^ng effect on Marvin's invention. The fact that revolutionists made up a majority of the Florida audience, leirgely determined what he could and could not say. He could ask the revolutionists and Loyalists to forget past differences, but he dared not ask revolutionists to support a policy of Loyalist supremacy. The result was that "rebels" contix)lled the convention and held most, if not all, of the key posts of the new administration — a fact which edded the Radical cause and motivated Florida's Loyalists to Join forces with Radical persuaders in 1866. Democratic processes, which provided an atmosphere of uninhibited e^cpression, also had a fatal influence on the tone of the rhetoric of adjustment. As southern delegates and legislators made the necessary political adjustments, they eulogized their war dead, hedged on the

PAGE 289

283 matter of repudiating the Confederate war debt, and responded to Marvin's rhetoric by emphasizing that they would not enfranchise the Negro. These themes allowed southerners to save face as they ratified the President's terms of reunion, but also enabled them to speak as everloyal Americaxis when they should have been speaking as conquered "rebels. " Thus the pervasive tone of the rhetoric of adjustment suggested that southerners as veil as northerners should have a hand in writing the terms of reunion. Floridians had more regard for their choice of words in 1866, but all their assurances of good faith could not eradicate the earlier impressions of belligerency— impressions which were easily interpreted as signs of disloyalty. Although the presidential plan of Reconstruction was the primary cuase of the "mistakes" of I865, there were two other contributing causes which are worthy of notice. First, William Marvin and Florida's Conservative leaders assumed that the President's policy of Reconstruction represented a final settlement. This assumption stenmied from the influence of history and from the neutral atmosphere which prevailed during the period of acquiescence and adjustment. The President had proposed a plan of Reconstruction based on constitutional procedures. No one, these men assumed, could repudiate such a policy. An attack on it would, in effect, be an attack on the Constitution. This, of course, was an unvoiced" assumption in I865, but it came to the surface as the major premise of the rhetoric of vindication in 1866. Few, if any, realized in I865 that the political crisis in 1866 would cause Americans to discard the "cult of the Constitution. "

PAGE 290

28i^ Tlae general atmosphere vliich prevailed during the period of acquiescence and adjustment contributed to this sissut^ption of finality. No one seemed to question the President's right to reconstruct the South. Ho one challenged i^oat everyone seemed to assume — that the presidential policy of Reconstiruction was the policy of the federal government. Congress vas not in session and vas not to meet until December l865« The President's plan had been laid before the Cabinet, and not a single member questioned his authority to reorganize state governments 'Vithout the aid of Congress. " Further, the "public mind" in 1865 seemed to flavor "quick restoration without the infliction of serious penalties upon the Soutli. " Regardless of the reasons, the mistaken notion that President Johnson's policy of Reconstraction could not or vould not be amended or revoked constituted a second major cause of the "mistakes" of I865. Speakers, who were intent on placating the Resident, failed to consider how their rhetoric vould be received by idealists, fanatics, and unscrupulous politicians. Finally, in the course of formulating Ic^slative remedies for local problems, the provisional governor and Floridians generally yielded to local economic and cultural pressures and ignored the broader requirements of political e35)edlency. The vagrancy law may be taken as a case in point. This law, which was later regarded as the most objectionable feature of the "Black Code, " resulted from an honest attempt to Randall, The Civil War and Reconstruction, pp. 713* 69lf.

PAGE 291

285 deal vith a very real problem. During the period of acqiaiescence and adjustment, Marvin and others tried to dissuade Negroes from ^randerIng to test their freedom. When It becajne apparent ttiat no amount of speechmaklng could resolve the problem, Marvin advised both the convention and the legislature to take steps that would discourage vagrancy and promote a stable labor system. A cotton state needed a dependable labor force. Florida had no state prison and there were no local vork houses. Imprisonment vas Impractical because It would punish the state Insteeui of the Individual. Marvin, therefore, recommended, and Floridlans agreed, that "temporary Involuntary servitude" would be the most practical method of dealing with vagrancy and other labor problons. The solution was practical Insofar as the problem was concerned, but It created greater problems than It cured when Radical politicians Interpreted the measure as "a new f oim of slavery. " In short, speakers who were Intent on resolving local problems failed to consider the prejudices of their conquerors. Their oversight constituted a third critical \reakness which was partially responsible for the "mistakes" of 1865. The American people passed judgaent on the rhetoric of reunion in 1866, and their verdict marked the speaking of Floridlans on the issues of presidential Reconstruction as an oratory of failure. A rhetorical analysis of the weaknesses which resulted from the "mistakes ' of 1865, and the causes which were responsible for these "mistakes, " provides a basis for understanding why the Floridlans' speaking

