One thing that I noted that all of the documents have in common is that they are talking about not just equality, but having equality in justice and patriotism. The very first document, I believe says it the best when it basically says, the color of skin doesn't matter when it comes to wanting to fight for your country. This is one thing that they all have in common, the right to be equal in a sense of justice and patriotism.
The difference between the primary sources is that two of the sources were mainly petitions from freedmen while the other two discussed the laws those freedmen should follow. To summarize the petitions, those who were freed pleads to keep their freedom and their land (Edisto Island). While in the other two sources mainly sets rules for the freed.
The four primary source documents all shared the idea that all men should be equal and expressed some forms of new freedoms to the freedmen. However they differed in the fact that the first to implemented thought processes of the freedmen themselves and they presented factual supports by stating that former slaves actually earned their freedoms by participating in the war and in the Union Army. While the last two were simply pieces of legislature that gave and took freedoms to the freedmen.
Take another look at the Sharecropping Contract. Is it a piece of legislature?
My mistake, it seems to have been a contact from the archives, not to the point of being a legislature passed by the government.
The similarity between all four primary source documents is that they all discussed laws still limiting African Americans, even though they were considered "freedmen" post civil war. The difference between the first two documents and the last two is who wrote them, which correlates directly to the purpose of the document. The first two documents were petitions written to receive the freedom African Americans deserved. The last two documents were laws issued by the government and land owners in which they made clear the limits African Americans had as freedmen in society.
Is the Sharecropping Contract a law issued by the government? Take a closer look.
While Sharecropping wasn't a law, it wasn't something the government initially made an effort to stop. It was allowed to advance to the point where, in conjunction with crop lien, many freedman weren't able to establish themselves financially and getting deeper and deeper into debt.
Initially, the idea on sharecropping wasn't a bad idea. When slavery was abolished, plantations have no workers and that was the main source of income for the South. Many freedmen wanted land and many of these plantation owners need workers. So sharecropping was kind of a compromised and it was okay for a while. It wasn't just the freedmen that was involved in sharecropping, many poor whites were involve as well. The federal government at that time can't really control sharecropping either because they can only regulate interstate commerce, so it was up to the state to regulate it. If is up to the state and sharecropping was somehow producing an income then it is working and people are desperate, since there was a collapse in the economic system in the south. In no means I'm saying sharecropping in that period was good, people just choose to abuse it. Sharecropping still exist and there are more regulations now, is a good idea but the terms were terrible at that time.
The similarity between all four primary source documents is the underlying topic of the issue of freedom and what rights are being granted and restricted for African Americans. For example, in document 96 we see the restriction of freedom being put on African Americans by taking away their land which was granted to them by the Special Field Order 15.
The differences between these four primary sources are the actual type of document it is. The first two documents are petitions where a group of people, in this case freed African Americans are asking the government for help on an issue. The third document is a law issued called the Black Code which helped to regulate the lives of former slaves. The final document is a written contract which spells out the rules and regulations of sharecropping which the laborers and owners of the land have to abide by.
All four documents talked about the free African Americans and what they must face after obtaining their freedom. The first two documents talks about the freedom African Americans deserve in reference to equality. It shows that freed slaves would take up the responsibilities of being a freeman and that they deserve some land in since they are willing to pay for them. The last two documents talk about the restrictions put upon the newly freed slaves. It includes free rights but the punishment were not equal amongst the different races. It also included restrictions on sharecropping which greatly benefit the white landowners.
The four documents have a unifying theme of rights that blacks were and were not given with the end of the Civil War. However, the first two documents are written from the side of the oppressed, in hopes of acquiring what they feel they should have the right to have. In the case of the first document, black residents petition for freedom from slavery and for the right to vote. In the case of the second, freedmen petition for the right to stay on the land that they were given and that they feel are being unjustly taken away and given back to those who were not loyal to the government. In both of these documents, they argue that their loyalty to the government, despite the color of their skin, should be enough to grant their wishes.
