July 4, 1865: An Anatomy of American Nationalism

The traditions, rituals, and stories of July 4, 1865 bound the disparate experiences of Americans to a common nation-state. Bereaved by death, bereft of those they loved, weary of revolution, and tired of violence, they ruminated over the course of the war and sought to define both the nation and their place in the emergent order. Out of a common toolkit and a shared past, Americans fashioned the narratives that gave meaning and purpose to their lives and which they would pass on to their children. Yet far from uniting the nation, the conclusion of the Civil War and its commemoration on the Fourth of July illustrated how the nation, united in theory, was still divided in fact and sentiment.  The recent sufferings and triumphs of millions shaped the memory of events and influenced the course of politics for a hundred years as first one then another of these stories gained ascendency. The only things Americans held in common on July 4, 1865 were their anniversary, their nation and their past. Together they used the day to reshape the past and refashion the nation according to their understanding of its history. No agreement could be reached. The great dream of a United States broke, repeatedly, on the separate experiences of its inhabitants, and their collective desire to give meaning to irreconcilable visions of a common past.

The anniversary of Independence served as a shared reference for Americans in the aftermath of civil war. Iowa Judge and future Republican Congressman, William Loughridge commemorated the day in glowing terms: “Eighty nine years ago to-day, our fathers severed the bonds that bound them to the throne of England, and declared to the world those great principles of liberty and equality.”[1] The editors of the Daily North Carolina Advertiser recounted how “at this point in time the Fourth of July had a peculiar value, not only in our eyes, but in the eyes of the entire people of the South who for the last four years have, in part, given up their heritage in the glorious legacy.”[2] A.E. Marshall of the Macon Daily Telegraph, in Georgia proclaimed that “the memory of the illustrious men and deeds of those times, over which nearly a century has rolled its waves, receives a new revival in our hearts.”[3] B.F. Washington the editor of the pro-Irish, Democratic Daily Examiner in San Francisco looked to the fourth of July and urged his readers: “Let us not, upon this day, dedicated to freedom, forget that we have liberties to preserve as well as to celebrate.”[4] The Reverend James Lynch, speaking at the celebration in Augusta, Georgia, saw the anniversary as “beginning a new epoch in the world’s history; promising to mankind an estate that the combined wisdom of a hundred centuries had sought and not obtained.”[5]  Likewise, William Howard Day announced that the African Americans at the Capitol, “met to-day inspired by the noble sentiments they had heard enunciated in the glorious declaration of Independence.”[6] In California, people gathered around the steps of the San Buenaventura mission to hear the Declaration of Independence read in Spanish.[7] Finally, out in Ottumwa Kansas, Susan B. Anthony related that “I came here today on this eighty ninth anniversary of our national Independence, that I might look into the honest earnest faces of the men and women, who, ten years ago, taught the nation anew that ‘resistance to tyrants is obedience to God.’”[8] To a degree unknown in other nations founded on more traditional ideals of nationalism, Americans of all persuasions claimed the Fourth of July as their own. They looked back across almost ninety years and read into the events of 1776, the principles that spoke to them in their current circumstances. The urge to grasp the anniversary knew no divisions of language and in many instances it cut across sectional lines. White southerners, Irish immigrants, former slaves, free blacks, Republicans, copperhead democrats, and feminists, all these and more, sought some kind of meaning in the national anniversary. Continue reading

July 4, 1865: The Narrative Scene

[Author’s note: So, I’m in the process of setting up the scene within which the action happens for my master’s thesis. Below is an impressionistic picture of the United States on July 4, 1865. I’m interested in your comments, how well does it work and what could be better? With that I’m opening the floor to everyone who wants to comment. Please, feel free and keep it respectful, best Sorn.

P.S. I apologize for the lack of footnotes, I have them, but they refuse to transfer to wordpress.]

The Narrative Scene:

      The national picture on July 4, 1865 looked strong and vibrant. The great fratricidal war had been over for three months, and the statistics for the fiscal year, ended just five days before, appeared to illustrate a strong, prosperous nation. The federal government had just spent the first billion dollars ever in the nation’s history, using that money to bring the war to a successful conclusion. The nation’s mines had produced nearly sixty four and a half million dollars in gold and silver; its seaports had received nearly four million tons of freight; and its citizens consumed eighty four million pounds of coffee. Petroleum, “one of the greatest benefits ever bestowed by divine providence,” had been discovered in almost every loyal state, and new discoveries emerged daily. The associated banks of New York held one hundred eighty seven millions in currency on deposit; Philadelphia’s banks thirty nine millions; and through all the national banks there circulated one hundred forty three millions of dollars—vital lifeblood to the arteries of commerce.
As these statistics illustrated, the United States stood firmly entrenched in the global economy. The telegraph brought news from all corners of the globe. Financial speculators in New York eagerly tracked the budget of the French government. Newspapers informed their readers of toll rates in Spanish ports, of economic developments in Calcutta, and of investments in Algeria paying five and a quarter percent per annum. The price of five-twenty and seven-thirty bonds in London affected the domestic price of gold. Anticipation of the monthly interest payments on gold-bearing bonds sold overseas caused fluctuations in the future’s market and affected the price of commodities. Approximately, five and a half thousand immigrants arrived in New York each week, and these exiles reputedly sought “the benefits which the New World holds aloft as tempting prizes to the industrious.” Indeed, fortune seemed to smile on the newly reunited republic, leading the editors of Harper’s Weekly, to proclaim, “we have a right to rejoice as never before.” Celebration appeared justified, and the promise of the newly reunited American nation looked on the verge of fulfillment.
In Boston bells rang morning, noon, and night in honor of the nation’s birthday while flags and hangings draped the city’s major streets. A huge banner hung across Merchants Row, carrying the words of Lincoln: “I leave you, hoping that the lamps of Liberty will burn in your bosoms until there shall no longer be a doubt that all men are created free and equal.” On Beacon Street Mall, flags, buntings, and twenty tables extended for three hundred and fifty feet to feast returning veterans. A morning concert played the national airs at seven o’clock, and at Faneuil Hall, the names of Ulysses S. Grant, William T. Sherman, David Farragut, and Robert Anderson, draped the panels of the galleries.
In Augusta Georgia, four thousand former slaves formed a procession leading to the parade ground headed by a banner proclaiming Abraham Lincoln “the father of our liberties and the savior of his country.” Out west in Nevada, the editors of the Carson Daily Appeal suffered hangovers the next day after attending a party where everyone refused to “go home until morning.” In Baltimore, the national flag draped nearly all public buildings, newspaper offices, and private homes. At sunrise in Fredericksburg, Virginia thirty-six guns—one for every state of the union—paid tribute to the nation’s natal day.

It seemed that the Fourth of July in 1865 once again stood as the nation’s pre-eminent holiday. Recalcitrant confederates in Matamoras, Mexico argued that “the twenty fifth day of December is no more sacred to Christians than is the Fourth of July to Americans.” In Virginia the editors of the Richmond Whig, burst into tears on hearing The Star-Spangled Banner, declaring that “we hadn’t heard the old tune for such a long time that we couldn’t help it.” In Boston Governor John Andrews proclaimed the anniversary, “the Sabbath day of freedom.” Likewise, from his prison cell, on Georges Island, former Confederate Vice President Alexander H. Stephens heard the bells of Boston tolling in the distance and wrote in his diary of “the ever memorable independence day, an anniversary which should be hailed with profoundest emotions of gratitude and patriotism by every friend of constitutional liberty and representative government the world over.” In short, the public and private thoughts of Americans appeared to lend an aura of authority to the picture of a reunited nation, peaceful and prosperous after four years of bloody civil war.
But the appearance of unity was only a receding mirage. The sculpted image of a singular nation showed a web of cracks when viewed closely for any length of time. Three quarters of a million souls had died in the past four years of total war, and the memories of the dead mingled with the hopes of the living. In the South, young white women of formerly prosperous families spent all day behind mules planting corn, or hauled water from the well to clean their own houses, while their former slaves went to barbeques, sang spirituals, heard speeches, and danced until midnight. In San Francisco many Irish boycotted the city’s Fourth of July celebration refusing to congregate with “dammed naygurs,” and, instead, commemorated the life of St. Patrick in a separate part of the city. On the grounds of the Capitol in Washington D.C., longtime black activist William Howard Day addressed the fifteen hundred children of the Sunday School Union, and thousands of others. In the words of the Christian Recorder’s Washington Correspondent: “it was the first Fourth of July of the colored people,” as full participants on the national stage. Yet even as Day spoke, far away in Kentucky, A.J. Beale, a local slave-owner, sold one African American woman for another of identical price and certified her good health.
The American nation on July 4, 1865 was caught between two distinct moments in its history. The old world of a slave-holder’s republic was dying, but slavery was not yet dead. The Civil War was over, but the much promised new birth of freedom was still in process. Everywhere men and women groped for meaning and direction seeking ends with which to make new beginnings. And so, they gathered up their past, ordered their experiences, and collectively sought to define the nation in the midst of their unfinished revolution.

The Voices of the Dead

Everywhere I go, when I stop to think on it, I am haunted by the voices of the dead. Dead friends, dead classmates, dead people seem to take up a great deal of my time when I reflect back on my early life. A high-school classmate, dead before he graduated, killed in a car accident, a student of my father’s also killed in a wreck, my brother’s best friend–stabbed two days before he was supposed to graduate, a kid who used to beat the daylights out of me in grade school killed by his own hand. Others too come to mind. The son of the best speaker I know, who sang the songs that revolve around in my head, a victim of inadequate health care at IHS.
All of these deaths happened before I was twenty-three–casualties of a system that cuts people off from the broad spectrum of opportunity that is supposed to exist in a first-world country.

And the people mentioned above are only the first to come to mind. There are others, so many others, that to call a roll of people I grew up with amounts to chanting a dirge. It’s an all too common story. The average reservation preacher performs more funerals in a year than ordinary communities see in five or more. The churches back home are filled with ministers who could tell you stories of preaching two, three, sometimes four funerals in a single week. None of this should surprise anyone deeply familiar with the history of indigenous life in the twentieth century. The life expectancy in Northern Cheyenne country is only 57 years old. In other reservations it isn’t much better:

American Indians are 600% more likely to die from heart disease than other Americans, 226% more likely to die from diabetes, and 600% more likely to die from tuberculosis.

