634 The Judiciary during Reconstruction

[1869-71

legal status of the Southern States during the Reconstruction period, Chief Justice Chase committed the Court squarely to the Congressional theory of the situation. A State-so the Court held in Texas v. White, 1869 is an indestructible part of an indestructible Union. Secession does not destroy the State, but suspends its legal rights; and to restore these is the duty of Congress under the clause guaranteeing a republican form of government. Although in this case, and in White v. Hart, three years later, the Court carefully refrained from any decision as to the Reconstruction Acts themselves, these opinions substantially ratified the Republican policy. Legally as well as practically Southern Reconstruction was an accomplished fact.

In the same years the financial situation was placed on a definite basis. In the existing state of public opinion immediate retirement of the "greenbacks" was out of the question; but the Republicans in Congress passed a bill in the winter of 1869 pledging the faith of the United States to redeem its notes "at the earliest practicable period" in coin. Resumption was thus promised. Simultaneously the constitutional validity of the legal tender notes was established by the Supreme Court in a peculiar way. During Johnson's administration the Court showed in successive decisions a strongly antagonistic attitude toward the "greenbacks," culminating, early in Grant's term, in the famous case of Hepburn v. Griswold, in which Chase as Chief Justice delivered an opinion declaring unconstitutional the notes he had himself issued as Secretary of the Treasury eight years before. Almost immediately afterwards the membership of the Court was altered by resignations and the appointment of two new judges; and within a year, in the Legal Tender Cases, the Court, by a majority of one, reversed its previous decision, and re-established the constitutionality of the "greenbacks." It was loudly asserted that Grant had packed the Court; but this was true only in so far that Grant appointed strong partisan Republicans as judges-a policy perfectly inevitable in 1870. The prestige of the Court suffered with impartial persons; but the number of such persons was few at the time, and the country at large felt relieved by the decision.

The rest of the financial programme was carried out, on the whole, with success. Internal taxation was steadily reduced, until by 1872 little remained beyond a few excises. The debt, the repudiation of which was threatened by Democrats and advocated by Johnson, was placed beyond danger of payment in depreciated paper, first by an "Act to strengthen the Public Credit," vetoed by Johnson, but repassed by Congress and signed by Grant on March 18, 1869, which pledged the faith of the country to the payment of its bonds in coin; and secondly by the Refunding Act of July, 1870. By this the Secretary was empowered to refund the "five-twenties," which all became redeemable about 1870, in bonds at 5, 4, and 4 per cent., running from ten to thirty years respect

1866-71]

Protection.

Civil Service reform

635

ively, and payable, principal and interest, in coin. The Republican party was not unanimous in support of these measures; but, since the Democrats were very nearly unanimous against them, the Republican majority fairly deserves the credit for them. While the government credit was by no means placed beyond the reach of attack, it had certainly been established on a safe basis. The financial future seemed assured.

An important result of the process of financial reconstruction was the fact that the country was committed to a policy of high protection. The industries taxed during the war had been granted ample duties on imports designed to compensate for their internal taxes. When the war ended, Congress, as has been said, rapidly wiped out these internal taxes, but, owing to pressure on the part of the manufacturing interests, refrained from altering the tariff rates. Bills to reduce duties were almost uniformly unsuccessful; and in 1867, 1869, and 1870 the rates were actually raised on wool and woollens, steel rails, copper, and a few other articles. By the middle of Grant's term the war tariff, imposed mainly for revenue, had, by remaining unaltered, become a highly protective one; and the manufacturing interests of the country had come to identify their prosperity with its retention.

Finally, to complete its record, the Republican party in 1871 took steps toward a much needed reform in the Federal Civil Service. The evils of partisan appointments and removals, although attracting slight popular interest during the crisis of Reconstruction, had become so flagrant that certain members of Congress had begun a campaign for reform. Bills for a competitive examination system, introduced in each Congress by Jenckes of Rhode Island, failed of success; but in Grant's first term the desired reform was at length attained, almost by chance, being incorporated as a "rider" to an Appropriation Bill on March 3, 1871. In this way the Republican Administration took a step apparently destined to be of incalculable benefit.

