ALABAMA. 



15 



ALABAMA. At the close of the previous 

 year, on December 28th, Major-General John 

 Pope having been relieved by President John- 

 son from the command of the Third Military 

 District, comprising the States of Alabama, 

 Georgia, and Florida, Major-General Meade 

 was assigned to the same, and a change of the. 

 district commander of Alabama soon followed, 

 by assigning Brigadier-General Julius Hayden 

 to the position held by Major-General Wag- 

 ner Swayne. 



Early in the month of January, Major E. W. 

 Crittenden, post commandant at Montgomery, 

 issued a general order, forbidding military or- 

 ganizations of any character, except troops of 

 the United States. He further directed that 

 all such organizations, in existence, should be 

 immediately disbanded ; and that all mayors, 

 sheriffs, or other civil authorities, should re- 

 porb at once every violation of this order. 



One of the earliest acts of General Meade 

 was to reinstate the clerk of the District 

 Court, Charles R. Hubbard, who had been re- 

 moved by General Swayne. 



The relations existing at this time between 

 the civil and military authorities of the dis- 

 trict are explained in an order issued by Gen- 

 eral Meade, on January 15th, which was as 

 follows : 



General Orders, No. 10. 

 HEADQUARTERS THIRD MILITARY DISTRICT, ) 

 ATLANTA, GA., January 15, 1868. ) 



The frequency of reported outrages, and the ac- 

 companying expression of opinion of subordinate 

 officers, that no justice is to oe expected from the 

 civil authorities, require notice and action on the 

 part of the major-general commanding. 



1. The commanding general desires it to be under- 

 stood that the trial and punishment of criminals is 

 to be left to th'e civil authorities, so long as the said 

 authorities are energetic, active, and do justice to the 

 rights of person and property without distinction of 

 race or color. Whenever the major-general com- 

 manding is satisfied, from evidence produced, that 

 the civil authorities fail to do their duty, then prompt 

 action will be taken by him, both for the punish- 

 ment of criminals, and the removal from office of der- 

 elict civil officers. 



2. The military are to cooperate with, and aid the 

 civil authorities in the detection, capture : and custody 

 of criminals, and they are further authorized, in cases 

 where they have reason to believe that the civil au- 

 thorities are not disposed to do their duty, to retain 

 criminals in custody until the fact becomes evident, 

 whether the civil authorities will or will not perform 

 their duty immediately reporting their action on all 

 such cases to these headquarters. 



3. Writs of habeas corpus, issued against crimi- 

 nals in the custody of the military, will be obeyed so 

 far as to produce the body of the prisoner in court, 

 and the making of a respectful return, setting forth 

 the grounds and authority by which the prisoner is 

 held. Should the court fail to respect the authority 

 under which the prisoner was held, the custody of 

 the criminal will not be transferred to the court with- 

 out a reference to these headquarters. 



4. The major-general desires to impress on the 

 officers under his command the exercise of a sound 

 discretion and good judgment. It is his determina- 

 tion to afford the civil authorities every opportunity to 

 discharge their duties untrammelled by any action on 

 the part of the military, but such as they, the civil 

 authorities, may invite and desire. He makes this 

 public notice to the civil authorities that they may be 



governed thereby assuring them that they shall be 

 respected in the exercise of their powers so long as 

 impartial justice is meted out to all ; but the com- 

 manding general is determined to exercise, to the 

 fullest extent, the plenary powers with which he is 

 intrusted, to secure protection of person and property 

 in the district he commands. 



By command of Major-General MEADE. 

 E. C. DRUM, Assistant Adjutant-General. 



There was much excitement, and strong 

 partisan feeling, throughput the State, relative 

 to the adoption or rejection of the new consti- 

 tution proposed by the convention, held in 

 1867, under the Reconstruction Act of Con- 

 gress. Meetings were held and addresses de- 

 livered, for and against it. The Conservative 

 State committee called upon the people to 

 form clubs, and thus concentrate their op- 

 position to the measure. A conference, in 

 opposition to the constitution, was held at 

 Montgomery, and attended by influential 

 delegates from all parts of the State. It is- 

 sued an address to the people, setting forth 

 the reasons for their opposition. They said 

 the Constitution was framed by delegates 

 representing merely the blacks and non-resi- 

 dents, and not the white inhabitants ; nearly 

 forty thousand of whom were disfranchised 

 by the article on franchise, passed by the 

 convention that formed the instrument, in 

 order to secure its success. They further de- 

 clared that so sweeping was the disfranchise- 

 ment, that its effect would be to place the 

 State government in the hands of the blacks 

 and their abettors. In 'addition, every person 

 wishing to vote was required to take a test- 

 oath. In the opinion of the conference, this 

 oath or affirmation, of itself, was rigid enough 

 to disfranchise several thousands of conscien- 

 tious voters. The address further stated as 

 follows : 



By the law of Congress as it now stands, a majori- 

 ty of the registered voters of the State must vote' in 

 the election, or the constitution is not adopted. 

 There are about 167,000 registered voters in the 

 State, so that it will require 84,000 votes to adopt 

 the constitution. 



We could not, under the unfair influences arrayed 

 against us, reasonably hope to secure more than 

 84,000 votes against the constitution, and unless we 

 do we would not accomplish more by voting than we 

 would by refusing to vote. Then, the most certain 

 way of defeating the constitution, as the law now 

 stands, is to refrain from voting. 



But, in the event the law is changed by Congress, 

 and it is enacted that the majority of thejotes cast 

 shall decide upon the adoption or rejection of the 

 constitution, the Congress will then have been forced 

 to a departure from the law which it has ordained, 

 and the rule which it has presented for itself and the 

 people of the State, in determining whether this con- 

 stitution should be the constitution of Alabama, and 

 will be compelled to exhibit to the world the fact 

 that the constitution they impose is not the constitu- 

 tion of the people of Alabama, but the constitution 

 of a minority of the whole people, and that, a negro 

 minority. 



Could the constitution be defeated by voting 

 against it under the assumed change in the law of 

 Congress, with the unpropitious and hostile influ- 

 ences opposed to us ? We are constrained to the opin- 

 ion that it could be : 



1. Because the negroes, as a body, will vote for its 



