A commissioner in Washington oversaw the entire organization. He delegated
authority to subordinates known as assistant commissioners. Each one super-
vised actions within a particular state (sometimes several states fell under an
18779-Bean_TooGreat.indd 5
18779-Bean_TooGreat.indd 5
4/27/16 11:13 AM
4/27/16 11:13 AM
6 “A
Stranger Amongst Strangers”
assistant commissioner’s jurisdiction). Over time, each state was sectioned into
subdistricts, generally comprising one to several counties. Each subdistrict was
headed by a subordinate, an SAC. Th
e responsibilities of the SACs extended to
“all subjects relating to refugees and freedmen” and empowered them “to exer-
cise and perform within their respective subdistricts all the powers . . . of the
Assistant Commissioner.” In eff ect, they held broad powers within their subdis-
tricts. Agents had to be familiar with army regulations, engage in diplomacy,
marriage counseling, and education, and serve as judge and jury. As one Bas-
trop agent described his duties for one month, it entailed “[e]xamining, explain-
ing and approving [labor] contracts, settlement of last year[’]s contracts, visiting
plantations, addressing the freedmen, hearing complaints, giving advice etc.”
To be sure, it required “an offi
cial jack- of- all- trades.”
From September 1865, when the agency arrived in Texas, to December 1868,
when its operations—excluding education—ceased in the state, 239 of these
jacks- of- all- trades served in Texas, a number approximately three times the
total in Arkansas (n=79). Some earlier accounts place the number of agents in
Texas at 202. Several reasons may explain the discrepancy. First, not all agents
were listed in the Freedmen’s Bureau Roster of Offi
cers and Civilians. Head-
quarters posted the roster on a monthly basis, but those who received their
appointments and were relieved all within the same month were not included.
SACs frequently exceeded their authority, appointing help to lessen their work-
load. In time, all would be fi ltered out by superiors, but this can be discerned
only by a thorough examination of the records. Past examinations also did not
include traveling agents, special agents, or assistant subassistant commissioners
(ASAC). Since these positions essentially had the same responsibilities as sub-
assistant commissioners, they should be included in any agent study. Inherent
problems oft en found in any large bureaucracy also led to inaccurate record
keeping. Further, critics oft en mislabeled certain men as agents in order to cas-
tigate them within the white community. Former slaves, Richard Allen and
Charles Bryant, and county offi
cial Benjamin Franklin Barkley have all been
erroneously cited as agents.
At the agency’s high point in Texas, it counted 61 subassistant commission-
ers, 10 assistant subassistant commissioners, 1 traveling agent, 1 special agent, 1
assigned to “special duty,” and 1 inspector (July 1867) manning 59 subdistricts.
As seen in Figure 1- 1, the high point for agents did not occur until nearly two
years aft er entering Texas, and came about because of the renewed eff ort when
Congress wrested the reconstruction process from the president in early 1867.
No matter who controlled the reconstruction process, the prevailing federal
18779-Bean_TooGreat.indd 6
18779-Bean_TooGreat.indd 6
4/27/16 11:13 AM
4/27/16 11:13 AM
Who Were the Subassistant Commissioners?
7
attitude believed U.S. military experience and “Northern” lineage necessary
for the work of the Freedmen’s Bureau. See Figure 1- 2 for a comparison of
the number of military and civilian agents. At any time in the three- month
interval sample there never exceeded more than seven (average 9.3 percent of
agents each month were “Southern”) men serving from the former Confeder-
acy (see Figure 1- 3). Only 23.4 percent of Bureau agents, in fact, lacked recent
military service.
Texas thus had a high of more than six dozen agents (SACs, ASACs, inspec-
tors, and traveling agents) in the fi eld at one time, greatly exceeding the maxi-
mum in other Southern states like Alabama, Arkansas, and Mississippi. But
considering Texas’s immense size and the fact that the Freedmen’s Bureau never
employed more than nine hundred agents, including offi
ce staff , throughout the
South at any given time, there never existed an adequate number of Texas agents
to service the community. While some served more than two years, others lasted
but days or a few weeks. More than half served six months or less (see Table 1- 1).
Turnover in Texas was high, resulting in an average tenure approximating seven
80
70
60
50
40
Total
30
20
10
0
Figure 1–1. Total Number of Bureau Agents in Th
ree-
18779-Bean_TooGreat.indd 7
18779-Bean_TooGreat.indd 7
4/27/16 11:13 AM
4/27/16 11:13 AM
60
50
40
30
Military
No Military
20
10
0
Figure 1–2. Total Number of Military- Civilian Agents in Th
ree-
Month Intervals
70
60
50
40
Northern
30
Southern
N/A
20
10
0
Figure 1–3. Total Number of Northern- Southern Agents in Th
ree-
Month Intervals
18779-Bean_TooGreat.indd 8
18779-Bean_TooGreat.indd 8
4/27/16 11:13 AM
4/27/16 11:13 AM
Who Were the Subassistant Commissioners?
