THE IDEAL SOLUTION.
I have attempted to show that the negro problem in the Southern States
cannot be satisfactorily solved by the limitation of the suffrage, by
the surrender of any portion of the country to the control of the black
majority, by education of the coloured citizen, or by miscegenation of
the races. The central point of the situation is the presence of the
negro in the South. If he were not there, there would be no negro
difficulty. The solution, therefore, that alone promises to be
thoroughly effective is his removal. His mere dissemination throughout
the Union would not be sufficient. No scheme of emigration from the
South to the North and West can permanently benefit the negro or settle
the race question. The “colour line” is, as has been repeatedly shown,
even more clearly defined in the North than in the South. Everywhere in
the South, for example, one may see black and white cab-drivers, though
they do not love one another, plying indiscriminately for hire, black
and white bricklayers working on the same buildings, black and white
compositors setting up type at adjoining cases; but in most parts of the
North things are different. There, with very few exceptions, the negro
is not admitted to ordinary trade-union organisations; he is
remorselessly “crowded out” from every occupation and employment; and
his position is, upon the whole, worse than in Georgia or Louisiana. If
the seven or eight millions of coloured people were to-morrow scattered
equally over the States, the South, no doubt, would be relieved, but
neither the North and West nor the negro would be better off. A more
radical programme of removal must be adopted by any party that earnestly
desires alike the welfare of the inferior stock and the final solution
of the problem. There must be another exodus from Egypt, another
restoration of the captive tribes.
In its bare outline the policy with which I am about to deal is not new.
One of Thomas Jefferson’s most prophetic utterances was:—“Nothing is
more clearly written in the Book of Destiny than the emancipation of the
blacks; and it is equally certain that the two races will never live in
a state of equal freedom under the same Government, so insurmountable
are the barriers which nature, habit, and opinion have established
between them.”
Jefferson, who died nearly forty years before emancipation became an
accomplished fact, did not omit to prepare, so far as lay in his power,
for the evil which he saw approaching. With Henry Clay and others, he
founded the African Colonisation Society, which established on the west
coast of Africa the Negro Republic of Liberia, and, between 1820 and
1860, sent thither about 10,000 free coloured people. It may at once be
admitted that the colony has not been a conspicuous success, for the
American immigrants and their descendants now hardly number 5,000 souls,
and, according to Mr. Charles H. J. Taylor, a late American Minister to
the Republic, the place is to-day “a land of snakes, centipedes, fever,
miasma, poverty, superstition, and death.” But the comparative failure
of the Liberia scheme is due, in my humble opinion, rather to the
principles in accordance with which it was carried out than to any
inherent and necessary unfitness of the negro for colonisation. I shall
later point out what appears to me to be the weak points in the
Constitution of Liberia, as well as in that of Hayti. If they lie where
I suspect they do, it is only natural that Jefferson and his associates
and successors should have overlooked them.
Nor were Jefferson and his friends the only ones who, early in the
century, sought to fend off the looming negro difficulty. In 1825
Senator Rufus King, of New York, was so far-seeing as to introduce to
the United States Senate a resolution declaring that “the whole public
land of the United States, with the net proceeds of all future sales
thereof, shall constitute and form a fund which is hereby appropriated;
and the faith of the United States is hereby pledged that the said fund
shall be inviolably applied to aid the emancipation of such slaves
within any of the United States, and to aid the removal of such slaves
and the removal of such free persons of colour in any of the United
States, as by the laws of the States respectively shall be allowed to be
emancipated, to any territory or country without the limits of the
United States.”
Senator King was far in advance of his day and generation, and, not
unnaturally, his motion came to nothing; but it is very likely indeed
that, had it been carried, there would at the present moment be no
considerable number of negroes in North America. The sum of money which
under his scheme would already have become available for the removal of
the coloured people exceeds £50,000,000 sterling, exclusive of interest,
and the lands still undisposed of are worth, at a moderate computation,
a hundred millions more.
Nothing practical, however, save the Liberia experiment, was attempted
in Mr. King’s day, or has been attempted since, towards the final
solution of a problem which for a generation has been yearly growing
graver and more dangerous.
It looks now as if the moment were about to arrive when either the
question must be peaceably settled or it will settle itself by violence;
and it is, therefore, worth while to consider whether the most radical
and permanent solution of the difficulty is practicable, and, supposing
it to be so, how it may, even at this late hour, be accomplished without
force and injustice.
First, let me premise that the United States, as a whole, and not merely
the South, owes an enormous debt to the negro race. Everyone admits that
the institution of slavery was a crime against humanity; but everyone
does not remember that for a century and more the North was _particeps
criminis_. Some aspects of her responsibility will be found dealt with
in the Appendix on Slavery in the North. It is too often forgotten that
Southern slavery, up to the time of emancipation, existed under and was
protected by the laws of the Union.
The debt owing to the blacks is manifold. Something is due to those who,
against their will, were dragged from their homes, subjected to the
untold horrors of the middle passage, and forced to labour, unrequited,
for strangers. What the horrors of the middle passage were is hinted at
rather than told in the log-book of Her Majesty’s ship _Skipjack_,
which, in 1835, captured the Portuguese slaver _Martha_, with 447 slaves
on board. The _Martha_ had left Loango forty-three days before for
Brazil with a freight of 790 slaves, of whom 353, or nearly 45 per
cent., had perished from the tortures and miseries of the voyage. These
tortures and miseries were not less, we may be sure, fifty or one
hundred years earlier. Something, again, is due to those who, in the
land of their captivity, were deprived by law of education, of the
privilege of marriage, and of the guardianship of their children. More,
perhaps, is due to those who, in support of the triumphant principles of
the land of their captivity, shed their blood. As many as 300,000 people
of colour took arms during the Civil War. And thankful recognition, if
nothing beyond, is owing by the South to the subject race which, in the
hour of national adversity, instead of rising to complicate the troubles
of the Confederacy, was loyal, and even helpful, to the dominant class.
There are other grounds of indebtedness, but they have been so fully
indicated in the course of this work that I need not again specify them.
My only objects here are to insist upon the fact that a heavy debt has
been incurred, and to point out that the time has not yet come when the
United States can say, “We are doing something tangible towards paying
it off.”
In considering the practicability of the removal from the United States
of the blacks and coloured people, one must bear in mind the following
questions:—
Is the negro willing to go?
Can the negro be dispensed with?
How can he be removed?
Whither can he be sent?
First let me attempt to offer a reply to the question, “Is the negro
willing to go?” I believe that he is, but he can best answer for
himself. The Rev. T. S. Lee, a coloured clergyman of Charleston,
speaking on Emancipation Day, 1890, said:—
“I believe that the ultimate solution of the so-called race problem
will be emigration, from necessity, if not from choice.... For two
people so distinct from each other in their physical structure, and
between whom there are naturally such insurmountable barriers, to
develop on separate and distinct lines, dwelling together here, is
about as reasonable as for two kings to reign on the same throne at
one and the same time.... We make a great mistake when we suppose that
the Anglo-Saxon gave us our enfranchisement for the love he had for
us ... He did it because he thought he could use us.... It is a
mistaken idea for us to kneel down to the whites. The Anglo-Saxon and
the black man cannot work together; one or the other will have to
leave, and I am somewhat of a believer in the tale about the Lord’s
fire. The fire will not burn the people, but it will be so warm that
our people will have to move on or get burnt; and I rather believe
that they will move on.... We must show our independence, and the
sooner we do this the better. Let some of us leave—go to Africa if
necessary—and show that we can get along without the Anglo-Saxon, and,
by this spirit of independence, make him learn and appreciate our
value. Independence and emigration are, in my opinion, the only
solutions to this great question.”
