[987] The convention in September had proceeded to correct the theory of the situation by conferring the powers of a civil governor upon Parsons, and authorizing him to act as governor until the elected governor should be qualified.
[988] McPherson, “Reconstruction,” p. 21. Alabama was the twenty-seventh state to ratify, and with seven other seceding states made up the necessary three-fourths of the thirty-six states. So far the Johnson state governments were recognized. Tribune Almanac, 1866. Later, when all that the “restoration” administration had done was found to be useless or worse than useless, an Alabama writer, in “The Land We Love,” complained:—
“The constitutional amendment abolishing slavery could only be passed constitutionally when the southern states were in the Union. We were then in the Union for the few weeks during which time this was being done. For this brief privilege we lost 4,000,000 of slaves valued at $1,200,000,000. We have every reason to be thankful for being wakened out of our brief dream of being in the Union. A few more weeks of such costly sleep would have stripped us entirely of houses and lands.”
[989] N. Y. Herald, Dec. 19, 1865.
[990] Inaugural Addresses, Dec. 13, 1865; Annual Cyclopædia (1865), p. 19.
[991] Both Parsons and Houston had been “Unionists,” but neither could have subscribed to the oath exacted from members of Congress. The representatives chosen were: (1) C. C. Langdon, Whig, Bell and Everett man, of northern birth, opposed secession, a member of the legislature of 1861; (2) George C. Freeman, Whig, Bell and Everett man, opposed secession, captain and major 47th Alabama; (3) Cullen A. Battle, Democrat, major-general C.S.A.; (4) Joseph W. Taylor, Whig, Bell and Everett man, opposed secession; (5) Burwell T. Pope, Whig, opposed secession; (6) Thomas J. Foster, Whig, Bell and Everett man, opposed secession. None of the congressmen-elect could subscribe to the test oath. The people would have voted for no man who could take the test oath.
[992] McPherson, p. 15.
[993] Cong. Globe, Dec. 4, 1865.
[994] Globe, Dec. 4, 1865. This was a distinct refusal to recognize, for the present at least, the restoration as done by the President.
[995] Cong. Globe, Dec. 18, 1865.