The Journal of Negro History, Volume 4, 1919

The unfortunate and inexcusable feature of the case is that, however much they may deplore such lawlessness, they have never, so far as we can learn, declined to accept its fruits. They may regret the violence and crimes by which American citizens are prevented from voting, but they rejoice in the Democratic victories which result therefrom. So long as they shall continue thus to accept the fruits of crime, the criminals will have but little fear of punishment or restraint, and the lawless conduct which is depopulating some sections of their laboring classes will go on. There is another unfortunate feature of this matter. So long as crimes against American citizenship shall continue to suppress Republican majorities, and to give a "solid South" to the Democracy, there will be found enough Democrats at the North who will shut their eyes to the means by which it is accomplished, and seek to cover up and excuse the conduct of their political partisans at the South.

This is well illustrated by the report of the majority of the committee. In the presence of most diabolic outrages clearly proven; in the face of the declaration of thousands of refugees that they had fled because of the insecurity of their lives and property at the South, and because the Democratic party of that section had, by means too shocking and shameful to relate, deprived them of their rights as American citizens; in the face of the fact that it has been clearly shown by the evidence that organizations of colored laborers, one of which numbered ninety-eight thousand, have existed for many years and extending into many States of the South, designed to improve their condition by emigration—in the face of all these facts the majority of the committee can see no cause for the exodus growing out of such wrongs, but endeavor to charge it to the Republicans of the North.

In view of this fact, it is our painful duty to point out some of the real causes of this movement. It is, however, quite impossible to enumerate all or any considerable part of the causes of discontent and utter despair which have finally culminated in this movement. To do so would be to repeat a history of violence and crime which for fifteen years have reddened with the blood of innocent victims many of the fairest portions of our country; to do so would be to read the numberless volumes of sworn testimony which have been carefully corded away in the crypt and basement of this Capitol, reciting shocking instances of crime, crying from the ground against the perpetrators of the deeds which they record. The most which we can hope to do within the limits of this report is to present a very few facts which shall be merely illustrative of the conditions which have driven from their homes, and the graves of their fathers an industrious, patient, and law-abiding people, whom we are bound by every obligation of honor and patriotism to protect in their personal and political rights and privileges.

We begin with the State of North Carolina because the migration from that State has been comparatively insignificant, and also because the conditions there are more favorable to the colored race than in any of the other cotton States of the South. Owing to the lack of funds, and to the time employed in the examination of witnesses called by the majority the Republican members of the committee summoned no witnesses from the State of North Carolina, and were obliged to content themselves with such facts as could be obtained from one or two persons who happened to be in this city, and such other facts as were brought out upon cross-examination of the witnesses called by the other side. By the careful selection of a few well-to-do and more fortunate colored men from that State, the majority of the committee secured some evidence tending to show that a portion of the Negroes of North Carolina are exceptionally well treated and contented, and yet upon cross-examination of their own witnesses facts were disclosed which showed that, even there, conditions exist which are ample to account for the migration of the entire colored population.

There are three things in that State which create great discontent among the colored people: First, the abridgment of their rights of self-government; second, their disadvantages as to common schools; third, discriminations against them in the courts; and, fourth, the memory of Democratic outrages. Prior to Democratic rule the people of each county elected five commissioners, who had supervision over the whole county, and who chose the judges of elections. The Democrats changed the constitution so as to take this power from the people, and gave to the general assembly authority to appoint these officers. This they regard not only as practically depriving them of self-government, but, as stated by one of the witnesses, Hon. R. C. Badger, as placing the elections, even in Republican townships, wholly under the control of the Democrats, who thereby "have the power to count up the returns and throw out the balance for any technicality, exactly as Garcelon & Co. did in Maine." This creates much dissatisfaction, because they believe they are cheated out of their votes. The Negro values the ballot more than anything else, because he knows that it is his only means of defense and protection. A law which places all the returning boards in the hands of his political opponents necessarily and justly produces discontent.