What the documents had in common is that they they spoke on freedom for the African American community and having congress grant rights that liberated the blacks such as the black codes. The people wanted equality and citizenship In American after the civil war and reconstruction policies.
The last two documents show how the governments were able to abuse their powers to their advantages. The documents spell out rights that blacks are being granted and the consequences that will be faced upon failure to adhere to the rules and regulations that come with these rights.
Although all four of these documents touch on black rights during Reconstruction, two documents show people making a plea, and two show answers to pleas made. The last two documents show how compromises were made in terms of what was discussed in the first two documents, yet also how there were ways to get around established laws and to keep blacks from having complete equality.
While I read these four documents I soon realized they all had the similar idea of black rights. But, when you look at this similarity is when you see the differences in the sources. For example, the first two sources show us "Freedman" who believe they deserve the right to own land and be able to vote and how the government needs to help them out at the state level. Contrastingly, the other two sources are ideas to limit the rights of the blacks by attempting to put new laws and documents on them to try and keep them oppressed. While all these sources are dealing with black rights they are opposing views on how they should be handled.
The four documents we read today we all discussing how all men, regardless of their skin color should be equal. Some highlight specific rights or necessities. For example, the first document discussed voting while the second was about land ownership in the South. What makes the documents differ is not only the type of document it is, i.e. petitions, codes/laws, or contract, but what the document is trying to accomplish. With the documents focusing on different subjects (voting, landownership, regulating freedmen, or sharecropping) it is bringing to the reader's attention what it is that was taking place Post-Civil War. Some are fighting for the rights that freedmen deserved, other are highlighting the way the South was attempting to limit the freedom the former slaves had fought for.
These documents show that freedmen are still confined to the slave-like role that they had before. For example, the Black Codes and sharecropping system kept freedmen working as laborers for white men, which is similar to slaves working for plantation owners. The latter is a little different from the former in that it isn't something that is legally imposed and that a lot of poor whites also do it to make ends meet. The petition to Andrew Jackson shows that the government had tried to keep blacks from owning land by reverting it back to the former owners. This, once again, meant keeping blacks in their slave-like niches because they would be forced to work on others' land instead of their own. The first petition asked for citizenship and rights, showing that blacks were still bound in shackles and were not free.
The documents that we've read are similar in that freedmen were still being oppressed by those who hold power and authority. In the first document, it was a petition on black rights and their rights to vote. The second document refers to the need of land ownership by the black community, that was told that they were able to have some of the "Sherman's land." The difference between the first and the second document was that, not every freedmen worry about the same thing, some people just wanted land to be able to feed themselves. We can also tell that the two documents were written by people that have different literacy levels.
The four primary source documents we read are all related to the idea that black's were not given equal rights to that of the white men. The first two documents are petitions by black residents arguing for better and equal rights, such as voting. They argue that despite being black they should enjoy the same freedoms and liberties that white men are able to enjoy. The other two documents are responses to black petitions regarding their rights. One of these responses was the Sharecropping contract, which was a compromise between whites and blacks regarding labor. The other was regarding the Mississippi Black Code, which allowed blacks many freedoms such as marriage, ownership rights and limited access to courts. Both of these response were merely compromises and had their limitations that did not give blacks the same amount of rights as whites.
The commonality between the four documents is the idea of the limited rights blacks were granted despite their newly acquired freedom. Despite their emancipation, they still faced problems achieving the same social status as whites as well as the entirety of rights they were entitled to. The first two documents were petitions from blacks who urged for the equality in degree of freedom that is granted to whites and blacks. These petitions hinged on their loyalty to the Union and the suffering they have endured. The other two documents were more official in that one was issued by the government while the other was a contract. Both these documents served as compromises between the recently freed blacks and the whites. These compromises stated the limited rights of blacks and the consequences they face if they had gone beyond the boundaries of their freedom.
