50. The Significance of the Experiment—The indiscriminate granting of universal suffrage to freedmen and foreigners was one of the most daring experiments of a too venturesome nation. In the case of the Negro its only justification was that the ballot might serve as a weapon of defence for helpless ex-slaves, and would at one stroke enfranchise those Negroes whose education and standing entitled them to a voice in the government. There can be no doubt but that the wisest provision would have been an educational and property qualification impartially enforced against ex-slaves and immigrants. In the absence of such a provision it was certainly more just to admit the untrained and ignorant than to bar out all Negroes in spite of their qualifications; more just, but also more dangerous.
Those who from time to time have discussed the results of this experiment have usually looked for their facts in the wrong place, i.e., in the South. Under the peculiar conditions still prevailing in the South no fair trial of the Negro voter could have been made. The “carpet-bag” governments of reconstruction time were in no true sense the creatures of Negro voters, nor is there to-day a Southern State where free untrammeled Negro suffrage prevails. It is then to Northern communities that one must turn to study the Negro as a voter, and the result of the experiment in Pennsylvania while not decisive is certainly instructive.
51. The History of Negro Suffrage in Pennsylvania—The laws for Pennsylvania agreed upon in England in 1682 declared as qualified electors “every inhabitant in the said province, that is or shall be a purchaser of one hundred acres of land or upwards, … and every person that hath been a servant or bondsman, and is free by his service, that shall have taken up his fifty acres of land, and cultivated twenty thereof;” and also some other taxpayers.1
These provisions were in keeping with the design of partially freeing Negroes after fourteen years service and contemplated without doubt black electors, at least in theory. It is doubtful if many Negroes voted under this provision although that is possible. In the call for the Convention of 1776 no restriction as to color was mentioned,2 and the constitution of that year gave the right of suffrage to “every freeman of the full age of twenty-one years, having resided in this State for the space of one whole year.”3 Probably some Negro electors in Pennsylvania helped choose the framers of the Constitution.
In the Convention of 1790 no restriction as to color was adopted and the suffrage article as finally decided upon read as follows:
“Article III, Section I. In elections by the citizens, every freeman of the age of twenty-one years, having resided in the State two years next before the election, and within that time paid a State or county tax, which shall have been assessed at least six months before the election, shall enjoy the rights of an elector.”4
Nothing in the printed minutes of the convention indicates any attempt in the convention to prohibit Negro suffrage, but Mr. Albert Gallatin declared in 1837: “I have a lively recollection that in some stages of the discussion the proposition pending before the convention limited the right of suffrage to ‘free white citizens,’ etc., and that the word white was struck out on my motion.”5
It was alleged afterward that in 1795 the question came before the High Court of Errors and Appeals and that its decision denied the right to Negroes. No written decision of this sort was ever found, however, and it is certain that for nearly a half century free Negroes voted in parts of Pennsylvania.6
As the Negro population increased, however, and ignorant and dangerous elements entered, and as the slavery controversy grew warmer, the feeling against Negroes increased and with it opposition to their right to vote. In July, 1837, the Supreme Court sitting at Sunbury took up the celebrated case of Hobbs et al. against Fogg. Fogg was a free Negro and taxpayer, and had been denied the right to vote by Hobbs and others, the judges and inspectors of election in Luzerne County. He brought action and was sustained in the Court of Common Pleas, but the Supreme Court under Judge Gibson reversed this judgment. The decision rendered was an evident straining of law and sense. The judge sought to refer to the decision of 1795, but could cite no written record; he explained the striking out of the word “white” in the constitutional convention as done to prevent insult to “dark colored white men,” and held that a Negro, though free, could never be a freeman.7
All doubt was finally removed by the reform constitutional convention of 1837–38. The article on suffrage as reported to the convention May 17, 1837, was practically the same as in the Constitution of 1790.8 This article was taken up June 19,1837. There was an attempt to amend the report and to restrict the suffrage to “free white male” citizens. The attempt was defended as being in consonance with the regulations of other States, and with the real facts in Pennsylvania, since “In the county of Philadelphia the colored man could not with safety appear at the polls.”9 The amendment, however, met opposition and was withdrawn. The matter arose again a few days later but was voted down by a vote of 61 to 49.10
The friends of exclusion now began systematic efforts to stir up public opinion. No less than forty-five petitions against Negro suffrage were handed in, especially from Bucks County, where a Negro had once nearly succeeded in being elected to the legislature. Many petitions too in favor of retaining the old provisions came in, but it was charged that the convention would not print petitions in favor of Negro suffrage, and some members did not wish even to receive petitions from Negroes.11
The discussion of the Third Article recurred January 17,1838, and a long argument ensued. Finally the word “white” was inserted in the qualifications of voters by a vote of 77 to 45. A protracted struggle took place to soften this regulation in various ways, but all efforts failed and the final draft, which was eventually adopted by popular vote, had the following provisions:12
“Article III, Section I. In elections by the citizens, every white freeman of the age of twenty-one years, having resided in this State one year, and in the electoral district where he offers to vote ten days immediately preceding such election, and within two years paid a State or county tax, which shall have been assessed at least ten days before the election, shall enjoy the rights of an elector.”13 This disfranchisement lasted thirty-two years, until the passage of the Fifteenth Amendment. The Constitution of 1874 formally adopted this change.14 Since 1870 the experiment of untrammeled Negro suffrage has been made throughout the State.
