NATIONAL PEDAGOGOC UNIVERSITY
FOREIGN PHILOLOGY DEPARTMENT
Tne Impact the Civil War 1861-1865 on Economic, Politic and Industry
Development in the USA
Written by
53-th group student
Tatiana Ryabchun
Kyiv, 2000
Reconstruction
(1865-77), in U.S. history, period during and after the American Civil
War in which attempts were made to solve the political, social, and
economic problems arising from the readmission to the Union of the 11
Confederate states that had seceded at or before the outbreak of war.
As early as 1862, Pres. Abraham Lincoln had appointed provisional
military governors for Louisiana, Tennessee, and North Carolina. The
following year, initial steps were taken to reestablish governments in
newly occupied states in which at least 10 percent of the voting
population had taken the prescribed oath of allegiance. Aware that the
presidential plan omitted any provision for social or economic
reconstruction, the Radical Republicans in Congress resented such a
lenient political arrangement under solely executive jurisdiction. As a
result, the stricter Wade-Davis Bill was passed in 1864 but pocket
vetoed by the President.
After Lincoln’s assassination (April 1865), Pres. Andrew Johnson further
alienated Congress by continuing Lincoln’s moderate policies. The
Fourteenth Amendment, defining national citizenship so as to include
blacks, passed Congress in June 1866 and was ratified, despite rejection
by most Southern states (July 28, 1868). In response to Johnson’s
intemperate outbursts against the opposition as well as to several
reactionary developments in the South (e.g., race riots and passage of
the repugnant black codes severely restricting rights of blacks), the
North gave a smashing victory to the Radical Republicans in the 1866
congressional election.
That victory launched the era of congressional Reconstruction (usually
called Radical Reconstruction), which lasted 10 years starting with the
Reconstruction Acts of 1867. Under that legislation, the 10 remaining
Southern states (Tennessee had been readmitted to the Union in 1866)
were divided into five military districts; and, under supervision of the
U.S. Army, all were readmitted between 1868 and 1870. Each state had to
accept the Fourteenth or, if readmitted after its passage, the Fifteenth
Constitutional Amendment, intended to ensure civil rights of the
freedmen. The newly created state governments were generally Republican
in character and were governed by political coalitions of blacks,
carpetbaggers (Northerners who had gone into the South), and scalawags
(Southerners who collaborated with the blacks and carpetbaggers). The
Republican governments of the former Confederate states were seen by
most Southern whites as artificial creations imposed from without, and
the conservative element in the region remained hostile to them.
Southerners particularly resented the activities of the Freedmen’s
Bureau, which Congress had established to feed, protect, and help
educate the newly emancipated blacks. This resentment led to formation
of secret terroristic organizations, such as the Ku Klux Klan and the
Knights of the White Camelia. The use of fraud, violence, and
intimidation helped Southern conservatives regain control of their state
governments, and, by the time the last Federal troops had been withdrawn
in 1877, the Democratic Party was back in power.
About 1900, many U.S. historians espoused a theory of racial inferiority
of blacks. The Reconstruction governments were viewed as an abyss of
corruption resulting from Northern vindictiveness and the desire for
political and economic domination. Later, revisionist historians noted
that not only was public and private dishonesty widespread in all
regions of the country at that time but also that a number of
constructive reforms actually were introduced into the South during that
period: courts were reorganized, judicial procedures improved,
public-school systems established, and more feasible methods of taxation
devised. Many provisions of the state constitutions adopted during the
postwar years have continued in existence.
The Reconstruction experience led to an increase in sectional
bitterness, an intensification of the racial issue, and the development
of one-party politics in the South. Scholarship has suggested that the
most fundamental failure of Reconstruction was in not effecting a
distribution of land in the South that would have offered an economic
base to support the newly won political rights of black citizens.
Wade-Davis Bill
(1864), unsuccessful attempt by Radical Republicans and others in the
U.S. Congress to set Reconstruction policy before the end of the Civil
War. The bill, sponsored by senators Benjamin F. Wade and Henry W.
Davis, provided for the appointment of provisional military governors in
the seceded states. When a majority of a state’s white citizens swore
allegiance to the Union, a constitutional convention could be called.
Each state’s constitution was to be required to abolish slavery,
repudiate secession, and disqualify Confederate officials from voting or
holding office. In order to qualify for the franchise, a person would be
required to take an oath that he had never voluntarily given aid to the
Confederacy. President Abraham Lincoln’s pocket veto of the bill
presaged the struggle that was to take place after the war between
President Andrew Johnson and the Radical Republicans in Congress.
Property law
Ownership as the absolute right to possession
One may thus define ownership in the same way that the legal philosopher
Felix Cohen defined property: “That is property to which the following
label can be attached: To the world: Keep off X unless you have my
permission, which I may grant or withhold. Signed: Private citizen.