These same years saw the settlement of pending foreign questions by the Administrations of Johnson and Grant, after a period in which brisk diplomatic activity, exhibited by Seward and Fish, successively Secretaries, gradually came to a standstill in the face of a strong popular disinclination for anything aggressive in foreign policy. Seward undoubtedly did his best to retrieve his popularity, damaged through his adherence to Johnson's plan of reconstruction, by an energy in treaty-making and negotiation scarcely equalled in the history of the United States. A score of commercial and extradition treaties were made with Powers large and small, the two most important being those with China and Germany in 1868; and many similar treaties were concluded under his successor. Seward's principal efforts, however, were directed toward the settlement of the serious questions pending with France and Great Britain. As regards the French intervention in Mexico, although General Grant was quite ready to use force, Seward

636

The Alabama controversy

[1865-71

wisely refrained from threats, and confined himself to a steady diplomatic pressure, confident that his end was more likely to be peacefully attained if he avoided affronting a government resting mainly on military prestige. Napoleon III acted as Seward had foreseen, and, harassed by European complications, withdrew his forces in 1867.

As regards relations with Great Britain, the situation was still more threatening. The country, while not anxious for war, cherished feelings of bitter resentment on account of the ravages committed by Confederate cruisers equipped in England, and the unsympathetic attitude of the English governing classes during the war. There were, moreover, unsettled boundary and fisheries controversies, and differences about naturalisation arising from the trial of certain Irish "Fenian" conspirators claiming American citizenship. At first Earl Russell, in 1865, absolutely denied the possibility of arbitrating on any American claims ; but a year later English opinion altered, and Lord Stanley, Russell's successor, intimated a willingness to discuss the question. Prolonged negotiations as to the extent to which the Alabama claims should be considered led eventually to the drawing up by Lord Clarendon and Reverdy Johnson, United States minister to England, of two protocols and a treaty for arbitration. One of the protocols, regarding naturalisation, was developed into the treaty of 1870; but the other results of Johnson's mission proved fruitless. The disfavour in which the Senate held Seward, together with the popular feeling that something more than a mere claims treaty was necessary, led to the rejection of the Johnson-Clarendon draft as inadequate and defective.

There followed a period of renewed negotiation between Lord Clarendon and Secretary Fish, much hampered by a speech of Sumner in the Senate, announcing that the United States would accept nothing less than a national apology, together with reparation for indirect damages suffered by the United States through England's recognition of Confederate belligerency. President Grant in his message of 1870 suggested that the United States should pay the claims, and thus assume them against Great Britain; but the necessity for any such radical action was avoided by an agreement reached through the skilful dealing of Sir John Rose and Fish in 1871. Both governments joined in appointing a High Commission, which met in Washington, and by a treaty in May, 1871, practically settled all outstanding questions. An expression of courteous regret on the part of the British Commissioners disposed of the claim for an apology; minor matters were dealt with; and three arbitrations were provided, for the fisheries, the North-western boundaries, and the Alabama claims. In the course of the following year the principal issue was laid at rest by the award of the arbitration tribunal, which, after a hearing at Geneva, dismissed the extreme American claims, but held Great Britain guilty of negligence in several cases, and assigned damages of $15,500,000. In this way the skill and persistence

1866-71]

Cuba, Panama, and Alaska

637

of the American secretaries finally disposed of the most threatening diplomatic questions arising from the war. No other achievement of the Reconstruction Administrations showed greater wisdom or ability, or was of greater benefit to the country and the world at large.

