The Union League and Biracial Politics in Reconstruction Texas by Carl H. Moneyhon

Abstract

Reviewed by: The Union League and Biracial Politics in Reconstruction Texas by Carl H. Moneyhon Derrick D. McKisick The Union League and Biracial Politics in Reconstruction Texas. By Carl H. Moneyhon. (College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 2021. Pp. xii, 401. $45.00, ISBN 978-1-62349-956-3.) Carl H. Moneyhon returns to his usual scholarly territory—Texas after the Civil War—in The Union League and Biracial Politics in Reconstruction Texas. This critical study concentrates on the twin developments of the [End Page 162] Republican Party and the Union League in Texas. Moneyhon relays a transformative story that details the first steps African Americans took toward developing a distinctive political voice in Texas and describes how Black Texans used the Union League as the base of their political activity during Reconstruction. Although the rise and fall of the Union League is not a new area of historical inquiry, Moneyhon’s focus on the interconnected development of the Texas Republican Party, the Union League, and African American political agency constitutes a break from earlier Reconstruction studies that have been more concerned with the national narrative. In Texas, unlike other southern states, the Union League and the Republican Party were formed through an uneasy alliance between native white Unionists and Black Texans, rather than by northern “carpetbaggers” and educated free people of color who moved south after the Civil War. According to Moneyhon, Texas presents an interesting lens through which to view the state Republican Party apparatus, the Union League, and African American political engagement. The Union League in Texas indicated the growth of a dynamic biracial coalition despite limited federal protection, Klan opposition, and a lack of support from various Republican factions. In this account, Moneyhon highlights the differences between Texas and other southern states. In Texas, the small antebellum free Black population, Union military policies requiring soldiers to muster out of service in the same state where they enlisted, and the late establishment of the Freedmen’s Bureau combined to limit the number of possible Black political leaders. In other southern states, educated free Black populations and former soldiers collaborated to provide a significant portion of political leadership. These constraints created an entirely different context for Black political leadership in Texas. Moneyhon merges this narrative with a narrowly focused inquiry into the political machinations surrounding the “ab initio controversy,” a period of political infighting centered on “the legality of the constitutions of 1861 and 1866 and any legislation or government action taken following secession” (p. 97). His examination of this debate shows how this thorny political issue ripped away at the underpinnings of Republican solidarity in Reconstruction Texas. Moneyhon uses a wide variety of primary sources and provides two appendixes listing the charter members of the Union League in 1870 and 1871. These sources bolster his argument about how the league developed in Texas and why Republicans viewed it as a critical component in their plans for Texas Unionists to gain political power after Congress passed the Reconstruction Acts of 1867. After the election of 1869, the Union League faced increasing political pressure within the state Republican Party to broaden its membership and create public clubs, outside resistance from a resurgent Democratic Party, and increased Klan violence. Moneyhon has created a significant volume in the study of Reconstruction that will give both scholars and history enthusiasts a clearer understanding of Reconstruction Texas. In this study, Moneyhon captures the developing tensions between native white Unionists in Texas, who supported the Republican Party and organized the Union League, and the increasing assertiveness of African American political leaders, who sought to use the Union League to further their political goals. His focus on this troubled relationship forms the basis of a balanced [End Page 163] historical narrative that offers a compelling analysis of Reconstruction politics in Texas. Derrick D. McKisick Texas A&M University–Commerce Copyright © 2023 The Southern Historical Association