When doing research on particular subject, there is no better source to go to than the subject itself. I spent a good chunk of time researching the life of slaves in a post emancipation proclamation society. Many of the primary sources I found were letters from slaves to family members and were very difficult to read and fully understand. One source I found was a collection and discussion of interviews that had been conducted with ex-slaves in the 1930s by the Works Project Administration(WPA). Many of these interviews, in fact over 700, were with slaves from Arkansas. It discussed how many slaves had found freedom a fairly easy and quick thing to adapt to but others did not.

One such ex-slave whose transition from a life of slavery to freedom was not as easy as some, was a man by the name of Jake Goodridge. He served under a Confederate military leader until he was captured by Federal forces near the end of the war. Once the war ended, the Federal troops who had taken him from his Confederate master simply left him by himself in Arkansas alone in foreign territory rather than return him to his home state of Tennessee. As he recalled the situation, “I didn’t know what to do…that was the big freedom to us colored folks. That the way white folks fightin’ do the colored folks.” Men like Jake Goodridge were what led to the creation of the Freedman’s Bureau in 1865.

The source also discussed working conditions for black Americans in a post slavery society. The need for cotton was high and skilled farm workers were in high demand, many of the former slaves returned to the fields and worked with better treatment and pay. Some ex-slaves even stayed and worked for their former masters. This last point was interesting to me because I know if I was in that situation I would want nothing to do with someone like that. I would have tried to work in a different place so the fact many slaves remained where they were was interesting. That was one point that stuck out to me personally. I was really surprised so many did that. 

The Pennsylvania Freedmen's Bulletin

The primary source I found was from the Pennsylvania Freedmen’s Bulletin that was a monthly journal put out to show all the progress being made by people volunteering to go south and help the freed people.  This monthly journal combines July, August, September, and October of 1867.  

The first part of this journal speaks of the courage teachers returning from the south and all their great works.  It asks that people donate money, clothes, food, or anything.  It also describes how much it would mean to a teacher if they received a letter of support.  They talk about the school buildings being in poor condition but the prosperity of the “colored people” depends on their children being educated.  They mentioned that the children voted unanimously to cancel recess to continue their studies.  They even indicate that the colored children are making more progress than their white counterparts.

Another article in this journal tells the story of Robert P. Martin of Person County, North Carolina.  He was a young man whom had been a slave since he was born.  He had traveled north to request $500 to build churches and schoolhouses.  The northern freedman’s organization was fascinated by his life story.  When he was 16 he had found God.  Going to church and learning how to pray made him want to learn how to read so he could preach the Word.  A friend of his taught him the alphabet on their lunch breaks and from that point on he taught himself how to read.  He was able to get his hand on a bible and continued to progress.  He had to be secretive about this since it was illegal for slaves to learn how to read.  The story so fascinated his northern friends that they were willing to donate money.  He only received a little over $200, but he believed it was a great start.

George White-A Freed Madison County Slave

 

I selected the sketch of the life and experiences of George White, located in the EKU Special Collections section.  Mr. White, born in Maryland in 1790 was eventually sold to Mr. John White of Madison County, KY.  The handwritten pages left for Mr. White's children, detail his life during both his time as a slave and post-slavery when he was ultimately freed by the children of his original master and mistress.

     The document provides a first-hand account of an actual slave who experienced the lows of life in bondage.  When Master John White died, George had to experience the ultimate disappointment when his freedom was not granted despite his now deceased masters wishes.  Knowing this the majority of John White's children honored their father's wishes and "bought" him a second time to ensure his freedom.  John Whites will stipulated that all of heirs had to agree in order to set John free, and one lone holdout prevented it.  The other children combined their efforts and purchased George, whereupon he was immediately set free.

     The third section of the document details the life of Gorge White as a free man.  He discusses his ability to "lay up a little for a rainy day."  He never outright discusses how or where he is earning his living, but states that he was successful enough to have a "competence of worldly goods" and was able to purchase the freedom of several family members and give them "a good start in the world."

     The final section, in which George reveals that he had the sketch written for him discusses his thoughts on hard work and the humility of man.  George states that his belief and reliance on his "Heavenly Master" is what carried him through all his lowest times and that as he comes to the end of his life, he believes himself to be an "honest man."  The overall document does not mention the Reconstruction process in itself, but I do believe the actions of White's children and the subsequent success of George himself as a freeman provide an excellent first-hand experience in the life of a slave and possibilities of what a person can do when given the same opportunities as everyone else, regardless of their race or creed.

 

 

 

Sharecropper contrat, 1867

With the ending of slavery after the Civil War, the question of where these newly freed people would go began to arise. One option that sprouted up was the idea that these previous slaves would work on land for wages that they would need to support themselves. Although this was a common idea, blacks had only recently been freed, and did not want to be subjected to persecution again. Due to this, the idea of sharecropping emerged as a compromise. Landowners divided their plantations into plots roughly 20-50 acres each that were suitable for farming by single families. In exchange for this, sharecroppers agreed to raise a cash crop and give a certain portion to the landowner. Although this seemed like a good system, the dependency and poverty grew as this was not a way that these freed people could better themselves and their families.