The broader world doesn’t seem to care. Without question, these evils are the product of a federally created system of apartheid, begun in the 19th century and carried forward today. Yet, well-meaning progressive friends of mine have told me repeatedly that I am playing oppression olympics. Some of them believe that I am being disrespectful when I mention this, but the statistics in Northern Cheyenne country speak for themselves:

$4970 is the average per capita income per year on the reservation. $2814 is your total assistance if you get welfare and food stamps – and that’s it for the whole year. $10,000 is about the income two parent families may achieve if they are able to get seasonal work on the summer. $28,500 is the average US per capita household income $14,417 is the average median household income per reservation family $40,800 is the average US median household income. 11.3% is the national rate of people estimated to be living below the poverty line. 22% is the number of Cheyennes who have work but remain beneath the national poverty threshold of $9214. 78% is the Northern Cheyenne Reservation’s unemployment figure. 87% is the total of people on the reservation who live beneath the poverty line.

I am so tired of being ignored, of having people overlook these statistics, of being told to be quiet. The approximately 5,000 people who live there, in Eastern Montana, deserve justice. They deserve not to be overlooked, and they deserve to be heard. But, it seems that Americans have no concept of life on the reservation. They prefer their reservations to be places with casinos and cheap cigarettes. They do not want to hear that they have created Soweto on the prairies. The legacies of institutionalized white supremacy are real. The realities of American Apartheid are also very real. Yet, people do not think of reservations as part of the same system of white supremacy that created Jim Crow. The same nation responsible for red-lining, for police brutality, and mass incarceration is the same nation that created this place on the plains, where people die in droves every single year.

Whatever their reasons for ignoring the pressing problems of life in a rural ghetto, one thing is clear. Most Americans cannot hear the dead. The same dead whose blood sometimes seems to cry out from the ground. There isn’t a single person who grew up on the res who hasn’t lost friends or family members in similar ways to those described in the introduction. All of us from these communities have a list of people we know who died too early. People, who if they had been born elsewhere would still be alive. Victims of a system that denied them the opportunity to live because of where they were born.

Mark Charles Diné Man Extraordinaire

I just found a new blog. If you haven’t started reading Mark Charles over at Reflections from the Hogan you need to start. He seems like a wonderful man, but more than any of these qualities here is a man who believes it necessary to take a stand. At 11 A.M. on December 19, 2012 he read the national apology  which congress had burried in a defense appropriation in 2010.

At Mr. Charles’ reading of the buried apology no one showed up. Further:

Every invitation I had delivered, to President Obama, Governor Brownback, many members of the United States Senate and House of Representatives; every one them had either been ignored or declined. No one was willing to step forward and publicly acknowledge and read the apology which they had buried in H.R. 3326.

This, ultimately, is how it feels to grow up in a community separated by time and space from the rest of the United States. In the article linked above, Mr. Charles speaks about moving to Diné country, and living in a situation where there was effectively, “no running water or electricity. Charles lived by candlelight and hauled his water.” He also speaks movingly about the loneliness and isolation of living in a western, rural reservation: “”The hardest part was how incredibly lonely and disconnected you feel from the rest of the country.” I wish more people understood these feelings of isolation, the extreme pain, and the difficulty that comes with merely trying to survive on reservations throughout the country. But, it seems that no one cares. Always when it comes to living way out beyond the-back-of-beyond, people seem to minimize, trivialize, or otherwise disavow the experiences individuals have to go through to merely survive.

If he met me on the street Mr. Charles probably wouldn’t know me from your ordinary, everyday belagana but everything he says brings up reminders of an earlier life. In 1993, when I was nine years old, my parents moved to Busby, Montana, where they reside today. I completed fourth and fifth grade there. It was in that place that I, this veho, this tricky spider, to use the Northern Cheyenne word, first learned the story of the Fort Robinson Breakout. In the midst of subzero temperatures, Little Wolf, Dull Knife and the entire Northern Cheyenne people left Nebraska and walked back to Montana. To this day, few people outside the reservation are even aware that this event happened. To most Americans, if they know of the Northern Cheyenne at all they mostly remember their participation in the Battle of the Greasy Grass. Americans would rather forget, this act of nationalistic defiance in the face of both the U.S. Government and the weather. “Tell the people we are going home,” Dull Knife was reported to say. And they went home, step by arduous step, fighting everyone the long way back.

No Northern Cheyenne comes to maturity without knowledge of this story bred in the bones. Every year, the event is commemorated in a 76 mile run around the reservation. In school children memorialize it, hear it from their relatives, and write essays about it. In many ways, the Fort Robinson Breakout is the Cheyenne origin story of modern times. But what is this place, this home marched to over so many hard miles with blistered feet carrying wounded friends?

In 1993, when my parents moved to Busby, the water was undrinkable. It smelled of sulphur, it turned toilets and sinks an ugly brown color from the iron. If you lived in Busby in the 1990s, in the age of dial-up modems, of cell phones and Nintendo, you had to carry your water every week. And, the water had to come from far away. At a minimum the water came from Lame Deer or Crow Agency, twenty miles away. A lot of folks would do what my parents did, and drive to Hardin, forty miles, because the grocery store in Hardin was cheaper than the one in Lame Deer. Every week, you had to buy water for the next week, if you wanted to cook, if you wanted to drink, if you wanted to live you had to buy water: six, eight, usually twelve gallons in re-usable plastic milk jugs. Each with a blue or red plastic top. So, every single week after church in Crow Agency, my parents bought water in Hardin along with their groceries, and hauled it home over bad roads rutted by heavy tractor trailers, to a hamlet of houses in eastern Montana.

Yet, for all of that, for so many people who I know, Busby was, and is, home. By God, the folks that lived there had fought everyone to keep it, and by God, they were going to stay. Yet, it was not, by any means an easy existence. The water system was finally fixed in 2003 That year would find me in Kuwait, once again drinking bottled water, for different reasons.

Ultimately, the story of Busby’s water system serves as an allegory of the government’s relationship to Indigenous Peoples. The infrastructure and employment problems on the nation’s Indian reservations have all been well-documented and everyone seems to know all about them. But, the government takes decades, and sometimes even longer, to address the problem, which in turn forces the young, the talented, and the economically viable to leave home in search of work.

In much the same way that South Africa’s maligned homelands acted to force Zulu and Xhosa people into the cities, the reservation system creates its own logic of large apartheid, where the productive move to the cities in search of work to feed a segregated system of American capitalism. But Americans don’t want to hear this story. They would rather bury it in a defense appropriations bill. They prefer a vanished nineteenth century Indian, to a real live member of a tribal nation, so that way Americans can all, somehow, claim descent from a fictitious Cherokee grandmother.

Mark Charles, a living member of the Diné nation, shows the strength, the endurance, and the long memories that inhabit First Nation’s Peoples are indomitable. He went to Washington D.C., and forcefully read an apology that should have been shouted from the rooftops instead of mumbled in the hall. I’m two years too late in acknowledging this, but for everything you’ve done and continue to do, from the bottom of my heart, I want to say “Thank You Mr. Charles.” Ha-Ho, as they say in Northern Cheyenne country. Thank you. Maybe some day the white folks of this American nation, maybe some day they will listen long enough to hear what indigenous people try so hard to tell them. If not, perhaps, they will hear with punctured eardrums in the afterlife.

The Anthem of the Master’s Thesis

I’m finishing up the fifth draft of the Master’s Thesis proposal as I write this. You can see the project’s anthem above, with thanks to Chris Parrish, aka Supaman. I’ve come too far to go back now. It’s a long way for this guy to a master’s degree at the University of Montana. I hope my teachers and mentors all of them, would be proud of me. The writing will start in earnest, tomorrow.

To all my teachers, family, and friends, who provided the models that I hope to emulate, a’ho. I know of few writers where I come from, I can only do the best that I am able.

Proposal Draft

Hey all, what follows below is the draft of my proposal. I hope that it’s as interesting to read as it was to write. I could really use ya’ll critical assessment of the whole thing.

Best,

Sorn

American Dreams July 4, 1865: A Nation in Search of Itself.

Initial statement of findings

On July 4, 1865 James Lynch, soon to become Mississippi’s first African American Secretary of State under its reconstruction government, stated the demands of the recently freed slaves before an assemblage of 4,000 freed-people in Augusta, Ga.  In a section titled What the Colored Man Asks, Lynch proclaimed: “he asks to stay in the land of his birth, to till the soil and labor in the workshop, and to fill positions of usefulness under these bright skies that smile[d] on his infancy. He asks and demands protection in the enjoyment of his liberty, which is only secured by equality before the law.”[i] Likewise, on the same day, the Colored People’s National Lincoln Monument Association held a celebration in Washington, D.C., commemorating the fallen president in which the master of Ceremonies read a letter from Frederick Douglass emphasizing the importance of Negro suffrage: “The one thought to be emphasized and deeply underscored on that occasion is this: The immediate, complete, and universal enfranchisement of the colored people of the whole country. This is demanded both by justice and national honor. . . . The great want of the country is to be rid of the negro question, and it can never be rid of that question until justice, right, and sound policy are complied with.”[ii] In the oration that followed William Howard Day, a graduate of Oberlin College, whose mother was one of the founders of the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church, expounded a vision of slavery as a two-hundred year “wave of blood” which by God’s providence had been set backward, and visited upon “the hearts and homes of the nation.”[iii] Yet, Day, as was the case with other African Americans on this national anniversary, perceived the national bloodshed as serving the higher purpose of freedom: “On these successive waves of blood, rising higher and higher, year by year, the colored man has been borne on and up to freedom, and must be borne outward still, to full enfranchisement.”[iv] The image thus presented was both of a glorious war of liberation and of a commitment to realize its results.

Not confined to prominent men and educated northern blacks the sentiment everywhere among African Americans, on the first Fourth of July after Appomattox, contained both elements of a hopeful promise for the future, and the necessary requirement of confronting racist realities in a former slave society. Sergeant William A. Warfield of the 119th U.S. Colored Infantry, in a letter to the Weekly Anglo African stated both conditions with clarity and verve. First he illustrated the meaning independence held for former slaves, and their corresponding desire for a brighter tomorrow: “This is an age of wonders, and not least among them is the celebration of the Fourth of July at Camp Nelson, Ky., by the colored people. To see so many thousands who a year ago were slaves, congregate in the heart of a slave State and celebrate the day sacred to the cause of freedom . . . was a grand spectacle. It was the first time we have ever been permitted to celebrate the Nation’s Day.”[v]  Second, Sergeant Warfield gave voice to a desire for equality and a determination for its achievement worthy of Douglass, James Lynch, or William Day. Moreover, while the orators and intellectual leaders of the black community affirmed a public principle before a large audience, Warfield demonstrated a private commitment, openly expressed, to strive for rights not yet secured:

If we would obtain our just privileges, we must strive for them [emphasis in original]. We must be willing to pay the same price that other people have always been compelled to pay. By laboring for our own cause we show, in the first place that we understand and appreciate what our rights are; in the second place, that we have the courage and manhood to ask for them; in the third place, that we are determined, sooner or later to have them. We need not expect those who have held us as slaves, and regarded us as incapable of an honorable position in government and society, to grant us that which we are indisposed to labor for.”[vi]

Collectively, the African American Community—regardless of region, class, or previous condition of servitude—emerged from the Civil War with a firm desire to secure the full rights of citizenship purchased by their bravery on the battlefield. The Elevator, a California Newspaper dedicated to “equality before the law” and advancing the rights of African Americans in a state which restricted citizenship to white men said of Negro suffrage that “nothing ‘has been accomplished for the Negro  during the past four  years’ but what the exigencies of the times and the God-scourged people demanded. We are not content with what you [were] compelled to grant, or what was grudgingly given, or else the nation would have been rent in twain.”[vii]  Clearly, the black community arose from the civil war with a shared sense of national purpose, a dedication to the half-finished work begun by the Civil War, and a commitment to securing the promises of the Second American Revolution.