Next to the ballot the Negro values the privileges of common schools, for in them he sees the future elevation of his race. The prejudice even in North Carolina against white teachers of colored schools seems to have abated but little since the war. Mr. Badger, when cross-examined on this point, said:

Q. Is there any prejudice still remaining there against white teachers of colored schools?—A. I think there is.

Q. Will you explain it?—A. I cannot explain it, except by the prejudices between the races.

Q. You mean, white persons teaching a colored school lose social status?—A. Yes, sir.

Q. Now, a white lady who comes from the North and teaches a colored school, to what extent is she tabooed?—A. I don't think she would have any acquaintances in white society.

Q. Would she be any quicker invited into white society than a colored woman?—A. Just about the same.

This fact contains within itself a volume of testimony. It shows that the Negro is still regarded as a sort of social and political pariah, whom no white person may teach without incurring social ostracism and being degraded to the level of the social outcast he or she would elevate in the scale of being. Is it surprising that the Negro is dissatisfied with his condition and desires to emigrate to some country where his children may hope for better things?

The most serious complaints, however, which are made against the treatment of colored citizens of North Carolina is that justice is not fairly administered in the courts as between themselves and the whites. On this point the evidence of Mr. R. C. Badger reveals a condition of things to which no people can long submit. Here is his illustration of the manner in which justice is usually meted out as between the Negroes and the whites:

Q. How about the discrimination in the courts as between the whites and blacks?—A. That is principally in matters of larceny. In such cases the presumption is reversed as to the Negro. A white man can't be convicted without the fullest proof, and with the Negroes, in matters between themselves, such as assault and battery, they get as fair a trial as the whites. At the January term of our court Judge Avery presided. A white man and a colored woman were indicted for an affray. The woman was in her husband's barn getting out corn; they were going to move, and the white man came down there and said, "You seem to have a good time laughing here this morning," and she said, yes, she had a right to laugh. He said, "You are getting that corn out, and you would have made more if you had stuck to your husband." She seemed to be a sort of termagant, and she said nobody said that about her unless you told them. He made some insulting remark, and she made something in return to him, and he took a billet of wood and struck her on the shoulder, and he pulled a pistol and beat her with it, and she went for him to kill him. They found the man not guilty and they found her guilty, but Judge Avery set the verdict aside and ordered the case nolle prossed against her.

Q. Do you think that is a fair sample of the justice they get?—A. Yes, sir.

Q. Do you think they will convict a colored woman in order to get a chance to turn loose a white man?—A. Yes, sir.

Mr. Badger was not our witness. He was called by the majority, but he is a gentleman of high character, the son of an ex-member of this body, and thoroughly acquainted with the condition of things in his State. He puts the case just mentioned as a "fair sample" of North Carolina justice toward the Negro. It is true the judge set aside the verdict, but this does not change the fact that before a North Carolina jury the Negro has but little hope of justice.

Back of all these things lies the distrust of Democracy which was inspired during the days when the "Kuklux," the "White Brotherhood," the Universal Empire, and the "Stonewall Guard" spread terror and desolation over the State in order to wrest it from Republicanism to Democracy. The memory of those dark days and bloody deeds, the prejudice which still forbids white ladies to teach colored schools, and denies "even-handed" justice in the courts, and the usurpations which place the returning boards all in the hands of Democrats, have inspired a feeling of discontent which has found expression in the efforts of a few to leave the State. These facts, taken in connection with the bonus of one dollar per head offered by the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company (a Democratic corporation represented by a Democratic agent) to leading colored men who would secure passengers for their road, has led to the emigration of some seven or eight hundred colored people from that State, and the only wonder is that thousands instead of hundreds have not gone.