PAGE 292

266 became an oratozy of failure. The essence of their failvire can be summed up in one sentence: in the course of acquiescing in and casrryIng out the requiranents of presidential Reconstruction, Floridians unwittingly provided reasons or arguments to justify a political revolution which they assumed could not or would not occur. Having considered the structure emd the rhetoric of the movement for presidential Reconstruction in Florida, we axe now in a position to leckon with one final question: What c«utt be said of the movement study as an approach to rhetorical criticism? On the basis of the writer's experience, it would appear that this sort of study provides valuable aids to criticism — aids afforded not only by the unique patterns of the chosen movement but also by the disciplines of the movement study itself. As the student surveys the Invention and style that characterize a chosen movement, he is able to detect certain unique patterns or characteristics that probably could not be made discernible in any other way. For exaiople, as the writer traced invention through the movement for presidential Reconstruction in Florida, the "unvoiced" assumption underlying the rhetoric of acquiescence and adjustment unexpectedly appeared as the major premise of the rhetoric of vindication — "Congress has no authority to tamper with constitutional procedures. " This discovery touched off what proved to be a fruitful investigation. Did Floridians assume in 1865 what they argued in 1866? The writer re-examined the political atmosphere of the period of acquiescence and adjustment with this question in mind, and found sufficient evidence to warrant the conclusion that in all probability Marvin and others did assume in

PAGE 293

287 l865 tliat no party would interfere with a process or policy that had as its sole puarpose the restoration of constitutional relations between the several states and the federal govenment. Second, the pattern revealed hy studying the relationship between the movement favoring presidential Reconstruction and the one opposing it the significance of timing as an eleanent of pers\iasion. The ninemonth period, bordered by the inception of the pro-movement on the
PAGE 294

a66 more cotaplete understanding of the circumstances under which the provisional governor 6ind the conquered spoke — circumstances which had a critical bearing on both the invention and the style of the discourse. Finally, the discipline imposed by the movement approach is salutory. The student of a movement is constantly reminded that he cannot re-create that movement unless he gives equal consideration to all of the essential elements in the rhetorical situation: the audience, the occasion, the speaker, and the speech. He studies these ccMiponents of the communicative process for the sole puzpose of searching out raw materials that are pertinent to the rhetorical image. "Side excursions" into history or biography are avoided for tear that they will blur the image. One cannot help being in^pressed, moreover, by the influence which the movement study "exerts" against the coomon tendency to become too much attached to an individual orator one may be studying. The student of a movement concerns himself with the rhetoric of many men, and is, therefore, less prone to etllow the stature of any individual to color his Jud^nent. In addition, it is easier to dissect a movonent than an individual. In the course of analyzing the movement for presidential Reconstruction in Florida, for exBii^>le, one can match the eloquence of a William Marvin with tliat of a David S. Walker. One can observe that the reconciliation speakers of 1865 were little more than "Fourth of July orators" in 1866. "Ship of state" analogies can be coorpcu'ed with "bloodyshirt " appeals. The ex-Confederate •s claims of good faith can be weighed a^^nst the testimony of those Mhaai northerners praised

PAGE 295

289 as the true sons of the Union in the South. The calibre of one man's arguments can be cc«ipared with that of a collesiGue and their joint argumentation can, in turn, be conpared with the argumentation of their opponents. The foregoing observations on the values of the movement studyas an approach to rhetorical criticism should not be interpreted as an attempt to discredit more usual methods of investigation. The nature of the approach used must necessarily vary with the nature of the problem 8U3d the interests of the individual scholar. Since there is no one final and all-superior pattern of treatment, each critic should be concerned to share with others what he has learned from the application of the particular approach he has chosen to esiploy.