Contracts were drawn up in which the specifics of this deal were disclosed. My primary source was a sharecropper contract from 1867 between Isham G. Bailey and the freedmen of Cooper Hughs and Charles Roberts on January 1. Located in the Gilder Lehrham collection  within the Institute of American History, it allows insight into what was required in return for the contracted land. A translation of the contract was provided by the institute in which the exact number from each family was listed as well as their gender. For this particular example, these families were required to grow forty aces of corn and twenty acres of cotton. For their services, half of the cotton and a third of the corn was to be received. It was also made clear that Bailey was in charge of this property, and that these families must follow his rules.

Farming was not the only required tasks to living on this land. Towards the end of the contract, Charles Roberts and his wife Hannah were agreeing to bind themselves to the washing and ironing, as well as all other necessary house work for Bailey and his family during that year, but would receive fifty dollars in money for their services. Cooper Hughs agreed to taking care of the catte and to milking the cows twice daily, as well as to do the churning when it was deemed necessary.

While these families did have more freedom than before, they were still doing that tasks that the southern families did not wish to do. Yes, they received pay but were still being worked very hard. From what I gathered from this primary source, these contracts were unique based on each individual, and varied from one to the next on a yearly basis. What began on the first day of 1867, this contract would not expire until the year was over.

source:

http://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-by-era/reconstruction/resources/sharecropper-contract-1867

Report of Conditions near Savannah Georgia - 1865

The source I ended up selecting was a “Report of Conditions near Savanah Georgia”. 

The report was written on September 1, 1865 by a Captain A.P. Ketchum to General R. Saxton.  Sherman’s troops had marched through Savannah and left many of the town’s people both white and black left with nothing so the city was trying to help the people by giving rations but soon ran out and Ketchum took over with his resources. He also wrote of the excitement he saw in the freed people when Sherman announced his plan to allocate land to the freed people and how they eagerly lined up to be given their plot of land. Ketchum seemed to respect the freed people as a race and did not see them as inferior.

He also wrote of an example of the hostility the whites held towards the freed people. On July 4^th the black engine company of Savannah wished to have their engine in the parade like the white engine companies were doing. The fire chief known only as Mr. Casey forbade the black engine company from participating in the parade. Ketchum intervened and the black engine company was allowed to participate. The engine company did not get far in the parade until they were attacked by white men and forced to flee. Ketchum later went to the Post Commandant and ensured better policing of the city so that attacks would decrease.

Labor contracts were also a topic reported about. Many white planters did not hold to their contracts with the freed workers. Ketchum wrote of a twelve year old that was kicked off the plantation he worked at and beaten.

The report along with the book Redemption has given me a view point of reconstruction that is on a more personal level. I think the personal stories of the conditions in the south should be shared because they help to reverse the way that scholars have looked at reconstruction through the “Redeemers” point of view instead of the point of view of the freed people.

Report of Conditions-- LaGrange, TN

The other night I sat down to start the research for this question not knowing it would lead to hours searching and reading through the information the Freedmens Bureau has on their site. So, of course, I chose to search information and documents from my home state, Tennessee. What I found were documents such as labor contracts, reports of outrages and reports of conditions. I found a report that was from LaGrange, Tennessee. LaGrange is situated on the outskirts of Memphis in western Tennessee, which we all know was Confederate territory. 

The document I chose was a report of conditions from a Superintendent by the name of S.H. Melcer. Melcer was replying to his Lieutenant J. T. Alden, whose location is unknown. Clearly Melcer is associated with the United States Army who was sent to Tennessee as a part of protection for freedmen. Melcer is very quick to address that the white men and women of LaGrange do not respect the emancipation of the freed people. Supt. Melcer wrote dates and information about specific incidents 2 of the 4 dealing with freed women being attacked by white men. 

Just as we discussed in class, the main reasons for these violent outrages are based on freedmen not finishing their servitude and refusal to be controlled any longer. This has not sat well with the white supremacists, leading them to steal weapons from the freedmen. The white civilians were not fond of being controlled and watched over by the Union Military. Supt. Melcer also mentions the treatment of black children in his report. Because of the Black Codes many of them were forced to work while younger children were still with their parents. 

Later in Melcer's report he states that the violent outrages have become less due to the freedmen having "protection" of the military. Melcer is very adamant about the importance of the Bureau and the troops being stationed in this area of Tennesse. He believed that without these forces protecting the freed people there would be an immense amount of violence that would be very hard to stop. 

Hailing from the state of Tennessee, I learned about how the South was "rebuilt" and the "right" policies and politicians were elected in the end of war. Clearly that was not the case. I believe that reports such as these are very important, especially to break the "Redemption" view of southern Reconstruction and emancipation that we all grew up hearing about. 

