As history takes course, most movements in American history come to an end. Leaders of this nation have come and gone, and have both failed and succeeded with different plans and objectives for the future. One movement in particular was Reconstruction. In 1865, William Mason Grosvenor argued that the reconstruction of the South should be harsh rather than lenient (Dudley 7). William Grosvenor was commander of one of the first units of African American soldiers to fight for the North in the Civil war, and was an abolitionist prior to the war (Dudley 7). During the Civil war, William Grosvenor witnessed the reconstruction process of the Louisiana state government first hand as it was re-created with little to no change in the political or economic status regarding African Americans after the abolition of slavery (Dudley 7). Mr. Grosvenor noted that the reconstruction process was rather lenient, and the state government was slightly changed…show more content… . . Shall be severe enough to prevent for all future time the recurrence of a crime so terribly destructive” (Dudley 8). In the opinion of Mr. Grosvenor, the defeated Confederate states needed to be punished, therefore no other state would commit treason like the rebellious states. William Grosvenor also was opposed to the abeyance theory. The “abeyance” theory of reconstruction was the idea that if Confederate states did not have legal reasoning for secession, still possessed all constitutional rights as American union members, and should be provided these temporarily suspended rights back as quickly as possible (Dudley 7). In 1866, Herman Melville argued that reconstruction should be lenient, and argued for a revenge-free policy (Dudley 9). Herman Melville was a writer most famous for his novels including Moby Dick, and poems inspired by the civil war (Dudley 9). Mr. Melville believed that Southern rebels should not be viewed as traitors, and should not be punished for treason (Dudley