PAGE 296

BIBLIOGBAPHT Selected Sources on the History and Criticism of AmericEUi Public Address Aly, Bower. "The Criticism of Oratory, " The Rhetoric of Alexander Hamilton . New York: Columbia University Press, 19IH. . "The History of American Public Address as a Research Field, " Quarterly Journal of Speech , XXIX (October, 19li-3), 3083l4. . "A Rhetorical Theory for a History of Public Speaking in the United States. " Papers in Rhetoric . Edited by Donald C. Bryant. St. Louis: Printed by Subscription, 19l<-0. Baird, A. Craig. "Opportunities for Research in State and Sectional Public Speaking, " Quarterly Journal of Speech, XXIX (October, 19^3 )> 30*1-308. . "The Study of Speeches. " American Public Addresses 17*4^0-1952 . New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1956. Baskervllle, Bamet. "Selected Writings on the Criticism of Public Address," Western Speech , XXI (Spring, 1957), 110-118. Bryant, Donald C. "Rhetoric: Its Functions and Its Scope, " QuarterlyJournal of Speech , XXXIX (December, 1953), *i-01-l42l». . "Some Problems of Scope and Method in Rhetorical Scholarship, " Quarterly Journal of Speech , XXIII (April, 1937), I82-I89. . "Of Style, " Western Speech , XXI (Spring, 1957), IO3-IIO. Cooper, iBXiB (trans. ). The Rhetoric of Aristotle . New York: Appleton Century Crofts, 1932. Dickey, Dallas C. "Southern Oratory: A Field for Research, " Quarterly Journal of Speech , XXXIII (December, 19*^7), h3Q-k63. . Seargent S. Prentiss, Whig Orator of the Old South . Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 194(j. "What Direction Should Future Research in American Public Address Take?" Quarterly Journal of Speech , XXIX (October, 19*13), 3OO-30I*. 290

PAGE 297

291 Duhamel, P. Albert. "The Function of Rhetoric as Effective Expression, " Journal of the History of Ideas , X (June, 19^9), S^-S?©. Griffin, Leland M. "The Rhetorical Structures of the Antimasonic Movement, " The Rhetorical Idiom: Essays in Rheto ric. Oratory, Laxmiarfit and Drama . Edited by Donald C. Bryant. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1958. , "The Rhetoric of Historical Movements," Qjuarterly Journal of Speech , XXXVIII (April, 1952), l81t-l88. Ifesseltine, William B. and Ewbank, Henry L., Jr. "Old Voices in the New South," Quarterly Journal of Speech, XXXIX (December, 1953), '«-51lt58. Hbchmuth, Iterie K. "The Criticism of Rhetoric, " A History a nd Criticism of American Public Address. Vol. III. Edited by Marie K. Hochmuth. New York: Lon^nans, Green 8: Co., 1955» Holland, Virginia. "Rhetorical Criticism: A Burkeian Method, " quarterly Journal of Speech , XXXIX (December, 1953), Ma^-i^50. Hudson, Hoyt H. "The Field of Rhetoric, " Quarterly J ournal of Speech, IX (April, 1923), 167-180. Natanson, Maurice. "The Limits of Rhetoric, " Quarterly J ournal of Speech, XLI (April, 1955), 133-139. Nilsen, Thomas R. "Interpretative Function of the Critic, " Western Speech , XXI (Spring, 1957), 70-76. Parrish, Way land M. "The Study of Speeches, " American Speeches , ed. Wayland M. Parrish and Marie K. Hochmuth. New York: longmans. Green & Co., 195^. Phifer, Gregg. "'Not for the Fi^rpose of I^iaking a Speech: • Andrew Johnson* s Svd.ng Around the Jircle, " Speech Monographs, XXI (November, 195i^), 285-293. Reid, Loren D. "The Perils of Rhetorical Criticism, " Quarterly J ournal of Speech , XXX (December, 19^), hl6'U2.2. Thonssen, Lester and Baird, A. Craig. Speech Criticism: Th e Development of Standards for Rhetorical Appraisal . New York: Ronald Press Co., 19^. Wallace, Karl R. "Rhetoric and Politics, " Southern Speech Jounaal , XX (Spring, 1955), 195-203.

