At the Arkansas State election in 1876 I was selected as Presidential elector, receiving the highest vote on the Republican ticket. The national election of that year was followed by the memorable canvass of the contested vote for Rutherford B. Hayes, which was ultimately settled by a commission appointed under the Compromise Bill, which was passed by Congress in January, 1877, Florida, Louisiana, and South Carolina declaring for Hayes. That the compromise was the result of an agreement that the United States troops should by withdrawn from Southern soil cannot be doubted, and for so doing he was bitterly criticised and denounced by many of his party, resulting, as it did, in the transfer of those States in the South from Republican, by continuous and unblushing disfranchisement, to Democratic rule.

President Hayes, not unlike many of historic fame, may have been "born before his time;" that his action in removing U. S. troops was immature, a continuation and increase of intimidation and violence abundantly proved. At what period of their remaining on Southern soil would have been a fitting time for removal, is an enigma hard to elucidate. Their retention ultimately rested with the sentiment and judgment of the nation. In the South the menace of their presence was galling and increasing in intensity. The North was daily growing averse to the bivouac of troops over a people who swore that they were on terms of "peace with all the world and the rest of mankind." Would compulsion soften animosity? Hayes was undoubtedly honest and sincere, but not of that class of epoch-making men who anchor on the right, await and buffet the advancing storm. Conciliation coyed as gently as loving dove his mate, while within easy reach glistened the jewel "President" of a fraternized Republic.

There are possibly men who would have spurned the enchantress. But an array of figures and ability to enumerate would not be sorely taxed in finding the number. I was among those at that period who saw the inutility of depending on physical force to extract justice and lawful methods from an unwilling constituency; that the reaction from a forced compulsion in the moral world was as evident and unfailing under the conditions as from compression in the physical. I was hopeful of good results, and so expressed myself in an interview with the President. He replied that he was "sincere in his policy, and should adhere to it unless it seemed impracticable that the policy of force and musket had been tried in the South and had failed and public sentiment now demanded a change." We had and have the change, and it would have been a bright jewel in the autonomy of many of the Southern States had it been more liberal and righteous.

History, as a record of the lower to a higher status of civilization increases in intensity and value as it records superior conditions, and the degree of unrest and earnestness of appeal for the abrogation of oppression is indicative of the appreciation and fitness for the rights of citizenship.

It should be remembered that as it became men dowered with the proud title of American Citizen, the Negro has not been remiss in stating his grievances and appealing for justice. To have done less would have banished sympathy and invited contempt. In Arkansas and some other Southern States there is a growing demand for the forms of law and the maintenance of order, and, while not attaining the zenith of accomplishment, it will be observable when contrasted with the lawlessness depicted in the following resolutions of a convention of colored men held in Little Rock August 29, 1883. They contain views and convictions I there presented, the equity of which 'tis fondly hoped have not been lost by lapse of time:

"Be it resolved, That this convention of colored men of the State of Arkansas have still to complain that violence and injustice to their race still exists to an alarming extent. In most cases the perpetrators go unwhipped of justice. That when they are arraigned the law is administered with such laxity and partiality that the escape of the criminal is both easy and possible. In no instance is the penalty of the law enforced against a white man for the murder of a Negro, however palpable the case may be; whilst in most instances the bare accusation of a Negro committing a homicide upon a white man is sufficient for law, with all its forms, to be ruthlessly set aside and the doctrine of lynch, swift and certain to be enforced.

"Case after case is chronicled by the press of Negroes hung by infuriated mobs without trial to determine their guilt or innocence. The farcical proceedings at law in their inefficiency of prosecution, the selection and manipulation of jurors, and the character of public sentiment have had painful illustration in several cases, and but recently of Johnson, the colored man murdered in this, the capital county of the State. The homicide of this man, a servant at a picnic, of a Christian society of white people, and in their presence, without provocation, was universally admitted. Notwithstanding, a jury of twelve men, with almost indecent haste, finds the murderer not guilty. A verdict fit to shock the sense of every friend of right and justice. Robinson, a white man, for killing a colored man because his victim asked for the return of money loaned, received but two years in the penitentiary. Burril Lindsey, a colored farmer, who had homesteaded land in Van Buren County and had commenced cultivation, was waited upon and told he must leave; that they would have no "niggers" in the settlement. They came back at midnight and broke down his door. One of the mob, lying dead on the threshold was Burril Lindsey's response. The press of our city—to their honor be it noted—said he did the proper thing. Respectable men in the neighborhood who knew Lindsey said the same. But yet, after being harrassed by threats and legal persecution for months, a jury found him guilty of an assault with intent to kill, and six years in the penitentiary at hard labor is the penalty for defending his home.

"Homicide has no local habitation; it is the accident of every community, in every nation, and the justice and impartiality with which the law is administered is the measure of their humanity and civilization. But here we have the spectacle of the press, pulpit, and rostrum of the State, with exceptions scarcely to be noted, either entirely dumb or a mere passing allusion, more often in commendation than censure. We are positive in our confidence that those, and only those who expose and denounce and lay bare this conduct, and thereby create a sentiment that will lessen this evil, are the only true friends to the State's moral as well as its material progress. That the attempt to deny and evade responsibility does not meet the issue in the minds of thoughtful men, who believe that no life is safe where the humblest is unprotected.

