Presidential Reconstruction in South Carolina April 1865 to May 1866 Walter Bright Clemson University, [email protected]
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Clemson University TigerPrints All Theses Theses 5-2008 Radicalism and Rebellion: Presidential Reconstruction in South Carolina April 1865 to May 1866 Walter Bright Clemson University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_theses Part of the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Bright, Walter, "Radicalism and Rebellion: Presidential Reconstruction in South Carolina April 1865 to May 1866" (2008). All Theses. 363. https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_theses/363 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses at TigerPrints. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Theses by an authorized administrator of TigerPrints. For more information, please contact [email protected]. RADICALSIM AND REBELLION: PRESIDENTIAL RECONSTRUCTION IN SOUTH CAROLINA APRIL 1865 TO MAY 1866 A Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of Clemson University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts History by Walter Steven Bright May 2008 Accepted by: Dr. Rod Andrew Jr., Committee Chair Dr. H. Roger Grant Dr. Abel A. Bartley ABSTRACT The focus of this thesis deals primarily with the white elite of South Carolina during Presidential Reconstruction. Historians have noted South Carolina radicalism before the Civil War, but I propose that this radicalism did not simply fade away when the war ended. I argue that the Civil War did not destroy white South Carolinians’ will to fight; a sense of nationalism still flourished as they continued to rebel against the federal government, despite the devastating effects of the war on the Palmetto State. This work will show that these white elites continued this fight because they were enraged over the total devastation left in the wake of Sherman’s march through the state and the failure of the federal government to institute an acceptable Reconstruction plan. The radicalism of South Carolina’s white elites started the Civil War, and they did not believe that all of the devastation was for nothing as they continued to defy the Radical Republicans at every opportunity. Continuing their radical nature, the same men who led the state into secession before the war were placed back into their public duties after the war. These radical leaders rejected the few prominent measures during Presidential Reconstruction that may have brought then into the Union much sooner. Provisional Governor Benjamin F. Perry, a staunch Unionist before the war, placed these radical leaders back into power because they were popularly elected by the people. Like the more radical element of the state, pre-war moderate leaders such as Perry and Wade Hampton III were irate over the total devastation inflicted upon their precious state even though initially they did almost everything necessary to comply with the President’s demands during Presidential ii Reconstruction. As the process dragged out, these leaders became more incensed, and their rage was reflected publicly in their rhetoric, which was based on their personal experiences through secession, the Civil War, and Reconstruction. With the onset of Radical Reconstruction, the leaders of the Palmetto State realized that the process of being readmitted into the Union would drag out indefinitely, making it a secondary concern. Now they had to worry about keeping power within their own state against the unrepresented sanctions of the federal government, and this further enraged these radical leaders. Many of these leaders such as Perry and Hampton would vent their rage by becoming proponents of “Lost Cause” rhetoric. This instigated negative reactions from their Northern opposition, making many of them targets for personal criticism aimed at discrediting them in the eyes of the public. Still, they espoused their rage publicly—even when their power within the state was taken away by Radical Republican legislation—all the while defying the federal government until reaching “Redemption” over a decade later. iii DEDICATION This work is for my adoring wife, Amanda, and my beautiful daughters, Megan, Madison, Mekenzie, and Mikaela, for their love and support. iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS There are numerous people who have been instrumental to my educational career since I decided to go back to school six years ago. Dr. Rod Andrew Jr. has been a tremendous help, always directing me in the right direction as my thesis advisor and I may not have finished this project without his guidance. For his professionalism and inspiration I simply say, “Semper Fidelis.” I would also like to thank Dr. Roger Grant and Dr. Abel Bartley for their input and criticism of this work; they are both great professors and a joy to work with. Special thanks are also in order to Dr. Alan Grubb who took the time to read through this work in its roughest form and for providing much valued and appreciated insight. I am also indebted to Dr. Steven Marks who was always available for any reason during his tenure as the graduate coordinator; his dedication to the history graduate students has always been greatly appreciated. Dr. Robert McCormick at USC-Upstate also deserves a tremendous amount of credit for rekindling my love of history. He is truly an inspiring professor and his positive attitude always kept students coming back for more. Dr. John Wilson also deserves gratitude as my undergraduate advisor and his guidance as I decided to continue in graduate school. Dr. John Edmunds deserves much appreciation for his exciting oratory during all of his lectures on Southern history, most notably the history of South Carolina. I would also like to thank Dr. Choong Lee and Dr. Dwight Lambert for their humor and dedication as they always kept me going in the right direction in political science, while I double majored as an undergraduate. v My family has also provided much needed love and support since I decided to come back to school. I would like to thank my in-laws—Jim and Ginny Coppedge—for inspiring me to return to school and finishing something that I started many years ago. Their love and support is greatly appreciated. I would also like to thank my Mom— Dianne, and her husband Steve—for their love and support in more ways than they can imagine. My father—George E. Bright, Jr. instilled my initial love of history and I am very proud of our relationship since I have reached adulthood. Thanks Dad and Mary for all of the much-needed retreats and for your love and support. “Semper Fi Dad,” you are still my hero! Finally, I would like to thank Dr. Thomas Oberdan for keeping me gainfully employed as a graduate assistant. Those paychecks and his bizarre humor have really helped out my family since I arrived at Clemson University. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TITLE PAGE....................................................................................................................i ABSTRACT.....................................................................................................................ii DEDICATION................................................................................................................iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...............................................................................................v CHAPTER I. INRTODUCTION .........................................................................................1 II. THE RADICAL NATURE OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND SECESSION ..........................................................................................16 III. THE PALMETTO STATE’S CIVIL WAR AND REESTABLISHMENT OF THE OLD ORDER: APRIL 1865 TO DECEMBER 1865 ............45 IV. CONTINUED RADICALISM AND RESISTANCE IN THE FACE OF DEFEAT: DECEMBER 1865 TO MAY 1866.....................................75 V. CONCLUSION............................................................................................96 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................103 vii CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION This thesis is concerned with answering a question occasioned by the collision of two historiographical themes. Historians have noted South Carolina radicalism before the Civil War; more recent historians have examined what they perceive to be the collapse of Confederate nationalism during the War. However, an examination of South Carolina in Presidential Reconstruction suggests otherwise. Examining South Carolina after the Civil War there is evidence to suggest that the radical nature of the white elite in the state remained intact and a sense of separate nationalism still flourished. While the radical nature of South Carolina before the Civil War is without dispute, the supposed loss of this radical nature and the will to fight during the War is disputable. This study will involve a chronological look at the uniqueness of South Carolina from secession to May 1866, but will pay particular attention to Presidential and early Radical Reconstruction. Central to this study is answering questions pertaining to the white elites of the state. If white South Carolinians believed that they were wrong, then why did they put the same men into political power who voted them out of the Union? If South Carolina lost the will to fight, then why did the white residents resist every measure proposed during Presidential Reconstruction that would have brought them back into the Union if they had complied? This thesis will focus on these questions by examining newspapers, memoirs, diaries, and other historical literature of the period. I will argue that the