9
Table 1- 1 Length of Tenure for Subassistant Commissioners in Texas
Length of Tenure w/Bureau
Number of Bureau Agents
Percentage
Less than Four Months Service
.
Four to Six Months Service
.
Seven to Nine Months Service
.
Ten to Twelve Months Service
.
More than Twelve Months Service
.
n=
Note: Dates came from Freedmen’s Bureau Roster of Offi
cers and Civilians.
and three- quarter months (7.8 months). Th
is was below the nine and one- half
months in the Arkansas Bureau and approximates the mean for Alabama.
Civilians remained with the Bureau slightly more than their military coun-
terparts. On average, their tenures lasted 8.1 months (n=48). As for those with
military experience, they remained with the agency for 7.7 months (n=165). Th
is
discrepancy is likely explained by the revolving commanders at Bureau posts.
Th
is resulted in one- or two- month tenures. Whether because of the workload,
revolving post commands, the low pay, or certain inherent dangers of the job, it
is certain that few served long enough to establish any confi dence, if that was
ever possible, within the white community or greatly enhance their overall
eff ectiveness for the freedpeople.
Of the 239 who served in Texas, all but one were white and all were men.
Some sources have listed agents other than George T. Ruby as black, most nota-
bly Jacob C. DeGress. But none of these assertions can be substantiated, and,
judging by DeGress’s place of birth (Prussia), this seems unlikely. Offi
cials in
Washington, although never specifi cally prohibiting black men, warned of
white reaction to them, noting they “created a hostility hard to overcome.” Of
those whose birthplace could be confi rmed (n=185), 160 or 86.5 percent were
born outside the former Confederacy (i.e., slaveholding states that did not
secede, Union states, and foreign countries). Twenty- fi ve men (13.5 percent)
came from states that seceded (the former Confederacy).
Th
e Bureau in Texas preferred men born north of Dixie, with approximately
two- thirds (120 of 185) coming from a non- slaveholding, Northern state. Men who
came from the Upper South—slaveholding states that remained in the Union,
including Delaware and D.C.—represented 6.5 percent (n=12). Th
e remaining 28
men (15.1 percent) came from another country, a percentage noticeably less than
the approximate 25 percent in the Union army. Th
e numbers for those born in
the non- slaveholding Union states (n=120) shows that about half (n=61, or 50.8
18779-Bean_TooGreat.indd 9
18779-Bean_TooGreat.indd 9
4/27/16 11:13 AM
4/27/16 11:13 AM
10 “A
Stranger Amongst Strangers”
percent) were born in a Middle Atlantic State (New York, Pennsylvania, or New
Jersey), with no agent being from New Jersey. Twenty- fi ve percent (n=30) were
born in New England, and the Great Lakes region produced 29 men (24.2 per-
cent). Only 25 (13.5 percent of 185) were born in one of the eleven states that seceded.
Surprisingly (or not), only one man came from Texas. A majority of men who
came from states that “left ” the Union came from Tennessee, Virginia, and Ala-
bama, former Confederate states with large Unionist populations. Th
e underrep-
resentation from seceded states corroborates fi ndings in other studies: the agency
hesitated to appoint men from the former Confederacy and desired men with
Northern roots.
Offi
cials preferred Northern- born applicants. All regions except the Middle
Atlantic States and New England were underrepresented. According to census
records, slightly more than 22 percent (22.9) and 9 percent (9.1) of the country’s
population came from the Mid- Atlantic and New England. In Texas, 33 and 16.2
percent, respectively, came from these two regions, meaning nearly half of the
Texas SACs came from the Northeast (see Table 1- 2). Men from the Upper South
and Great Lakes Region, however, represented 6.5 percent and 15.7 percent of
Bureau men in Texas. Th
at is noticeably lower than the general population from
those areas: 10.6 and 26.8 percent. Not surprising, Bureau offi
cials in Texas
drastically underrepresented those born in the former Confederate states. Th
at
region represented a quarter of the population in 1870, but only 13.5 percent of
Texas subassistant commissioners. Foreign- born agents approximated the gen-
eral population as a whole: 15.1 percent in Texas and 14.4 percent for the general
population.