Jourdon Anderson...August 7, 1865

The primary source I found was a letter written by a former slave named Jourdon Anderson. Written August 7, 1865 and location Dayton, Ohio, the letter was written to his former Master Colonel P.H. Anderson a year after the Civil War. In his letter, Jourdon discusses what good could his former Master offer him. His letter is a reply to a letter he received from Colonel P.H. Anderson, who had asked him to return to work for him.  What I found the most interesting about the letter is that Jourdon and his wife Mandy were considering going back if the promises of the old master were true. Jourdon demanded higher wages, to be treated fairly and kindly. He wanted to know was there more opportunities for coloreds if he returned.  Jourdan even made reference that he hopes the good Lord had open Colonel Anderson's eyes to the wrong he had done to Jourdon. Towards the end of the letter I inferred it as Jourdon telling Anderson to make sure that the young white males on his farm leave his daughters alone. This letter hinted to a lot of things I already knew about slavery. The unfair treatment, low wages, violence, sexual violence, but this letter now demonstrates an equal level of power. Before the proclamation, Jourdon would not have been allowed to make such demands like this, but since he now has freedom he can demand what he wants. This letter also plays on the loyal slave and master relationship. Jourdon said that even after Colonel Anderson shot at him for seeking his freedom, he forgave him.  He cared that his former master was alive and well, and he even said that any black would be happy to be an Anderson slave. The letter was quite interesting; when I thought of freed Black I always anticipated that their views towards white would be negative. I am sure some were negative, but Jourdon’s response was quite different.

Petition for Habeas Corpus

After searching for a few hours on various library databases, I came across a petition for habeas corpus on www.archives.gov.  Edmund Kinney, a black freed slave living in Hanner County, Virginia, was requesting the court to look back over his arrest and imprisonment in 1878 after Kinney and his girlfriend Mary (a white woman) went to Washington, D.C. to get married.

As a refresher, habeas corpus allows a person under arrest to be brought back before a judge or court; the court must show lawful grounds for imprisonment. Throughout this 16-page document, Kinney had to make it an obvious point that he is, as a black man, an American citizen: “The petition of Edmund Kinney humbly sheweth that he is a citizen of the United States… a man of color, of the negro race…”  He insisted that he had been “unlawfully restrained” and that Kinney and his wife’s arrest and subsequent punishment (hard labor) was a “violation of the Constitution”: a phrase that he repeated numerous times during his plea to the court.

On page two, Kinney mentioned that his wife is white – but that she was also an American citizen.  Both Edmund and his wife Mary knew that interracial marriage was against Virginia law, which was why they left for Washington, D.C. to be “united in the bonds of matrimony.”  He also made the point that they were both of lawful age to be wed, and that they had gone through the proper paperwork, and that the only reason they had been arrested and convicted was on racial grounds… which he believed was illegal.  Kinney insisted that if his marriage was valid in D.C., this should transcend any state lines and become valid in other areas of the United States, as well.  Eventually, they were awarded a rehearing of their case, so their petition for habeas corpus was granted.

I thought that this source was incredibly interesting.  It showed that although slaves had been freed in 1863, some fifteen years later they were still having to vehemently fight for their rights, and had to constantly show that they were indeed citizens of the United States (which Kinney mentioned numerous times during his petition) and should thus be awarded their basic rights.  Another interesting aspect of this source was how the legality of interracial marriage varied from state-to-state, much like gay marriage in today’s society.  It raised a lot of questions then (the primary one being, of course, whether or not other states had to recognize other states’ marriages), and it raises those same questions today.  It’s fascinating to see how documents from a vastly different time period can still have similarities to issues we are having in modern society.

Experience of Emancipation

            The primary source I chose to evaluate concerning the consequences of emancipation was a story told by an ex-save named Henry Adams. Adams had been chosen to testify about his experiences dealing with freedom in front of the U.S. Senate fifteen years after it happened. Adams begins his description by explaining that his previous master had told the slaves they were free, but offered them protection from the whites who would, “kill them for fun”. By intimidating his former slaves, the plantation owner was able to convince almost all of the slaves to stay and work as sharecroppers on his plantation. Adams discusses how they were all forced to sign contracts that gave them a portion of what they grew, but the portions were just small enough to survive on. These contracts also specifically said that the previous master had no right to whip the new sharecroppers. This aspect of the contract was quickly overlooked when a young girl was almost beaten to death by the lady of the house and her husband. The beating of this young girl caused a major upset among the former slaves who had chosen to remain on the planation. Therefore, on September 18 many of these former slaves decided they would leave the plantation because the contracts had been broken by the beating and they were free to do so. These emancipated slaves were quickly stopped by a group of around 40 armed white men who informed them that they were, “going to kill ever' nigger they found leaving their masters”. The men robbed the slaves, but allowed them to return to their former master without killing them. Adams goes on to explain the many other ways they were intimidated into remaining with their former masters as sharecroppers. From Henry Adams’ report it is clear that the time after the Civil War was not all about freedom and rebuilding the nation, but intimidation and violence. This intimidation would continue long after the war and influence the emancipated slaves to stay with their abusive previous owners. Henry Adams’ account of emancipation clearly shows that freedom did not come easy.