52. City Politics—About 5,500 Negroes were eligible to vote in the city of Philadelphia, in 1870. The question first arises, Into what sort of a political atmosphere were they introduced, and what training did they receive for their new responsibilities?
Few large cities have such a disreputable record for misgovernment as Philadelphia. In the period before the war the city was ruled by the Democratic party, which retained its power by the manipulation of a mass of ignorant and turbulent foreign voters, chiefly Irish. Riots, disorder, and crime were the rule in the city proper and especially in the surrounding districts. About the time of the breaking out of the war, the city was consolidated and made coterminous with the county. The social upheaval after the Civil War gave the political power to the Republicans and a new era of misrule commenced. Open disorder and crime were repressed, but in its place came the rule of the boss, with its quiet manipulation and calculating embezzlement of public funds. To-day the government of both city and State is unparalleled in the history of republican government for brazen dishonesty and bare-faced defiance of public opinion. The supporters of this government have been, by a vast majority, white men and native Americans; the Negro vote has never exceeded 4 per cent of the total registration.
Manifestly such a political atmosphere was the worst possible for the new untutored voter. Starting himself without political ideals, he was put under the tutelage of unscrupulous and dishonest men whose ideal of government was to prostitute it to their own private ends. As the Irishman had been the tool of the Democrats, so the Negro became the tool of the Republicans. It was natural that the freedman should vote for the party that emancipated him, and perhaps, too, it was natural that a party with so sure a following, should use it unscrupulously. The result to be expected from such a situation was that the Negro should learn from his surroundings a low ideal of political morality and no conception of the real end of party loyalty. At the same time we ought to expect individual exceptions to this general level, and some evidences of growth.
53. Some Bad Results of Negro Suffrage—The experiment of Negro suffrage in Philadelphia has developed three classes of Negro voters: a large majority of voters who vote blindly at the dictates of the party and, while not open to direct bribery, accept the indirect emoluments of office or influence in return for party loyalty; a considerable group, centering in the slum districts, which casts a corrupt purchasable vote for the highest bidder; lastly, a very small group of independent voters who seek to use their vote to better present conditions of municipal life.
The political morality of the first group of voters, that is to say, of the great mass of Negro voters, corresponds roughly to that of the mass of white voters, but with this difference: the ignorance of the Negro in matters of government is greater and his devotion to party blinder and more unreasoning. Add to this the mass of recent immigrants from the South, with the political training of reconstruction and post-bellum days, and one can easily see how poorly trained this body of electors has been.
Under such circumstances it is but natural that political morality and knowledge should be even slower in spreading among Negroes than wealth and general intelligence. One consequently finds among those of considerable intelligence and of upright lives such curious misapprehension of political duties as is illustrated by the address of the Afro-American League to the mayor of the city, February 8, 1897:
“MR. MAYOR:—We desire first and foremost, to tender you our profound thanks for the honor of this cordial reception. We regard it, sir, as proof of the recognition on your part of that just and most admirable custom of our country’s government, which permits the subjects, however humble may be their condition in life, to see their ruler as well as feel the workings of his power.