"We insist that value of the colored brother as a tiller of the soil, the increasing thrift and economy conceded in securing homes and taxable property, their favorable comparison (by fair judgment) with any other classes as to their moral and law-abiding character, should at least merit justice in the courts, and we ask for him consideration and fair settlement for labor. For where could superiority and nobility of character be better displayed than by generous treatment to the former bondsmen. That the better element of the Democratic party do not favor this lawlessness we are continually assured. But the ugly fact stands out in bold relief that they are unable or unwilling, with forces of wealth and intelligence, to create a healthier sentiment. To them, and just men everywhere, we appeal to assist in bringing the moral power of denunciation against this great wrong, that impartial justice shall be the law for every citizen of the Commonwealth; and that the president and secretary be empowered to sign a petition in behalf and as the earnest request of this convention for presentation to his Excellency the Governor, asking executive clemency in the pardon of Burril Lindsey, now incarcerated in the penitentiary, under a sentence of six years."

The Governor was graciously pleased to pardon him, but for personal safety he was compelled to abandon his homestead and leave the State.

For some time a general unrest among the colored people on account of violence had permeated the South, and thousands of the most substantial planters had already settled in Kansas, Indiana, and other Western States to enjoy legal protection hitherto denied them. Upon the question of Negro emigration the white South were divided. The planters and leading politicians were adverse. The planter for the reason that he could not supplant him by more efficient and tractable labor; the politician for fear of reducing Congressional representation, each regardless of the conditions creating his discontent. A minority respectable in numbers and prominent for standing, approved of his removal, alleging that the movement would be mutually beneficial, that it would induce white immigration, relieve the congested overproduction of the staples of the Southern States, introduce a higher class of industries, and simplify the so-called problem by removing the bugbear of Negro domination by means unobjectionable.

Of this class of opinion the "Nashville American," of the State of Tennessee, was a fair exponent. In its issue of May 9, 1879, it had this to say: "We rather rejoiced at a movement which will bring about a better understanding and teach both races a lesson they ought to learn. To the Negro it is simply a question as to whether he will be better off there or here. If there, he ought to go; if here, he ought to stay; and this simple economic proposition will settle it."

This, the sentiment of the best Southern thought, encountered an adverse which, while unwilling to grant the Negro the right of an American citizen, maltreated and imprisoned immigrant agents; desiring his retention in a specious of serfdom. Such being the conditions existing at the time of the meeting of the Nashville Conference in 1879, induced it by resolution to request Senator Windom, Chairman of the National Executive Committee, to appoint a committee to visit the Western States to ascertain what inducement they offered for immigration.

In pursuance whereof I received the following, containing words of wisdom warranting their insertion here:

It often happens that distance lends enchantment to the view; that while contending with hardship, disappointment, and earnest toil, we are apt to imagine that at some far locality, amid new surroundings, there abides a reign of contentment and happiness, where labor has its highest rewards and where there is a minimum of those trials inseparable from human existence. The gratification of this migratory impulse has in many instances proved disastrous, the yielding to which should be only indulged after every possible effort has been made to remove local obstacles by uprightness, softening animosities, and by industry accumulate wealth. But emigrants have been illustrious as nation builders, their indomitable spirit blessing mankind and leaving impress on the scroll of time. The bump on the head of the Negro that the phrenologists call "inhabitiveness" is very prominent; he is not naturally migratory—"content to bear the ills he has, than fly to those he knows not of." Hence there appeared reason, if not entire "method in his madness."

In all movements of like character there are always conflicting rumors and reports as to success or failure of the benefit or loss of the venture, and this was no exception. Colored immigrants to the number of 10,000 had left the South during a brief period, and the wildest rumors circulated as to reception and success of these forerunners, and, as bad news is ever alert, much was heard that was discouraging and demanded investigation; hence the action of the Nashville Conference referred to. In pursuance of our appointment, J. T. Rapier and myself, in August, 1879, went to Topeka, Kan., and from there, chiefly by wagon travel, visited different colonies of the immigrants. Kansas had received seven or eight thousand. At Topeka we found nearly 100 at immigrant camp receiving rations, some sick, others looking for work; the balance had settled on lands or had found work as laborers. At Dunlop we found a colony of 300 families settled upon 20,000 acres of land. In Wabunsee County 230 families had settled on their land, while in Lawrence and other counties hundreds had found work. Mechanics receiving $2 to $2.25 per day and farm hands $13 to $15 per month and board. We found women in great demand for house servants from $6 to $8 per month.

In our interviews with the colonists we found the list and nature of their grievances were the same as have impelled men in all ages to endeavor to better their condition, and should five or ten thousand, for a period, annually leave the South and settle in Western States and Territories, the effect would be mutually beneficial to whites and blacks alike. In Emporia we found the colony in a very prosperous state. Out of 120 families one-half owned their houses and land on which they lived. We remained twenty days in Kansas and had not opportunity to visit Indiana and other States that had received immigrants. But the information we received, with few exceptions, was similar to that of those visited. There had been suffering and destitution in some localities during the past winter; that was to be expected, as many had come wholly unprepared and without that push and ready adaptation to the status of a new country.

We made an extended report to Senator Windom, which contained data as to the success and prosperity of the many and advice to the moneyless to avoid the suffering which might lie in wait.