#otd in 1871, Pres. US Grant suspended the writ of habeas corpus in 9 South Carolina counties to break up the Ku Klux Klan.

The Klan's "unlawful combinations and conspiracies," Grant declared, amounted to "rebellion against...the United States."

presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/proc…
Suspending the writ - an act authorized by the April 1871 Ku Klux Act - would allow the mass arrest and detention of Klansmen.

5 days earlier, Grant had ordered terrorists to turn in their weapons and disguises and "retire peaceably to their homes."

US Attorney General Amos Akerman traveled to SC to investigate.

Klansmen had committed thousands of acts of criminal violence over the last year, he reported. Most white residents were in active cooperation with Klan, or at least offered it their "sympathy and countenance."
The presence of federal troops had led to "some abatement" in Klan terrorism, Akerman wrote.

"But the organizations and discipline are industriously kept up." If the US government did not uproot the Klan, "no freedman will enjoy essential liberty."

msstate.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collec…
100s of arrests followed, carried out by US troops & marshals. Some Klansmen surrendered. Others fled to Texas, Canada, and elsewhere.

US officials now faced a challenge that will sound familiar in 2021:

What to do with a volume of cases that would overwhelm federal courts?
US grand juries returned over 1300 Klan indictments in S. Carolina.

By Jan. 1873, federal courts tried 35 cases and accepted guilty pleas in 71 others. Almost 1200 still waited.

Prosecutors could try only "cases...of the worst class, in which one or more murders are charged."
Oh, and this part may sound familiar too:

Politicians and press sympathetic to the Klan expressed outrage over the treatment of convicted terrorists - and little concern for the Klan's victims.

Ultimately, most of the remaining indictments against Klansmen were dropped.

So we're left with a question that—again!—resonates after Jan. 6:

Was this use of federal law enforcement against "insurgents engaged in...unlawful combinations and conspiracies" a failure or success?
Securing only a few dozen convictions certainly looks like a failure.

But the arrest and detention of 100s of Klansmen—and flight of many others—temporarily suppressed terrorism in South Carolina, and the 1872 election passed off in relative peace. A success.
That success depended on suspending the writ of habeas corpus.

But when Grant's authority to do so expired in mid-1872, Congress refused to renew it.

The result was to weaken his power to respond to renewed terrorism—in La. in 1873, in Ala. in 1874. The list when went on.
The ultimate failure, in other words, was not so much of the courts as of the political branches.

Which is the lesson for today:

Don't try to treat an insurrection—what Grant called a "rebellion"—as simply a law enforcement problem, and leave the courts to sort it out. /fin

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Stephen West

Stephen West Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Stephen_A_West

7 Jun
Joe Manchin in his op-ed today said he couldn't vote for a bill that he couldn't explain to the voters back home.

The good news, Joe, is that it isn't that hard.

Let me help, drawing a little inspiration from the history of Civil War & Reconstruction.

wvgazettemail.com/opinion/op_ed_…
I support pro-democracy measures, Joe Manchin might say—protecting voting rights, #DCStatehood, filibuster reform, &c—because:

1. they're just;

2. they're now made "partisan" by an assault on democracy by the leaders of the other party;

3. that assault hurts my constituents.
What's this got to do with Civil War & Reconstruction?

Before the war, some white Northerners forged an alliance with African Americans, opposing slavery and supporting equal rights on principle—think, abolitionists and Radical Republicans, swayed by argument #1. But ...
Read 10 tweets
27 May
Swap the party labels, and this headline/description could have run in 1890-1, when Congress almost passed the Lodge Election Bill.

Designed to protect black voters in the South, it narrowly passed the US House but stalled in the Senate.

theatlantic.com/politics/archi…
Some Republicans had other priorities and feared electoral fallout.

Senate Democrats filibustered. Key GOP Senators defected, sealing defeat.

A wave of constitutional disfranchisement followed in the South. American democracy didn't recover for decades.

nytimes.com/2021/03/05/opi…
To be clear on a few things:

1. No, the current crop of voter suppression laws don’t threaten the kind of wholesale disfranchisement that Black Americans suffered at peak Jim Crow.

But they’re enough to swing key states, and success likely begets more attempts.
Read 7 tweets
21 Mar
"It's not a local issue anymore" - and in fact, it never was.

With a Congressional hearing scheduled Monday on #DCStatehood, let's trace the roots of opposition to democracy for DC—roots in the racist, late 19th century backlash against Reconstruction.

washingtonpost.com/politics/dc-st…
Elected local government existed in DC before the Civil War, but Black men were denied the vote.

Congress abolished slavery in DC in 1862, and in 1867 banned racial restrictions on voting.

Biracial democracy flourished briefly—tho not without opposition.
Less than a decade later, Congress eliminated local elected government in DC, part of a national retreat from Reconstruction.

On that brief flourishing and later retreat, I highly recommend @katemasur’s An Example for All the Land.

uncpress.org/book/978080787…
Read 9 tweets
9 Nov 20
Lincoln is getting quoted a lot, but selectively.

Everyone remembers "with malice towards none; with charity for all" from the 2d Inaugural.

Keep reading. Lincoln called as well for a "just, and a lasting peace."
Lincoln had a genius for using the language of conciliation even as he refused to compromise.

He had done it 4 years earlier too.

In the 1st Inaugural, he appealed to the "mystic chords of memory" that united Americans—even as refused to compromise on the extension of slavery.
And so, as Lincoln said in the 2d inaugural, "the war came."

That speech frustrated those who hoped he would lay out a vision of Reconstruction.

What would a "just…and lasting peace" entail?

Lincoln gave a hint 5 weeks later, in what would become his last public address.
Read 6 tweets
19 Sep 19
1956 Republican party platform:

"We favor self-government, national suffrage and representation in the Congress of the United States for residents of the District of Columbia."
1960 Republican party platform:

"Republicans will continue to work for Congressional representation and self-government for the District of Columbia and also support the constitutional amendment granting suffrage in national elections."
1964 Republican party platform on the District of Columbia:

[crickets]
Read 7 tweets
27 Oct 18
1. In the Reconstruction South, Democratic leaders publicly denied responsibility for the terrorism of the Ku Klux Klan and other groups.

They blamed violence on "poor whites" and said it had no political significance.

Those politicians were lying.
2. Their responsibility for terrorist violence took 2 forms.

One was direct participation. Democratic leaders personally organized and committed violence.

Before he was elected to the US Senate, M. C. Butler took part in the 1876 Hamburg massacre.

3. Historians generally view Reconstruction-era terrorism as decentralized, sharing common goals but lacking much coordination.

This great article from @bdproctor explores coded, interstate communication bwn 2 brothers - both Klansmen & ardent Democrats.

Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(