The Fiery Trial_ Abraham Lincoln and American Slavery - Eric Foner [180]
The Louisiana constitutional convention assembled in April 1864. It not only abolished slavery immediately but also tried to reconstruct the politics and society of the state. The constitution made New Orleans the capital and sharply increased its representation in the legislature at the expense of plantation counties. It included forward-looking provisions such as a minimum wage on public works, a system of free public education, and a progressive income tax. “We have changed all the elements of society,” Banks wrote. “Rhode Island or Massachusetts is as likely to become a slave state, as Louisiana is to reestablish the institution.” But when it came to extending rights to blacks, resistance to change dominated. “Prejudice against the colored people is exhibited continually,” reported a correspondent of Chase, “prejudice bitter and vulgar.” Some delegates who favored abolition also called for the expulsion of the entire black population from the state, even though black soldiers were guarding the convention hall. The convention petitioned Congress to compensate loyal owners for their loss and ignored Lincoln’s “suggestion” regarding partial black suffrage. Only after intense lobbying by Governor Hahn, who showed Lincoln’s letter to key delegates, did the delegates authorize the legislature to extend the right to vote in the future and to give black children access to a separate system of public schools.73
To Lincoln, the key provision was abolition. He urged the swift ratification of the new constitution and insisted that all federal appointees in Louisiana support it. Early in September, voters in and around New Orleans approved it and elected a legislature and members of Congress. Lincoln hailed the outcome and urged General Stephen A. Hurlbut, who had replaced Banks, to cooperate with the new government. The constitution, Lincoln observed, was “better for the poor black man than we have in Illinois.” But Radical Unionists and free blacks denounced the new regime and called on Congress to repudiate it, setting the stage for a battle in Washington over Reconstruction.74
IV
A GROWING CONTROVERSY over the army’s policies toward black laborers further complicated discussions of Reconstruction. Shortly after Lincoln decreed emancipation, the New York Times observed that “if the Proclamation makes the slaves actually free, there will come the further duty of making them work.” “This,” it added, “opens a vast and most difficult subject.”75
All Republicans agreed that free labor must replace slave, a conviction reinforced by the war. But many doubted that the freedpeople, having been reduced to a state of “infantile weakness and inexperience” by slavery, could be expected to compete immediately as free laborers. Such observers envisioned a prolonged period in which blacks, under federal oversight, would learn the rules and discipline of the market economy. Others believed that federal assistance created dependence; blacks, they insisted, had the same capacities and motives as white persons and would work efficiently if treated fairly and allowed to rise in the social scale. “What the freedman wants,” declared the Philadelphia Inquirer, “is education, instruction, and an opportunity