understand the condition of affairs.  It is not, therefore, to be marvelled at that the white men of the South spread death and terror in their pathway to the throne of power in subverting the governments of the Reconstruction policy, based as those governments were, upon disorganized ignorance on the part of the blacks and organized robbery on the part of the white adventurers, who have become infamous under the expressive term “carpet-baggers;” although the genuine Northern immigrants, the “Fools” who came in good faith to cast in their lot with the Southern people supposing themselves to be welcome, should not share in the obloquy of that epithet.  But, should the white men of the South continue indefinitely as the rulers of the South, to the absolute exclusion of participation of the black citizens of those states, then would my surprise be turned into profound amazement and horror at what such tyranny would produce as a logical result.  Yet I know the temper of the people of the South too well to base any deduction upon a proposition so full of horror and despair.  And, then, too, such a proposition would be at variance with all accepted precedents of two peoples living in the same community, governed by the same laws and subject to the same social and material conditions.  I submit that I have no fears about the future political status of the whites and blacks of the South.  The intelligent, the ambitious and the wealthy men of both races will eventually rule over their less fortunate fellow-citizens without invidious regard to race or previous condition.  And the great-grandson of Senator Wade Hampton may yet vote for the great-grandson of Congressman Robert Smalls to be Governor of the chivalric commonwealth of South Carolina.  Senator Wade Hampton may grit his teeth at this aspect of the case; but it is strictly in the domain of probability.  The grandson of John C. Calhoun, the great orator and statesman of South Carolina, has not as yet voted for a colored Governor, but he has for a colored sheriff and probate judge, as the following testimony he gave before the Blair committee on “Education and Labor,” (Vol II, p. 173), in the city of New York, September 13, 1883, will show: 

“Q. (the Chairman) What do you think of his [the black man’s] intellectual and moral qualities and his capacity for development?  A. (Mr. Calhoun, John C.) ...  The probate judge of my county is a Negro and one of my tenants, and I am here now in New York attending to important business for my county as an appointee of that man.  He has upon him the responsibilities of all estates in the county; he is probate judge.

     “Q.  Is he a capable man?  A. A very capable man, and an
     excellent, good man, and a very just one.”

Again (Ibid p. 137), Mr. Calhoun testified: 

     The sheriff of my county is from Ohio, and a Negro, and he
     is a man whom we all support in his office, because he is
     capable of administering his office.