NY Times February 8, 1866
In February 1866 a Convention of Colored Men met in Washington, D.C. to protest the South’s Black Codes[1]. On February 7th a delegation of participants met with President Johnson.
From The Struggle between President Johnson and Congress over Reconstruction by Charles Ernest Chadsey:
On February 7, 1866, a delegation of colored representatives from fifteen States and the District of Columbia called upon President Johnson in order to present their wishes concerning the granting of suffrage to their race. Geo. T. Downing and Frederick Douglass acted as spokesmen. In reply, President Johnson described his sacrifices for the colored man, and went on to express his indignation at being arraigned by incompetent persons. Although he was willing to be the colored man’s Moses, he was not willing “to adopt a policy which he believed would only result in the sacrifice of his [the colored man’s] life and the shedding of his blood.” The war was not waged for the suppression of slavery; “the abolition of slavery has come as an incident to the suppression of a great rebellion—as an incident, and as an incident we should give it the proper direction.” He went on to state that the negro was unprepared for the ballot, and that there was a danger of a race war. The States must decide for themselves on the question of the franchise. “Each community is better prepared to determine the depository of its political power than anybody else, and it is for the legislature * * * to say who shall vote, and not for the Congress of the United States.”[97] [Edward McPherson, History of the Reconstruction, 52-56]
This plain statement of his opposition to negro suffrage greatly added to Johnson’s unpopularity. This was not due to the fact that his views on that subject had not been made public before, for he never had tried to conceal his attitude towards any of the questions before the people. But the attitude of the people themselves had greatly changed since the ill treatment of the freedmen and the objectionable legislation of the Southern States had been placed vividly before the public through the newspapers. The sentiment in favor of the extension of the franchise had rapidly gained strength; and the attitude of the President, made conspicuous anew by his almost harsh reply to so prominent a delegation representing such a wide extent of territory, called forth much hostile criticism, which, added to the vigorous letter published by the delegation in reply to the President, aided in unifying the opposition to him.
According to William S. McFeely, George T. Downing told the president that black people “should be given the vote ‘with which to save ourselves.'” President Johnson became angry and stated that if blacks were allowed to vote there would be a race war between poor whites and poor blacks. President Johnson stated that the majority will should prevail in each state. Mr. Downing said that blacks were the majority in South Carolina. To the president’s suggestion that the freed slaves emigrate, Frederick Douglass
countered with a suggestion that struck at the heart of all that was tragic in Andrew Johnson – and in his South – saying that if poor black people and poor white people were given the vote, they would unite to achieve the justice denied them by the rich. Johnson, once an indentured servant learning the craft of tailoring, had himself smarted under such denial of justice, but he was not going to have a former slave tell him so. He had been willing to advocate black rights during the war as a way to affront rich Confederates of western Tennessee; he could not take the next step – a step back, the tailor thought – and stand equal with the caulker, achieving true democracy. The meeting ended, according to Douglass, “not without courtesy,” but with nothing more.[2]