“We are here to state to your excellency that the colored citizens of Philadelphia are penetrated with feelings of inexpressible grief at the manner in which they have thus far been overlooked and ignored by the Republican party in this city, in giving out work and otherwise distributing the enormous patronage in the gift of the party. We are therefore here, sir, to earnestly beseech of you as a faithful Republican and our worthy chief executive, to use your potent influence as well as the good offices of your municipal government, if not inconsistent with the public weal, to procure for the colored people of this city a share at least, of the public work and the recognition which they now ask for and feel to be justly due to them, no less as citizens and taxpayers, than on a basis of their voting strength of something over 14,000 in the Republican party here in Philadelphia.
“As the chosen organ of this body of men I am actuated by a due sense of their earnestness of purpose in this matter and I regret to be inadequate to the task of convincing you, Mr. Mayor, of the deep interest which is being universally manifested by the colored element in Philadelphia in this somewhat important question. The colored people neither ask for nor expect extremes; we only claim that our loyal fidelity to the Republican party should count, at some time, for some benefits to at least a reasonable number of the colored race when our friends are installed into place and power; and, cherishing as we do, sir, the most implicit confidence in your justice as the chief executive of this great city, we firmly believe that this most unfair treatment of which our people now complain, would not fail, when brought thus to your attention, in moving you in our humble behalf. We, therefore, have here to present for your candid consideration a paper containing the names of some worthy and reliable men of our race and they are respectfully urged for appointment as indicated on the face of that paper, and out of a desire, Mr. Mayor, to facilitate your efforts should you take favorable action upon this matter, these men, as we will state, have been selected as near as possible from every section of the city, as well as upon the proof of their fitness for the places named.”
The organization which here speaks is not large or nearly as representative as it claims to be; it is simply a small faction of “outs” who are striving to get “in.” The significant thing about the address is the fact that a considerable number of fairly respectable and ordinarily intelligent citizens should think this a perfectly legitimate and laudable demand. This represents the political morality of the great mass of ordinary Negro voters. And what more does it argue than that they have learned their lesson well and recited it bluntly but honestly? What more do the majority of American politicians and voters to-day say in action if not in word than: “Here is my vote, now where is my pay in office or favor or influence?” What thousands are acting, this delegation had the charming simplicity to say plainly and then to print.
Moreover one circumstance makes this attitude of mind more dangerous among Negroes than among whites; Negroes as a class are poor and as laborers are restricted to few and unremunerative occupations; consequently the bribe of office is to them a far larger and alluring temptation than to the mass of whites. In other words here are a people more ignorant than their fellows, with stronger tendencies to dishonesty and crime, who are offered a far larger bribe than ordinary men to enter politics for personal gain. The result is obvious: “Of course I’m in politics,” said a Negro city watchman, “it’s the only way a colored man can get a position where he can earn a decent living.” He was a fireman by trade, but Philadelphia engineers object to working with “Niggers.”
If this is the result in the case of an honest man, how great is the temptation to the vicious and lazy. This brings us to the second class of voters—the corrupt class, which sells its votes more or less openly.
The able-bodied, well-dressed loafers and criminals who infest the sidewalks of parts of the Fifth, Seventh and other wards are supported partly by crime and gambling, partly by the prostitution of their female paramours, but mainly from the vast corruption fund gathered from office-holders and others, and distributed according to the will of the party Boss. The Public Ledger said in 1896:
“It is estimated that the Republican City Committee realized nearly if not all of $100,000 from the 1½ per cent assessment levied upon municipal officeholders for this campaign. Of this sum $40,000 has been paid for the eighty thousand tax receipts to qualify Republican voters. This leaves $60,000 at the disposal of David Martin, the Combine leader.”15
How is this corruption fund used? Without doubt a large part of it is spent in the purchase of votes. It is of course difficult to estimate the directly purchasable vote among the whites or among the Negroes. Once in a while when “thieves fall out” some idea of the bribery may be obtained; for instance in a hearing relative to a Third Ward election:
William Reed, of Catharine street, below Thirteenth, was first on the stand. He was watcher in the Fifteenth Division on election day.
“Did you make up any election papers for voters?” asked Mr. Ingham.
“I marked up about seventy or eighty ballots; I got $20 off of Roberts’ brother, and used $100 altogether, paying the rest out of my own pocket.”
“How did you spend the money?”