Louisiana and Mississippi

The States of Louisiana and Mississippi have furnished the larger portion of the migration to Kansas, and as the conditions which caused the exodus are the same in both of these States, we may speak of them together. No single act of wrong has inspired this movement, but a long series of oppression, injustice, and violence, extending over a period of fifteen years. These people have been long-suffering and wonderfully patient, but the time came when they could endure it no longer and they resolved to go. We can convey no adequate idea of what they endured before adopting this desperate resolve, but will mention a few facts drawn from well authenticated history, from sworn public documents, and from the evidence taken by the Exodus Investigating Committee. Writing under date of January 10, 1875, General P. H. Sheridan, then in command at New Orleans, says:

Since the year 1866 nearly thirty-five hundred persons, a great majority of whom were colored men, have been killed and wounded in this State. In 1868 the official records show that eighteen hundred and eighty-five were killed and wounded. From 1868 to the present time no official investigation has been made, and the civil authorities in all but a few cases have been unable to arrest, convict or punish the perpetrators. Consequently there are no correct records to be consulted for information. There is ample evidence, however, to show that more than twelve hundred persons have been killed and wounded during this time on account of their political sentiments. Frightful massacres have occurred in the parishes of Bossier, Caddo, Catahoula, Saint Bernard, Saint Landry, Grant, and Orleans.

He then proceeds to enumerate the political murders of colored men in the various parishes, and says:

"Human life in this State is held so cheaply that when men are killed on account of political opinions, the murderers are regarded rather as heroes than criminals in the localities where they reside."

This brief summary is not by a politician, but by a distinguished soldier, who recounts the events which have occurred within his own military jurisdiction. Volumes of testimony have since been taken confirming, in all respects, General Sheridan's statement, and giving in detail the facts relating to such murders, and the times and circumstances of their occurrence. The results of the elections which immediately followed them disclose the motives and purposes of their perpetrators. These reports show that in the year 1868 a reign of terror prevailed over almost the entire State. In the parish of Saint Landry there was a massacre from three to six days, during which between two and three hundred colored men were killed. "Thirteen captives were taken from the jail and shot, and a pile of twenty-five dead bodies were found burned in the woods." The result of this Democratic campaign in the parish was that the registered Republican majority of 1,071 was wholly obliterated, and at the election which followed a few weeks later not a vote was cast for General Grant, while Seymour and Blair received 4,787.

In the parish of Bossier a similar massacre occurred between the 20th and 30th of September, 1868, which lasted from three to four days, during which two hundred colored people were killed. By the official registry of that year the Republican voters in Bossier parish numbered 1,938, but at the ensuing election only one Republican vote was cast.

In the parish of Caddo during the month of October, 1868, over forty colored people were killed. The result of that massacre was that out of a Republican registered vote of 2,894 only one was cast for General Grant. Similar scenes were enacted throughout the State, varying in extent and atrocity according to the magnitude of the Republican majority to be overcome.

The total summing-up of murders, maimings, and whippings which took place for political reasons in the months of September, October and November, 1868, as shown by official sources, is over one thousand. The net political results achieved thereby may be succinctly stated as follows: The official registration for that year in twenty-eight parishes contained 47,923 names of Republican voters, but at the Presidential election, held a few weeks after the occurrence of these events but 5,360 Republican votes were cast, making the net Democratic gain from said transactions 42,563.

In nine of these parishes where the reign of terror was most prevalent out of 11,604 registered Republican votes only 19 were cast for General Grant. In seven of said parishes there were 7,253 registered Republican votes, but not one was cast at the ensuing election for the Republican ticket.

In the years succeeding 1868, when some restraint was imposed upon political lawlessness and a comparatively peaceful election was held, these same Republican parishes cast from 33,000 to 37,000 Republican votes, thus demonstrating the purpose and the effects of the reign of murder in 1868. In 1876 the spirit of violence and persecution, which in parts of the State had been partially restrained for a time, broke forth again with renewed fury. It was deemed necessary to carry that State for Tilden and Hendricks, and the policy which had proved so successful in 1868 was again invoked and with like results. On the day of general election in 1876 there were in the State of Louisiana 92,996 registered white voters and 115,310 colored, making a Republican majority of the latter of 22,314. The number of white Republicans was far in excess of the number of colored Democrats. It was, therefore, well known that if a fair election should be made the State would go Republican by from twenty-five to forty thousand majority. The policy adopted this time was to select a few of the largest Republican parishes and by terrorism and violence not only obliterate their Republican majorities, but also intimidate the Negroes in the other parishes. The testimony found in our public documents, and records shows that the same system of assassinations, whippings, burnings, and other acts of political persecution of colored citizens which had occurred in 1868 was again repeated in 1876 and with like results.

