Note:
Gunnar Myrdal died in 1987, less than 70 years ago.
Therefore, this work is protected by copyright,
restricting your legal rights to reproduce it.
However, you are welcome to view it on screen, as you do now.
Read more about copyright.
Full resolution (TIFF) - On this page / på denna sida - Footnotes - Chapter 20
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
Below is the raw OCR text
from the above scanned image.
Do you see an error? Proofread the page now!
Här nedan syns maskintolkade texten från faksimilbilden ovan.
Ser du något fel? Korrekturläs sidan nu!
This page has never been proofread. / Denna sida har aldrig korrekturlästs.
1314 An American Dilemma
missible action under the limitations of the Federal Constitution, with a view to the
elimination of every Negro voter who can be gotten rid of, legally, without materially
impairing the numerical strength of the white electorate. ... It is a fine discrimination,
indeed, that we have practiced in the fabrication of this plan.”*
Moffat states:
‘‘There can be no reasonable doubt that the intent of the delegates to these various
conventions [Mississippi, South Carolina, Louisiana, North Carolina, Maryland, Ala-
bama, and Virginia] was to frame their constitutions in such wise as to stand the test
of the Fifteenth Amendment to the Constitution and at the same time withhold the
ballot from the great mass of negro voters in their respective states.”**
Moffat backs his statement with many pages of quotes from the legislators who partici-
pated in the conventions.®
James Weldon Johnson makes the following statements:
“Not long ago, in a widely circulated weekly magazine, Senator George, formerly
a member of the Supreme Court of Georgia, was quoted as saying in the course of an
interview:
“ ‘Why apologize or evade? We have been very careful to obey the letter of the
Federal Constitution—^but we have been very diligent and astute in violating the spirit
of such amendments and such statutes as would lead the Negro to believe himself the
equal of a white man. And we shall continue to conduct ourselves in that way.*
“Senator Glass was quoted by the same interviewer as saying:
“ ‘The people of the original thirteen Southern States curse and spit upon the
Fifteenth Amendment—and have no intention of letting the Negro vote. We obey the
letter of the amendments and the Federal Statutes, but we frankly evade the spirit
thereof—and purpose to continue doing so. White supremacy is too precious a thing
to surrender for the sake of a theoretical justice that would let a brutish African deem
himself the equal of white men and women in Dixie.*
****
Bertram Schrieke reflects likewise:
“National history strongly believes in the fait accomflu If a revolution is successful,
its promoters are heroes, their opponents tyrants; if a revolution is unsuccessful, the
promoters are dishonest agitators or at least impractical but dangerous idealists. Since
the revolution that undid reconstruction, no new revolution in the South has occurred;
therefore no need has been felt for a new evaluation. The slogans of the struggle of
the southern Democrats—‘Negro domination,* ‘carpet-bagger governments,* ‘corruption,
frauds, and maladministration because of Negro participation in politics,* and so on
have now become ‘historical verities.* As a matter of fact, there had never been a Negro
majority in the reconstruction governments, whereas Southerners of standing had
prominently participated in them. As for political corruption and ‘spending,’ these had
not been much worse than in the North, especially in New York, during the same
* Virginia Debates: igot-02, Vol. 2. Quoted from Lewinson, of» ci/., p. 86.
^ R. Burnham MoflFat, “The Disfranchisement of the Negro from a Lawyer’s Standpoint,”
Tbe Journal of the American Social Science Association (September, 1904), p. 33.
* Ibid,, pp. 34-62. See also James ’A. Hamilton, Negro Suffrage and Congressional
Refresentation (1910).
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
