Before moving to Cincinnati, Rutherford decided to take a trip south to Texas to visit his college friend, Guy Bryan. His entries describing his journey along the Moro Castle (a Mississippi River steamboat) are some of the most enjoyable to read. He highlighted such interesting individuals as “a loud-talking, boastful youngster (a Jew, Moses, of Cincinnati),” a “good-natured, laughing Hoosier,” and “four professional gentlemen busy at poker for money.” Shots were nearly fired at one of the gaming tables when Moses accused one of the four poker players—“a small, villainous-looking professional gent”—of cheating. Hayes described the scene: “the lie given; pistols cocked. No blood shed but gambling probably done for.” Yet, he added that the Hoosier (who to this point had nothing to do with the altercation), “dreamed of being in a free fight” and decided to attack his “visionary antagonist” only to end with a bruised “cheek and eye.”[1]

Beyond being entertained by these rowdy characters, Hayes also recollected on his first moments witnessing signs of slavery. In a letter to his sister, he described the “neat, whitewashed cabins for the negroes … always in sight.” Yet, quickly transitioned to his excitement for seeing (slave owner) Zachary Taylor’s home and his war horse, “Old Whitey.” Upon transferring to the ocean steamer, Galveston, Hayes recollected that some passengers were “pro- and some anti-slavery,” and this generated “discussions by the quantity” (perhaps using the word quantity as an antonym for quality). Hayes chose not to provide his opinion on the subject in his journal, nor, do I suspect, to his fellow passengers. But after he reached his destination, he embraced slavery with a handshake…[2]

 

Hayes biographer Ari Hoogenboom made a unique observation about Hayes’ first direct interaction with slavery. He wrote that, Hayes “had quite literally come to grips with slavery.” An interesting image; it refers to Hayes shaking “heartily by the hand … a bushy-headed, fine-looking boy” whom he mistook for Stephen, Guy’s younger brother. Later while recounting his error to his journal, he referred to this “fine-looking boy” as simply “a connection.”  Leaving us to ponder his meaning.[3]

In the published version of the Hayes journal, C.R. Williams made the editorial decision to place “but” before “a connection.” The full quote from Williams thus reads:

“Hitch our horses and are met by a bushy-headed, fine-looking boy who resembled Stephen so much that I shook him heartily by the hand, supposing him to be my old friend Stephen, [but] a connection.”

This implies, to me, that Williams interpreted Hayes as acknowledging that this “bushy-headed” individual was most likely Stephen’s half-brother: not Stephen, but “a connection.”

Stephen was the half-brother of Guy, whose father died when Guy was a year old. His mother had remarried to James F. Perry who fathered Stephen. So, the paternal connection between Stephen and the “bushy-headed” boy is possible. An avowal, from Hayes, that this individual was likely the product of a union between Perry and a slave woman. An assumption in which Hoogenboom clearly concurs evidenced by his “come to grips with slavery” comment. While this might not be earth-shattering analysis, and this incident is not quite new to anyone who has studied the nineteenth president, we should never assume others’ assumptions are properly weighed. But, in this case, the assumption has merit.[4]

Yet, if Hayes understood this “connection,” and this seems likely, it does not flavor his opinion of James Perry. Hayes called him a “sensible matter-of-fact sort of man, full of jokes and laughter.” Further, Sardis Birchard and Perry would go on to be fast friends during their time in Texas. Hoogenboom highlights all of this. But, I would argue, the details of this moment are not fully developed in his analysis, and he moves too quickly to the next topic.[5]

We can dismiss all of this by simply stating that Hayes was 26-years old and still maturing intellectually in a time when slavery (and all of the practices thereof) were viewed as acceptable to many within the American public. But in doing so we miss clues on how Hayes was developing, ideologically, on this topic. Image: Guy Bryan

As detailed in previous entries, Hayes was gradually developing an anti-slavery political stance. Why then, upon visiting Texas, was he willing to ignore such an obvious moral deficiency that he “came to grips” with upon meeting his first enslaved man? Perhaps he, understanding that he just arrived at his host’s dwelling, would need to spend months there before returning home. Why leave any trace in his journal or in his letters that he condemned their actions? But, if this were true, perhaps we should expect his reflections upon the system after he returned home. Yet, from our remaining evidence, he never spoke out against what he witnessed.

Instead, it’s likely that Hayes had yet to develop a moral opposition to slavery. Instead, he had separated the hot-button political topic of slavery from the actual practice. As a devout, northern Whig, he was opposed to political developments that spread slavery and brought-increasing sectionalism, and the ensuing tug-of-war between Southern Democratic and Northern Whig ideals that felt to many northerners as if the South was imposing its policies upon an unwilling North (a political struggle that disintegrated the Whig party and gave birth to the Republican party). But, as the nephew of Sardis and friend to Guy Bryan, he had not yet developed a moral repulsion to the institution itself. In fact, a few years later, Bryan was comfortable describing to Hayes his purchasing of slaves, writing, in 1851, that he had “shipped some negros [he purchased] to Texas before [leaving] Baltimore.” We do not have Hayes’ response to Bryan, nor, if we did, would we likely find any condemnation for his friend’s business transaction anyway.[6]       

It would be a few more years before Hayes would change his tune…

 

[1] RBH Journal, December 15 and 19, 1848, HPLM.

[2] RBH to FAHP, December 16, 1848, HPLM; RBH Journal, December 25, 1848.

[3] Ari Hoogenboom, Rutherford B. Hayes: Warrior & President, 68; RBH Journal, December 27, 1848.

[4] Diary & Letters of Rutherford B. Hayes, ed. by C.R. Williams, Vol. I, 246.

[5] RBH Journal, December 27, 1848; you can read Hoogenboom’s analysis on page 68 of Rutherford B. Hayes: Warrior & President.

[6] GB to RBH, April 25, 1851, HPLM.