All four documents were alike in the sense that they talked about black rights. The first two documents were petitions to the government wanting equal rights and freedom as white men. The petitions explain that they are loyal to the union and wish for the same rights as white men. Even though they are free, they don't feel free at all when they can't vote or own any land. The third document was a law passed that limited the rights of black men. This law detailed what the former slaves can/can't do and things they must do (like sign yearly labor contracts). The fourth document was a contract for Sharecropping. It was a compromise for former slaves to have their own land, and whites to have their own labor force. This contract stated what the former slaves limitations of freedom and the consequences of not obeying it.
All four documents were similar in the fact that their main point was that people of color were not given equal rights as white people. But where they differ is that the first two primary documents talked about petitions by freedmen for equality and equal rights. The other two primary documents were in response to the petitions by freedmen regarding their argument for equality in front of the law. In summary the first two documents were freedmen petitioning to keep their freedom and whereas the other two documents were in response to their plea for equality.
The documents all talk about how many freed slaves believe that even though they were freed they were still not equal to a white man and their rights compared to a white man were lacking. The first two documents were petitions of freedman to Andrew Johnson or the government asking them that they who fought on the battlefield and died to gain freedom and rights that white men have, why they still while in the union loyal to it still not be treated the same as white men. While the other two documents talk about sharecropping and black code which limit the right/power of freedman.
The four documents are similar in that they all address the problem of equal rights for blacks. The first three documents specifically discuss the policies of Andrew Johnson, opposing his plans of reconstruction and demanding the equal rights of all men. The first two documents are petitions and the last two are codes and contracts.
These documents are related in the sense that they reveal how even after the Civil War, the blacks are still at the mercy of white supremacy. The first two documents served the purpose of appealing to President Andrew Johnson showing how the black residents of the South were more loyal to the nation than the white Southerners and that their needs (i.e. the need for land and property) should come before those of the white Confederates. The other two documents focuses on the limitations placed on freedmen after the Civil War that uphold the reign of white supremacy and racial segregation. These four documents emphasize the sluggish process that is being made towards racial equality during this era in American history.
The main similarity among all four documents was that they discussed about the inequality blacks faced after the Civil War. In addition, each document had one or two paragraphs at the beginning that summarized the entire document. In terms of the difference among the four documents, the third document on the Mississippi Black Code of 1865 (Document #96) was merely referring to the laws and regulations. The remaining three documents were focused primarily on a certain person or group, such as Document #94 was written to the delegates at the abolition convention or Document #95 was sent to President Andrew Johnson.
The biggest similarity I found between all four documents is that they were examples of how freedmen were still constrained to some form of oppression and slavery even after the civil war ended. The first article was a petition of black men begging to be seen as citizens and not as solely former slaves to acquire citizenship and equality as a white man. The second article, a petition from the Freedmen's Bureau to Johnson, described how even after the fight for freedom ended, they were still constrained to poverty and given less opportunity than a white man. The third article was of a black code, once again constraining freedmen's rights and once again depriving them ownership of land and freedom to create a means of living. And finally, he sharecroppers contract created a system where freedmen were mandated to sign a contract to plot on a white mans land and all expenses from the black man would be taken out at the end of the season, once again systematically stripping away the freedoms that should have been granted to them post Civil War.
The four documents were similar in the sense that they were all describing the rights that blacks had during the reconstruction era. They were different in way that they were all different types of documents, and the documents focused on different aspects of black lives after the civil war. Document 94 mainly focused on blacks not being to vote in elections in Nashville. Document 95 mainly focused on the fact that blacks were not able to own homes and land that they wanted. While documents 96 and 97 mainly discussed the unfairness of laws and rules towards blacks in the South after the civil war.
All four documents discuss the difficulties that the freedman had to face during Reconstruction. The documents focused on different themes, the Petition of Black Residents of Nashville asked for the right to vote, document 95 was the freedmen's plea for President Johnson to revoke the ordering of the land back to the former slave owners. The Mississippi Black Code, stated the rights and prohibitions for the freedman, and the Sharecropping Contract was a legal contract signed between white landowners and the African American workers, that showed how brutal the working conditions were for the former slaves.