PAGE 298

Weaver, Richard M. The Ethics of Rhetoric , Chicaso: Henry Regnery Co., 1953. Wichelns, Herbert. '"Hie Literary Criticism of Oratory," The Rhetorical Idiom; Essays in Rhetoric, Oratory, Langiiage, and Drajna. Edited by Donald C. Bryant. Itliaca: Cornell University Press, 1953. Wiley, Larl W, "State History and Rhetorical Research," Quarterly Journal of Speech , XXXVI (December, I950), 51U-519. Yeager, Willard H. "Wendell Phillips," A History and Criticism of American Public Address . Vol. I. Edited by William Norwood Brigance. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 19^4-3 , General and Special History Abbey, Kathriyn T. Florida Land of Change . Chapel Hill: University of North Csurolina Press, 19'tl. Barbour, George M. Florida for Tourists, Invalids and Settlers . New York: D. Appleton & Co., 1665, Bentley, George R, A History of the Freedmen's Bureau , niiladeljdiia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1955. Brevard, Carolina M. A History of Florida from the Treaty of I763 to Our Own Times . 2 vols. Edited by James A, Robertson. Deland: Publication of the Florida State Historical Society, I92U. Browne, Jefferson B. Key West the Old and the New, feaint Aiogustine: The Record Co., 1912, Buck, Paul H. The Road to Reunion I865-I90Q , Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1937. Cash, William J. Mind of the South . New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 191^1. Cash, William T. The Story of Florida , k vols. New York: The American Historical Society, 1936, History of the Democratic Party in Florida . Ttillahassee: Florida Democratic Historical Foimdation, I936. Coulter, E. Merton. The South During Reconstruction, 1865-1877. Vol. VIII (19^7) of A History of the South . 10 vols. Edited by Wendell H, Stephenson and Ellis M. Coulter. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 19^+7.

PAGE 299

293 Dau, Frederick W. Florida OM and New . New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 193^. Davis, T. Frederick, History of Jacksonville, Florida and Vicinity 1^13 to I92U . Saint Atigustlne: The Record Co., 1925. Davis, William W. The Civil War and Reconstruction in Florida . Vol. LIU (No. 131) of Columbia University Studies in History, Economics and Public Law. Mited by the Faculty of Political Science of Coluuibia University. Mew York: Longmans, Green & Co., 1913. Dickison, John J. Military History of Florida . Vol. XI of Confederate Military History . 12 vols. Edited by aement A. Evans. Atlanta: Confederate Publishing Co., 1699. Dovell, J. E. Florida: Historic, Dramatic, Contemporary , k vols. Nefw York: Lewis Historical Publishing Co., 1952. Dunning, William A, Reconstruction, Political and Economic, I865-I877 . Vol. XXII (1907) of The American Nation: a History from Original Sources by Associated Scholars . 28 vols. New York: Harper and Brothers , 1904-1918. , Essays on the Civil V.zx and Reconstruction and Related Topics. New York: Iteter Smith, I93I. First Century of Gainesville Lodge No. ^^1, F. and A. M., Gainesville , Florida, lb57-1957 . Gainesville: Wayside Press, 1957. Fleming, Walter L. Docianentary History of Reconstruction . 2 vols. Cleveland: Arthur H. Clark Co., I906-I907. King, C. Wendell. Social Movements in the United States . New York: Random House, 195&. Knauss, James 0. Territorial Florida Joxornallsm . Deland: Publication of the Florida State Historical Society, I926. Pasco, Samuel. "Reconstruction in Florida." Vfliy the Solid South? or . Reconstruction and its Resiilts . Hilary A. Herbert et al. Baltimore: R. H. Woodward & Co., I89O. Patrick, Eembert U. Florida Under Five Flags. Geiinesville: University of Florida Press, 1955. Haillips, Ulrich B. and Glunt, James D. (eds.). Florida Plantation Records from the Papers of George Noble Jones . St, Louis: Missouri Historical Society, 1927.

PAGE 300

29!^ Randall, J. G. The Civil War and Reconstruct iox:t. Boston: D, C, Heath & Co., I953. Reid, Whltelaw. Afl^er the War; A Southern Tour, ttey 1, lo6^, to May 1, 1865T Cincinnati; i'foore, i.ilstach, and BaldTcLn, 1866. Rerick, Roland H. Fieioolrs of Florida. 2 vols. Edited by J^ancis P. Fleming. Atlanta: Southern Historical Association, I902. Simkins, Francis B. A Hiatory of the South . New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1953. Wallace, John, Carpetbag Rule in Florida . Jacksonville; Da Costa Printing and Publishing House, 1886. Watson, Thomas E, History of Southern Oratory , Vol. DC (I909)cf The South in the Building of the nation. I3 vols. Richmond: Southern Historical Publication Society, I909-I913, Woodward, C. Vann, Reunion and Reaction . Garden City: Doubleday & Co., 1956. Newspapers Cincinnati Daily Gazette , Septeciber, IS66. Femandina Weelily Courier , March 9 and I6, 1866, Gainesville Weekly New Era, I865-I866. Indianapolis Daily Herald , September, 1366, Indianapolis Daily Journal , August -September, I866, Jacksonville Weekly Herald , I865, Jacksonville Weeiay Florida Times , I865-I866. Jacksonville Weekly Florida Union , 1865-1366. Lake City Weekly Columbian , March 22, I865. Madison Weekly Southern Messenger , April 20, 27, 29, I866, New York Times , I865-I866, New York World , 1866, Pensficola Tri -Weekly Observer , August k, I866,