The dreams of African Americans for full equality before the law, and a measure of equal citizenship, however, fundamentally clashed with the desires of current and former slave-owners who wished to create a dependent labor force, curtail African American civil rights, and preserve a modicum of the antebellum way of life. Northern abolitionists, and teary-eyed reformers, might agree with William Garrison that “Hitherto the returning anniversary of the Fourth of July . . . has been a bitter mockery to the millions held in the galling chains of slavery on our soil and a satire upon all our professions as a free and Christian people. On Tuesday next, for the first time, it will be celebrated with something like the semblance of consistency and in the semblance of universal emancipation.”[viii] Yet, without fully knowing it, Garrison presumed that universal emancipation was everywhere fully realized. On the contrary, despite his rosy words, the following Tuesday did not dawn bathed in the collective sunshine of human rights for all. Even as the Thirteenth Amendment made its way through the ratification process, and as James Lynch propounded that “this great Republic was raised up to elevate humanity and to oppose the despotism of the universe,” in the state of Kentucky A.J. Beale sold to Angeline Outland a “negro girl” for another African American woman “equal in value” and certified her soundness on “this the 4[th] day [of] July[,] 1865.”[ix] Slavery far from being dead was very much alive in the state of Kentucky, which remained in control of a conservative coalition of Unionists firmly opposed to any change in the relationship between master and slave.

What is more, in the states of the old confederacy, where the war had brought about emancipation, former slave-owners clung to their old justifications and old beliefs with a tenacity revealed in words and deeds. Still believing that their former slaves were the “descendants of Ham,” and that “service in some form is their heritage,” white southerners fought through legal and extra-legal means to re-assert or maintain their mastery.[x] In Tennessee William Bonner, calling upon the help of three federal soldiers—Privates Mathew Mullins, Tyler Harrison and Captain Adkins—tied his house servant, Henry Bonner to a tree and administered 150 lashes with elm branches, whipping him twice. In the testimony of Mathew Mullins: “we whipped him for saucing his master Wm. Bonner—we were sent out under the charge of the home guard captain and were to do what he directed and [Bonner] directed the party to whip the negro.”[xi]  Even after four years of bloody conflict the realities of human bondage remained, both in slave-holding border-states, and in the erstwhile confederacy,.

In other parts of the South, the Fourth of July took on the sullen air of a defiant refusal to acknowledge the realities of defeat. Mary Boykin Chesnut wrote in her diary from Camden, South Carolina that “Our people were all at home quiet, orderly, respectfull [sic], and at their usual work. There was nothing to show that any one of them had ever seen a Yankee or knew that there was one in existence.”[xii]  Likewise, the Norfolk Post, gave its readers the following advice: “Let our people who are now mourning over the loses of the last four years, pause for one moment in their lamentations, and think for one moment how much greater were our forefathers in the war of revolution and that of 1812.”[xiii] Furthermore, the paper added in a tone of passive-aggressive warning:  “We counsel all soberness and propriety, and let all abstain from too much enthusiasm, as the weather is hot and the consequences to [the public] health might be very detrimental.”[xiv] Or, as a Mathew Woodruff, a sergeant in the Union Army recounted from Vicksburg, Mississippi, on this day: “The war is over, but I am sorry to say the people does [sic] not do honor to the fallen Braves, or the suffering communities of our Nation.”[xv] In short, the actualities of conquest were far from being universally acknowledged, and many former confederates stood opposed to any sort of reconciliation.

Still elsewhere in the former confederacy, in Texas, people stood resigned to reunion and life under the old flag, but greatly feared the prospect of a coming race war.  As General Phillip H. Sheridan wrote in his memoirs concerning the condition of Texas in July, 1865: “It was greatly feared that political rights were to be given those so recently in servitude, and as it was generally believed that such enfranchisement would precipitate a race war unless the freedmen were overawed and kept in a state of subjection, acts of intimidation were soon reported from all parts of the State.”[xvi] In a similar fashion, one Texas newspaper, The Bellville Countryman, publicly expressed Sheridan’s observations while commemorating the Fourth of July: “There being no demonstrations here today . . . we have concluded to raise the ‘stars and stripes’ ourselves. We expect to remain in Texas, and to live under the old flag. But we don’t want to fight under that flag,—nor any other. We are opposed to the NEXT WAR [emphasis in original].”[xvii] On the same page, giving a concrete reality to the possibility of intimidation, the paper reported that “Peter, a gentleman of color, who has for several months past occupied rooms at the County Hotel [Jail] at this place and been fed at the public crib, stepped out last night (July 3), by permission of the proprietor, to procure a drink of cold water at an adjacent house, and has not yet returned.”[xviii]   Clearly the hopes of southern blacks for equality before the law and basic safety relative to southern whites could not be maintained without outside enforcement.

The governing powers of the South, however, seemed far more concerned with maintaining and securing a reliable black labor force, and with implementing means of social control than they did in creating any sort of public safety for the former slaves. As Carl Schurz relayed to President Andrew Johnson in his Report on the Condition of the South 1865, white southerners felt that “the blacks at large belong to the whites at large,” and that “the negro will not work without physical compulsion.”[xix] The planter class remained determined to reassert its mastery. Believing that “these niggers will all be slaves again in twelve months,” and that the National Government possessed “nothing but Lincoln proclamations to make them free,” the White South, set about to re-assert its mastery over labor with the help of municipal, state, and, where possible, federal authorities both in the army and the recently formed freedman’s bureau.[xx]  The town of Opelousas, Louisiana passed the following municipal ordinance which took effect on the Fourth of July, 1865. Thirteen regulations effectively restricted the movement, status, and opportunity of freedmen and women, so that the only place for them in society was working for their former masters. No freedman was allowed to come within the city limits without permission from his employer, and every black found on the streets after 10’oclock at night, or three p.m. on Sundays, was thrown in jail and compelled to labor on public works. No African American was allowed to own or rent property within the city limits or reside there without permission from an employer. Both public meetings and black preachers were forbidden without permission from the mayor. Additionally no freed person was allowed to carry a firearm that was not in military service, and no person of color was permitted to buy, sell, trade, or barter any merchandise without the written permission of an employer, the mayor, or the president of the board.[xxi]

In cases where such municipal ordinances did not exist, planters and freedman’s bureau agents worked in conjunction to create a dependent labor force by forcing former bonds-people into contracts at well below market value.  James Yeatman, writing to O.O. Howard on this day expressed his observations that “the tendency everywhere is to pay too little. I have seen no wages named either by employers, military commandants or others which would be deemed fair and just compensation were they the owner of the negro, and hiring them to labor for others.”[xxii] As a case in point, James Eason in a contract with his former slave Eddy dated July 4, 1865, guaranteed him and the eleven people in his household one thirty-second of the crop in exchange for an entire year’s labor. As a condition of the contract, Eddy and his family agreed to “remain with and serve him the said Eason, their former owner as they have heretofore done for and during the remainder of the present year.”[xxiii] In a similar fashion to northern iron ore miners whose wages fell from a wartime high of $2.50 a day in July of 1864, to a post-war value of $1.50 a day in July of 1865, freed slaves found their labor worth far less to themselves in freedom than it had been to their masters under slavery before and during the war.[xxiv] The realities of the industrial revolution, intensified by the war, meant that the values of free labor ideology were becoming obsolescent, to be replaced by a new reality of dependence upon an impersonal market.

Northern Reformers, and members of the African American community might agree with New York State Senator Palmer Havens that “negro suffrage is absolutely essential to our future peace and safety,” but these individuals faced stiff resistance in implementing their vision of the future from more conservative northern whites, recalcitrant southerners still dealing with the realities of southern defeat, and those in the border states who wished to perpetuate slavery.[xxv] The Reverend Frederick Brown, might proclaim before the congregation of the Central Presbyterian Church in Chicago that “swords are beating into ploughshares and spears into pruning hooks,” but the mysteries of Peter’s fate at the hands of persons unknown, belied the mythic image of peaceful coexistence.[xxvi] The bloody contest between competing armies on the battlefield stood resolved, but the sanguinary war of competing principles, and with it the bloody contest regarding the meaning of the civil war had yet to be determined.  The competing dreams unleashed by the Second American Revolution shown visibly on this day of national observance, but their truths remained to be realized.

Literature Review and Discussion of Major Themes.

Nearly a century after Charles and Mary Beard labeled the Civil War, the Second American Revolution historians still contest its meaning. In Beardian parlance the Civil War was a “social war, ending in the unquestioned establishment of a new power in the government, making vast changes in the arrangement of classes, in the accumulation and distribution of wealth, in the course of industrial development, and in the constitution inherited from the Fathers.”[xxvii] Beard’s view of the Civil War, as a social war between distinct groups in American society, has much to offer, for each sectional group or social class possessed its own view of the conflict. To northerners the war was an attempt to save the union, transformed into a war against slavery by slow, painful degrees. To white southerners the conflict was the second war for independence, and it was when the Yankees stole their country and their slaves from them. Finally, to the African American population it was a war for liberation, a contest that defined their position in the country: delivering them from the cotton, rice, and tobacco fields, placing muskets in their hands, and creating citizens out of former slaves. These three distinct views of the conflict each, in turn, birthed their own historiographical traditions. To Alan Nevins, the civil war was a War for the Union. To Edward Channing and to Shelby Foote the conflict was a southern war for hearth and home, while to W.E.B. Dubois and the scholars who rediscovered him in the 1960s, the Civil War was the “most dramatic episode in American history [this] the sudden move to free four million slaves in an effort to stop a great civil war, to end forty years of bitter controversy, and to appease the moral sense of civilization.”[xxviii] In many ways, these three views of the Civil War continue to shape our opinions, and fuel many mythologies concerning the war. As James McPherson and James K. Hogue wrote in 2009 “the civil war is the central event in the American historical consciousness.”[xxix] But, without Reconstruction, the Civil War was a revolution only half completed.

