Flashcards in Unit 1 Test Part 2 Deck (39)
Explain the point of view reflected in the cartoon above regarding the civil rights act of 1866
It's portrayed as ineffective, and citizens are treating African Americans like slaves again while the government is blinded
Explain one element of the cartoon that expresses the point of view you identified in part A
The peaceful lady protecting the African Americans (representing the government) is blindfolded to actual treatment of blacks
Explain one development in the period of the 1860s that challenged or supported the point of view in the cartoon
The Plessy vs Ferguson case that ruled "separate but equal", when, in reality, blacks were far from being equal, and the government and courts did nothing about it
Which of the two following statements best expresses historical argumentation?
1. Dubbing' view of reconstruction was grounded in racial beliefs that almost nobody accepts today.
2. I agree with the efforts of Charles Sumner on Reconstruction.
3. The freedmen's bureau and black codes provide contradictory evidence for the conclusion that reconstruction was a success
1 and 3
1. Why were the political times so prone to political corruption in the post–Civil War Era?
Grant allowing corruption to happen. Along with his favor seekers in the White House, he allowed, not only, the scandals of "Jubilee" Jim Fisk and Jay Gould (who worked directly with President Grant to get the Treasury to stop selling gold, just so the duo could bid the price higher) and, for a while at least, the Tweed Ring's bribery, graft, and fraudulent elections to get as much as $200 million, but President Grant allowed bigger political scandals as well. There was the Credit Mobilier Scandal (when Union Pacific railroad insiders formed the Credit Mobilier Construction Company and then hired themselves, then distributed shares of stock to congressmen), and the scandal of the Whiskey Ring (who robbed the Treasury of millions in excise tax revenues, got Grants original response of "let no guilty man escape", yet eventually Grant volunteered a written statement to the jury helping to exonerate the thief), when Grant accepted Secretary of War, William Belknap's resignation (after he pocketed bribes from suppliers to the Indian Reservation) "with great regret". ...so prone to corruption because of Grant allowing them to happen.
2. What circumstances led to the impeachment and trial of President Johnson and what was the outcome?
Radicals were getting annoyed with President Johnson (the "drunken tailor") in the White House and began to falsely accuse him of maintaining a harem of "dissolute women". After this, they passed the Tenure of Office Act (meaning Johnson had to get consent from the Senate to remove appointees once they had been approved by that body) and secured the secretary of war, Edwin M. Stanton, who was a spy and informer for the radicals. When Johnson dismissed Stanton in 1868, the radicals then had reason to begin impeachment proceedings. In these, the House of Representatives voted 126 to 47 to impeach Johnson for "high crimes and misdemeanors", though, in the end, House prosecutors (Benjamin F Butler and Thaddeus Stevens) had a hard time coming up with a care for Johnson's impeachment. In the end, Johnson was declared not guilty, which was a good thing because a destabilized precedent wasn't formed, the system of checks and balances wasn't abused, and Benjamin Wade (Johnson's successor and the pro tempore of the Senate who was disliked by many business people because of his views and was distrusted by Repiblicans) wasn't put into office.
3. What were some of the biggest challenges facing labor in the second half of the nineteenth century?
How corporations treated simple workers. As manual skills replaced originality and creativity, factories became depersonalized, bodiless, soulless, and usually conscienceless. New machines replaced many workers, and railroads bringing in unemployed workers from all over the country and elsewhere beat down high wage levels. The employees were highly dispensible and replaceable, as employees could gain wealth through stockholders, get expensive lawyers, buy up local press, pressure politicians, import strikebreakers, and employ thugs to beat up labor organizers. To lessen employees voices even more, corporations also had the power to call upon federal courts to order strikers to stop striking, and if the defiance continued, the corporations caused the state and federal authorities to bring in troops, along with also having the power to call upon federal courts to stop striking, and if the defiance continued, the corporations caused the state and federal authorities to bring in troops, along with also having the power of the procedure, the "lockout", shutting rebelling workers out and starving them into submission. The companies could also make employees agree not to join a labor union, put them on a "black list" for fellow employers to see, and cause employees to go into perpetual debt to them.
4. What were some of the main ways in which the government tried to deal with the trusts? How did the Interstate Commerce Act and the Sherman Anti-Trust Act deal with monopolies? Were they successful?
The government, at first, tried to control the trusts through state legislation, like they had previously done to curb the railroads. Again, they failed, and appealed to Congress. The Interstate Commerce Act dealt with monopolies by (among other things like prohibiting rebates and pools, requiring railroads to publish their rates openly, forbidding unfair discrimination against shippers, and outlawing charging more for a short haul than for a long one over the same line) establishing the interstate commerce commission (ICC) to administer and enforce the legislation that individual states had no power to regulate interstate commerce. The Sherman anti trust act was established to go against monopolies, and, when passed, forbade combinations in restraint of trade. This act proved to be unsuccessful because it didn't distinguish between "good trusts" and "bad trusts", and had legal loopholes that corporation lawyers were able to find, though it did end up (going away from its original intent) curbing labor unions or labor combinations that restrained trade. The interstate commerce act, though not a major victory of corporate wealth, did allow competing business interests to resolve conflicts peacefully, and to prevent rate wars between railroads and outraged state legislators who attacked to confiscate them.