PAGE 301

295 Pensacola Weekly Mail , Jantiary 30, I872. Poughkeepsie Dally Eagle , October, I866. Quincy Semi -Weekly Dispatch , March 15, I865. Qiiincy Semi -Weekly Commonwealth , May 15, J^e 5, October I6, I866. Qoincy Weekly Gadsden Democrat , July 21, I893. Rochester Daily Union and Advertiser , I866. Saint Augustine Weekl;;,^ Examiner , I866. Syracuse Sxinday Herald , March 5> 1899. Syracuse Daily Journal , 1366, Syracuse Daily Courier and Union , I866, Tallahassee Semi -Weekly Floridian , I865-I866. Tallahassee Tri-Weekly Florida Sentinel , 1066. Tampa Weekly Florida Peninsular , I866. Public Documents Congressional Globe . 39th Congress, 1st Session, Part 1. Washington: Government Printing Office, I866. Convention Journal, I865 . Tallahassee: Office of the Floridian printed by Djdce and Sparhawk, I865. House Journal, IS65 . ll+th General Assembly of the State of Florida, 1st Session, Tallahassee: Office of the Floridian printed by Dyke and Sparhawk, I865. House Journal, I866 . lUth General Assembly of the State of Florida, 2nd Session, Tallahassee: Office of the Floridian printed by Dyke and Sparhawk, I866, Laws of Florida . lUth General Assenbl: of ths State of Florida, 1st Session, Tallahassee: Office of the Floridian printed by Dyke and Sparhawk, I866. iiaoiciial Uniw:^ C.^lO.r'-ti :.r .1_^^; -ion Boa ^?, September IT, I866. Pamphlet IIo. 13 (in bound volume containing campaign pamphlets. History Room, New York Public Library).

PAGE 302

296 Proceedings of the National Union Convention, Held at Riiladelphia , August 1^, 1866 . Washingtoni National Union Executive Committee, 1666, (Princeton University Librarj^ ) Report of the Joint Committee on Reconstruction . 39th Congress, 1st Session, Part k, V/ashington: Government Printing Office, 1866. "Reconstruction in Florida," Legislative Blue Book, I917 . Tallahassee: T. J. Appleyard, 1917. Richardson, James D. (ed.). A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents I769-I897 . Vol. VI, Washington: Government Printing Office, 1899. Senate Journal, IQ63 , ll+th General Assembly of the State of Florida, 1st Session, Tallahassee: Office of the Sentinel printed by Hart and Shober, I865, Senate Journal, I866 . li^th General Assembly of the State of Florida, 2nd Session, Tallahassee: Office of the Sentinel printed by J. B. Oliver, I866. Testimony Talten by the Joint Select Committee to Inquire into the Con dition of Affairs in the Late Insurrectionary States . Vol. XIII. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1872. The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies . Series I, Vol. XLVIII, Part 1, and Series I, Vol. XLIX, Part 2. Washington: Government Printing Office, I895, 1697. Diaries and Letters David L. Yulee Papers. l8iH-l866. P. K. Yonge Library of Florida History, University of Florida Libraries, Gainesville, Florida. Diary of A. M. Reed, I8U8-I899, and a Portion of I900 by Others . Copy prepared by Historical Records Siirvey Works Progress Administration State Office, 1939. P. K. Yonge Library, of Florida History. Eppes, Susan Bradford. Itoough Some Eventful Years . Macon:. J. W. Btirke Co., 1926. Long, Ellen Call. Florida Breezes; or Florida Mev and Old . Jfeujksonvllle: Ashmead Brothers, Printers, I883.

PAGE 303

297 Periodicals Bates, (Haelina. "The Legal Status of the Negro in Florida," Florida Historical Quarterly , VI (January, I928), I59-I8I. Bentley, George R. "The Political Activity of the Freedmen's Bureau in Florida," Florida Historical Quarterly , XXVIII (July, 19^9), 28-37. Cotterill, R. S, "David Shelby Walker," Tallahassee Historical Society Annual , I (February, 193^ )# 56-60. Dorris, J. T, "Pardoning the Leaders of the Confederacy," Mississippi Valley Historical Review , XV (June, 1928), 3-22, Bnig, Elmer J. "A Qieclc-list of Extant Florida Newspapers, I8U5-I876," Florida Historical Quarterly , XI (October, 1932), 77-87. Kearney, Kevin E, "Autobiography of William Marvin," Florida Histori cal Quarterly , XXXVI (January, 1958), 179-222. Osborn, George E. "Letters of a Carpetbagger in Florida, I866-I869," Florida Historical Quarterly , XXXVI (January, 1958), 239-285. Parks, Albert S. "The Negro in the Reconstruction of Florida," Quar terly Journal of the Florida Agricultural and Mechanical Co3Jgge , V (October, 1936), 35-61. Haillips, Ulrich B. "The Central Theme of Southern History," American Historical Review , XXXIV (October, I928), 30-43. Roberts, Albert H. "Wilkinson Call, Soldier and Senator," Florida Historical Quarterly , XII (January, April, 193'<-)» 95-113; 179-197. . "Tallahassee Rejoins the Union," A palachee (Publication of the Tallahassee Historical Society, 1944), 7^-80. Russ, William A., Jr. "Disfranchisement in Florida during Radical Reconstruction," Susquehanna University Studies, IV (March, I950), 162-181. Smith, George W. "Carpetbag Imperialism in Florida, I862-I868," Florida Historical Quarterly , XXVII (October, 19^8; January, 19^9), 99-I3OJ 260-299. "Some Officials of the City Government of Pensacola," Florida Historical Quarterly , III (January, 1925), 31-33.

PAGE 304

298 Suimer, Charles. "Clemency and Common Sense," Atlantic Monthly j XVI (December, I865), 7^5 -T6o. Thomas, David Y. "The Free Negro in Florida before I865," South Atlantic Quarter 1;^^ , X (October, I9II)* 333-3^5Wight, V/illard E, "Horace Greeley, Presidential Candidate: A Floridian's View," Florida Historical Quarterly, XXXV (January, 1957), 271-275. V/illiams, Edwin L., Jr. "Negro Slavery in Florida," Florida Historical Quarterly , XVIII (October, 19*^9; January, 1950), 93-110; 152-204. Wooster, Ralph A. "The Florida Secession Convention," Florida Historical Quarterly , XXXVI (April, 195^), 373-3C5. Yonge, Julien C. "Notes on Reconstruction in Tallahassee and Leon County, 1666-1876," Florida Historical Quarterly , V (Janxiary, 1927), 153-158. Reference Works American Annual Cyclopedia and Register of Important Events of the Year 1865 . Vol. V. New York: D. Appleton & Co., 1866. Biographical Directory of the American Congress 1774-1914-9 . Wasliington: Government Printing Office, 1950. Gray, Giles W. (ed.). Index to the Quarterly Journal of Speech . Dubuque: Vi'llliam C. Brown Co., 1956. Guide to the ^fanuscript3 in the Southern Historical Collection of The University of North Carolina . Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1941. Gregory, Winifred. Aiaerican Newspapers I82I-I936, A Union List of Files Available in the United States and Canada . New York: H. W. Wilson Co., 1937 . Handlin, Oscar, et al. Harvard Guide to Aiaerican History. Cambridee: Beliuaap Press of Harvard University Press, 195^. Headley, P. C. Public Men of To-Day . Hartford: S. S, Scranton & Co., 1882. Index to the Writings on American Histor, , 1902-19l<-0 . Washington: American Historical Association, I956, Johnson, Allen, and Malone, Duraas (eds,). Dictionary of American Biography . 21 vols. New York: C. Scr ibner • s Sons , I928-I936 .