And Mr. Lee does not stand alone. Bishop H. M. Turner, of Atlanta,
Georgia, a leader among the negro Methodists, said, in the course of a
public speech in 1889, that nothing but poverty had kept his people
where they were, and that nothing but actual departure from the country
could cure existing evils.
And a few days later, he said, with reference to the Morgan Bill which
was then before Congress:—
“May God grant that the Bill may pass. The white people brought us
here against our will. Now they ought to provide for us to leave if we
desire. Besides, we must work out our destiny anyhow, and if a portion
of us think we can do it better elsewhere, let the nation help us to
try it. If the Bill meant compulsory expatriation, we would fight it
to the death; but, as it is voluntary upon the part of the negro, let
it pass as soon as possible. The negro at best is but a scullion here,
and he can be no less in Africa. I am tired of negro problems, lynch
law, mob rule, and continual fuss, and millions of other negroes are
tired of it. We want peace at some period in our existence, and if we
cannot have it here, where we were born and reared, let that portion
of us who choose to try another section of the world have a little
help. This nation owes the negro forty billion of dollars any way; so
give us a little to emigrate upon.”
Dr. Edward Wilmot Blyden, formerly of the West Indies and more recently
of Sierra Leone, is another distinguished negro who advocates negro
emigration from the States. More than this, in November, 1889, a negro
colonisation society was established in Augusta, Georgia, to promote
emigration to Africa. At about the same time a wholesale emigration of
negroes to Mexico was projected, and a negro delegation visited the city
of Mexico to make arrangements for it; while, a little earlier, a large
scheme of negro migration from the States to the Argentine Republic was
extensively advocated by most of the negro journals of the South.
Unfortunately, neither Mexico nor the Argentine Republic wants the
negro. The Mexican newspapers, as with one voice, bitterly attacked the
scheme, and called upon their Government to be patriotic, and not to
countenance a plan which would bring into the Republic a race alien in
blood and language. And the Buenos Ayres _Standard_ said:—“The darkey is
destined to give the United States far more trouble some day than the
detested heathen Chinee; and it would be really too cool of Jonathan to
ask us here to help him out of the unsavoury mess.” The _Prensa_, a
Spanish newspaper of the same city, declared upon the same occasion:—
“It cannot be comprehended that a country proud, as ours is, of its
wonderful and rapid advancement should commit the folly of introducing
an element of obstruction, offensive both to sight and smell, and with
marked tendencies to laziness. The United States would ridicule South
America if the latter were to accept this Greek gift.”
But these remarks do not touch the question of the negro’s readiness to
migrate. There is really no doubt that he is quite ready, provided
always that migration will better him, and provided also that he can
accomplish it without serious immediate loss to himself.
Can he, then, be spared? The answer, I think, is “Yes.” The Birmingham,
Alabama, _Age-Herald_ took up the question in June, 1889, and thus
expressed itself:—
“In the lowlands of the Mississippi delta, the river bottoms of
Arkansas and Louisiana, the Alabama black belt, and the South Carolina
coast, negro labour may seem indispensable; but this is simply because
the big plantation system exists in those sections. It would be a
blessing to the South if the big plantation system could everywhere be
broken up, and small farms, occupied and cultivated by thrifty white
owners, substituted. In Texas, in Georgia—in all parts of the South,
in fact, except those enumerated above—the white farmers work their
own fields, and work them to much better advantage than those tenanted
out to negroes.... The negro can be easily dispensed with, and if he
stays in the South it is painful to conceive what must be the
inevitable consequence.... The negro must go, or those Southern
communities where he is found in such large numbers will go to
something worse than perdition.”
Upon this the Memphis _Avalanche_ of June 8th, 1889, remarked:—
“We have no hesitation in endorsing as true everything the
_Age-Herald_ has said. There are hundreds and thousands of white
labourers in the cotton fields of the South to-day. In Texas, where an
immense amount of cotton is grown, a negro is frequently not seen in a
day’s ride.”
The New Orleans _Times-Democrat_, one of the most respectable and
influential of Southern journals, on June 17th, 1889, took the same view
in very decided terms, and added:—
“There is no portion of the South where the whites cannot live, where
they do not work more intelligently and better than the negroes, and
where they do not produce larger crops _per capita_. The South would
be more productive, richer, and more prosperous in every way if it
were peopled altogether by white men.”
The Galveston, Texas, _News_ held similar language; so did the
Charleston _News and Courier_; so did the Atlanta _Constitution_, the
Nashville _American_, the Richmond _Dispatch_, the Arkansas _Democrat_,
the New Orleans _Picayune_, and, in brief, all the leading newspapers of
the South. Indeed, I know of no important exception. Concerning the
filling of the gap which would be created by the removal of the negro,
the Greenville, South Carolina, _News_ of March 17th, 1889, had already
said:—
“If we can keep the white people there will be no lack of labour and
population. The natural increase may be trusted to occupy every acre
of available ground without the coming of new citizens; but we might
reasonably hope for a great inflow of white immigration to follow the
tide of coloured emigration.”
Colonel Stokes, a representative Southern, writing on the same subject,
argues forcibly and convincingly against the assumption that the negro
is an essential element in cotton raising. “It is generally admitted by
all who are acquainted with the matter that the negroes are the most
inefficient of all labourers in nearly all the fields of labour. The
Southern negroes cultivate an average of not more than six or eight
acres to the hand; the Northern farmer cultivates forty to sixty acres.
The latter uses a great variety of improved farming implements. The
negro cannot be taught to use any other than the primitive types he has
been long accustomed to. Still, the planter is dependent upon the negro
to till his fields simply because the negro is here and cannot be got
rid of, and white labour is not available in any sufficient numbers
while the field is so occupied. But it is certain that if the negro
cotton-raiser could everywhere be replaced by white men, the cotton
region would wear a very different aspect.”
There are even signs that the negro is being dispensed with already, and
that, if he remain, his position as a labourer will deteriorate rather
than improve. The _Forum_ for December, 1889, contained a powerful
article on “The Race Problem,” by Professor Scomp, of Emory College,
Georgia. The writer, in summing up, says:—
“Sadly, yet with perfect conviction, we are driven to the inevitable
conclusion that if the negro’s citizenship and his social and business
privileges are to have play and development, it must be upon another
soil than that of the whites. As equals, the races cannot and will not
exist together.”
And, writing privately to Dr. E. W. Blyden, Professor Scomp thus
explains his views as to one aspect of the negro’s future in the
States:—
“One feature which I regard as ominous to the future of most of the
Southern negroes is the steady and rapid improvement in machinery in
all departments of the cotton-plantation industry; _e.g._, less than
two months ago there was exhibited at the Georgia State Fair, at
Macon, a machine for chopping cotton, by which one man, upon a kind of
buggy plough, could in one day do the work, by horse-power, of more
than a dozen ordinary choppers. Such machinery, generally introduced,
must, for the most part, put an end to the plantation negro’s summer
work and his means of subsistence. Many efforts, too, are making at
the invention of a proper cotton-picking machine, and, though this has
not yet succeeded to any great degree, American industry will
undoubtedly prove equal to the task of invention. When that day comes
the mass of Southern negroes will be practically out of an occupation
and without a livelihood.”
Apart from this, the negro is now doing much less in the South than he
used to do. The Charleston _News and Courier_, which made a careful
investigation of this matter in South Carolina, county by county, a few
years ago, found that 30 per cent. of the cotton was raised by white and
70 per cent. by coloured labour. In Mississippi the State census of
1880, taken coincidentally with the United States census, showed that
328,568 bales were produced by white and 627,240 bales by negro labour.
In these States, with large negro majorities, nearly a third of the
cotton crop was raised by the whites. Judging by these figures, it is
safe to say that, including the comparatively white States of Texas and
Arkansas, very nearly half the cotton is raised by the whites, whereas
thirty years ago not over 400,000 bales, or one-tenth the crop, was
grown by them.
If, as would appear to be the case, the negro be willing to migrate and
can be dispensed with, the next questions for consideration are—How can
he be removed? And whither can he be sent? The two questions are
intimately allied, and may best be examined together. I think that a
rough key to one of them has been furnished by Mr. J. A. D. Mitchell,
who, writing on January 11th, 1890, to the Cleveland, Ohio, _Gazette_, a
newspaper conducted by and in the interests of coloured people, says:—
“Let the United States Government assume a protectorate over such
portions of the African Continent as are not already provided for,
and, to enforce the claim, call for 100,000 or more American negro
volunteers to assist, not only in the abolition of the slave traffic,
but also in Christianising and reclaiming the African negro from
heathenism and idolatry. I claim that climatic and other influences
preclude the possibility of the white man accomplishing much without
the aid and influence of the negro.... The necessity for forced
emigration or colonisation would (either being distasteful as well as
impracticable) be supplanted by a voluntary uprising of the negro to
participate in reclaiming the land of his forefathers.”
There is here, I really believe, the germ, though only the germ, of a
sound and useful scheme. It is not likely that the United States
Government will, in our day, assume onerous protectorates in other
continents; and it is not, I am convinced, desirable that, in the future
home of the negro, the emigrant shall live under institutions similar to
those which at present contribute so much to his discomfort. If the
black were to move to what would practically be an American foreign
possession, he would scarcely improve his position. He would still find
himself on nominal equality with, but in actual inferiority to, the
white governing powers. If not, he would have to govern himself; and for
this task the negro is peculiarly unfitted. It is for this reason that
Hayti and Liberia have proved failures.
Where I detect the true ring in Mr. Mitchell’s crude suggestion is in
his proposal that the negro shall be given not only a country, but also
a stimulus to make himself worthy of the boon. In one or other of these,
to my mind, absolutely essential features, all the remaining projects of
negro migration that have come under my notice are lacking.
Several Bills, aspiring to deal in an adequate manner with the race
problem, have lately been brought before the notice of the United States
Senate. Senator Butler, of South Carolina, asked for the appropriation
of five millions of dollars in aid of negro emigration generally.
Senator Gibson, of Louisiana, advocated the acquirement, as the negro’s
future home, of extra-Union territory. Senator Morgan, of Alabama,
brought forward a scheme of African colonisation; and Senator Call, of
Florida, revived the old project of opening negotiations with Spain to
secure the establishment in Cuba of a negro republic.
But all these legislators have missed the one important point. You
cannot, without the use of force, ensure anything approaching to a
general exodus of a whole race, unless you first provide the people with
high aims, and also hold out to them a reasonable hope of improved
political, social, and financial conditions. Had the Israelites seen
nothing better than Egypt before them, they would never have quitted the
land of Goshen; had the Babylonian captives not looked to the rebuilding
of the Temple, it is doubtful whether many of them would have availed
themselves of Cyrus’s permission to return to Palestine.
Speaking in the Senate on the subject of the Butler Bill, Senator Wade
Hampton, who has been one of the most honoured and successful Governors
of South Carolina, the blackest State in the Union, said, on January
30th, 1890:—
“I have expressed the opinion that the separation of the white and
coloured races in the United States would be of permanent benefit to
both.... I recognise as fully as anyone the political rights of the
coloured people, and amongst these rights is that paramount one of
every citizen of the Republic to choose his own home. The forcible
expulsion of the negroes would not only be unlawful, but would be
impolitic, unjust and cruel.... No thoughtful patriotic man would
contemplate any such action. But whilst patriotism, wisdom, and an
enlarged philanthropy dictate these views, it may still be a question
whether some feasible plan cannot be adopted by which such coloured
people as desire to seek a new home, where, under their own laws and
their own government, they could work out their own destiny free from
contact with the white race, could not receive the generous and
fostering assistance of this great and rich Government.”
Like his brother legislators, Senator Hampton fails to grasp the
necessity of giving to the negroes a motive to induce them to leave the
States; like them, too, he appears to be of opinion that, no matter
whither the negro may remove, he must be, if not an American subject, at
least a self-governing individual. On both these points, I venture to
think, his attitude is a wrong one; but on the other point which is
dealt with in this extract from his speech he is right. The American
Government ought, in recognition of its indebtedness, as well as from
politic consideration of its own best interests, to be prepared to
assist the proposed negro emigration; and on that point Senators Butler,
Gibson, Morgan, and Call are in practical agreement with Senator
Hampton.
One of the most conspicuous characteristics of the negro is, as I have
already had occasion to point out, his childishness. Referring to the
negroes of Africa, Mr. H. M. Stanley, writing in December last to _The
Times_, said:—
“If one regards these natives as mere brutes, then the annoyances that
their follies and vices inflict are, indeed, intolerable. In order to
rule them and to keep one’s life amongst them, it is needful
resolutely to regard them as children, who require, indeed, different
methods of rule from English or American citizens, but who must be
ruled in precisely the same spirit, with the same absence of caprice
and anger, the same essential respect to our fellow-men.”
Another recent writer has said of them:— “They are children; children
naughty or children good; pleased or angry; children to be ruled firmly,
treated kindly; but always, at bottom, children.” And everyone who knows
thoroughly the African negro, either in Africa or in America, can have
no other estimate of his character.
This being so, is it reasonable, on the one hand, to elevate the negro,
as he has been elevated in America, to a level of political and legal
equality with the Caucasian; or, on the other hand, to expect this child
of nature to properly govern himself? The experiment of equality has
failed in America; the experiment of self-government has failed in
Hayti, in Liberia, and wherever else it has been tried. Surely, then, it
is as necessary, in the experiment of the future, to avoid placing the
negro on a pedestal which he has proved himself incapable of occupying
as it is to avoid enslaving him, oppressing him, or in any way unfairly
treating him. If my contentions be sound, it results that the experiment
of the future must be conducted with due regard to the following
conditions:—
1. The emigrating negro must be offered a country in which he may pursue
high aims, enjoy a prospect of improved political, social, and financial
_status_, and find climate and employment suited to his needs.
2. He must not govern, but be governed. At the same time he must not be
oppressed, either physically or morally; and there must be no restraint
upon his improvement and advancement.
3. His emigration must be assisted, either by those who owe him a debt
or by those who will benefit by his migration, or by both.
Accepting the above conditions as postulates, I may now definitely
indicate what, after a long and careful study of the problem in its
various aspects, seems to be the only solution that will be alike just
and permanent.
The country that is most suitable for the negro is, beyond all cavil,
that central belt of Africa which lies between the Sahara and the Tropic
of Capricorn, and which includes the Congo Free State, Senegambia,
Liberia, the British and German possessions on the Gulf of Guinea,
Sierra Leone, Gaboon, Angola, Damaraland, Mozambique, Zanzibar, and the
territories of the various British and German African companies. The
greater part of this belt is the negro’s own country, the place whence
his ancestors were kidnapped, or in which his race still dwells; and, so
far as civilisation is concerned, nearly all of it is, to this day,
virgin soil.
The past fifty years have witnessed the first serious attempts on the
part of civilisation to open up this immense district, the riches and
fertility of which no one, even now, is in a position to estimate. Very
little progress has been made. The climate and general conditions are,
over much of the tract, unsuitable for the majority of Europeans.
European influences, nevertheless, are almost everywhere dominant; and
almost everywhere there exists the framework, though not all the
machinery, of just government. The crying need of the situation is more
civilisation—civilisation not of a very advanced or cultured variety,
but rather civilisation of a kind which, not being too much superior to
native habits and modes of thought, and being, nevertheless, of a
moderately progressive type, may first, if properly encouraged and led
by white influence, capture the Africans and then gradually raise them
with itself to higher planes.
Who are more suited to apply such modest civilisation to the blacks of
Africa than the blacks of America? Africa, as a whole, will never be a
white man’s country. It will not, therefore, be the scene of such race
jealousies as torment the Southern States of the American Union.
At the same time, Africa, it is tolerably certain, will always have the
advantage of white rule, and of a kind of white rule, moreover, that
will not possess the irksome defects of white rule as it now exists in
America. In no British colony, for example, is there any reason why a
capable negro should not raise himself to high position and honour. In
no British colony, on the other hand, does the negro govern. And I think
it may also be said that in every British colony in which he is to be
found the negro is a fairly happy and contented person. It is a great
mistake to suppose, as many people do, that the negro objects to be
governed, and to be governed firmly. On the contrary, he likes it,
provided always that the government be fair as well as firm. Colonel
Shepard, an acknowledged advocate of the negro, admits, with regard to
the present condition of Hayti, that the whole business is a fine
illustration of the futility of introducing republican institutions to a
country whose people are uneducated, untrained in affairs, and incapable
of self-government.
Nor is the negro hopelessly enamoured of the suffrage. He clings to it
in the United States, because there it constitutes almost his only badge
of humanity; but to those who will freely concede his humanity he will
as freely surrender the suffrage.
By a wholesale migration, and properly conducted, of Southern negroes to
Africa, America would be relieved, and Africa would be benefited.
Already this fact has, to a limited extent, been recognised and acted
upon. In 1884 a plan for the introduction of Southern negro labour to
the Congo district was submitted to the King of the Belgians by an
American, Colonel George W. Williams; and I believe I am correct in
saying that Colonel Williams was in consequence empowered to engage
twelve clerks, accountants, and storekeepers at 125f. a month, and
twelve mechanics and engineers at from 200f. to 300f. a month,
transportation, board, lodging, and medical attendance to be provided by
the Congo Free State. Five years later, in 1889, the King of the
Belgians made application to the United States for twenty-four
professional men and artisans to go to the Congo as representatives of
the trained and educated American negro. His Majesty’s agent visited,
among other places, Shaw University, at Raleigh, North Carolina, a
remarkably well-conducted college for coloured students. The principal,
Dr. H. M. Tupper, declared his firm belief that thousands of American
negroes would, within a few years, go to the Congo country; and he said
that he recognised in the opportunity a grand means of permanently
improving the condition of many coloured people.
If the American negro were shown, as he easily might be shown, first,
that his exodus to Africa would result in vast good to his race, and
would open to him an honourable mission as a civiliser; next, that the
proceeding would result in a general amelioration of his own condition;
and finally, that in Africa he would escape from the discomforts and
persecutions that hem in his career in America; and if, at the same
time, he were offered aid to enable him to migrate to and establish
himself on the soil of his fathers, I do not doubt that he would leave
America, not merely in his thousands, but in his millions. He desires,
above all things, a country and an aim in life. Give him those, and he
will seize them gladly. But it is useless to counsel him to go to
Africa, or elsewhere, unless you also hold out to him an object to be
attained. And even a grand object will not alone induce him to move. He
is, as a rule, poor. His investments, such as they are, are all in
America. It is necessary not only to assist him to move and settle, but
also to pay him generously for the little that he must surrender.
It is impossible, while considering this scheme, to avoid thinking,
again and again, of the parallelism of the exodus of the Israelites, and
of the Biblical conclusion, “And they spoiled the Egyptians.” The
Egyptians, like the Americans, had incurred a great debt to their
bondsmen, and, like the Americans, they sought to evade it, and suffered
bitterly in consequence. But the payment was inevitable in Goshen, and
it is inevitable in the United States. In Goshen it was paid in the form
of spoils, surrendered in panic by a people who, at the last, were glad
to be rid of their captives at any cost. How will it be paid in America?
One cannot foresee, but it is quite certain that it is not yet too late
for it to be voluntarily tendered in cold blood, and to be gratefully
accepted; and it is reasonable to suppose that delay in payment will not
lessen but rather increase the amount—be it of treasure, blood, misery,
or unrest—to be ultimately paid.
It would seem, therefore, that principles of ordinary economy, as well
as of common justice, indicate that an effort should be made to pay off
the negro as soon as possible.
It cannot be said that the Union has any lack of means. Her actual
indebtedness at the conclusion of the Civil War was, roughly speaking,
£551,286,000; it is now only £187,115,000, and between June 30th and
October 1st, 1890, it was reduced by £14,537,000. In twenty-five years
the Federal Debt has been lessened by £364,171,000, or at the average
rate of over fourteen and a half millions sterling per annum; and the
annual surplus available for reduction is now, as a rule, so much larger
than it was a few years ago, while the debt remaining is of such very
manageable proportions, that very little hardship to the United States
would result from a temporary diversion—say, for thirty years—of a
portion of the surplus from the purposes of the reduction of the Federal
Debt to the payment of interest and gradual payment of principal of a
special series of negro emigration and settlement loans.
It is calculated that an annual sum of twelve or fourteen millions
sterling might thus, without undue pinching, be diverted; and this
represents a very large capital amount—an amount which would probably be
quite sufficient, with a certain quota of aid from outside, not only to
decently transport, but to comfortably establish in Africa, every
pure-blooded negro now on United States territory.
It might not be also sufficient to buy out the negro; but that might
justly be assigned as a duty, in whole or in part, to the individual
States concerned, seeing that they are more immediately interested than
is the nation at large in getting rid of him, and that the expenditure
to be incurred would sooner or later be returned to the States in the
shape of payments on the re-sale of lands and buildings now belonging to
the negroes.
That the United States have not already entered upon some such course is
rather remarkable; for they have spent scores of millions in the payment
of debts which are less pressing, and they have, indeed, been so
generous in certain directions as to have incurred the reproach of
unwarrantable extravagance. They have over half a million names on their
pension-roll, and they pay the pensioners more than twenty millions a
year, in spite of the fact that most of the persons who benefit had no
legal claim upon the country at the time when the services in respect of
which pensions are now paid were rendered. The pensions are not, as
pensions are in England, deferred pay; they are compensations and
gratuities. The Union has been lavish with them; but the Governments
which have granted them have always looked forward to a return in the
shape of political support, and so the sums disbursed have been regarded
as profitable investments.
Hitherto, there is no doubt, American politicians as a body have not
discovered that any profit can result from the payment of the nation’s
indebtedness to the negro; and that is the reason why they have not
dealt with the negro as they have dealt with the soldier.
But will there be no profit? The South is now stagnant under the incubus
of the negro.
According to Governor Lee, of Virginia, the negro does not “pay” as a
citizen. The Greenville _News_ goes so far as to make the following
estimate of the results which would follow upon the removal of
two-thirds of the present coloured population from South Carolina:—
“We should lose,” it says, “$50,000 to $75,000, which is probably a
full estimate of the total amount of taxes paid by coloured people;
the cultivation of some land, the production of some cotton, for a
time. We should have about $175,000 of the amount now used for
coloured public schools for the use of white schools, nearly doubling
the present terms and adding much to the facilities and comforts of
teachers and scholars. We should have in the penitentiary about 100
convicts instead of 800. Our criminal courts would sit on an average
from a day to a day and a half a week, nine-tenths of their time being
now occupied by trying coloured persons. Our gaols would have about
one-fifth of the inmates they now have, nineteen-twentieths of the
prisoners now fed and kept at the cost of the taxpayers being
coloured. The lunatic asylum would have one-half its present
population and would cost one-half of what it now costs. The county
poor-houses would contain one-half, or less, of their present
population. The trial justices would have, on an average, about a case
a month. These calculations are from the actual figures. What we
should gain in the way of keeping white people who are now crowded out
by coloured competition, the improvement of lands by intelligent and
careful cultivation, and the incoming of white mechanics and farmers,
are matters of further estimation.”
The Union is divided, and it is the presence of the negro that causes
the division. Nearly one-eighth of the population of the Union is of
alien race, and, besides being hopelessly alien, is oppressed,
discontented, and dangerous. These are evils which might be abolished to
the general profit. And worse evils lurk in the future. The prosecution
of a race war would not be cheaper than the promotion of a negro exodus.
The severance from the Union of six or eight States would be vastly more
weakening to the nation as a whole. In some form the debt must be paid.
Nature has never yet admitted the plea of any Statute of Limitations in
cases like the one under discussion. It were well, then, to make a
settlement while it can still be made peacefully and, comparatively
speaking, cheaply.
If America would do its duty by the negro, those civilised nations which
have established themselves in Africa would, in pursuance of their own
interests, aid her. Great Britain, Germany, and France would each and
all welcome the immigration to their African possessions of large and
leavening bodies of American blacks. Not long ago Sir Alfred Moloney,
Governor of Lagos, received a deputation from “the Brazilian and
Havannah repatriates in the colony of Lagos,” and was assured that all
the negroes of Brazil wished to return to the country of their
ancestors. In reply, Sir Alfred Moloney said that he had induced the
commercial world to take an interest in the project, and that the
African Steamship Company had engaged to provide improved and cheaper
facilities for negro immigrants from Brazil. He welcomed the idea of
“repatriation,” and would encourage it. Much more, no doubt, would he
welcome the idea of the “repatriation” of the immeasurably more
civilised and less debauched American negro. The black, it is true, will
not do much good for himself anywhere without white superintendence, but
there is no reason why such superintendence as is necessary should not
be forthcoming, and, if it be once understood that the salvation of
Africa lies with the negro even more than with the white, there is every
ground for believing that the American negro will rise bravely to the
occasion.
Even in a greater degree than in the African possessions of Great
Britain, Germany, and France does there appear to be a career for the
American negro in the Congo Free State. The author of “An Appeal to
Pharaoh” has indicated that State as the American negro’s promised land.
A copy of the book was recently given to Mr. H. M. Stanley, a man who,
having spent parts of his life not only in the Dark Continent but also
in Louisiana, knows the negro both in America and in Africa. The volume
drew from the traveller a very interesting letter, from which I extract
the following:—
“There is space enough in one section of the Upper Congo basin to
locate double the number of the negroes of the United States without
disturbing a single tribe of the aborigines now inhabiting it. I refer
to the immense Upper Congo forest country, 350,000 square miles in
extent, which is three times larger than the Argentine Republic, and
one and a half times larger than the entire German Empire, embracing
224,000,000 acres of umbrageous forest land, wherein every unit of the
7,000,000 negroes might become the owner of nearly a quarter square
mile of land. Five acres of this, planted with bananas and plantains,
would furnish every soul with sufficient subsistence—food and wine.
The remaining twenty-seven acres of his estate would furnish him with
timber, rubber, gums, dye-stuffs, for sale. There are 150 days of rain
throughout the year. There is a clear stream every few hundred yards.
In a day’s journey we have crossed as many as thirty-two streams. The
climate is healthy and equable, owing to the impervious forest which
protects the land from chilly winds and draughts. All my white
officers passed through the wide area safely. Eight navigable rivers
course through it. Hills and ridges diversify the scenery and give
magnificent prospects. To those negroes in the South accustomed to
Arkansas, Mississippi, and Louisiana, it would be a reminder of their
own plantations without the swamps and the depressing influence of
cypress forests. Anything and everything might be grown in it, from
the oranges, guavas, sugarcane, and cotton of sub-tropical lands to
the wheat of California and the rice of South Carolina. If the
emigration were prudently conceived and carried out, the glowing
accounts sent home by the first settlers would soon dissipate all fear
and reluctance on the part of the others. But it is all a dream. The
American capitalists, like other leaders of men, are more engaged in
decorating their wives with diamonds than in busying themselves with
national questions of such import as removing the barrier between the
North and the South. The ‘open sore’ of America—the race question—will
ever remain an incurable fester. While we are all convinced that the
Nessus shirt which clings to the Republic has maddened her, and may
madden her again, it is quite certain that the small effort needed to
free themselves for ever from it will never be made.”
I am inclined to be more sanguine than Mr. Stanley was when he wrote
that letter. Some solution of the race question cannot be long deferred,
and surely there is enough latent justice and prudence in the American
people to induce them to render the inevitable solution a peaceable and
equitable one.
In a still later utterance on the subject Mr. Stanley has taken a
cheerier view. The Congo Government, he declares, is favourable, and the
laws are calculated to promote happiness and content. Whites cannot
colonise the State, since a white man living in the Congo Valley for
three years expends ten years of vitality, while women cannot retain
health.
“With negroes forming the majority of its citizenship, the State
would, with proper encouragement, make remarkable development, and, in
time, become a great nation.... At present the Congo Free State’s
government is entirely in the hands of whites, but, in my opinion, any
man who can prove his capacity would receive all that any could
expect.”
For the half-breed of the South another haven must be sought. He is no
more the friend of the black than he is of the white. Neither desires
his company. But in the West Indies, or in some parts of South and
Central America, he might, no doubt, discover a land in which his
existence would be a not unpleasant one.
I have discussed this great subject copiously, but very inadequately. No
question at present before the world has so many aspects; and to America
no question is equally important. The solution which I have advocated is
costly; but it is, I believe, the only one that promises a permanent and
honourable settlement of the difficulty. Any other must be imperfect, or
must involve wholesale bloodshed. Until something of the kind is put
into practice, the dearly bought union must remain a nominal one, and
North and South must continue to cherish different aims, and to be, in
effect, separate nations. Only when the negro shall have departed will
the name of the United States truly represent anything more than a
magnificent aspiration.
It would be ungenerous to conclude this work without some acknowledgment
of the great assistance that has been rendered to me in my study of the
subject by, among others, Mr. Eustace Ballard Smith, Mr. John Bigelow,
Mr. P. Bigelow, Major Post, U.S.A., Mr. Chauncey M. Depew, Mr. J. W.
Barnwell, Mr. G. W. Cable, Mr. Theodore Roosevelt, Mr. C. M‘Kinley, Mr.
S. J. E. Rawling, Mr. R. W. Gilder, and the Governors of most of the
Southern States. To them, and to many others, including a number of
negro gentlemen, whose names, if I have not already mentioned them
incidentally, are, at their own wish, withheld, I desire to express my
most grateful thanks, coupled with the sincere hope that the difficulty
which interests all of them, and which is only fortunate in that it has
enabled me to make their acquaintance, may, before long, cease to exist.
APPENDIX.
[Illustration: Black ornamental horizontal divider with a central
diamond-shaped motif.]
A.—THE POPULATION OF THE SOUTH IN 1890.
Up to the time of sending this book to the press, no official statistics
of the relative proportions of the races in the Southern States of the
Black Belt in 1890 have reached me from Washington. Bulletin No. 16 of
the Census Office contains, however, a final statement as to the total
population of each State in question. I give the figures in tabular
form, leaving vacant columns for the insertion hereafter of the missing
information:—
──────────────┬───────────┬───────────┬───────────
│ Total │ White. │ Coloured.
│Population,│ │
│ 1890. │ │
──────────────┼───────────┼───────────┼───────────
North Carolina│ 1,617,947│ │
Virginia │ 1,655,980│ │
Georgia │ 1,837,353│ │
Florida │ 391,422│ │
Alabama │ 1,513,017│ │
Louisiana │ 1,118,587│ │
Mississippi │ 1,289,600│ │
South Carolina│ 1,151,149│ │
──────────────┼───────────┼───────────┼───────────
│ 10,575,055│ │
──────────────┴───────────┴───────────┴───────────
B.—COLOUR CASTE.
To the _Forum_ for October, 1889 (_Forum_ Publishing Company, 253, Fifth
Avenue, New York), the Rev. John Snyder contributed an article with the
above title. As it illustrates many points that are briefly touched upon
in the present volume, I venture to append some further portions of it
beyond those already quoted.
“A gifted American actor,” says Mr. Snyder, “has conceived a
professional scheme which promises an affluent return of profit and
reputation. He is convinced that, under certain clearly recognised
conditions, the drama of _Othello_ may be made popular in the Southern
States. He sees clearly, of course, why this great product of the
master’s genius has been ‘under a cloud,’ so to speak, south of Mason
and Dixon’s line, and he purposes revealing to the art-loving people of
that section the beauties of a work which the interpretative power of
the greatest actors of the past has never made tolerable on the Southern
stage.
“He is conscious of the natural difficulties to be overcome; of the
state of social feeling which will always resent the intrusion of the
African on the histrionic stage, except within the limited range of the
minstrel show. But his system contemplates an easy solution of these
apparently insuperable difficulties. He does not design to impart a less
pronounced colour to the face of _Othello_, because experience has
taught him that the slightest tinge of creaminess in the complexion and
the faintest crinkle in the hair would leave the prejudice against his
hero’s race practically unaffected. He simply intends to ‘improve’
Shakspeare so that the great bard’s creations may be made generally
acceptable to all sections of our free and enlightened land.
“There is no intention wilfully to misrepresent Shakspeare, or to
distort his plain meanings. But this artist has reasoned himself into
the conviction that the great author’s hero could not have been a negro.
Therefore, all the prejudice against him on that ground is manifestly
unreasonable. In the very nature of things, he must have been the
representative of another race, or else _Brabantio’s_ friendship,
_Desdemona’s_ love, _Cassio’s_ esteem, and the unstinted admiration of
Venice would all be impossible and inconceivable. Accordingly, our actor
holds, _Othello_ must have resembled one of those stately Arab chiefs
whose portraits gleam from the pages of ‘Picturesque Palestine.’
“Our Southern brethren are at last to have an _Othello_ who cannot, as
the moral circus advertisements say, ‘offend the most fastidious.’
Shakspeare, carefully modernised, will become popular once more in the
sunny South. All references to the blackness of _Othello’s_ face and the
thickness of his lips are to be conscientiously softened down into less
objectionable phrases, and those audiences which may be ethnologically
unenlightened are to have their sensitive natures soothed by some such
prologue as _Bottom_ proposed for the sapient actors of Athens: ‘Ladies,
or fair ladies, I would wish you, or I entreat you, not to fear, not to
tremble; my life for yours. If you think I come hither as a “nigger,” it
were a pity of my life. I am no such thing. I am an Arab.’ That would
put all doubt at rest.
“The only thing likely to interfere with the success of this scheme of
mingled philanthropy and profit is the presence of that vast amount of
astute Shakspearean philosophy which is based upon the assumption of
_Othello’s_ objectionable ethnic relationship. What becomes of Professor
D. J. Snider’s ‘System of Shakspeare’s Dramas.’? It is quite probable
that Shakspeare, could he be consulted, would offer no strenuous
objection to the proposed change. Having been an actor himself, he would
doubtless sympathise with the despair to which the modern representative
of his profession is reduced in the task of catering to the present
unreasonable demand for dramatic novelties. As there is not the
slightest appreciable trace of a ‘system’ in any of his dramas, and as
the social prejudice against the African race as such is something which
in his day and generation was still unborn, it is reasonable to suppose
that _Othello_ might be re-made into a Chinaman or a Choctaw without
seriously affecting the motive of the tragedy.
“Still, when a man has constructed a ‘System of Shakspeare,’ and has
announced that ‘Shakspeare makes race an ethical element of marriage, as
important as chastity,’ and that ‘in Europe to-day the marriage of a
lord and a servant-girl collides with the moral consciousness of the
whole public,’ he naturally has the same kind of affection for that
system which Dr. Sangrado had for his, and any attempt to upset its
‘ethical’ conclusions by substituting an Arabian _Othello_ for an
Ethiopian, will be apt to be resented. It is as fundamentally unethical
to marry an Arab as a negro. It will be much wiser for our actor frankly
to retain the African characteristics of his hero, letting it be
understood that a true Shakspearean system employs this tragedy as an
‘awful example’ to warn those who are tempted to leap over the ethical
fence of racial distinctions.
“Once outside of the atmosphere of American social life, it is difficult
to treat the spirit of colour caste with seriousness or decent respect.
Of course, that man would be but a shallow ethnologist who should
maintain that the terms ‘superior’ and ‘inferior’ do not justly mark the
distinctions between races, or who should refuse to acknowledge that
certain choice characteristics of civilisation are confined within
fairly well-ascertained racial limitations. And the man who looks with
disapproval upon marriage unions between the members of a progressive
race like the Caucasian, and the members of a conditionally unimprovable
race, is governed by principles of the simplest prudence, to say no
more. The difficulty is always in determining this question of
improvability. The Spanish race in its various colonies has seemed to
stand still for three centuries, yet to attribute racial inferiority to
the countrymen of Cervantes and Loyola would be manifestly unjust. The
negro race in this country may be mentally and morally both inferior and
unimprovable, and hence it would be both wise and ethical for our stock
to refuse to make with it a mixture of blood. But the average American
knows nothing and cares nothing about any physiological reasons for
declining such marriages. In truth, the race question does not, with us,
involve this marriage element at all. Generally speaking, nobody wants
his daughter to marry a negro, and the negro is not anxious to seek such
marriages. As a matter of fact, in the matter of marriage the negro is
ridiculously fastidious, accepting without complaint the white man’s
classification of every shade of colour, even the slightest, under the
head of negro, and rigorously claiming for his own race every possible
modification of the original type. There are plenty of octoroons and
quadroons who might easily pass for members of the white race, but who
never think of seeking marriage associations outside their mother’s
stock. And they would be subjected to the severe censure of the black
race if they did so. The bugbear of ‘miscegenation’ is the least
substantial phantom that haunts the imagination of ignorant people.
“The cruel wall of caste which has been relentlessly built around the
negro in this country was not created by the fear of racial
deterioration on the part of the Caucasian. The feeling from which it
sprang is so inexplicable as almost to defy any philosophical analysis.
That in the Southern States slavery should have created a clearly
defined colour caste was reasonable and natural. That among a people
generous in disposition and generally religious in their habits of mind
this caste feeling should have been strengthened by every argument
tending to show the negro’s natural inferiority and fitness for his
servile position was equally natural. That within the limits of slave
territory every Southern gentleman should consider the presence of
mental ability in an individual negro a reflection upon the system and a
menace to its continuance, was the most reasonable thing in the world.
But it is only justice to say that not in the South but in the North did
this curious feeling of colour caste first have its rise. The Southern
man apparently denied to the negro social recognition not primarily
because he was a negro, but because he was a slave. The Northern man
seems to hate the negro primarily on account of his colour. In domestic
service, the filthiest and most ignorant Irish or German servant refuses
to eat at the same table with the cleanest and most respectable negro.
In some of our hotels the wealthiest negro in the land could not
purchase, at any price, the privilege of sitting in the common
dining-room, or of occupying one of the sleeping apartments.
Industrially, he is practically restricted to a “beggarly account,” of
the least profitable and most menial trades. Those labour unions which
complain so bitterly of the oppression of capital, and announce Utopian
principles of universal brotherhood, do not dare to cast their mantle of
protection over the despised and neglected labourer with a black skin.
But saddest of all is the attitude which the Church has held towards
this spirit of colour caste. Ideally, at least, the Church is the home
of human equality. All classes and conditions of men are supposed to
meet there on a common ground. And while we constantly depart from this
principle in practice, we usually try to cover and disguise our
shortcomings by a thin veil of self-exculpation. We may not want the
poor and poorly dressed man sitting in our pews, but we rarely make a
frank confession of the fact. Only the negro is openly, and by common
consent, excluded from the broad definition of Christian equality. We
have not yet accepted Mr. Nasby’s advice, and altered our version of the
New Testament so that it shall read ‘Suffer the little (white) children
to come unto Me,’ but it would be quite consistent for us to do so.
“This condition of things would cease to be mysterious if it were based
upon recognised physiological reasons. We can easily understand
_Brabantio’s_ surprise when his daughter became enamoured of a
thick-lipped African, or Aunt Ophelia’s disgust at seeing Eva hanging
about the neck of Uncle Tom. We are not disposed to question the good
Puritan’s conviction that the pure negro is ‘an acquired taste.’ But we
entertain the same personal and social repugnance for every possible
modification of the negro. Even when the bleaching process has been so
thorough that no external indication of African blood remains; even when
the individual has assumed all the characteristics of Caucasian beauty
and intelligence, we still treat him as a social pariah. Several years
ago there was, at a certain school in Pittsburg, a very beautiful and
intelligent young lady. In scholarship and deportment she stood for a
year at the head of the school. At the end of that time somebody told
the principal that his favourite pupil had lurking in her veins a few
unsuspected and undiscoverable drops of African blood. She was turned
out of the doors as ignominiously as if she had been guilty of
unchastity or was afflicted with some infectious disease.
“Tell the average American that he is descended from Pocahontas, that
his blood may be traced to Confucius, or that his daughter has secretly
married one of Madame Blavatsky’s mythical Indian Mahatmas, and the
chances are that he will be flattered and gratified. You stumble over no
‘ethical principle’; you encounter no fatal racial prejudice. Tell him
that his great-great-grandfather was probably a powerful potentate from
the Congo or the Niger, and you touch the acme of insult. It would be
safer to accuse him of highway robbery.
“But the most astonishing feature of this colour caste is found in the
complacent assumption of the average American that it is something
inherent and natural in the human mind, and is therefore universal. Tell
such a person that it is the result of social and political education,
and he will smile at your ignorance. Yet when such an American steps
over the borders of his own country he does not find this prejudice
shared by any other nation. The Frenchman, Englishman, or German may not
want his daughter to marry a negro, but in no part of Europe do you
detect the presence of that galling system of social discrimination
which so exasperates the black man in this country. All over the
continent of Europe you find the negro living in the best hotels,
travelling in first class coaches, and sitting as an equal on the
benches of the great scientific and art schools. You find no trace of
this prejudice in the press or literature of Europe; you find no taint
of it in its social life. London is the great meeting-place of all the
varied races of the world. A new Peter would find there the
representatives of more peoples than listened to the many-tongued sermon
on the Day of Pentecost. All colours and conditions of men make up the
varied web and woof of its marvellous life. Each man’s condition is
determined by his rank, his wealth, his social position. Social caste
indeed exists of the most rigid type; but it is never based on colour,
hardly ever upon racial distinctions. It may be, as the author of the
‘System of Shakspeare’s Dramas’ affirms, that the marriage of a lord and
a servant-girl ‘collides with the moral consciousness of the whole
public,’ but a man’s treatment is conditioned upon his wealth, his
intelligence, his knowledge, his rank, or his personal character, never
upon the colour of his skin. In the light of this fact our colour caste
seems as provincial as it is undeniably absurd, cruel, and
indefensible.”
C.—SLAVERY IN THE NORTH.
The following letter was addressed in 1888 to the Editor of, and was
printed in, the Charleston _News and Courier_. As it deals very ably,
though from a pronouncedly Southern standpoint, with the responsibility
of the North towards the negro, I reprint it with a few insignificant
corrections:—
“SIR,—I was glad to see your editorial on March 9th last on the
Emancipation Proclamation. It is surprising how much ignorance exists
upon the subject of emancipation in some of the usually best-informed
circles. I desire to call your attention to two instances of this in
that usually accurate journal, the _Nation_ (of New York). In a recent
number there appeared the review of a letter written from Washington
to a paper in Frankfort:—
“‘The condition of our negro population is the subject of a Washington
letter in the _Frankfurter Zeitung_ of December 24th, 1887. The
writer’s view of their social status is correct enough, but he is
rather at sea in his historical retrospect, as when he says that the
South was at one time more opposed to slavery than was the North, and
that the Civil War was a struggle between “the sons of the
slave-owners and the planters to whom their fathers had sold their
dark commodities.” This is a corollary to the misleading statement
that “in 1790 the negroes were distributed throughout this country,
and were almost exclusively slaves,” but that, “during the first
quarter of a century the inhabitants of the Northern States gradually
sold their slaves to the South, where climate and the nature of the
agricultural products increase the value of negro labour,” all of
which sounds as if the countryman of Von Holst had drawn his
inspiration from the pro-slavery pamphlets of Buchanan’s
Administration.’