In fifteen parishes where 17,726 Republicans were registered in 1876 only 5,758 votes were cast for Hayes and Wheeler, and in one of them (East Feliciana), where there were 2,127 Republicans registered, but one Republican vote was cast. By such methods the Republican majority of the State was supposed to have been effectually suppressed and a Democratic victory assured. And because the legally constituted authorities of Louisiana, acting in conformity with law and justice, declined to count some of the parishes thus carried by violence and blood, the Democratic party, both North and South, has ever since complained that it was fraudulently deprived of the fruits of victory, and it now proposes to make this grievance the principal plank in the party platform.

On the 6th of December, 1876, President Grant in a message to Congress transmitted the evidence of these horrible crimes against the colored race, committed in the name and in the interest of the Democracy. They are not mere estimates nor conjectures, but the names of the persons murdered, maimed and whipped, and of the perpetrators of the crimes, the places where they occurred, and the revolting circumstances under which they were committed, are all set forth in detail. This shocking record embraces a period of eight years, from 1868 to 1876, inclusive, and covers ninety-eight pages of fine type, giving an average of about one victim to each line. We have not counted the list, but it is safe to say that it numbers over four thousand.

These crimes did not end in 1876 with the accession of the Democracy to control of the State administration. The witnesses examined by your committee gave numerous instances of like character which occurred in 1878. Madison Parish may serve as an illustration. This parish, which furnished perhaps the largest number of refugees to Kansas, had been exceptionally free from bull-dozing in former years. William Murrell, one of the witnesses called by the committee, states the reasons for the exodus from that parish as follows:

You have not read of any exodus yet as there will be from that section this summer, and the reason for it is that, for the first time since the war in Madison Parish last December, we had bull-dozing there. Armed bodies of men came into the parish—not people who lived in the parish, but men from Ouachita Parish and Richland Parish; and I can name the leader who commanded them. He was a gentleman by the name of Captain Tibbals, of Ouachita Parish, who lives in Monroe, who was noted in the celebrated massacre there in other times. His very name among the colored people is sufficient to intimidate them almost. He came with a crowd of men on the 28th of December into Madison Parish, when all was quiet and peaceable. There was no quarrel, no excitement. We had always elected our tickets in the parish, and we had put Democrats on the ticket in many cases to satisfy them. There were only 238 white voters and about 2,700 colored registered voters.

Mr. Murrell says that David Armstrong, who was president of third ward Republican club, a man who stood high in the community, and against whom no charge was made except that of being a Republican, made the remark:

"What right have these white men to come here from Morehouse Parish, and Richland Parish, and Franklin Parish to interfere with our election?" And some white men heard of it and got a squad by themselves and said, "We'll go down and give that nigger a whipping." So Sunday night, about ten o'clock, they went to his house to take him out and whip him. They saw him run out the back way and fired on him. One in the crowd cried out, "Don't kill him!" "It is too late, now," they said, "he's dead." The Carroll Conservative, a Democratic newspaper, published the whole thing; but the reason they did it was because we had one of their men on our ticket as judge, and they got sore about it, and we beat him. They killed Armstrong and took him three hundred yards to the river, in a sheet, threw him in the river, and left the sheet in the bushes.