PAGE 305

299 Kiiower, Franklin H. (ed.). Table of Contents ^j^^ ^^^^^^J ^^°^^ 'nr STve^ech , 1915-1956. Si .eech Monographs, 193^-^9^^; ^T^.... Spgj^ Teacher. 1952'l95b. Publication of Speecn AssociaT^lon of America, 1957. Library of Compress Catalo.i of Printed Cards . 259 vols. Ann Arbor: J. W. Edwards, 19*^2List of Doc toral Dissertations in HistoryJbv in Progress at Co l l eges ani UniversitUs in the United States . liashington: American Historical ilssociation, 1955. I^tekers of America , h vols. Atlanta: Florida Historical Society, 1909-1911. Martin, Michael, and Gelber, Leonard. The Nev Dictionary of American History . New York: Polyglot Press, 1952. Marvin, Georse F. Descendants of Reinhold a nd Ifatthew Marvin. Boston: Marvin, I90U. Morris, Charles (ed.). Makers of New York, an Historical Work Giving Portraits and Sketches of the Ikast Eninent Citize ns of New York. Philadelphia: L. R. Hamersly and Co., Iti95. National Cyclopaedia of American Biocraphy. iH vols. New York: James T. White & Co., 1^93-195^. Thonssen, Lester, Father son, Elizabeth, and Thonssen, Dorothea (eds.). Bibliography of Speech Ediication . New York: H. W. Wilson Co., 1939. Wilson, James G. and Fiske, John (eds.). Appletons' C yclopaedia of American Bi ography . 6 vols. New York: D. Appleton i Co., Theses and Dissertations Ackerman, Philip D. "Florida Reconstruction from Walker through Reed, IS65 to 1873." Unpublished master's thesis. University of Florida, Gainesville, 19*i6. Ferrell, Sidney S. "Public Opinion in Confederate Florida," Unpublished master's thesis. University of Florida, Gainesville, 1950Futch, Ovid L. "Salmon P. Chase and Radical Politics in Florida, 18621865." Unpublished master's thesis. University of Florida, Gainesville, 1952.

PAGE 306

300 Golden, James L. "The Political Speaking of Henry Washington Hilliard: Southern Unionist." Unpublished Ha.D. dissertation. University of Florida, Gainesville, 1953. Kearney, Kevin E, "Political Speaking in Florida from I859 to I86I." Unpublished master's thesis. University of Florida, Gainesville, 1955. Fbifer, Gregg, "The Last Stand of Presidential Reconstruction: Rhetorical Study of Andrew Johnson's Swing around the Circle in 1666," Uniniblished Ph.D. dissertation, State University of Iowa, Iowa City, 19^+9 . Thompson, Arthur W. "David Yulae: A Stiidjof Nineteenth Century American Thought and Enterprise," Unpublished Hi,D. dissertation, Columbia University, New York, 193k, Williamson, Edward C, "Williinson Call, a Pioneer in Progressive Democracy," Unp\iblished master's thesis, Itoiverslty of Florida, Gainesville^ 19^, "The Era of the Democratic Coimty Leader: Florida Ftilitics, I877-IO93," Unpublished Hi.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 195^.

PAGE 307

BIOGMPHICAL SKETCH The vrlter was bom on January 1% 1929, in BoGota, New Jersey. A veteran of World War II and the Korean War, he attended the University of Vermont from 19^1^ to 1950. Con5>letlns his naval service in 1952, he returned to Vemont and received the Bachelor of Science degree in June, 195^* He eirbered upon his graduate studies at the University of Florida in Septenber, 195^^, and received the Ifaster of Arts degree in August, 1955. Remaining in residence, he spent the period September, 1955Jamiary, 1958 vorMng toward the Ph.D. Upon the conrpletion of his graduate studies, he vas appointed to his present position as Instructor in the Department of Speech, Butler University, Indianapolis, Indiana. While a graduate student in the Department of Speech at the Italversity of Florida, the vriter assisted with forensics and taught public speaking as a graduate assistant, September, 195^June, 1956. m June, 195^ he received a graduate fellowship which enabled him to continue his graduate studies and research. In June, 1959, be received a grant from Butler University to cocrplete work on the dissertation from funds donated to the University by Lilly Endowment, Inc., for the purpose of upgrading faculty. The writer holds membership in three honor societies: Hd Kappa Phi (scholarship), Tau Kappa Alpha (forensics), and Sigm Alpha Eta (speech and hearing honorary). 301

PAGE 308

This dissertation was prepared iinder the direction of the chairman of the candidate's supervisory committee and has been approved by all members of that committee. It was submitted to the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences and to the Graduate Council^ and was approved as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. January 30* 19^0 -A? ?. Dean, Co] of Arts and iSdl|CT SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE: Dean, Graduate School Ckalrman "' in" m a^M-fj^i

PAGE 309

8091