The black codes were aimed at stopping the movement of equality in the "de jure" sense, demonstrated by the vagrancy laws which saw homeless unemployed black Americans arrested and fined. Sanders believes "blacks constituted an American underclass in all parts of the United States in 190013" whilst Chambers contrasts this, believing "the black codes did not technically re-establish slavery.14" Also in contrast to Sanders is Dunning who states "as the black codes were concerned, it was pointed out that they could not be alleged as a tendency to restore slavery since the offensive acts had in many of the states been repealed by the legislatures themselves and in all had been superseded by the civil rights act.15" I agree with William Dunning to an extent; the passing of the Civil Rights Act in 1866 showed that whilst many federate governments were not in favour of "de jure" equality Congress was, demonstrated as it stopped Johnson's attempt to veto the bill when he declared such rights would "operate in the favour of the coloured and against the white16." Willoughby's view, in line with my own, is that "his motives were blatantly racist.17" Johnson demonstrates whilst progress towards equality was slowly being made in the "de jure" sense it was hindered by the President. By contrast to William Dunning, Sinclair agrees with my view that equality was hardly gained in the "de jure" and certainly not the "de facto" sense as he states "the white South would have had to forget or reject everything it had believed and maintained for the previous century and more it would have had, virtually overnight, to confess that it had been wholly mistaken about the nature and character of people of African origin and that slavery, the heart and essence of its famous culture had been a horror based on a misconception.