In a recent book, The Fall of the house of Dixie, Bruce Levine argues that “this great and terrible war undermined the economic, social, and political foundations of the old South, destroying human bondage and the storied world of the slaveholding elite.”[xxx] Levine, however, declines to extend his narrative much beyond Appomattox, and, as previously demonstrated, slavery was still very much a reality on the Fourth of July 1865. Dying but not dead the removal of involuntary servitude was by no means certain until the final ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. As a case in point, Missouri, on July 4, 1865, ratified its new constitution, which would have extended slavery in that state until 1876 under a scheme of gradual emancipation.[xxxi] Even so, much mythology concerning slavery and the course of the war exists both in the popular and scholarly imaginations. Building on the work of Ken Burns, whose Civil War documentary captured the hearts of the nation, these narratives of the conflict perpetuate an image in which the war that freed the slaves began in Wilbur Maclean’s backyard and ended in his living room. But this narrative does not do justice to the complex realities of the Second American Revolution. When W.E.B. Dubois, wrote in Crisis Magazine for February 1912, that “this country has had its appetite for facts on the Civil War and the Negro problem spoiled by sweets,” he spoke against such oversimplified understandings of the war that reduce it to a tragedy with a happy ending.[xxxii]  Michael Vorenberg writing in Final Freedom: The Civil War, The Abolition of Slavery and the Thirteenth Amendment, argues that “by itself, the Emancipation Proclamation did not free a single slave.”[xxxiii] The process by which the dreams of the Second American Revolution became reality, therefore, must include Reconstruction as a fundamental part of the struggle, and not as a separate chapter in the nation’s history.

Additionally, to fully capture the long term effects of this massive upheaval in the nation’s political, social, and economic institutions, historians should speak of a long civil war, much as they speak of a long nineteenth century. Only when viewed as a single unit—stemming from 1860 until 1877 and encompassing all of Reconstruction—do the realities of the Second American Revolution emerge with any clarity. Otherwise, stopping the narrative at Appomattox leaves the revolution unfulfilled. But once again, including Reconstruction divides the narrative along racial and sectional lines. To Southerners, Reconstruction flew in the face of everything they believed concerning the place of African Americans in society. Still struggling with the realities of Confederate defeat, they faced also the experience of a world turned upside down, in which competent, capable former slaves and free northern African Americans attempted to fashion a freedom fully actualized. Out of the experiences of Reconstruction, the South fashioned its own historiography: a narrative contained in the Dunning school with its myth of Reconstruction as a “tragic era” that captured the emotional dislocation that white Southerners felt at being on the losing end of the second American Revolution. Likewise, to northerners, progressive historians of the New Left, and those generations appearing after the 1960s, who interpreted Reconstruction in light of the Civil Rights Movement and the rediscovery of W.E.B. Dubois, the period was, in the words of Eric Foner: “[the] first attempt to live up to the noble professions of [America’s] political creed.”[xxxiv] But is it a fair assessment to characterize Reconstruction as an attempt to create an idea of “national citizenship whose equal rights belonged to all Americans regardless of race,” when Native Americans would not gain their rights as citizens until 1924, or, when an orator, mocking the progressive spirit of Abolitionists on July 4, 1865, could say: “Let us all hope that the political millennium is at hand, when the lion and the lamb shall lie down together, and if the lamb should happen to be inside of the lion it is the lamb’s fault, and will be overlooked by a discriminating public [emphasis in original].”[xxxv]  Indeed the idea that Reconstruction was an attempt to create a non-racial democracy is indicative of another type of mythology: a mythos born from the combined ideas of the Civil Rights struggle of the 1960s, the African American memory of the Second American Revolution—preserved by Dubois—and  northern ideas of progress, a mythology which although it corrects the racism of the Dunning school is surely guilty of promoting a degree of American exceptionalism.

The reason for the competing historiographical narratives surrounding the Civil War and Reconstruction is that, as Robert Penn Warren wrote in his Legacy of the Civil War, “the civil war is our only ‘felt’ history—history lived in the national imagination.”[xxxvi] If this is true how then should one evaluate the meaning of the Second American Revolution, without either creating a new mythology, or doing violence to the historical record? How to disentangle the knot of competing historiographies?  Is there a way to expose what David Blight in Race and Reunion: The Civil War in American Memory calls, the three overall visions of the Civil War: the reconcilliationist vision, the white supremacist vision, and the emancipationist vision, without unduly prejudicing one over the other?[xxxvii] I believe there is. The first step is to bound the study in time. Focusing on the history of a single day freezes the competing visions of the Civil War and Reconstruction in place, and renders possible a still-life portrait of competing aspirations. The second step is to choose a day. It can’t just be any day for then the project loses meaning. July 4, 1865 recommends itself as the first Independence Day celebration after Appomattox: a day of national reflection, in which the meaning of past conflict met the plans for future reconstruction. It also has the advantage of dividing the Second American Revolution, or the long Civil War, almost exactly in half. Furthermore by July 4, 1865, congress has decided on the policy of emancipation, but it is not yet a guaranteed reality. In the words of the poet Mathew Arnold, the nation is “wandering between two worlds/One dead, the other powerless to be born.”[xxxviii] In short, the union as it was is dying but no clear replacement appeared ready to hand.

The third step is to find a way to engage the problem without either confirming the old racist view of reconstruction as a tragic era, or reinforcing the mythology of American exceptionalism. Here the question becomes one either of finding a new historical methodology, or of refurbishing an old idea so that it meets the demands of modern scholarship. In The Mind of the South Willard J. Cash argues that the Second American Revolution succeeded in transforming the South into “a frontier once more.”[xxxix] Without accepting his racist, old-time, Dunning School interpretation of Reconstruction, nor prejudicing Frederick Jackson Turner’s definition of the frontier as the “meeting place between savagery and civilization,” the idea merits consideration.[xl] Perhaps, building on this idea in a way Cash never intended, the ideas laid down by the new western history may be applied to the history of the Second American Revolution producing a history of July 4, 1865 by tapping other themes.

Elliot West, in The Contested Plains: Indians, Goldseekers and the Rush to Colorado, defines the frontier as a “wave of new experience” a “merging of worlds,” and goes on to argue that “above all else the merging of worlds was a reevaluation of routes to power in its largest sense.”[xli] Aside from being well-written, it also serves as a workable definition of revolutionary change, one that does not rely on Gramscian theories of hegemony and counter-hegemony, or stale dynamics of revolution and counter-revolution. West also argues that this “merging of worlds” released visions of life that were fundamentally incompatible: “When moved out of human heads and set to life in the effective world, they could not exist in the same place. The reason was simple. They conceived of and used power in conflicting ways yet each drew its power from the same sources.”[xlii] This is the first major theme: that the Second American Revolution released dreams, visions of the future, which were irreconcilable, and destined to battle over the contested ground of the American Nation on July 4, 1865.

Western historians also speak of a Western Myth, concerning how the collective memory of the settling of the West, by Jeffersonian yeoman farmers, small mechanics, and tradesmen, simply isn’t true. Moreover, there is an indistinguishable line between mythology and memory. The Western Myth exists because individual’s memories of Western settlement were categorically different than the historical reality. In a similar fashion the mythology of the Civil War has its roots in the historical memory of the conflict. A close look at the history of the national anniversary after the end of the Civil War reveals the nascent mythologies emerging out of the memories of the conflict. As David Blight argues in Race and Reunion: “The Long and troubled career of Civil War memory began well before the conflict ended. It took root in the dead and the living. The living were compelled to find meaning in the dead, and, as in most wars, the dead would have a hold on the living.”[xliii] Furthermore, the mythologies present on the Fourth of July, 1865 are readily identified. First was a mythology of American exceptionalism, and a tendency to idealize both the founding generation and the Declaration of Independence. The second was the mythology of free-labor ideology. Here we see a direct overlap with the Western Myth, for the remnants of free-labor ideology, together with a Jeffersonian agrarianism, comprised the driving forces behind a view of the West as settled by small-holders, mechanics, and tradesmen. Yet, the massive revolution in production, capital-structures, labor, and the national government, intensified by the war, meant that the old free labor ideology—with its ideal of the poor attaining productive property—was increasingly obsolescent. The third mythology present on this day was the mythology surrounding pro-slavery ideology. As previously stated, slavery was a dying institution, dying but not quite dead, and the justifications planters used to assert their mastery—the mythologies behind white supremacy—were readily apparent. Finally the fourth piece of mythology is the mythology of peace: the idea that the war was over, instead of entering a new phase comprised of counter-insurgency and nation building.

The third theme derived from western history is the question of place. Elliot West in his book, The Last Indian War argues concerning the Second American Revolution: “It’s as if there are two independent historical narratives, and because the one that is set in the East and centered on the Civil War has been tapped as the defining story of its time, the one that is set out West seems peripheral, even largely irrelevant, to explaining American during a critical turn of its history.”[xliv] Focusing on a single day and viewing that day through the literature of place allows the historian to connect North, South, East and West, into a single coherent narrative regarding the effects of the Second American Revolution. The fourth theme is what Patricia Nelson Limrick called The Legacy of Conquest, or what Drew Faust in her book This Republic of Suffering, labeled, “the work of death.”[xlv] How did Americans deal with the deaths caused by the conflict on the national anniversary of American Independence? The fifth theme is the question of labor. If industrialization was making free-labor ideology obsolete, what was to take its place? Here Western history meets the historiography of the New South. Both western and southern historians speak of the creation of a colonial economy in the South and West, where raw materials were shipped to eastern manufacturing centers, and of the creation of a dependent labor force. As we have seen from the initial statement of findings both realities were in evidence on this day, but the larger question is can one see the colonial economy and a new dependent labor force, almost in the moment of their creation, on a single day? And, more importantly, what was the relationship between public policy and private interest that made these realities possible?

The final subject is the question of “Americanization,” or nation-building. Once again the impetus for the theme derives from Western history. Historians Ray Allen Billington and Martin Ridge described the end of the frontier process as “the Americanization of peoples and institutions.”[xlvi] The questions that naturally follow from this are: how were the various sections brought together, and how was a national consciousness formed out of what had been previously two independent nations? Is it possible to see, on July 4, 1865, the seeds of a new American nationalism? As Melinda Lawson states, advancing the historical consensus concerning nationalism and the American Civil War: “Most historians of the Civil War agree: the war, they argue, fostered a metamorphosis in American national identity. A restless, individualistic, acquisitive people, divided in their loyalties, suspicious of federal power, and tentative in their commitment to the nation learned through the crucible of war the importance of organized, united action, a patriotism of sacrifice and national as opposed to state loyalties. By war’s end a “Union” of states had become a “nation” of Americans.”[xlvii] This claim that the war created American national unity, however, propagates a northern vision of the war, and does not adequately examine the divided loyalties present on July 4, 1865.  As an example of these separate allegiances, the citizens of Vicksburg, Mississippi would not celebrate Independence Day until 1945. Thus, the questions facing the nation resembled those confronted by more recent policy-makers both in Iraq and Afghanistan: what is the best way to undertake the re-building of a nation shattered by war, and how does one win “hearts and minds?”

