Civil Rights in 19th Century United States

In 1619, slavery was introduced in Virginia.  It was not abolished until 1865.  Two years later, the Reconstruction after the Civil War began, which lasted ten years.  Reconstruction included trying to ensure that freed slaves were granted their rights.  This was met with strong opposition from anti-abolitionist movements and groups. Strong legal power of white supremacist groups in the South and the serious consequences of an economic depression made the efforts of Reconstruction inefficacious.

In order to better understand Plessy v. Ferguson, let's understand the recent legal history at the time.  The 15th Amendment (1870), for example, claimed that race cannot be the basis for denying someone the right to vote.  The 13th Amendment (1865) declares that slavery shall only exist as a punishment for a crime.  The 14th Amendment (1868) declares that all persons born or naturalized in the U.S. are citizens; that the privileges and immunities of whom cannot be violated by state laws; that citizens' life, liberty and property cannot be taken away without due process and that every person under this jurisdiction is granted equal protection under the law.

Let's talk about two different kinds of rights.  Political rights are rights that the government owes citizens, such as the right to vote.  Social Rights, as understood in the 17th century, were rights that individual citizens could claim over other citizens.  For example, a business owner has the right to deny business to anyone.  Yet a black person has the right to be served by private businesses.  In the Civil Rights Act of 1875 claimed that no public transit services could deny access based on race.

"The Freedman's Case in Equity" of 1885 is an essay that appeals to a sense of justice that transcends written law.  The essay points out that although freed slaves are free in name, they are denied constitutional rights (258) because of personal prejudices.  These prejudices are that blacks were considered to be alien (254) and menial laborers (255).  The essay then claims that we must not have two classes of citizens (258).  The author, Cable, claims that we must try to fight our "race instinct" (265) and that this is a national problem and not just a regional problem.

Contra Cable, Grady argues against Cable in "In Plain Black and White" (1885).  Grady agrees that we should find an equitable solution to civil rights issues.  As a rhetorical strategy, Grady establishes his own ethos by attacking Cable's ethos.  Grady claims that Cable himself is a Northerner (269) and that the problem is a Southern problem to be solved by Southerners.  Whereas Cable is sentimental, Grady is practical and logical and provides an astute summary of his opponent (269-270).  He thinks it is practical and logical to keep people divided along racial lines.  He claims that African Americans have been allowed legal protections (270, 276) by the federal government.  Grady also claims that it is not prejudice but instinct that drives biased notions about other races (271).  His equitable solution is that things should be "separate but equal" (271, 276, 278).  It is important to note, however, that Grady never calls black Americans "citizens" and he thinks that separate but equal means the domination of whites over blacks (280).