and all white persons so assembling with freedmen
The extent that the law makers are going to to ensure that white and blacks continue to be segregated is really astounding. They know that if they let the people intermingle that they will see that they are really not so different after all.
Be it further enacted, that every civil officer shall, and every person may, arrest and carry back to his or her legal employer any freedman, free Negro, or mulatto who shall have quit the service of his or her employer before the expiration of his or her term of service without good cause, and said officer and person shall be entitled to receive for arresting and carrying back every deserting employee aforesaid the sum of $5, and 10 cents per mile from the place of arrest to the place of delivery, and the same shall be paid by the employer, and held as a setoff for so much against the wages of said deserting employee: Provided, that said arrested party, after being so returned, may appeal to a justice of the peace or member of the board of police of the county, who, on notice to the alleged employer, shall try summarily whether said appellant is legally employed by the alleged employer and his good cause to quit said employer; either party shall have the right of appeal to the county court, pending which the alleged deserter shall be remanded to the alleged employer or otherwise disposed of as shall be right and just, and the decision of the county court shall be final.
When reading about most of the laws written during this time it makes me think did most of the freedmen understand what this meant when it was first passed. Or were they just told that they were about giving them the right to own things. To me its like the saying "Polishing a turd" its still a well you know. This section 7 in particular, this is slavery, you can not leave and if you do you will be dragged back, oh what there is more and we are going to make you pay for the inconvenience you caused. The statement about "without good cause" is one of those subjective statements, once again the fate of these men and women are in the hands of the people who enslaved them. I highly doubt that their idea of "without good cause" would be fair and just in any way shape of form.
In answering this letter, please state if there would be any safety for my Milly and Jane, who are now grown up, and both good-looking girls. You know how it was with poor Matilda and Catherine.
This statement is not surprising, all slaves were required to do their masters bidding regardless of what it was. Females not just slaves did not have the same rights as male. It is no wonder that he would rather keep his daughter as far from that as he could.
I suppose they never heard about your going to Colonel Martin’s to kill the Union soldier that was left by his company in their stable. Although you shot at me twice before I left you, I did not want to hear of your being hurt, and am glad you are still living.
This statement along with others in this letter clearly shows that even though Jourdan has been wronged by his former master, he still feels attachment to him. I'm not saying that he wants to be his slave, its just shows how complicated everything was from all sides after the war. It wasn't as simple as now you are free and you will have the save rights and privileges as everyone else. It takes longer to change attitudes, having the idea that one is superior to another takes a long time to unlearn from both sides.
This, our new Government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth
it is interesting that he uses moral truth here, when morality is based off of what you are taught. How you were raised, if you were raised being told that eating certain things are immoral, then you would believe that it is immoral to eat those items( it doesn't matter what item it is, pork, beef, gummy bear) it does not matter what it is. You would believe that it was you are moral obligation to not eat that item, maybe you would even feel that it was your responsibility to convince others to not eat it as well. You only feel that way because that it what you are taught, but there is someone else that is taught that something else is morally wrong. Who is right? Each feel that they are correct and the other is wrong.
Just a little food for that about Morality
They assume that the negro is equal, and hence conclude that he is entitled to equal privileges and rights, with the white man
When reading things like this speech or listing to speeches that have such absurd ideas in them, it makes me wonder if the people who are saying these thing really believe them or are just using them as a rallying point to get the voters all fire up to fallow what they want. Does he actually believe that the "negro" is less evolved/created to be enslaved or does he say this because he knows that if all slaves were freed then the wealthy of the south out loose unimaginable amounts of money. This tactic is still used today, politicians will say whatever they think the masses what to hear so they will follow/vote for them, when the real motivation/driving force is something very different.
Regardless if Stephens believes what he is saying, the fact that he says it means that there were people that believed that it was true and that is both very sad and disgusting.