To review, the proposed master’s thesis, will attempt to evaluate the history of a single day: July 4, 1865, along themes borrowed from Western history, while engaging the relevant, recent secondary literature outlined, in part, above. The themes for each chapter may each be described in a word: Dreams—or contested visions of the future, mythology, place, conquest—or death, labor, and last nation-building or Americanization. Finally, the argument underlying each of these themes is that the life-ways, habits, customs and practices on display on July, 4, 1865 fundamentally clashed because each vision “conceived of and used power in different ways.”[xlviii]

Tentative Chapter Outline:

American Dreams July 4, 1865: A Nation in Search of Itself.

Sorn Jessen

22 August 2013

Chapter 1: Dreams and Visions: The Contested Meaning of the Second American Revolution.

  1. Dreams of Peace and Reconciliation
  2. Visions of White Supremacy
  3. Dreams inspired by Emancipation and Visions of Equality before the Law

Chapter II: Myths: Memory and the Creation of Competing Mythologies Surrounding the Civil War.

  1. The Mythology of American Exceptionalism
    1. A Northern Vision the First American Revolution as seen by the Civil War Generation
    2. A Southern Vision of the First American Revolution
    3. An African American Vision of the Founders
    4. The Mythology of Free Labor
    5. The Sons of Ham: Pro-Slavery Ideology in the Aftermath of the Civil War
    6. The Mythology of Peace.

Chapter III: Place: The Meaning of Sectionalism on July 4, 1865.

A. The Meaning of Place and Section on July 4, 1865.

1. A Northern Independence Day

2. The Lost Cause and Causes not Lost: The Meaning of the Southern Patriotism after Defeat on July 4, 1865.

3.  Independence Day in the West: or The Civil War without Armies (something along these lines not entirely clear how to shape this)

Chapter IV: Legacy of Conquest: The Meaning of Death.

A. The Work of Death

                        1. Abraham Lincoln American Jesus: Remembrances of Lincoln on July 4, 1865.

                        2. Confederate Death: A Former Nation Remembers its Fallen

3. African American Sacrifice and the meaning of Manhood.

Chapter V: The Realities of Dependent Labor

  1. Colonial Economics on Display
  2. Labor in an Industrial Society.

Chapter VI: Nation-Building in the Aftermath of the Civil War.

Working Bibliography of Primary Sources (incomplete)

Adams, Henry W. The Past, Present, and Future of America.: An Oration Delivered in the First Presbyterian Church, Orange, New Jersey, July 4th, 1865. New York: John F. Trow &, 50 Greene Street, 1865.

Aldrich, Nelson W. Wholesale Prices, Wages and Transportation. Report of Changes in Railway Transportation Rates on Freight Traffic throughout the United States, 1852 to 1893 Part IV. Washington: Goverment Printing Office, 1893.

Anderson, Edward Clifford. Confederate Foreign Agent: The European Diary of Major Edward C. Anderson. Edited by W. Stanley Hoole. University, Alabama: Confederate Publishing Company, 1976.

Andes, John W., and Will A. McTeer. Loyal Mountain Troopers: The Second and Third Tennessee Volunteer Cavalry in the Civil War : Reminiscences of Lieutenant John W. Andes and Major Will A. McTeer. Edited by Charles S. McCammon. Maryville, TN: Blount County Genealogical and Historical Society, 1992.

Andrews, Sidney. The South Since the War. New York: Arno Press, 1969.

Banks, Nathaniel Prentiss. An Address Delivered by Major-General N.P. Banks, at the Custom House, New Orleans, on the Fourth of July, 1865. New York: Harper & Bros., 1865.

Barber, Lucius W. Army Memoirs of Lucius W. Barber, Company “D,” 15th Illinois Volunteer Infantry: May 24, 1861, to Sept. 30, 1865. Alexandria, VA: Time-Life Books, 1984.

The Bellville Countryman (Bellville, Texas). 1865.

Berlin, Ira, ed. Freedom: A Documentary History of Emancipation: Series 1 Volume II The Wartime Genesis of Free Labor: The Upper South. Cambridge [England: Cambridge University Press, 1993.

Bingham, Joel Foote. Bright Republic a Song and Chorus, Written for the National Jubilee, July 4th, 1865. Buffalo?: S.n., 1865.

Bishop, Albert Webb. An Oration Delivered at Fayettville, Arkansas, by Big.-Gen. Albert W. Bishop, Adjuinct General of the State, July 4 1865. New York: Baker & Godwin Printers, 1865.

Blanchard, Ira. I Marched with Sherman: Civil War Memoirs of the 20th Illinois Volunteer Infantry. San Francisco: J.D. Huff, 1992.

Blatchford, JNo. S. Circular Addressed to the Branches and Aid Societies Tributary to the U.S. Sanitary Commission. July 4, 1865. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1865.

Boker, George H. Hymn for the Union League, July 4, 1865. Philadelphia?: S.n., 1865.

Boker, George H. Poems of the War. Boston: Ticknor and Fields, 1864.

Boston City Council Dinner at Faneuil Hall July 4, 1865 Bill of Fare. [Boston]: Geo. C. Rand & Avery, Printers, 3 Cornhill, Boston., 1865.

Boutwell, George S. Reconstruction: Its True Basis. Speech of Hon. George S. Boutwell, at Weymouth, Mass., July 4, 1865. Boston: Wright & Potter, Printers, 1865.

Brown, Frederick T. An Address Delivered in the Central Presbyterian Church, Chicago July 4th, 1865,. Chicago: Jameson & Morse, Printers, 1865.

Chesnut, Mary Boykin Miller. A Diary from Dixie. Edited by Ben Ames Williams. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1949.

City of Boston. Eighty Ninth Anniversary of American Independence. July 4, 1865.: Sir–You Are Respectfully Invited to Unite with the City Council of Boston in Celebrating the Approaching Anniversary of the Declaration of American Independence. … –[Boston: S.n., 1865] –[2] Leaves: Ill; 25cm.

Crawford, James Garvin, Martha Elizabeth Wilson, and Elizabeth Ethel Parker. Bascom. “Dear Lizzie”: Letters Written by James “Jimmy” Garvin Crawford to His Sweetheart Martha Elizabeth “Lizzi” Wilson While He Was in the Federal Army during the War Between the States, 1862-1865. N.C.: N.P., 1978.

Cutler, William Parker. The Duty of Citizens in the Work of Reconstruction. Marietta, OH: Printed at the Register Office, 1865.

Day, William Howard, John Pierpont, and Henry Wilson. Celebration by the Colored People’s Educational Monument Association in Memory of Abraham Lincoln: On the Fourth of July, 1865, in the Presidential Grounds, Washington, D.C. Washington, D.C.: McGill & Witherow, Printers, 1865.

Dell, P. A., ed. “Negro Suffrage.” The Elevator: A Weekly Journal of Progress (San Francisco, California), May 5, 1865.

Doty, Lockwood L., comp. Presentation of Flags of New York Volunteer Regiments and Other Organizations, to His Excellency, Governor Fenton, in Accordance with a Resolution of the Legislature, July 4, 1865. Albany: Weed, Parsons and, Printers, 1865.

Edwards, Abial Hall. “Dear Friend Anna”: The Civil War Letters of a Common Soldier from Maine. Edited by Beverly Hayes. Kallgren and James L. Crouthamel. Orono, Me., U.S.A.: University of Maine Press, 1992.

Fisk, Wilbur, Emil Rosenblatt, and Ruth Rosenblatt. Hard Marching Every Day: The Civil War Letters of Private Wilbur Fisk, 1861-1865. Lawrence, Kan.: University Press of Kansas, 1992.

Freedom: A Documentary History of Emancipation, 1861-1867:Series 3: Volume 1: Land and Labor , 1865. Chapel Hill: Univ of North Carolina Press, 2008.

Garrison, William L. The Liberator, 1865.

Geer, Allen Morgan. The Civil War Diary of Allen Morgan Geer, Twentieth Regiment, Illinois Volunteers. Edited by Mary Ann Andersen. Denver: R.C. Appleman, 1977.

Gibbons, Charles. Proceedings of the Union League of Philadelphia, in Commemoration of the Eighty-Ninth Anniversary of American Independence, July 4th, 1865. Oration of Charles Gibbons, Esq. Philadelphia: King & Baird, Printers, 1865.

Greene, William B. Letters from a Sharpshooter: The Civil War Letters of Private William B. Greene, Co. G, 2nd United States Sharpshooters (Berdan’s) Army of the Potomac, 1861-1865. Edited by William H. Hastings. Belleville, WI: Historic Pub., 1993.

Hancock, John. The Great Question for the People! Essays on the Elective Franchise; Or, Who Has the Right to Vote? Philadelphia: Merrihew & Son, Printers, 1865.

Havens, Palmer E. Oration of Hon. P.E. Havens, of Essex, Delivered at Crown Point, July 4, 1865. Albany: Weed, Parsons and, Printers, 1865.

Hodges, Charles. “President Lincoln.” Princeton Review XXXVII, no. III (July 1865): 435-58.

Hopkins, Owen Johnston, and Otto Ferdinand Bond. Under the Flag of the Nation: Diaries and Letters of a Yankee Volunteer in the Civil War. Columbus: Ohio State University Press for the Ohio Historical Society, 1961.

Horrocks, James. My Dear Parents: The Civil War Seen by an English Union Soldier. Edited by A. S. Lewis. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1982.

Howard, O. O., O. O. Howard, and Andrew Gregg Curtin. Oration of Major-General O.O. Howard and Speech of His Excellency A.G. Curtin, Governor of Pennsylvania: At the Laying of the Corner Stone of the Monument in the Soldiers’ National Cemetery, at Gettysburg, July 4, 1865, with the Other Exercises of the Occasion. Gettysburg: Printed for the Cemetery Association by Aughinbaugh & Wible, 1865.

Inauguration of the Statue of Horace Mann, in the State-House Grounds, Boston, Massachusetts, July 4, 1865:: With the Addresses of Gov. Andrew, John D. Philbrick, President Hill, Dr. S.G. Howe, and Others. Boston:: Walker, Fuller, and Company., 1865.

Independence Programme for July 4, 1865. How Shall We Celebrate the Coming “Fourth”?. [Boston?]: N.P., 1865.