Endorsed: The state.” Cohen, however, goes on to warn that all the terms
of the definition “shade off imperceptibly into other things.” Consider,
for example, the large range of possibilities encompassed in the phrase
“permission, which I may grant or withhold.” In all Western legal
systems there are a number of situations in which the law will either
assume that permission has been granted or will require the private
citizen to grant his permission. The situations tend to be dramatic:
Firefighters, for example, are usually allowed to enter private property
to prevent the spread of a fire and frequently are authorized to destroy
private property in order to prevent the spread of a fire.
In the 1960s a number of U.S. Supreme Court cases starkly posed the
conflict between the property owner’s right to exclude and civil rights,
in the context of “sit-ins” in restaurants that were excluding customers
on racial grounds. These cases suggested, if they did not quite hold,
that in this context the possessory right of the restaurant owner would
have to yield to the civil-rights claim of those sitting in. In the same
period a number of courts held that owners of farms could not exclude
visitors from agricultural migrant labour camps.
The conflict in these cases between property rights and civil rights was
made starker by the practice in the United States of treating social
issues as constitutional controversies. The issue, however, of the use
of property to discriminate against members of the society whom the
property owner disfavours is present throughout the Western world.
Ultimately in the United States the problem of restaurant sit-ins was
resolved by national legislation that made it the duty of anyone
providing food or lodging to serve all comers without regard to race.
Similar legislation exists in many Western countries, as does
legislation allowing access to premises in which workers are employed.
Black code
in the United States, any of numerous laws enacted in the states of the
former Confederacy after the American Civil War, in 1865 and 1866; the
laws were designed to replace the social controls of slavery that had
been removed by the Emancipation Proclamation and the Thirteenth
Amendment to the Constitution, and were thus intended to assure
continuance of white supremacy.
The black codes had their roots in the slave codes that had formerly
been in effect. The general philosophy supporting the institution of
chattel slavery in America was based on the concept that slaves were
property, not persons, and that the law must protect not only the
property but also the property owner from the danger of violence. Slave
rebellions were not unknown, and the possibility of uprisings was a
constant source of anxiety in colonies and then states with large slave
populations. (In Virginia during 1780-1864, 1,418 slaves were convicted
of crimes; 91 of these convictions were for insurrection and 346 for
murder.) Slaves also ran away. In the British possessions in the New
World, the settlers were free to promulgate any regulations they saw fit
to govern their labour supply. As early as the 17th century, a set of
rules was in effect in Virginia and elsewhere; but the codes were
constantly being altered to adapt to new needs, and they varied from one
colony, and later one state, to another.
All the slave codes, however, had certain provisions in common. In all
of them the colour line was firmly drawn, and any amount of Negro blood
established the race of a person, whether slave or free, as Negro. The
status of the offspring followed that of the mother, so that the child
of a free father and a slave mother was a slave. Slaves had few legal
rights: in court their testimony was inadmissible in any litigation
involving whites; they could make no contract, nor could they own
property; even if attacked, they could not strike a white person. There
were numerous restrictions to enforce social control: slaves could not
be away from their owner’s premises without permission; they could not
assemble unless a white person was present; they could not own firearms;
they could not be taught to read or write, or transmit or possess
“inflammatory” literature; they were not permitted to marry.
Obedience to the slave codes was exacted in a variety of ways. Such
punishments as whipping, branding, and imprisonment were commonly used,
but death (which meant destruction of property) was rarely called for
except in such extreme cases as the rape or murder of a white person.
White patrols kept the slaves under surveillance, especially at night.
Slave codes were not always strictly enforced, but whenever any signs of
unrest were detected the appropriate machinery of the state would be
alerted and the laws more strictly enforced.
The black codes enacted immediately after the American Civil War, though
varying from state to state, were all intended to secure a steady supply
of cheap labour, and all continued to assume the inferiority of the
freed slaves. There were vagrancy laws that declared a black to be
vagrant if unemployed and without permanent residence; a person so
defined could be arrested, fined, and bound out for a term of labour if
unable to pay the fine. Apprentice laws provided for the “hiring out” of
orphans and other young dependents to whites, who often turned out to be
their former owners. Some states limited the type of property blacks
could own, and in others blacks were excluded from certain businesses or
from the skilled trades. Former slaves were forbidden to carry firearms
or to testify in court, except in cases concerning other blacks. Legal
marriage between blacks was provided for, but interracial marriage was
prohibited.
It was Northern reaction to the black codes (as well as to the bloody
antiblack riots in Memphis and New Orleans in 1866; see New Orleans Race
Riot) that helped produce Radical Reconstruction (see Reconstruction)
and the Fourteenth and Fifteenth amendments. The Freedmen’s Bureau was
created in 1865 to help the former slaves. Reconstruction did away with
the black codes, but, after Reconstruction was over, many of their
provisions were reenacted in the Jim Crow laws, which were not finally
done away with until passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
References:
1. Garraty, John A
A short history of the American nation, – 6th ed. – New York Collons
college publ, 1992
2. Ray Allen Willington,
American frontier heritage,- New Mexico, Press 1991
3. Thomas A. Bailey
David M. Kennedy
The American pageant, – 9th ed.- Toronto
Нашли опечатку? Выделите и нажмите CTRL+Enter