“Oh, well, there were some few objectionable characters there to make trouble. We’d give ’em a few dollars to go away and attend to their business.” Then he addressed Mr. Ingham directly, “You know how it works.”
“I’d give ’em a dollar to buy a cigar. And if they didn’t want to pay $1 for a cigar, why, they could put it in the contribution box at church.”
“Was this election conducted in the usual way?” inquired Mr. Sterr.
“Oh, yes, the way they’re conducted in the Third Ward—with vote buying, and all the rest of it.”
“Did the other side have any money to spend?”
“Saunders had $16 to the division.”
“What did your side have?”
“Oh, we had about $60; there was money to burn. But our money went to three people. The other fellows saved theirs. I spent mine—like a sucker.”
James Brown, a McKinley-Citizen worker, began his testimony indignantly.
“Election? Why Reed and Morrow, the judges of the election, run the whole shootin’ match,” he declared. “It was all a farce. I brought voters up; and Reed would take ’em away from me. When we challenged anybody, Reed and the others would have vouchers ready.”
“Did they use money?”
“There was a good deal of money through the division. We wasn’t even allowed to mark ballots for our own people who asked for help. The judge would ask ’em if they could read and write. When they said’yes,’ he’d tell’em they were able to mark their own ballot. There were even some people who wanted to mark their own ballots. Reed would simply grab ’em and mark their ballots, whether they liked it or not.”
Lavinia Brown, colored, of the rear of 1306 Kater street, said that Mr. Bradford was judge on election day, of the Sixteenth Division, and that on the morning of the election she cooked his breakfast. She said that I. Newton Roberts came to the house, and in her presence gave Bradford a roll of notes, at the same time throwing her $2, but she did not know for what purpose he gave it.
George W. Green, colored, of 1224 Catharine street, said he was a watcher at the polls of the Sixteenth Division. He told of fraud and how the voters were treated.
“Were you offered any money?”
“Yes, sir. Lincoln Roberts came over to me and shoved $50 at me, but I turned him down and would not take it, because I didn’t belong to that crowd.” Continuing, he said: “Seven or eight men were challenged, but it did not amount to anything, because Lincoln Roberts would tell the police to eject them. He also vouched for men who did not live in the ward. This condition of affairs continued all day.”
Several other witnesses followed, whose testimony was similar to Green’s, and who declared that money was distributed freely by the Roberts faction to buy over voters. They said that challenges were disregarded, and that the election was a farce. Voters were kept out, and when it was known that any of Saunders’ adherents were coming a rush would be made, making it impossible for that side to enter the booth.
Philip Brown, a McKinley-Citizen watcher, said that the election was a fraud. He saw Mr. Roberts with a pile of money, going around shouting, “That’s the stuff that wins!” When asked what the judge was doing all this time he said:
“Why, the judge belonged to Mr. Roberts, who had full control of the polling place all day.”
William Hare, of 1346 Kater street, proved an interesting witness. His story is as follows:
“Mr. Lincoln Roberts brought my tax receipt and told me to come around to the club. I went and was given a bundle of tax receipts, marked for other men, and told to deliver them. The next day being election day I made it a point to watch, and saw that every man to whom I gave a receipt came to the polls and voted for Mr. Roberts. I saw Mr. Newton Roberts mark the ballots over six times myself.”
Many of the men mentioned here are white, and this happened in a ward where there are more white than Negro voters, but the same open bribery goes on at every election in the slum districts of the Fourth, Fifth, Seventh and Eighth Wards, where a large Negro vote is cast. In a meeting of Negroes held in 1896 one politician calmly announced that “through money from my white friends I control the colored vote in my precinct.” Another man arose and denounced the speaker pretty plainly as a trickster although his allegation was not denied. This brought on general discussion in which there were uncontradicted statements that in certain sections votes were bought for “fifty cents and a drink of whisky” and men “driven in droves to the polls.” There was some exaggeration here and yet without doubt many Negroes sell their votes directly for a money consideration. This sort of thing is confined to the lowest classes, but there it is widespread. Such bribery, however, is the least harmful kind because it is so direct and shameless that only men of no character would accept it.