Inzer, John Washington, and Mattie Lou Teague. Crow. The Diary of a Confederate Soldier: John Washington Inzer, 1834-1928. Huntsville, Ala.: Strode Publishers, 1977.

Johnston, Gertrude K., ed. Dear Pa–and so It Goes. Harrisburg, PA: Business Service Company, 1971.

Jones, Themistocles Alcibiades., and Nastasio Byronis. Stuffoniosi. Oration by Themistocles Alcibiades Jones and A Poem by Nastasio Byronis Stuffoniosi. Pronounced at the Parade of the Antique and Horrible Phantastiques, at Waterbury, Conn., July 4, 1865. Waterbury [Conn.: Phantastique Committee, 1865.

“July, 4 1865.” In TSLA: Civil War Sourcebook. Nashville, TN: Tennessee Historical Commission, 2011. Accessed June 25, 2013. http://tn.gov/tsla/cwsb/1865-07-Article-4-Page5.pdf.

Keeler, William Frederick. Aboard the USS Florida: 1863-65: The Letters of Paymaster William Frederick Keeler, U.S. Navy to His Wife, Anna. Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 1968.

Lynch, James. The Mission of the United States Republic. An Oration Delivered by Rev. James Lynch, at the Parade Ground, Augusta, Ga., July 4, 1865. Augusta, GA: Chronicle & Sentinel Office, 1865.

Manning, J. M. Peace Under Liberty: Oration Deviered before the City Authorities of Boston, on the Fourth of July, 1865 by J.M. Manning. Together with an Account of the Municipal Celebration of the Eighty Ninth Anniversary of American Independence. Boston: J.E. Farwell & Company, Printers, 1865.

May, Charles Sedgwick. The Experiment and the Trial of Republican Institutions: An Oration Delivered at Jackson, Michigan, July 4, 1865. Jackson [Mich.: O’Donnell & Ray, 1865.

Moulton, Charles H. Fort Lyon to Harper’s Ferry: On the Border of North and South with “Rambling Jour” : The Civil War Letters and Newspaper Dispatches of Charles H. Moulton (34th Mass. Vol. Inf.). Edited by Lee C. Drickamer and Karen D. Drickamer. Shippensburg, PA: White Mane Pub., 1987.

The National Freedman, a Monthly Journal of the National Freedman’s Relief Association (New York). June 1865.

Newton, Isaac. Monthly Report of the Agricultural Department for June and July, 1865. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1865.

The Norfolk Post (Norfolk, VA). “Fourth of July.” July 4, 1865.

Paige, Alonzo C. Address before the Common Council and Citizens of the City of Schenectady, July 4, 1865. Albany: Van Benthuysen’s Steam Printing House, 1865.

Parker, Joel. Oration Delivered by Governor Parker, at the Dedication of a Monument to the Memory of John Hart: One of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence from New Jersey, at Hopewell, Mercer County, New Jersey, July 4th, 1865. Trenton, NJ: Printed at the True American Office, 1865.

Patterson, James W. 89th Anniversary of the National Independence, July 4, 1865, at Dover, N.H.: Full Report of the Celebration, Including Preliminary Incidents, Procession, Engine Trial, Fireworks, Decorations, &c. Also Oration by Hon. James W. Patterson, of Hanover, N.H. Dover, NH: B. Barnes, Jr., Publisher, 1865.

Pugh, J. Howard. The Success and Promise of the American Union, an Oration, Delivered before the Citizens of Burlington, N.J., on the Occasion of Their Celebration of the Eighty-Ninth Anniversary of Independence Day, July 4th, 1865. Philadelphia: King & Baird, Printers, 1865.

Redkey, Edwin S. A Grand Army of Black Men: Letters from African-American Soldiers in the Union Army, 1861-1865. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.

Reid, Whitelaw. After the War: A Tour of the Southern States, 1865-1866. Edited by C. Vann Woodward. New York: Harper & Row, 1965.

Rhodes, Elisha Hunt, and Robert Hunt Rhodes. All for the Union: The Civil War Diary and Letters of Elisha Hunt Rhodes. New York: Vintage Books, 1992.

Robinson, James T. National Anniversary Address, Delivered at the Baptist Church, North Adams, Mass., July 4th, 1865. North Adams Mass.: W.H. Phillips, Printer, 1865.

Schurz, Carl. Report on the Condition of the South “1865”:. Civil War Classic Library. N.C.: Create Space Independent Publishing Platform, 2012.

Sheldon, James. Oration Delivered July 4th, 1865, at Eden, Erie Co., N.Y. Buffalo [N.Y.: A.M. Clapp &’s Morning Express Steam Printing House, 1865.

Sheridan, Philip Henry. Personal Memoirs of P.H. Sheridan, General United States Army. Edited by Jeffry D. Wert. New York: Da Capo Press, 1992.

Smith, Benjamin T. Private Smith’s Journal: Recollections of the Late War. Edited by Clyde C. Walton. Chicago: Lakeside Press, 1963.

Smith, David, and Ann Smith. Who Only Stand and Wait: Civil War Letters of David and Ann Smith, 1863-1865. Edited by Helene C. Phelan. Almond, NY: H.C. Phelan, 1990.

Smith, James C. Oration, Delivered at Canandaigua, N.Y., July 4, 1865 by Hon. James C. Smith. Canandaigua, NY: N.J. Milliken, Printer, 1865.

Smith, Nathaniel. An Oration Delivered by Nathaniel Smith, Esq., at Woodbury, Conn., on the Fourth of July, 1865. N.C.: Press of J. Giles Waterbury, 1865.

Soldiers’, Memorial Society., and George Putnam. The Soldiers’ Memorial Society. Boston, MA: Soldiers’ Memorial Society, 1865.

Stevens, Thomas N., and George M. Blackburn. “Dear Carrie– “: The Civil War Letters of Thomas N. Stevens. Mount Pleasant, MI: Clarke Historical Library, Central Michigan University, 1984.

Stone, A. L. Elements of National Life: An Oration Delivered before the City Authorities and Citizens of Providence, July 4, 1865. Providence: H.H. Thomas &, City Printers, 1865.

Thayer, M. Russell. The Great Victory.–Its Cost and Its Value. An Address Delivered at Chestnut Hill, Pennsylvania, July 4th, 1865,. Philadelphia: King & Baird, Printers, 1865.

Thayer, M. Russell. The Great Victory.–Its Cost and Its Value. An Address Delivered at Chestnut Hill, Pennsylvania, July 4th, 1865,. Philadelphia: King & Baird, Printers, 1865.

Thorpe, Francis Newton. The Federal and State Constitutions, Colonial Charters, and Other Organic Laws of the States, Territories, and Colonies Now or Heretofore Forming the United States of America Vol. IV Michigan-New Hampshire. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1909.

Tuttle, John W., and Hambleton Tapp. The Union, the Civil War, and John W. Tuttle: A Kentucky Captain’s Account. Edited by James C. Klotter. Frankfort: Kentucky Historical Society, 1980.

Williams, Hiram Smith, Lewis Nicholas. Wynne, and Robert A. Taylor. This War so Horrible: The Civil War Diary of Hiram Smith Williams. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, 1993.

Woodruff, Mathew. A Union Soldier in the Land of the Vanquished: The Diary of Sergeant Mathew Woodruff, June-December, 1865. Edited by F. N. Boney. University, Ala.: University of Alabama Press, 1969.

Yates, Richard. Speech of Hon. Richard Yates, Deliovered at Elgin, Ill on The Fourth Day of July, A.D. 1865 [As Reported for the Chicago Press]. Jacksonville, Ill: Ironmonger & Mendenhall, 1865.

Yeatman, James E. “Freedmen’s Wages.” The National Freedman: A Monthly Journal of the New York National Freedman’s Relief Association (New York, NY), August 15, 1865.


Notes.

1. James Lynch, The Mission of the United States Republic. An Oration Delivered by Rev. James Lynch, at the Parade Ground, Augusta, Ga., July 4, 1865. (Augusta, GA: Chronicle & Sentinel Office, 1865), 12.

[ii]. William Howard Day, John Pierpont, and Henry Wilson, Celebration by the Colored People’s Educational Monument Association in Memory of Abraham Lincoln: On the Fourth of July, 1865, in the Presidential Grounds, Washington, D.C. (Washington, D.C.: McGill & Witherow, Printers, 1865), 5.

[iii]. Ibid., 15.

[iv]. Ibid..

[v]. Edwin S. Redkey, A Grand Army of Black Men: Letters from African-American Soldiers in the Union Army, 1861-1865 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 187.

[vi]. Ibid., 188.

[vii]. P. A. Dell, ed., “Negro Suffrage,” The Elevator: A Weekly Journal of Progress (San Francisco, California), May 5, 1865. *N.B. The Microfilm service copy from the University of Arkansas did not contain the issues from June through September 1865 as requested, so the paper has been re-ordered. I still thought, however, that this quote was representative enough that it merited inclusion.

[viii]. William Garrison, ed., “Fourth of July,” The Liberator (Boston, MA), June 30, 1865.

[ix]. Lynch,  The Mission of the United States Republic, 7.; A.J. Beale, “Certificate regarding soundness of a Negro girl sold by A.J. Beale to Angeline Outland, signed by D.U. Outland and F.W. Russell, July 4, 1865,” Folder 1, Item 7, A.J. Beale Papers 1835-1901, Accession MS 92-04, Murray State University Special Collections, Kentucky Digital Library, Accessed 21 July 2013. http://kdl.kyvl.org/catalog/xt7w6m33340r_1_13.

[x].  Whitelaw Reid, After the War: A Tour of the Southern States, 1865-1866., ed. C. Vann Woodward (New York: Harper & Row, 1965), 218.

[xi]. “July, 4 1865,” in TSLA: Civil War Sourcebook (Nashville, TN: Tennessee Historical Commission, 2011), accessed July 25, 2013, http://tn.gov/tsla/cwsb/1865-07-Article-4-Page5.pdf.

[xii].  Mary Boykin Miller Chesnut, A Diary from Dixie, ed. Ben Ames Williams (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1949), 544.

[xiii]. “Fourth of July,” The Norfolk Post (Norfolk, VA), July 4, 1865.

[xiv]. Ibid..

[xv]. Mathew Woodruff, A Union Soldier in the Land of the Vanquished: The Diary of Sergeant Mathew Woodruff, June-December, 1865, ed. F. N. Boney (University, Ala.: University of Alabama Press, 1969), 10.

[xvi]. Philip Henry Sheridan, Personal Memoirs of P.H. Sheridan, General United States Army, ed. Jeffry D. Wert (New York: Da Capo Press, 1992), 414.

[xvii]. The Bellville Countryman (Bellville, Texas), July 1, 1865.

[xviii]. Ibid..