All 4 documents reveal how African Americans lives were restricted or limited during the Reconstruction era in the act of exercising freedom, justice, and equality.The first two documents are petitions written by African decendents requesting that slavery be abolished by the constituion and the right own property. If slavery was not abolished by the constitution, the Emanicipation proclamation becomes null and void. Without a homestead former slaves found themselves renting land from former slave owners or share cropping from them. The documents reveal a new form of slavery under the newly established state governments of the South by limiting access to land, voting, employment, etc and other rights that a free white citizen would enjoy
I do agree that these documents all support the freedom within the black community. Within these documents I saw that black people rights slowly increased. For example the petition of black residents they demanded the right to abolish slavery and have the freedom to vote. Then onto the Mississippi black code they obtained the right to marry legally, some access to court and to own some land. Moving on to the sharecropping contract, which allowed the blacks to make some type of profit by laboring on the landowners’ lands. These documents slowly describe how unequally equal they were to white people. They demanded the same right as white people but it is clear that by law they weren’t equal.
After reading/analyzing these documents, it is apparent that the primary theme revolves around the rights and equality that African Americans rightfully deserve, as well as the new hardships that freedmen had to endure. These documents are all different in regards to what the remaining issues are in relation to what rights African Americans were still not receiving (land being taken away, sharecropping, etc). Based upon the first two documents, it is easy to recognize that they are petitions for further rights, and the last two are responses in form of law and lay out the regulations that newly freedmen must follow. Despite being given new rights, the latter two documents demonstrate the continuity of oppression upon the black community.
These documents express in a similar fashion the restriction of freedom and power over a freedman's own life as an African-American in 1865 to 1866. In particular ,each document displays a feeling in which freedmen may be lacking in responsibility to manage their individual lives as either citizens, landowners,or laborers as equals in citizenship. However, these texts differ in the degree of responsibility that freedmen are recognized to have. In Particular the "Petition of Black Residents of Nashville"(1865) points out that these individuals have a desire and will to embrace these responsibilities as burdens of a citizen if they were to be emancipated. Within the "Petition of Committee on Behalf of the Freedmen to Andrew Johnson(1865) the individuals have already been emancipated and feel a certain responsibility as free men towards becoming land owners. "The Mississippi Black Code" (1865) directly addresses the view of the state to assert itself as having the responsibility of granting certain rights such as marriage , but denying them the right to testify in court. The "A Sharecropping Contract"(1866) demonstrates a responsibility from a freedman towards a landowner in a transaction between two parties that severely limits potential progress for the freedmen in economic growth however allowing him flexibility to oversee his own labor.
The documents are all aimed at the full expansion of rights, african americans, women, asian americans, as well as freedmen. every social group explains why this freedom is necessary. One way that the documents are different, is that all of the documents are written by individuals with very different backgrounds and they also appear to be in chronological order.
Hi Carlos- we're talking about Documents 94, 95, 96 and 97, from the reading for August 31. Take a look at previous comments to get a sense of the conversation so far.
This comment has been removed by the author.
All four of the documents are concerning the freedom of blacks. The first two documents are by African Americans whom are requesting, through means of petition, a greater respect and level of equality. The first of those two documents is a request to be considered citizens under Constitutional law, promising that if they are to be emancipated, that they will fully take on all the responsibilities of citizenship. The second document was written after they gained citizenship, and now the main concern was that of equality, through a request for the right to own land. Even with inclusion of "freedmen" of citizens in the constitution, they were not totally "free" as they're title implies. The last two documents are of the opposing side, attempting to restrain and limit the right of "freedmen", attempting to treat "freedmen" as subcitizens through decreasing there rights. The freedom of slaves was a long, drawn out process that entailed lots of back and forth from the opposing sides. The "freedmen" realized what it would mean to be considered equal (such as by the right to own property, the right to vote, etc..), while many whites were still stuck on the notion that blacks were lesser humans who should not, and could not participate in American civilization as equals, and these four documents are a perfect depiction of that back and forth dynamic.
New comments are not allowed.