Next to this direct purchase of votes, one of the chief and most pernicious forms of bribery among the lowest classes is through the establishment of political clubs, which abound in the Fourth, Fifth, Seventh and Eighth Wards, and are not uncommon elsewhere. A political club is a band of eight or twelve men who rent a club house with money furnished them by the boss, and support themselves partially in the same way. The club is often named after some politician—one of the most notorious gambling hells of the Seventh Ward is named after a United States Senator—and the business of the club is to see that its precinct is carried for the proper candidate, to get “jobs” for some of its “boys,” to keep others from arrest and to secure bail and discharge for those arrested. Such clubs become the centre of gambling, drunkenness, prostitution and crime. Every night there are no less than fifteen of these clubs in the Seventh Ward where open gambling goes on, to which almost any one can gain admittance if properly introduced; nearly every day some redhanded criminal finds refuge here from the law. Prostitutes are in easy reach of these places and sometimes enter them. Liquor is furnished to “members” at all times and the restrictions on membership are slight. The leader of each club is boss of his district; he knows the people, knows the ward boss, knows the police; so long as the loafers and gamblers under him do not arouse the public too much he sees that they are not molested. If they are arrested it does not mean much save in grave cases. Men openly boast on the streets that they can get bail for any amount. And certainly they appear to have powerful friends at the Public Buildings. There is of course a difference in the various clubs; some are of higher class than others and receive offices as bribes; others are openly devoted to gambling and receive protection as a bribe; one of the most notorious gambling houses of the Seventh Ward was recently raided, and although every school boy knows the character of the proprietor he was released for “lack of evidence.” Still other clubs are simply winter quarters for thieves, loafers and criminals well known to the police. There are of course one or two clubs, mainly social and only partially political, to which the foregoing statements do not apply—as for instance the Citizens’ Club on Broad street, which has the best Negroes of the city in its membership, allows no gambling and pays its own expenses. This club, however, stands almost alone and the other twelve or fifteen political clubs of the Seventh Ward represent a form of political corruption which is a disgrace to a civilized city. In the Fourth, Fifth and Eighth Wards there are ten or twelve more clubs, and probably in the whole city the Negroes have forty such places with a possible membership of five or six hundred. The influence of these clubs on the young immigrants, on growing boys, on the surrounding working people is most deplorable. At the polls they carry the day with high-handed and often riotous proceedings, voting “repeaters” and “colonists” often with impunity.
Among the great mass of Negro voters, whose votes cannot be directly purchased, a less direct but, in the long run, more demoralizing bribery is common. It is the same sort of bribery as that which is to-day corrupting the white voters of the land, viz:
Men accept from political organizations, contributions to charitable and other objects which they would not think of accepting for themselves. Others less scrupulous get contributions or favors for enterprises in which they are directly interested. Fairs, societies, clubs and even churches have profited by this sort of political corruption, and the custom is by no means confined to Negroes.
A better known method of political bribery among the mass of Negroes is through apportionment of the public work or appointment to public office. The work open to Negroes throughout the city is greatly restricted as has been pointed out. One class of well-paid positions, the city civil service, was once closed to them, and only one road was open to them to secure these positions and that was unquestioning obedience to the “machine.” The emoluments of office are a temptation to most men, but how much greater they are for Negroes can only be realized on reflection: Here is a well-educated young man, who despite all efforts can get no work above that of porter at $6 or $8 a week. If he goes into “politics,” blindly votes for the candidate of the party boss, and by hard, steady and astute work persuades most of the colored voters in his precinct to do the same, he has the chance of being rewarded by a city clerkship, the social prestige of being in a position above menial labor, and an income of $60 or $75 a month. Such is the character of the grasp which the “machine” has on even intelligent Negro voters.
How far this sort of bribery goes is illustrated by the fact that 170 city employes are from the Fifth Ward and probably forty of these are Negroes. The three Negro members of the machine in this ward are all office-holders. About one-fourth of the fifty-two members of the Seventh Ward machine are Negroes, and one-half of these are office-holders. The Negro’s record as an office-seeker is, it is needless to say, far surpassed by his white brother and it is only in the last two decades that Negroes have appeared as members of councils and clerks.16
In spite of the methods employed to secure these offices it cannot as yet justly be charged that many of the Negro office-holders are unfitted for their duty. There is always the possibility however that incompetent Negro officers may increase in number; and there can be no doubt but that corrupt and dishonest white politicians have been kept in power by the influence thus obtained to sway the Negro vote of the Seventh and Eighth and other wards. The problem of the Negro voter then is one of the many problems that baffle all efforts at political reform in Philadelphia: the small corrupt vote of the slums which disgraces republican government; the large vote of the masses which mistaken political ideals, blind party loyalty and economic stress now holds imprisoned and shackled to the service of dishonest political leaders.