Th
e small proportion of Southern- born agents demonstrates the fi rst assis-
tant commissioner for Texas E. M. Gregory’s suspicion of anyone from former
“secesh” states. His successors generally followed his lead, as did other ACs for
other states. Manpower shortages sometimes forced offi
cials to draw from the
state’s “scalawag” (i.e., Southern white Unionist) population. It is true that the
organization occasionally turned to residents such as Hardin Hart, Albert Lat-
imer, and James A. Hogue, all born in the South and residents of Texas prior to
the war; but white Southern men were few, and they were greatly outnumbered
by Northerners.
Who were some of these so- called scalawags and carpetbaggers? Few could
exactly be called heroes or villains. Most turned out to be quite unassuming
men on the frontline of Reconstruction. But a few achieved some status and
popularity for their time. For instance, “scalawag” Albert H. Latimer, a moder-
ate Republican, was born in Tennessee either in 1800 or 1808 and arrived in
Texas with his wife just prior to hostilities with Mexico. Although he served
18779-Bean_TooGreat.indd 10
18779-Bean_TooGreat.indd 10
4/27/16 11:13 AM
4/27/16 11:13 AM
Who Were the Subassistant Commissioners?
11
Table 1- 2 Origins of Subassistant Commissioners in Texas
Number of Bureau Agents
Percentage of Bureau
Place of Origin
n=
Agents from Each Region
Outside the former
.
Confederacy,
including
foreign
born
Middle Atlantic States
(New Jersey, New York,
and
Pennsylvania)
Upper South (Delaware,
.
D.C., Kentucky, Missouri,
and
Maryland)
New England
.
(Massachusetts,
Vermont,
Maine,
Connecticut,
Rhode Island, and
New
Hampshire)
Great Lakes (Michigan,
.
Ohio, Indiana, Illinois,
Wisconsin, and Iowa)
Foreign Countries (England,
.
Prussia, Ireland, Sweden,
Canada, and Scotland)
Confederate States
.
(Virginia,
Tennessee,
Texas, Georgia, North and
South Carolina, Florida,
Mississippi,
Alabama,
Louisiana, and Arkansas)
n=
Note: Th
e information in this table came from various sources, but much of it came from the
U.S. Census and the agent’s application to the Freedmen’s Bureau.
in a military unit during the Texas Revolution, he became best known for
representing his region at the Convention of 1836 at Washington- on- the- Brazos,
where he signed the Texas Declaration of Independence. An ardent Unionist
and owner of twenty- two slaves, Latimer resisted secession but remained in
Texas throughout the war. He served in the provisional government of Gover-
nor Andrew Jackson Hamilton before being elected to the Constitutional Con-
vention in 1866. With stints as a tax collector, voter registrar, and Freedmen’s
18779-Bean_TooGreat.indd 11
18779-Bean_TooGreat.indd 11
4/27/16 11:13 AM
4/27/16 11:13 AM
12 “A
Stranger Amongst Strangers”
Bureau agent in north Texas, Latimer in 1869 accepted an appointment to the
Texas Supreme Court, but resigned later that year. Such positions helped him
attain a high economic status, owning nearly nine thousand dollars in wealth in
1870. A moderate Republican, Latimer opposed the gubernatorial run of the
more radical Edmund Jackson Davis in 1869, but still received an appointment
by Davis as a district judge. It is uncertain exactly why Davis appointed Latimer,
but his appointment might have had something to do with his reputation as one
of the premier legal minds in the state, unquestioned Unionism during and
aft er the war, and loyalty to the Republican party. Th
e Radical Republicans had
a tenuous hold on power in the state and never claimed a majority of support.
Th
us, Latimer’s appointment could easily have been an attempt by Governor
Davis to coalesce support by courting moderate Republicans. Considering the
numerous fusion parties and tickets throughout Reconstruction, such an asser-
tion is quite plausible. He would serve three years in Davis’s administration
before dying in Clarksville in 1877. Most citizen agents lived less conspicuous
lives, going about with little fanfare or reason for people to notice.
Born in New York, George T. Ruby was the only black SAC in Texas. Th
ere
remains speculation concerning his parents, with some doubt about whether he
was a “mulatto” or not. He came south, zealously committing himself to black
education in Louisiana, where he became interested in politics. He arrived in
Texas in the summer of 1866. Appointed as a traveling agent, he toured the state
to encourage the establishment of freedmen schools and morality, particularly
temperance. Ruby left Bureau service in late 1867, and through his political
work, became a delegate at the Republican National Convention and later to the
state’s constitutional convention. Aft erward, his constituents in Galveston
elected him to the state legislature in 1869, where he furthered business interests
and became one of the most important and infl uential black politicians during