[xix]. Carl Schurz, Report on the Condition of the South “1865”:, Civil War Classic Library (N.C.: Create Space Independent Publishing Platform, 2012), 32-33.

[xx]. Ibid., 128.

[xxi]. Ibid., 162-164.

[xxii].  James E. Yeatman, “Freedmen’s Wages,” The National Freedman: A Monthly Journal of the New York National Freedman’s Relief Association (New York, NY), August 15, 1865.

[xxiii]. Freedom: A Documentary History of Emancipation, 1861-1867:Series 3: Volume 1: Land and Labor , 1865 (Chapel Hill: Univ of North Carolina Press, 2008), 357-358.

[xxiv]. Nelson W. Aldrich, Wholesale Prices, Wages and Transportation. Report of Changes in Railway Transportation Rates on Freight Traffic throughout the United States, 1852 to 1893 Part IV (Washington: Goverment Printing Office, 1893), 1567.

[xxv]. Palmer E. Havens, Oration of Hon. P.E. Havens, of Essex, Delivered at Crown Point, July 4, 1865. (Albany: Weed, Parsons and, Printers, 1865), 17.

[xxvi].  Frederick T. Brown, An Address Delivered in the Central Presbyterian Church, Chicago July 4th, 1865, (Chicago: Jameson & Morse, Printers, 1865), 7.

[xxvii]. Charles Austin Beard and Mary Ritter Beard, The Rise of American Civilization: Volume II The Industrial Era (New York: Macmillan, 1927), 53.

[xxviii]. W.E.B. Dubois, Black Reconstruction in America: An Essay Toward a History of the Part Which Black Folk Played in the Attempt to Reconstruct Democracy in America, 1860-1880 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2007), 1.

[xxix]. James M. McPherson and James Keith Hogue, Ordeal by Fire: The Civil War and Reconstruction (Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2009), xxiii.

[xxx]. Bruce C. Levine, The Fall of the House of Dixie: The Civil War and the Social Revolution That Transformed the South (New York: Random House, 2013), xviii.

[xxxi]. Francis Newton Thorpe, The Federal and State Constitutions, Colonial Charters, and Other Organic Laws of the States, Territories, and Colonies Now or Heretofore Forming the United States of America Vol. IV Michigan-New Hampshire (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1909), 2190.

[xxxii]. W.E.B. Dubois, “The Gall of Bitterness,” The Crisis 3, no. 4 (February 1912): 153.

[xxxiii]. Michael Vorenberg, Final Freedom: The Civil War, The Abolition of Slavery, and the Thirteenth Amendment (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001), i.

[xxxiv]. Eric Foner, Reconstruction: America’s Unfinished Revolution, 1863-1877 (New York: Harper & Row, 1988), xxvii.

[xxxv]. Eric Foner, A Short History of Reconstruction, 1863-1877 (New York: Harper & Row, 1990), xvi; Themistocles Alcibiades. Jones and Nastasio Byronis. Stuffoniosi, Oration by Themistocles Alcibiades Jones and A Poem by Nastasio Byronis Stuffoniosi. Pronounced at the Parade of the Antique and Horrible Phantastiques, at Waterbury, Conn., July 4, 1865. (Waterbury [Conn.: Phantastique Committee, 1865), 7.

[xxxvi]. Robert Penn Warren, The Legacy of the Civil War (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1998), 4.

[xxxvii]. David W. Blight, Race and Reunion: The Civil War in American Memory (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2001), 2.

[xxxviii]. Matthew Arnold, New Poems by Mathew Arnold (Boston: Ticknor and Fields, 1867), 180.

[xxxix]. W. J. Cash, The Mind of the South (New York: Vintage Books, 1991), 103.

[xl]. Frederick Jackson Turner, The Frontier in American History (New York: H. Holt and, 1920), 3.

[xli]. Elliott West, The Contested Plains: Indians, Goldseekers, & the Rush to Colorado (Lawrence, Kan.: University Press of Kansas, 1998), xxii.

[xlii]. Ibid., xxiii-xxiv.

[xliii]. Blight, Race and Reunion, 6.

[xliv]. Elliott West, The Last Indian War: The Nez Perce Story (Oxford [England: Oxford University Press, 2009), xix.

[xlv]. Drew Gilpin. Faust, This Republic of Suffering: Death and the American Civil War (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2008), xiv.

[xlvi].Ray Allen Billington and Martin Ridge, Westward Expansion: A History of the American Frontier (New York: Macmillan, 1982), 2.

[xlvii]. Melinda Lawson, Patriot Fires: Forging a New American Nationalism in the Civil War North (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2002), 3.

[xlviii]. West, The Contested Plains, xxiv.

American Dreams July 4, 1865: A Nation in Search of Itself. (First part of the proposal)

What follows below for those who are interested is the first part of my proposal on what I hope will be my M.A. thesis here at the University of Montana. The working title, is the one you see here and in the subject heading. I’m hoping that when I finish with it I can garner enough interest to form a committee.

American Dreams July 4, 1865: A Nation in Search of Itself.

On July 4, 1865 James Lynch, soon to become Mississippi’s first African American Secretary of State under its reconstruction government, stated the demands of the recently freed slaves before an assemblage of 4,000 freed-people in Augusta, Ga.  In a section titled What the Colored Man Asks, Lynch stated that “he asks to stay in the land of his birth, to till the soil and labor in the workshop, and to fill positions of usefulness under these bright skies that smile[d] on his infancy. He asks and demands protection in the enjoyment of his liberty, which is only secured by equality before the law.”[i] Likewise, on the same day, the Colored People’s National Lincoln Monument Association held a celebration in Washington, D.C., commemorating the fallen president in which the master of Ceremonies read a letter from Frederick Douglass emphasizing the importance of Negro suffrage: “The one thought to be emphasized and deeply underscored on that occasion is this: The immediate, complete, and universal enfranchisement of the colored people of the whole country. This is demanded both by justice and national honor. . . . The great want of the country is to be rid of the negro question, and it can never be rid of that question until justice, right, and sound policy are complied with.”[ii] In the oration that followed William Howard Day, a graduate of Oberlin College, whose mother was one of the founders of the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church, expounded a vision of slavery as a two-hundred year “wave of blood” which by God’s providence had been set backward, and visited upon “the hearts and homes of the nation.”[iii] Yet, Day, as was the case with other African Americans on this national anniversary, perceived the national bloodshed as serving the higher purpose of freedom: “On these successive waves of blood, rising higher and higher, year by year, the colored man has been borne on and up to freedom, and must be borne outward still, to full enfranchisement.”[iv] The image thus presented was both of a glorious war of liberation and of a commitment to realize its results.

Not confined to prominent men and educated northern blacks the sentiment everywhere among African Americans, on the first fourth of July after Appomattox, contained both elements of a hopeful promise for the future, and the necessary requirement of confronting racist realities in a former slave society. Sergeant William A. Warfield of the 119th U.S. Colored Infantry, in a letter to the Weekly Anglo African stated both conditions with clarity and verve. First he illustrated the meaning independence held for former slaves, and their corresponding desire for a brighter tomorrow: “This is an age of wonders, and not least among them is the celebration of the Fourth of July at Camp Nelson, Ky., by the colored people. To see so many thousands who a year ago were slaves, congregate in the heart of a slave State and celebrate the day sacred to the cause of freedom . . . was a grand spectacle. It was the first time we have ever been permitted to celebrate the Nation’s Day.”[v]  Second, Sergeant Warfield gave voice to a desire for equality and a determination for its achievement worthy of Douglass, James Lynch, or William Day. Moreover, while the orators and intellectual leaders of the black community affirmed a public principle before a large audience, Warfield demonstrated a private commitment, openly expressed, to strive for rights not yet secured:

If we would obtain our just privileges, we must strive for them [emphasis in original]. We must be willing to pay the same price that other people have always been compelled to pay. By laboring for our own cause we show, in the first place that we understand and appreciate what our rights are; in the second place, that we have the courage and manhood to ask for them; in the third place, that we are determined, sooner or later to have them. We need not expect those who have held us as slaves, and regarded us as incapable of an honorable position in government and society, to grant us that which we are indisposed to labor for.”[vi]

Collectively, the African American Community regardless of region, class, or previous condition of servitude emerged from the Civil War with a firm desire to secure the full rights of citizenship, purchased by their bravery on the battlefield. The Elevator, a California Newspaper dedicated to “equality before the law” and advancing the rights of African Americans in a state which restricted citizenship to white men said of Negro suffrage that “nothing ‘has been accomplished for the Negro  during the past four  years’ but what the exigencies of the times and the God-scourged people demanded. We are not content with what you [were] compelled to grant, or what was grudgingly given, or else the nation would have been rent in twain.”[vii]  Clearly, the African American community emerged from the civil war with a shared sense of national purpose, a dedication to the half-finished work begun by the Civil War, and a commitment to completing the work begun during the first half of the Second American Revolution. 

The dreams of the African American community for full equality before the law, and a measure of equal citizenship, however, fundamentally clashed with the desires of current and former slave-owners who wished to create a dependent labor force, curtail African American civil rights, and preserve a modicum of antebellum way of life. Northern abolitionists, and teary eyed reformers, might agree with William Garrison that “Hitherto the returning anniversary of the Fourth of July . . . has been a bitter mockery to the millions held in the galling chains of slavery on our soil and a satire upon all our professions as a free and Christian people. On Tuesday next, for the first time, it will be celebrated with something like the semblance of consistency and in the semblance of universal emancipation.”[viii] Yet, without fully knowing it Garrison presumed that universal emancipation was everywhere fully realized, for despite his rosy words, the following Tuesday did not dawn bathed in the collective sunshine of human rights for all. Even as the thirteenth amendment was making its way through the ratification process, and as James Lynch was propounding that “this great Republic was raised up to elevate humanity and to oppose the despotism of the universe,” in the state of Kentucky A.J. Beale sold to Angeline Outland a “negro girl” for another African American woman “equal in value” and certified her soundness on “this the 4[th] day [of] July[,] 1865.”[ix] Slavery far from being dead was very much alive in the state of Kentucky, which remained in control of a conservative coalition of Unionists firmly opposed to any change in the relationship between master and slave.

What is more, in the states of the old confederacy, where the war had brought about emancipation, former slave-owners clung to their old justifications and old beliefs with a tenacity revealed in words and deeds. Still believing that their former slaves were the “descendants of Ham,” and that “service in some form is their heritage,” white southerners fought through legal and extra-legal means to re-assert or maintain their mastery.[x] In Tennessee William Bonner, calling upon the help of three federal soldiers—Privates Mathew Mullins, Tyler Harrison and Captain Adkins—tied his house servant, Henry Bonner to a tree and administered 150 lashes with elm branches, whipping him twice. In the testimony of Mathew Mullins: “we whipped him for saucing his master Wm. Bonner—we were sent out under the charge of the home guard captain and were to do what he directed and [Bonner] directed the party to whip the negro.”[xi]  Even after four years of bloody conflict, both in slave-holding border-states, and in the erstwhile confederacy, slavery was very much alive.