54. Some Good Results of Negro Suffrage—It is wrong to suppose that all the results of this hazardous experiment in widening the franchise have been evil. First the ballot has without doubt been a means of protection in the hands of a people peculiarly liable to oppression. Its first bestowal gained Negroes admittance to street-cars after a struggle of a quarter century; and frequently since private and public oppression has been lightened by the knowledge of the power of the black vote. This fact has greatly increased the civic patriotism of the Negro, made him strive more eagerly to adapt himself to the spirit of the city life, and has kept him from becoming a socially dangerous class.
At the same time the Negro has never sought to use his ballot to menace civilization or even the established principles of this government. This fact has been noticed by many students but it deserves emphasis. Instead of being radical lightheaded followers of every new political panacea, the freedmen of Philadelphia and of the nation have always formed the most conservative element in our political life and have steadfastly opposed the schemes of inflationists, socialists and dreamers. Part of this conservatism may to be sure be the inertia of ignorance, but even such inertia must anchor to some well-defined notions as to what the present situation is; and no element of our political life seems better to comprehend the main lines of our social organization than the Negro. In Philadelphia he has usually been allied with the better elements although too often that “better” was far from the best. And never has the Negro been to any extent the ally of the worst elements.
In spite of the fact that unworthy officials could easily get into office by the political methods pursued by the Negroes, the average of those who have obtained office has been good. Of the three colored councilmen one has received the endorsement of the Municipal League, while the others seem to be up to the average of the councilmen. One Negro has been clerk in the tax office for twenty years or more and has an enviable record. The colored policemen as a class are declared by their superiors to be capable, neat and efficient. There are some cases of inefficiency—one clerk who used to be drunk most of his time, another who devotes his time to work outside his office, and many cases of inefficient watchmen and laborers. The average of efficiency among colored officeholders however is good and much higher than one might naturally expect.
Finally, the training in citizenship which the exercise of the right of suffrage entails has not been lost on the Philadelphia Negro. Any worthy cause of municipal reform can secure a respectable Negro vote in the city, showing that there is the germ of an intelligent independent vote which rises above even the blandishments of decent remunerative employment. This class is small but seems to be growing.
55. The Paradox of Reform—The growth of a higher political morality among Negroes is to-day hindered by their paradoxical position. Suppose the Municipal League or the Woman’s School-board movement, or some other reform is brought before the better class of Negroes to-day; they will nearly all agree that city politics are notoriously corrupt, that honest women should replace ward heelers on school-boards, and the like. But can they vote for such movements? Most of them will say No; for to do so will throw many worthy Negroes out of employment: these very reformers who want votes for specific reforms, will not themselves work beside Negroes, or admit them to positions in their stores or offices, or lend them friendly aid in trouble. Moreover Negroes are proud of their councilmen and policemen. What if some of these positions of honor and respectability have been gained by shady “politics”—shall they be nicer in these matters than the mass of the whites? Shall they surrender these tangible evidences of the rise of their race to forward the good-hearted but hardly imperative demands of a crowd of women? Especially, too, of women who did not apparently know there were any Negroes on earth until they wanted their votes? Such logic may be faulty, but it is convincing to the mass of Negro voters. And cause after cause may gain their respectful attention and even applause, but when election-day comes, the “machine” gets their votes.
Thus the growth of broader political sentiment is hindered and will be until some change comes. When industrial exclusion is so broken down that no class will be unduly tempted by the bribe of office; when the apostles of civil reform compete within the ward Boss in friendliness and kindly consideration for the unfortunate; when the league between gambling and crime and the city authorities is less close, then we can expect the more rapid development of civic virtue in the Negro and indeed in the whole city. As it is to-day the experiment of Negro suffrage with all its glaring shortcomings cannot justly be called a failure, but rather in view of all circumstances a partial success. Whatever it lacks can justly be charged to those Philadelphians who for thirty years have surrendered their right of political leadership to thieves and tricksters, and allowed such teachers to instruct this untutored race in whose hand lay an unfamiliar instrument of civilization.