CH.15 analysis

docx

School

Texas A&M University, Corpus Christi *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

3304

Subject

Economics

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

1

Uploaded by DeanFog14992

Report
96. Petition of Committee on Behalf of the Freedmen to Andrew Johnson (1865) 1. The petitioners wrote to the former president, Andrew Johnson, and the head of the Freedmen’s Bureau, O. O. Howard, in an attempt to regain ownership of the land in Edisto Island. The petitioners consisted of a group of freepeople that had been formally occupying the land, but Johnson ordered that the land be returned to the previous owners. This elicited a reaction of disbelief and protest from free people, since it was critical for them to remain inhabiting that area. The writer claims that, “This is our home, we have made These lands what they are we were the only true and Loyal people that were found in posession of these Lands” (Foner, 308). Because they had previously lived and served there for the most of their life, forcing them out would be unjust. It was extremely important to them to be able to stay in the land they knew, worked on, and should continue to work on instead of having to move to a different area. Staying on and owning that specific land gave the freepeople the rights they felt were deserved and was a physical way to show that they truly were free. 2. During the reconstruction period, owning land and freedom were two concepts that went hand in hand. Many freedmen and their advocates saw land ownership as a crucial component of true freedom and economic independence. The idea was rooted in a desire to break away from the economic and social dependence that had characterized the institution of slavery. Some argued that they have earned their title of “freedman and have been always true to this Union have the same rights as are enjoyed by Others” (Foner, 308). Being able to buy and own land is the strongest way these former slaves felt they could attain true freedom and independence. 98. A Sharecropping Contract (1866) 1. In the opening sentence of the contract, it states that a freedman will be allowed to plant and raise crops on a plantation with “Rules, Regulations and Remunerations,” making it known right away that there's already going to be limitations (Foner, 315). Specifically, these regulations consist of limiting laborers freedom by having them obey their supervisors orders. If the supervisor doesn’t think that work is up to standard or there’s some form of disobedience their payments could be docked. Division of the crops, money, and labor were up to the two parties to agree on and compromise about. Although the idea of sharecropping seemed fair, in most cases it limited laborers freedom and left them in a state of dependency. 2. Sharecropping presented both benefits and risks for the free people in the postwar south. With sharecropping, they had access to land, housing, some independence, and potential for economic growth. If the laborer is successful with their crops and listening to their supervisor, they will be able to climb up the social ladder; similar to a job nowadays. However, in the same sense if they do something not in their contract, they will “be docked for disobedience” (Foner, 316). This risks their job, life, and economic stability. So with the benefits sharecropping offers it also comes with risks that could leave the laborers with nothing.
Discover more documents: Sign up today!
Unlock a world of knowledge! Explore tailored content for a richer learning experience. Here's what you'll get:
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help