In other parts of the South, the fourth of July took on the solemn, sullen air of a defiant refusal to acknowledge the realities of defeat. Mary Boykin Chesnut wrote in her diary from Camden, South Carolina that “Our people were all at home quiet, orderly, respectfull [sic], and at their usual work. There was nothing to show that any one of them had ever seen a Yankee or knew that there was one in existence.”[xii]  Likewise, the Norfolk Post, gave its readers the following advice: “Let our people who are now mourning over the loses of the last four years, pause for one moment in their lamentations, and think for one moment how much greater were our forefathers in the war of revolution and that of 1812.”[xiii] Furthermore, the paper added in a tone of passive-aggressive warning:  “We counsel all soberness and propriety, and let all abstain from too much enthusiasm, as the weather is hot and the consequences to [the public] health might be very detrimental.”[xiv] Or, as a Mathew Woodruff, a sergeant in the Union Army recounted from Vicksburg, Mississippi, on this day: “The war is over, but I am sorry to say the people does [sic] not do honor to the fallen Braves, or the suffering communities of our Nation.”[xv] In short, the actualities of conquest were far from being universally acknowledged, and many former confederates stood opposed to any sort of reconciliation.  

Still elsewhere in the former confederacy, in Texas, people stood resigned to reunion and life under the old flag, but greatly feared the prospect of a coming race war.  As General Phillip H. Sheridan wrote in his memoirs concerning the condition of Texas in July, 1865: “It was greatly feared that political rights were to be given those so recently in servitude, and as it was generally believed that such enfranchisement would precipitate a race war unless the freedmen were overawed and kept in a state of subjection, acts of intimidation were soon reported from all parts of the State.”[xvi] In a similar fashion, one Texas newspaper, The Bellville Countryman, publicly expressed Sheridan’s observations while commemorating the Fourth of July: “There being no demonstrations here today . . . we have concluded to raise the ‘stars and stripes’ ourselves. We expect to remain in Texas, and to live under the old flag. But we don’t want to fight under that flag,—nor any other. We are opposed to the NEXT WAR [emphasis in original].”[xvii] On the same page, giving a concrete reality to the possibility of intimidation, the paper reported that “Peter, a gentleman of color, who has for several months past occupied rooms at the County Hotel [Jail] at this place and been fed at the public crib, stepped out last night (July 3), by permission of the proprietor, to procure a drink of cold water at an adjacent house, and has not yet returned.”[xviii]   Clearly the hopes of the African American population for equality before the law and basic safety relative to the white population of the South could not be maintained without outside enforcement.

The governing powers of the south, however, seemed far more concerned with maintaining and securing a reliable black labor force, and with implementing means of social control than they did in creating any sort of public safety for the former slaves. As Carl Schurz relayed to President Andrew Johnson in his Report on the Condition of the South 1865, the feeling in the south was that “the blacks at large belong to the whites at large,” and that “the negro will not work without physical compulsion.”[xix] The planter class remained determined to reassert its mastery. Believing that “These niggers will all be slaves again in twelve months,” and that the National Government possessed “nothing but Lincoln proclamations to make them free,” the White South, set about to re-assert its mastery over labor with the help of municipal, state, and where possible federal authorities in the form of the recently formed freedman’s bureau or the army.[xx]  The town of Opelousas, Louisiana passed the following municipal ordinance which took effect on the Fourth of July 1865. In thirteen ordinances, the movement, status, and opportunity of freedmen and women were effectively restricted so that the only place for them in society was working for their former masters. No freedman was allowed to come within the city limits without permission from his employer, and every negro found on the streets after 10’oclock at night, or three p.m. on Sundays, was thrown in jail and compelled to labor on public works. No African American was allowed to own or rent property within the city limits or reside there without permission from an employer. Both Public meetings and black preachers were forbidden without permission from the mayor. Additionally no freed person was allowed to carry a firearm that was not in military service, and no person of color was permitted to buy, sell, trade, or barter any merchandise without the written permission of an employer, the mayor or the president of the board.[xxi]

In cases where such municipal ordinances did not exist, planters and freedman’s bureau agents worked in conjunction to create a dependent labor force by forcing former bonds-people into contracts at well below market value.  James Yeatman, writing to O.O. Howard on this day expressed his observations that “the tendency everywhere is to pay too little. I have seen no wages named either by employers, military commandants or others which would be deemed fair and just compensation were they the owner of the negro, and hiring them to labor for others.”[xxii] As a case in point, James Eason in a contract with his former slave Eddy dated July 4, 1865, guaranteed him and the eleven people in his household one thirty-second of the crop in exchange for an entire years labor. As a condition of the contract, Eddy and his family agreed to “remain with and serve him the said Eason, their former owner as they have heretofore done for and during the remainder of the present year.”[xxiii] In a similar fashion to northern iron ore miners who saw their wages fall from a wartime high of $2.50 a day in July of 1864, to a post-war value of $1.50 a day in July of 1865, freed slaves found their labor worth far less to themselves in freedom than it had been to their masters under slavery before and during the war.[xxiv] The realities of the industrial revolution, begun by the war, meant that the values of free labor ideology were becoming obsolescent, to be replaced by a new reality of dependence upon an impersonal market.

Northern Reformers, and members of the African American community might agree with New York State Senator Palmer Havens that “negro suffrage is absolutely essential to our future peace and safety,” but these individuals faced stiff resistance in implementing their vision of the future from more conservative northern whites, recalcitrant southerners still dealing with the realities of southern defeat, and those in the border states who wished to perpetuate slavery.[xxv] The Reverend Frederick Brown, might proclaim before the congregation of the Central Presbyterian Church in Chicago that “swords are beating into ploughshares and spears into pruning hooks,” but the mysteries of Peter’s fate at the hands of persons unknown, belied the mythic image of peaceful coexistence.[xxvi] The bloody contest between competing armies on the battlefield stood resolved, but in so many ways the sanguinary war of competing principles, and with it the bloody contest regarding the meaning of the civil war had yet to be determined.  The competing dreams unleashed by the Second American Revolution shown visibly on this day of national observance, but their truths remained to be realized.


Notes.

1. James Lynch, The Mission of the United States Republic. An Oration Delivered by Rev. James Lynch, at the Parade Ground, Augusta, Ga., July 4, 1865. (Augusta, GA: Chronicle & Sentinel Office, 1865), 12.

[ii]. William Howard Day, John Pierpont, and Henry Wilson, Celebration by the Colored People’s Educational Monument Association in Memory of Abraham Lincoln: On the Fourth of July, 1865, in the Presidential Grounds, Washington, D.C. (Washington, D.C.: McGill & Witherow, Printers, 1865), 5.

[iii]. Ibid., 15.

 [iv]. Ibid..

 [v]. Edwin S. Redkey, A Grand Army of Black Men: Letters from African-American Soldiers in the Union Army, 1861-1865 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 187.

[vi]. Ibid., 188.

 [vii]. P. A. Dell, ed., “Negro Suffrage,” The Elevator: A Weekly Journal of Progress (San Francisco, California), May 5, 1865. *N.B. The Microfilm service copy from the University of Arkansas did not contain the issues from June through September 1865 as requested, so the paper has been re-ordered. I still thought, however, that this quote was representative enough that it merited inclusion.

 [viii]. William Garrison, ed., “Fourth of July,” The Liberator (Boston, MA), June 30, 1865.

[ix]. Lynch,  The Mission of the United States Republic, 7.; A.J. Beale, “Certificate regarding soundness of a Negro girl sold by A.J. Beale to Angeline Outland, signed by D.U. Outland and F.W. Russell, July 4, 1865,” Folder 1, Item 7, A.J. Beale Papers 1835-1901, Accession MS 92-04, Murray State University Special Collections, Kentucky Digital Library, Accessed 21 July 2013. http://kdl.kyvl.org/catalog/xt7w6m33340r_1_13.

[x].  Whitelaw Reid, After the War: A Tour of the Southern States, 1865-1866., ed. C. Vann Woodward (New York: Harper & Row, 1965), 218.

[xi]. “July, 4 1865,” in TSLA: Civil War Sourcebook (Nashville, TN: Tennessee Historical Commission, 2011), accessed July 25, 2013, http://tn.gov/tsla/cwsb/1865-07-Article-4-Page5.pdf.

[xii].  Mary Boykin Miller Chesnut, A Diary from Dixie, ed. Ben Ames Williams (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1949), 544.

[xiii]. “Fourth of July,” The Norfolk Post (Norfolk, VA), July 4, 1865.

[xiv]. Ibid..  

 [xv]. Mathew Woodruff, A Union Soldier in the Land of the Vanquished: The Diary of Sergeant Mathew Woodruff, June-December, 1865, ed. F. N. Boney (University, Ala.: University of Alabama Press, 1969), 10.

 [xvi]. Philip Henry Sheridan, Personal Memoirs of P.H. Sheridan, General United States Army, ed. Jeffry D. Wert (New York: Da Capo Press, 1992), 414.

 [xvii]. The Bellville Countryman (Bellville, Texas), July 1, 1865.

[xviii]. Ibid..  

 [xix]. Carl Schurz, Report on the Condition of the South “1865”:, Civil War Classic Library (N.C.: Create Space Independent Publishing Platform, 2012), 32-33.

 [xx]. Ibid., 128.  

 [xxi]. Ibid., 162-164.   

 [xxii].  James E. Yeatman, “Freedmen’s Wages,” The National Freedman: A Monthly Journal of the New York National Freedman’s Relief Association (New York, NY), August 15, 1865.

 [xxiii]. Freedom: A Documentary History of Emancipation, 1861-1867:Series 3: Volume 1: Land and Labor , 1865 (Chapel Hill: Univ of North Carolina Press, 2008), 357-358.

[xxiv]. Nelson W. Aldrich, Wholesale Prices, Wages and Transportation. Report of Changes in Railway Transportation Rates on Freight Traffic throughout the United States, 1852 to 1893 Part IV (Washington: Goverment Printing Office, 1893), 1567. 

[xxv]. Palmer E. Havens, Oration of Hon. P.E. Havens, of Essex, Delivered at Crown Point, July 4, 1865. (Albany: Weed, Parsons and, Printers, 1865), 17.

[xxvi].  Frederick T. Brown, An Address Delivered in the Central Presbyterian Church, Chicago July 4th, 1865, (Chicago: Jameson & Morse, Printers, 1865), 7.