The popular feeling was, however, far less positive in foreign affairs than were the aspirations of Seward and his successors. The pressure of debt, the excitements of the Reconstruction struggle, and the absorbing interests of domestic industrial development, rendered public opinion. apathetic and peaceable. When a Cuban insurrection broke out, some sympathy was manifested in the United States for the insurgents; but Grant's Administration had no difficulty in maintaining a peaceful attitude, and in 1871 agreed to a treaty for settling all claims arising from Spanish acts against American citizens. Even when, in 1873, the Virginius, an American steamer suspected of filibustering, was seized, and fifty of its crew were shot, Grant took no belligerent steps and accepted an indemnity from Spain. The lack of popular interest in an expansive foreign policy was also shown by the failure of a movement begun by Seward towards the control of an Isthmian canal. A treaty with Nicaragua in 1868 for a right of way across the Isthmus was successful; but a treaty with Colombia for sole control of a Panama canal was rejected by the Senate in 1869; and another treaty for joint control failed similarly in 1870. The utmost accomplished was a

government survey in the latter year.

But perhaps the most striking illustration of the popular temper was the practical failure of a movement toward territorial expansion begun by Seward and continued by Grant, but repudiated by the country. Russia having offered in 1867 to sell Alaska, Seward instantly agreed, made a treaty for the purchase, sent it to the Senate, and through Sumner's influence secured its ratification before the public was at all aware of what was taking place. So averse was the general feeling, however, that a serious effort was made in the House in 1868 to defeat the appropriation of the purchase-money; and only a feeling of friendship for Russia saved the day. At about the same time a treaty with Denmark for the annexation of the Danish West Indies, although favoured by naval authorities, met with obstinate popular opposition and was suppressed by the Senate. Seward also began and Grant took up a project to annex San Domingo by treaty or by joint resolution; but this was rejected by both the Senate and the House, partly owing to a flavour of corruption attaching to it, but mainly because of popular disapproval. Grant took the utmost interest in the affair, going so far as to establish a sort of naval protectorate over San Domingo while the treaty was pending; and his personal efforts with senators to secure ratification were such as to involve him in a savage quarrel with Sumner ; but not even his prestige nor the desire for party harmony could coerce the reluctant Senate. The failure of the San Domingo project in 1871

638

Results of Reconstruction

[1871

marked the cessation for another decade of any aggressiveness in external affairs. The country had settled all outstanding questions, and was committed to a thoroughly conservative course.

The year 1871 marks the culmination of Republican policy. The three problems which confronted the country in 1865 had been dealt with; and it now remained for time to test the permanence of the settlement. All the South was once more a part of the Federal union, wonderfully changed by an experiment in political democracy more radical than any previously attempted. The debt had been partly refunded and placed on a firm basis; the currency was pledged for redemption; the war taxes were abolished. The country, at peace with its neighbours, had settled all dangerous external questions successfully. But, in the process of attaining these results, the political conditions of society had been subjected to a terrible strain. The Union party of all loyal men, which controlled the North in 1865, had vanished; many of its leaders were dead or had retired, or had in disgust joined the Opposition; while its place and power had passed to a Republican party, led by intense partisans, rigidly controlling every governmental act on a party basis. This Republican party showed in the years 1865 to 1871 a forcefulness and a relentlessness of purpose not displayed by any other group of men in the country's history. What they wished, they did. If pledges or conditions previously announced proved inconvenient, they were broken without hesitation. Constitutional objections of the utmost weight brought against their measures were absolutely disregarded, if the end to be attained seemed necessary. Scruples, in short, were as conspicuously lacking as indomitable purpose was visibly present. The result of their policy was that they controlled the country, North and South, with an unyielding grip. It now remained to be seen whether, after the solution of the great war problems, this party domination could continue; and whether, if it should fall, its work might not fall with it.

The six years of Republican domination were followed by a somewhat longer period of reaction against the measures of political and financial reconstruction, and against the party responsible for them. To understand this a brief reference is necessary to the economic conditions of the country and their effect upon society. The two decades from 1865 to 1885 were marked in the United States, as elsewhere, by an enormous development along industrial lines, aided by invention and discovery. Railway building became at first a profitable speculation, then a mania, lines being recklessly constructed until competition developed in extravagant forms. Manufactures also were extremely profitable during and after the war, and underwent great expansion. Land crazes in connexion with new railways were frequent; and not only private but public credit was copiously lent to aid new enterprises. Add to all this