Cornerstones of Georgia History

10. Postwar Poverty: Fault of the North or the South?

10 Postwar Poverty: Fault of the North or the South? Reconstruction has been described by historian Numan Bartley as the "revolution that failed."1 He suggests that the Republicans challenged planter domination and tried to empower classes who had little influence before the war. Along with civil rights for blacks, Republicans championed economic development through energetic government support of business. Defeat meant the return of the old social order. Back in control, the Democrats wrote the 1877 constitution, which insured rural domination, severely limited the size of the state debt, curtailed government support for education, and prohibited government from endorsing railroad construction bonds. Once among the top ten states in per capita wealth, Georgia after the war dropped near the bottom. Following Reconstruction, urban-based "New South" Democrats championed many Republican economic goals and tried to attract northern capital to stimulate industrial growth. Atlanta Constitution editor Henry W. Grady became nationally famous for a speech in 1886 to a group of prominent Northerners in which he described Atlanta as a "brave and beautiful 122 city" that had risen from the ashes because the people had caught the work ethic and put the Civil War behind them.2 According to Hartley, however, the "New South" crusade was defeated before it began. Wedded to one political party and white supremacy, Georgians were stuck with a system fundamentally hostile to urban, industrial interests. While the state did little to assist economic growth, the U.S. government did less. National power resided with northern businessmen and politicians, who often promoted their region at the expense of everyone else. For example, northern-owned railroads charged much higher rates for hauling freight from southern terminals than from northern. Wall Street banks had ultimate control of investment capital and seemed reluctant to finance ventures that competed with northern interests. Moreover, federal tariff policy placed stiff taxes on foreign imports, favoring American industry (largely northern) over farmers and consumers. Practically all Georgia leaders were aware of the disabilities their region faced. They differed sharply in what to do about them. The documents below offer descriptions of life among Georgia's poorest workers and examine the paths to prosperity plotted by two prominent Georgians, Joseph E. Brown and Thomas E. Watson. A Business Perspective on the Southern Problem The most fascinating opportunist in nineteenth-century Georgia politics undoubtedly was Joseph E. Brown.The Civil War governor, Brown converted to the Republican Party early in the Reconstruction era. He was rewarded in 1868 when Republican Governor Bullock made the erstwhile secessionist the chief justice of the Georgia Supreme Court. Two years later he resigned from the court to form a company that received a twenty-yearlease on the state-owned Western and Atlantic Railroad. With the collapseof Republican rule, Brown again switchedparties, and quickly moved back into the inner circle of the Democratic Party. In the 18705 he received a lucrative contract to lease state prisonersto work in his north Georgia coal mines. In 1880 he replaced John B. Gordon in the U.S. Senate and held that seat until his retirementa decade later. The following is an 1881article P O S T W A R P O V E R T Y ?£ 123 in the Atlanta Constitution that presents succinctlythe "New South" philosophy of men such as HenryW. Grady and Brown. A "Progressive" Democrat: Senator Brown on the New South—Business First, Politics Second The New York Herald prints a long interview on political questions and the future of the south with Senator Brown, of Georgia. Mr. Brown said that he regarded it to be the first duty of the south to make political agitation subordinate to practical matters. It would be better for it to have nothing to do with politics for the next eight or ten years.The principles of the democracy would not suffer from abeyance, for the party is based on essential principles and they will live without perpetual agitation. Notwithstanding that the south lost $4,000,000,000 by the war, including the value of the slaves, the people are almost out of debt. The immense incomes from cotton and other crops that have been for the past ten or twelve years devoted to rehabilitation and settling up old scores, will, for the next ten years, seek new investment, and it is the highest duty of statesmanship to encourage measures that will lead to a legitimate investment of this money. With this...