University of Arkansas, Fayetteville ScholarWorks@UARK Theses and Dissertations 8-2017 Arkansas's Divided Democracy: The akM ing of the Constitution of 1874 Rodney Waymon Harris University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd Part of the Political History Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Harris, Rodney Waymon, "Arkansas's Divided Democracy: The akM ing of the Constitution of 1874" (2017). Theses and Dissertations. 2446. http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/2446 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Arkansas’s Divided Democracy: The Making of the Constitution of 1874 A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History by Rodney W. Harris Arkansas State University Bachelor of Arts in Political Science, 2009 University of Central Arkansas Master of Arts in History, 2011 August 2017 University of Arkansas This dissertation is approved for recommendation to the Graduate Council. ________________________________ Dr. Patrick Williams Dissertation Director _________________________________ _________________________________ Dr. Janine Parry Dr. Jeannie Whayne Committee Member Committee Member _________________________________ Dr. Michael Pierce Committee Member Abstract: This dissertation examines the making of Arkansas’s constitution of 1874, which drew the curtain on Reconstruction in the state and remains in force in the twenty-first century. It contributes to the scholarship of Arkansas history, Southern history, and U.S. political and constitutional history by showing that Arkansas’s Redeemers were not unified or homogeneous, but rather a fractured group who fought about how restrictive the state’s new constitution would be. In the end, it was more generous in some sections than some Democrats wished. This dissertation, thus, challenges a traditional narrative of a likeminded convention and relentlessly restrictive constitution-making. However, it also shows delegates partook of political and constitutional trends present in the North and West as well as in the South, demonstrating that Redemption was part of a larger political current rather than simply a regional political reaction to the perceived and real abuses of Reconstruction. © 2017 by Rodney W. Harris All Rights Reserved Acknowledgments: This dissertation stems from dual commitments made by my parents. The first is a commitment to education. This, in part, stems from an unusual legacy of education. In fact, I am a fourth-generation educator. My great-grandfather and my grandmother both taught school in one-room schoolhouses in rural northeast Arkansas. While neither achieved a college degree, they both obtained a significant number of college credits at a time when such education was far from the norm. Both my parents continued this tradition—both earning graduate degrees in education and spending their careers in public education. The second commitment involved the exploration of history. My dad taught high school history and English. Our family vacations revolved around long summer road trips to historical sites. If there is a plantation to visit, I have been there. These trips led to questions about Reconstruction, Redemption, and civil rights. I would like to thank the librarians and archivists who have assisted my work in untold ways. I would like to single out the staff of the Special Collections Department at Mullins Library at the University of Arkansas in Fayetteville as well as the interlibrary loan staff at Mullins who found obscure and remote items for my use. I would also like to thank the staff at the Arkansas State Archives in Little Rock for all of their assistance. I owe a special debt of gratitude to Dr. Patrick Williams who served as a mentor and advisor. He read countless drafts and offered few complaints even when he found the organization of my ideas baffling at times. Dr. Williams helped me hone my ideas and develop a clear thesis for this project. He also saved me from numerous mistakes along the way. I would also like to thank the members of my dissertation committee, Dr. Jeannie Whayne, Dr. Janine Parry, and Dr. Michael Pierce who provided guidance and encouragement along the way. I would be remiss if I did not single out Dr. Jim Gigantino who took me under his wing when I got to the University and nurtured my writing ability. He went above and beyond for someone who was not to be his PhD student. There are two professors, Dr. Lorien Foote (who is now at Texas A & M but served as my mentor and directed my master’s thesis at the University of Central Arkansas) and Dr. Wendy Castro who served as the Graduate Director at the University of Central Arkansas prior to becoming the chair of the History Department. These two were not only mentors but remain dear friends. My fellow doctoral candidate Misti Harper deserves special thanks for the many lunches where I was allowed to vent my frustrations as well as for being a constant friend through both our master’s program and our time at Arkansas. The History Department at the University of Arkansas provided me with a lectureship and office space. I was also the recipient of the Mary Hudgins Arkansas History Research Fund for the study of Arkansas History as well as numerous travel grants that allowed me to attend conferences that provided valuable feedback on my work. One of these conferences, the Saint George Tucker Society, allowed me to spend a weekend interacting with historians and to take away great insight about my work. This dissertation would not be possible without the financial support of the Diane D. Blair Center of Southern Politics and Society. Who would have thought when I read Arkansas Politics and Government as an undergrad that I would one day be the recipient of a Blair Fellowship? Special thanks goes to my wife Kristi who read as many drafts as Dr. Williams and saved me from an equal number of mistakes. She and I have known each other since the second grade and she stood by me when few people thought I would ever finish one degree, let alone three. She has supported me both financially and emotionally through this process. Most of all I want to thank her for not running away when I told her I wanted to quit work and go back to school. I dedicate this dissertation to my sons, Trae and Will. Most people thought I was crazy when I adopted two boys while working on a PhD. I would be lying if I said that it hasn’t been hard, but they have also brought me much joy and provided a reason to forge ahead with this project. Dedication This dissertation is dedicated to my wife, Kristi, and my sons Trae and Will. Table of Contents: 1. Introduction 1 2. “The ablest men who ever assembled” 11 3. Decentralization 26 4. Retrenchment 51 5. Judicial Branch 73 6. Franchise 93 7. Railroads, Immigration, and Manufacturing 111 8. Education 129 9. Conclusion 151 10. Bibliography 155 Chapter 1 Introduction On November 26, 1868, Gov. Powell Clayton addressed the Arkansas General Assembly. The state, he said, was in the grip of “civil commotion.” Opposition to the Republican-led government had grown, and he had no choice but to take action, saying, “The fearful history of the last few months, with its dark catalogue of crimes committed, will, in all probability, never be entirely disclosed.” In Ashley County, Moses Dean, a freedman, and his wife had been hanged and another freedman had been shot while hauling cotton to market. In Columbia County, white citizens had impeded the work of the appointed election registrars and tax collectors. A freedman, Aaron Hicks, had been murdered at a town barbeque. The governor claimed that Hicks had been killed for nothing more than being a union man while white leaders in Columbia County claimed that he had boasted to white men that he would take their land. In Lafayette County, multiple freedmen were killed and in Sevier, the sheriff barely escaped death in his own home. In Monroe County, a Democrat assassinated Congressman James M. Hinds and in Crittenden County, six men were killed in ten days. Clayton declared martial law to put a stop to what he saw as a rebellion.1 Conservative white opponents of the Republican regime would, in fact, not be shy about using violence to thwart Reconstruction. However, they would win a more enduring triumph over Reconstruction by mustering their vote and rewriting the state’s organic law in 1874. 1 “Governor’s Message,” Daily Arkansas Gazette (Little Rock), November 26, 1868. 1 This dissertation is about a constitutional convention that, in the literature of Arkansas history and politics, barely exists. However, its work would shape government in Arkansas in the long term. While much amended, the Constitution of 1874 has never been replaced. Yet this convention is significant not only for its impact on the state, but what it reveals about Redemption across the South and Gilded Age constitution-making more generally. This dissertation builds on the work of others who have challenged the assumption that Redemption in Arkansas, as well as the rest of the South, was solely a reaction to the perceived abuses and expansion of government during Reconstruction. Instead, what emerges is a more complex story that is not simply regional in scope but national.2 The lack of substantial scholarship on Arkansas’s constitution might, in part, be explained by a thinness of source material. For scholars who study the Reconstruction constitutional convention of 1868, the debates and proceedings were published shortly afterword.