Joseph E. Brown and the Politics of Reconstruction (review)

88CIVIL WAR HISTORY under Radical control: Louisiana, South Carolina, and Florida. The remaining chapters treat the stalemate following announcement of the disputed electoral votes and the failure of either candidate to have a majority. The author faults Tilden for failing to provide leadership in this crisis and dramatize the Democratic position to the public. This failure encouraged the Republicans to carry out plans "boldly and confidently ," and created "a power vacuum that allowed the party's centrifugal forces to pull it asunder. The Democratic party never fully recovered the initiative in the dispute" (pp. 222-23). The final chapters outline the several compromises of 1877 and the resulting selection of Rutherford B. Hayes as president by the joint electoral commission. Polakoff concludes that the electoral dispute ended as it did because Hayes worked harder than Tilden to hold party factions together and because Tilden had the grace and courage to accept defeat. Both Tilden and Hayes lost control of their forces at the same time, and the result was the joint electoral commission which Illinois Democrats, in a classic breakdown of intra-party communication and coordination, helped turn into an eight to seven Republican majority through the incredibly stupid election of an "independent," Justice David Davis, to the Senate as a Democrat, resulting in Davis' replacement by Justice Joseph P. Bradley, a Republican. The commission then determined the election's final outcome. Three weeks of bluffing by both parties followed, the Democrats eventually accepting the inauguration of Hayes. In return, Hayes promised to remove those troops supporting the Radical governors in Louisiana and South Carolina, a policy to which he was previously committed. Polakoff writes in a taut but pleasant manner. His footnotes are informative but not overwhelming. The index is reasonably complete and useful. The essay on sources contains valuable comments on both the primary and secondary works used in preparing this volume with an interesting note of caution to any historian planning to do research at the Hayes Library in Fremont, Ohio. William P. Vaughn North Texas State University Joseph E. Brown and the Politics of Reconstruction. By Derrell C. Roberts . (University, Alabama: The University of Alabama Press, 1973. Pp. 159. $6.00.) One third of this slim volume relates the activities and associations of Joseph E. Brown of Georgia before and after Reconstruction, while only seventy pages are directed toward the subjects as indicated by the title ( Brown and Reconstruction ) . This allotment of space is sadly deficient. Brown was a four-term governor and a chief justice of the supreme court in Georgia, and for ten years he represented the state in the United States Senate. At different points in his career Brown was aligned with BOOK REVIEWS89 ante-bellum Southern Democrats, the Confederacy, Andrew Johnson Unionists, Radical Republicans, Liberal Republicans, and Democrats of the New South. During Reconstruction Brown's political involvement was complex and substantial. To tell the story of Brown and Reconstruction is an important, but difficult task. Unfortunately, the monograph under review is an unsatisfactory treatment of the man and the period. Joseph E. Brown and the Politics of Reconstruction is inadequate for many reasons. There is no preface or introduction to inform readers of the author's objectives and approach. Moreover, questions crucial to an understanding of the subjects are slighted or ignored. For instance, explanation for Brown's political wanderings receives scant notice. Was he a political accommodationist because he wanted the best for Joe Brown, his constituents, or both? How successful was he in influencing Reconstruction policy? Too little consideration is given to these questions and others, while inordinate attention is directed to the fluctuations of Brown's popularity in Georgia. The narrative is beset by uneven prose—too much is repetitious, obscure, and ponderous; quotes are too numerous and awkwardly used. Careless proofreading, or its absence, left errors unattended. Historians will be wary of this work because of the inconsistent scholarship ; general readers will be disappointed because of the labored prose. William J. McNeill Lee College ...