The period of reconstruction which followed the Civil War presented to
the statesmen of that time three problems of unusual significance.
These were: what should be the status of the eleven Confederate
States; what should be done with the leaders of the Confederacy; and
finally, what should be the rôle to be played by the several millions
of freedmen? In the effort to deal effectively with these problems the
Thirty-ninth and Fortieth Congresses adopted a reconstruction policy
which provided for the readmission of the formerly rebellious States
to the Union, the imposition of political disabilities upon many
former Confederates, and the bestowal of citizenship and suffrage upon
the freedmen. Upon the enlarged electorate the reconstruction of the
States was undertaken.
That the freedmen, comprising in many communities a preponderance of
voting power, should elect to public office ambitious outstanding men
of their race was expected. At that time, therefore, Negroes attained
not only local and State offices of importance, but also sat in the
United States Congress. Indeed, during the period from 1871 to 1901,
the latter year marking the passing of this type of Congressman,
twenty-two Negroes, two of whom were senators, held membership in
Congress. It seems, moreover, that men like Menard of Florida,
Pinchback of Louisiana, Lee and others, though unable to prove their
contentions, were, nevertheless, contestants with good title.
This situation, no less unique than it was interesting, has become the
source of interminable debate. It has been contended that because of
the ignorance of the blacks, in letters, in manners, in business, and
in the affairs of State, it was a serious mistake to enfranchise them,
thus making possible for a period however brief their virtual
direction of the political affairs of some of the Southern States.
Consistent in principle, historians of this conviction have viewed
with abhorrence the seating of black men in the highest legislative
assembly of the land. Not all men, however, have concurred in this
opinion. There were those who had precisely the opposite view, basing
their argument on the necessity of the plan of reconstruction
effected, in order to preserve to the Union the fruits of its victory.
The merits of that reconstruction are not here, however, at issue. Of
far greater import for our consideration is the single fact that
Negroes were thereby sent to Congress. Did the Negroes elected to
Congress justify by their achievements their presence there? To what
extent did they give direction to the thought and policies which were
to govern and control in this nation? Manifestly an impartial judgment
in this matter may be most adequately arrived at by the setting up of
certain criteria of excellence expected to inhere in Congressmen and
measuring by these the achievements of these functionaries.
Considering the matter in this light, therefore, the following
questions are advanced as bearing a direct relationship to the
services of these Congressmen. First, what of their mental equipment
to perform the tasks of law makers? Second, as measured by their
experience in public positions of trust and by their grasp of the
public questions at that time current, to what extent did they show
capacity for public service? Third, in what directions were their
chief interests manifested?