Why did Congress Reconstruction efforts to ensure equal rights to the freedmen (blacks) fail?

Answer 1

A number of tendencies and events led to the undermining and eventually the end of Reconstruction efforts by 1877.

Primarily the opposition to Reconstruction efforts in various quarters (some mild, some virulent) led those who wished to continue it either to become discouraged and give up their efforts, or to lose the political power (seats!) to be able to carry on.

1) The conservative Supreme Court undercut Reconstruction legislation as early as 1868. Their declaration that the Civil Rights Act of 1875 was unconstitutional removed further tools the effort had depended on to guard the rights of the freedmen.
http://www.sparknotes.com/history/american/civilrights/section1.html

2) Strong white opposition in the South meant that the effort to enforce Reconstruction entailed a MILITARY effort which, over time, Northern whites were less willing to continue. Some messy encounters from white intimidation of black voters, lynching, etc. acclerated the disenchantment . (Racism played a role here, though over time ANY such military efforts against fellow citizens was bound to make people war-weary.)

3) The PERCEPTION -- perpetuated esp by conservative Southern opponents -- that the Southern governments under the control of blacks and of Southern whites who had remained loyal to the Union were incompetent and very corrupt, undermined Northern support for these governments and made them more willing to accept the return of the former white leaders ("Redeemers").

This view of incompetence and corruption -- perhaps not of the early Northern 'carpetbaggers' but at least of the Southern Unionist 'scalawags' and black leaders-- was dominant for many years, esp. as articulated by William Dunning of Columbia University in the early 20th century.
http://www.wwnorton.com/college/history/archive/resources/documents/ch18_02.htm

More recent studies have indicated that these perceptions were inaccurate. Though there was some corruption, it was no more than could be found in Northern states, and many of the radical governments were very competent and successful. And the daunting task of rebuilding the states after the war and of expanding services (including education for black children) was a daunting one. But whatever the facts the perception (that is, general public opinion) was enough to undercut public support for the whole endeavor.
http://www.let.rug.nl/~usa/H/1994/ch6_p14.htm

4) Northern radicals and Grant's pro-freedmen policies lost signficant power as the Grant administration was buffeted by accusations of corruption (which led to a breakoff group of "Liberal Republicans" opposing his second term) and an economic depression.

Amidst all this the Republican party as a whole (that is, not just the radicals who had been in control) found that it had a sufficient political base to succeed on the national level even without a strong southern wing (of 'scalawags' and freedmen). So there was less incentive to prop up the Southern Republican goverments.

It is often suggested that a major key to the end of Reconstruction was the so-called "Compromise of 1877", a hypothetical secret deal made by supporters of Rutherford B Hayes to secure his election in the disputed election of 1876, and including an agreement to remove federal troops from the last two Southern statehouses they were guarding. But the real key was that Northern support for the effort had fallen apart, as outlined above. In fact, Grant had already been moving in this direction, feeling he had no choice, and Hayes had promised in his CAMPAIGN that he would remove these troops. (Hence it is questionable whether the "Compromise" ever even happened.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compromise_of_1877

Also often missed in this whole discussion of its failure is how unprecedented was this effort to establish the freedmen politically and economically. No other nation after freeing slaves, serfs, etc., had ever even attempted such an undertaking. It is surprising then, that it was attempted, and that it had such success (initially) as it did.


For a good overview of the end of Reconstruction see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconstruction#Redemption_and_the_end_of_Reconstruction_in_1870s

Answer 2

The Congress never considered the real question of racism nor the actual Liberation of Blacks as an intelligent people. It therefore took for granted that they were doing Blacks a favour even when confronted with the white backlash in the South that encouraged peonage and sharecropping. Miscegenation was still on the books even in some northern states, hence Blacks were being considered humans but hardly equals and Kant's Philosophy supported this reasoning in their minds!