Proceeding with the account of that transaction, Mr. Murrell swears that the colored people had heard that the bulldozers were coming from the surrounding parishes, and that he and others called on some of the leading Democrats in order to prevent it, but all in vain. He says:

We waited on Mr. Holmes, the clerk of the court, and we said to him, "Mr. Holmes, it is not necessary to do any bulldozing here; you have the counting machinery all in your hands, and we would rather be counted out than bulldozed; can't we arrange this thing? I made a proposition to him and said, "You know I am renominated on the Republican ticket, but I will get out of the way for any moderate Democrat you may name to save the State and district ticket. We will not vote for your State ticket; you cannot make the colored people vote the State ticket; but if you will let us have our State ticket we will give you the local offices." We offered them the clerk of the court, not the sheriff, and the two representatives. We told him we would not give them the senator, but the district judge and attorney. After this interview Holmes sent us to Dr. Askew, ex-chairman of the Democratic committee, and he said to me, "Now, Murrell, there is no use talking, I advise you to stand from under. When these men get in here we can't control them. We like you well enough and would not like to see you hurt. I will see you to-night at Mr. Holmes." We had an interview with Mr. Holmes and made this proposition, and Holmes asked me this question: "Murrell, you know damned well the niggers in this parish won't vote the Democratic ticket—there is no use to tell me you will give us the clerk of the court, you know the niggers won't do it. You can't trust the niggers in politics; all your eloquence and all the speeches you can make won't make these niggers vote this ticket or what you suggest, even if we was to accept it. No, by God, we are going to carry it. Why," said he, "there is more eloquence in double-barreled shot-guns to convince niggers than there is in forty Ciceros." I said to him, "Well, do you suppose the merchants and planters will back you up," and he said, "O, by God, they have got nothing to do with it. We have charge of it. We three men, the Democratic committee, have full power to work."

The result of this "work" was, as stated by the witness, and not disputed by any one before the committee, that in this parish, containing 2,700 registered Republican voters, and only 238 Democrats, the Democrats returned a majority of 2,300. The witness, who was a candidate on the Republican ticket, swears that not more than 360 votes were cast. Democratic shot-gun eloquence did its "work," as prophesied by Mr. Askew, ex-chairman of the Democratic committee, but it also served as a wonderful stimulus to migration from Madison Parish.

We cite this case for two reasons: First, because it has been said that the Negroes have not emigrated from bulldozed parishes; and, secondly, because it serves as an illustration of the many similar cases which were given to the committee.

We desire also to invite attention to the evidence of Henry Adams, a colored witness from Shreveport, La. Adams is a man of very remarkable energy and native ability. Scores of witnesses were summoned by the majority of the committee from Shreveport but none of them ventured to question his integrity or truthfulness. Though a common laborer, he has devoted much of his time in traveling through Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, working his way and taking notes of the crimes committed against his race. His notes, written in terse and simple language, embraced the names of six hundred and eighty-three colored men who have been whipped, maimed or murdered within the last eight years, and his statement of these crimes covers thirty-five pages of closely printed matter in the report. We are sure no one can read it without a conviction of its truthfulness, and a feeling of horror at the barbarous details he relates. Adams is the man who has organized a colonization council, composed of laboring colored people, and rigidly excluding politicians, which numbers ninety-eight thousand who have enrolled themselves with a view to emigration from that country as early as possible. He details the character and the purpose of the organization and the efforts it has made to obtain relief and protection for its members. "First," he says, "we appealed to the President of the United States to help us out of our distress, to protect us in our rights and privileges. Next, we appealed to Congress for a territory to which we might go and live with our families. Failing in that," says he, "our other object was to ask for help to ship us all to Liberia, Africa, somewhere where we could live in peace and quiet. If that could not be done," he adds, "our idea was to appeal to other governments outside of the United States to help us to get away from the United States and go and live there under their flag." What a commentary upon our own boasted equality and freedom! Finding no relief in any direction, they finally resolved to emigrate to some of the Northern States. He says they had some hope of securing better treatment at home until 1877, when "we lost all hopes and determined to go anywhere on God's earth, we didn't care where; we said we was going if we had to run away and go into the woods." Perhaps we can best summarize the condition of affairs in Louisiana and the causes of the exodus from that State, as the Negroes themselves regarded them, by quoting a brief extract from the report of the business committee to the colored State convention held in New Orleans on the 21st of April, 1879: