9.6 The Compromise of 1877 & Legacy of Reconstruction

By the mid-1870s, national support for Reconstruction was rapidly waning. A combination of severe economic depression, widespread Northern voter fatigue, political corruption scandals in the Grant administration, and conservative Supreme Court rulings systematically eroded the national commitment to enforcing Black civil rights in the South. This retreat culminated in the bitter electoral crisis of 1876 and the subsequent Compromise of 1877, which formally ended Reconstruction and ushered in the era of Redeemer home rule and Jim Crow segregation.

Northern Fatigue & The Panic of 1873

Northern public commitment to Southern Reconstruction waned significantly during the 1870s due to several compounding factors:

1. The Panic of 1873: In September 1873, the prominent Wall Street banking firm Jay Cooke & Company collapsed due to over-speculation in railroad bonds. The resulting Panic of 1873 triggered a devastating six-year national economic depression. Bankruptcies soared, unemployment reached 15 percent, and labor strikes erupted across Northern industrial cities. Preoccupied with personal economic survival, Northern voters lost interest in Southern racial issues—a phenomenon historians term "Northern fatigue."
2. Grant Administration Corruption: President Ulysses S. Grant's administration was plagued by major financial scandals, including the Crédit Mobilier railroad bribery scheme, the Whiskey Ring tax fraud, and the Indian Ring corruption scandal involving Secretary of War William Belknap. Though Grant was personally honest, these scandals tarnished the Republican Party and alienated Moderate reformers.
3. 1874 Midterm Elections: Capitalizing on economic hardship and corruption scandals, the Democratic Party won a landslide victory in the 1874 midterm elections, gaining control of the House of Representatives for the first time since the Civil War. Democratic control of the House brought an immediate halt to new federal Reconstruction legislation.

---

Judicial Narrowing: Supreme Court Decisions

During the 1870s and 1880s, the United States Supreme Court issued a series of landmark decisions that severely narrowed the scope of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, stripping the federal government of its authority to protect Black citizens from private white violence:

The Slaughter-House Cases (1873)

In a 5–4 decision, the Court examined a Louisiana statute granting a slaughterhouse monopoly in New Orleans. The Court drew a sharp distinction between national citizenship rights and state citizenship rights. It ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment's Privileges or Immunities Clause protected only a very narrow set of federal rights (such as navigating international waterways, applying for federal office, and traveling to the national capital). It held that fundamental civil and property rights derived entirely from state citizenship, leaving state governments virtually unchecked in defining civil rights for their residents.

United States v. Cruikshank (1876)

This case arose from the 1873 Colfax Massacre in Louisiana, where an armed white mob attacked Black citizens defending a county courthouse, murdering over 100 Black militia members. Federal prosecutors indicted white mob leaders under the Enforcement Act of 1870. The Supreme Court overturned the convictions, ruling that the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause prohibited civil rights violations committed by state action only, not private individuals or armed mobs. The Court declared that policing private murder and assault was strictly a state responsibility, effectively rendering federal prosecution of Klan violence impossible.

The Civil Rights Cases (1883)

The Court declared the federal Civil Rights Act of 1875 unconstitutional. The decision held that Congress lacked authority under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment to prohibit racial discrimination by private businesses (such as hotels, theaters, and railroads), clearing the legal path for widespread private Jim Crow segregation.

---

The Disputed Election of 1876

The presidential election of 1876 matched Republican Rutherford B. Hayes (Governor of Ohio) against Democrat Samuel J. Tilden (Governor of New York, renowned for breaking the corrupt Tweed Ring). Tilden campaigned on government reform and an end to military Reconstruction.

When the votes were counted, Tilden won the national popular vote by over 250,000 votes and held 184 clear electoral votes—just one short of the 185 electoral votes needed to secure the presidency. Hayes held 165 electoral votes. However, 20 electoral votes remained in dispute:

• Single contested electoral vote in Oregon (procedural challenge).
• 19 contested electoral votes across three Southern states where Republican state governments remained in power: South Carolina, Florida, and Louisiana.

In those three Southern states, both political parties submitted conflicting electoral returns. Democrats claimed Tilden had won, alleging Republican election fraud. Republicans claimed Hayes had won, asserting that white Democratic violence and intimidation under the Mississippi Plan had illegally suppressed thousands of Black Republican votes.

Contested Electoral Votes (20 Total):
- Florida: 4 electoral votes
- Louisiana: 8 electoral votes
- South Carolina: 7 electoral votes
- Oregon: 1 electoral vote

Tilden: 184 Electoral Votes (Needs 1 to win)
Hayes: 165 Electoral Votes (Needs all 20 to win)

The Electoral Commission of 1877

With the Constitution providing no explicit guidance for resolving conflicting electoral returns, Congress created a temporary 15-member Electoral Commission in January 1877, composed of:

• 5 U.S. Representatives (3 Democrats, 2 Republicans)
• 5 U.S. Senators (3 Republicans, 2 Democrats)
• 5 Supreme Court Justices (2 Republicans, 2 Democrats, and 1 independent Justice, David Davis).

Before deliberations began, Justice Davis resigned from the Court after being elected to the Senate by Illinois Democrats, and was replaced by Republican Justice Joseph P. Bradley. In February 1877, the Commission voted 8 to 7 along strict party lines on every disputed state, awarding all 20 contested electoral votes to Rutherford B. Hayes. This gave Hayes a total of 185 electoral votes, defeating Tilden (184) by a single vote.

---

The Compromise of 1877 & The End of Reconstruction

Enraged Democrats denounced the Commission's decision as the "Great Stolen Election" and threatened to filibuster the electoral count in the House to prevent Hayes's inauguration, raising fears of a second civil war ("Tilden or War!").

To avert crisis, leaders from both parties held secret negotiations in February 1877 at Washington's Wormley Hotel, producing the informal Compromise of 1877:

• Republican Concessions:
  1. Complete removal of all remaining federal occupation troops from South Carolina and Louisiana.
  2. Appointment of at least one Southern Democrat to Hayes's Cabinet (Postmaster General David M. Key of Tennessee).
  3. Allocation of federal subsidies and land grants for Southern transcontinental railroad construction (Texas and Pacific Railway) and river improvements.
• Democratic Concessions:
  1. Abandonment of the filibuster and formal acceptance of Rutherford B. Hayes as President.
  2. A pledge to respect the legal and civil rights of Black citizens (a pledge Southern Democrats immediately violated).

In April 1877, President Hayes ordered federal troops back to their barracks. Deprived of military support, the Republican state governments in South Carolina and Louisiana collapsed immediately, allowing Democratic Redeemers to assume total political control across the entire South. The Compromise of 1877 marked the official end of Reconstruction.

---

Historical Legacy & Long-Term Consequences

Reconstruction is widely viewed by modern historians as a "tragic era" of unfulfilled promise or an "unfinished revolution" (in Eric Foner's words). Freed from federal oversight, Southern Redeemer governments enacted Jim Crow laws mandating legal racial segregation, instituted disenfranchisement devices (poll taxes, literacy tests, grandfather clauses), and tolerated rampant lynching and violence.

However, Reconstruction was not a complete failure. The Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments permanently altered the American constitutional framework. By establishing national birthright citizenship, federal equal protection, and constitutional voting protections, these amendments laid the indispensable legal foundation that 20th-century civil rights leaders—such as Thurgood Marshall, Martin Luther King Jr., and the NAACP—successfully invoked during the Civil Rights Movement to dismantle Jim Crow (Brown v. Board of Education, Voting Rights Act of 1965).