“I have not seen this letter, nor do I know who is the writer, but if
you will allow me space I think I can convince even the _Nation_, and
its readers who shall happen to see this communication, that the
statements quoted are not so wide of the mark as the _Nation_ seems to
think.
“If such, as the _Nation_ suggests, was indeed the source of the
writer’s information, can the following facts and figures, which are
taken mostly from a work of that time, be disputed? The author from
whom I take the figures, as I cannot at this moment put my hand upon
the census of 1790, was, it is true, a Rebel brigadier, the heroic
defender of Marye’s Heights at Fredericksburg, where he was killed;
but, all the same, can the statements be denied?—(‘Cobb on Slavery,’
Philadelphia, T. and I. W. Johnson and Co., 1858):—
“By the census of 1790 there were 40,370 slaves in the States north of
Virginia. Now how were those 40,000 slaves emancipated? Can any one
point to a single Act by any Northern State by which any negro was
actually and immediately emancipated? We ask this because it is clear
that all the gradual emancipation schemes had just the effect which
the Frankfort writer states: to wit, they caused the inhabitants of
the Northern States generally to sell their slaves to the South. Laws
prohibiting slavery after some future date were but warnings to the
owners of slaves to send them out of the State before the Act should
go into effect. The inevitable working of such Acts was to send the
slaves South for sale.
“Vermont, we know, claims the honour of having been the first to
exclude slavery. She claims that this was done by her Bill of Rights
in 1777. But the census of 1790 shows seventeen slaves. Her Bill of
Rights could not have done a very perfect work since it allowed
seventeen slaves to remain in bonds thirteen years after its adoption.
Slavery, which had been introduced into Massachusetts soon after its
first settlement, was ‘tolerated,’ as Chief Justice Parsons gently
expresses it, certainly until the adoption of the Constitution of
1780. Nor, indeed, did the Constitution of 1780, by any express
provision or declaration, prohibit slavery. But a very few days ago a
letter of Mr. Thomas Silloway, of Boston, appeared in the Charleston
_Sun_, giving instances of bills of sale and disposition by will of
Indian and negro slaves in Massachusetts as late as 1771. Dr. Oliver
Wendell Holmes makes Old Sophy, the nurse of Elsie Venner, the
daughter of a slave mother. So gradual was the decadence of slavery in
Massachusetts that as late as 1833 her Supreme Court could not say by
what specific Act the institution had been abolished. (Winchendon v.
Hatfield, 4 Mass. 123; Commonwealth v. Aves, 18 Pick, 209.)
“In Belknap’s ‘New Hampshire,’ Vol. III., 280, published in 1792, the
matter is thus explained:—
“‘Slavery is not prohibited by any express law. Negroes were never
very numerous in New Hampshire. Some of them purchased their freedom
during the late war by serving three years in the army. Others have
been made free by the justice and humanity of their masters. In
Massachusetts they are all accounted free by the first article in the
Declaration of Rights, “All men are born free and equal.” In the Bill
of Rights of New Hampshire the first article is expressed in these
words: “All men are born equally free and independent;” which, in the
opinion of most persons, will bear the same construction. But others
have deduced from it this inference, that all who are born since the
Constitution was made are free; and that those who were in slavery
before remain there still. For this reason, in the late census, the
blacks in New Hampshire are distinguished into free and slaves. It is
not in my power to apologise for this inconsistency.’
“The author then goes on to explain, as we Southerners afterwards
continued to do, how much better off those who were slaves were than
those who were free in other States. By the census of 1790 there were
158 slaves in New Hampshire, and in 1840 there was still one
remaining.
“In the plantations of Rhode Island slaves were more numerous than in
the other New England States, as, indeed, they necessarily were,
considering that the merchants and sailors of that little State were
the greatest slave traders of this country. But as the negroes could
not thrive in that latitude, her Legislature provided a gradual scheme
of emancipation, which took a lifetime to work out, leaving as late as
1840 five slaves in that State. Connecticut was too much interested to
indulge her philanthropy at the expense of an immediate emancipation.
In 1790 she had 2,750 slaves. So she too adopted a plan of gradual
emancipation, by the slow and prudent workings of which seventeen of
her slaves remained as such in 1840.
“As Mr. Bancroft observes: ‘that New York is not a slave State like
Carolina, is due to her climate and not to the superior humanity of
her founders.’ (Vol. II., 303). When South Carolina prohibited the
importation of slaves from Africa in 1789, New York imported them and
shipped the savages to this State as American slaves. As late as 1858
the London _Times_ charged that New York had become the greatest
slave-trading mart in the world, a charge which Wilson, in the ‘Rise
and Fall of the Slave Power,’ fully corroborates. In 1790 New York had
21,324 slaves. She, too, adopted an Act of gradual emancipation, by
the operation of which in 1840 all but four slaves had been gotten rid
of. New Jersey, though adopting the same scheme, was slower in getting
rid of her slaves, 674 still remaining in 1840.
“Adam Smith observed:—‘The late resolution of the Quakers in
Pennsylvania to set at liberty all their negro slaves may satisfy us
that their number cannot be very great. Had they made any considerable
part of their property such a resolution could never have been taken.’
(‘Wealth of Nations.’) There were 3,737 slaves in Pennsylvania in
1790, and, as Adam Smith predicted, she would not sacrifice so much
property. So she, too, provided for gradual emancipation. The census
of 1840 showed sixty-five negroes still in slavery. In 1823 a negro
woman was put up on the auction block along with some machinery,
smith’s tools, and one cow, and sold for debt by the sheriff of
Fayette County, in the State of Brotherly Love. They were still
discussing this case in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania as late as
1837, but it was the inadequacy of the price the poor wretch brought,
and not the iniquity of the transaction, about which they were
contending. (Lynch v. Commonwealth, 6 Watts 495.) It was the frosts
and snows which put an end to slavery at the North, not philanthropy.
“It is familiar history that the slave trade by which slavery was
established in this country was carried on by Old England and New
England, and not by the South. As Mr. Lecky points out, the New
England trade, just prior to the Revolution, consisted in sending her
lumber out and bringing slaves in.
“Some time since in his notes, in this same paper, while reviewing a
work on ‘Brazil and Slavery,’ the editor of the _Nation_ wrote as
follows:—
“‘We can recommend it for its own sake, but we have read it with the
deepest interest for its reflected light on that irrepressible
conflict which ended, some would say, in April, 1865, and others in
March, 1876. First, and above all, it inspires a sense of profound
thankfulness that there never existed in this country a party, or a
policy, or a measure of gradual emancipation. We mean, of course,
against that purely Southern slave power which dictated the
compromises of the Federal Constitution.’
“In this the editor of the _Nation_ could not have meant that there
never existed in this country a policy or a measure of gradual
emancipation, for, as we have seen, just such a policy was adopted
throughout the Northern States. It was by just such measures that the
Northern people rid themselves of the institutions which they had so
large a hand in imposing upon the South. But was this statement
correct even if limited by his last sentence, ‘We mean, of course,
against the Southern slave power,’ &c.?
“Mr. Lincoln declared, in his inaugural address, that the Republican
party had no intention to interfere with the institution of slavery;
and Congress, by a joint resolution, approved July 22nd, 1861,
repeated Mr. Lincoln’s declaration, and announced to the South that
the war was only for the preservation of the Union, and not for the
abolition of slavery; and Congress actually passed in March, 1861, by
a two-thirds vote, a proposed amendment to the Constitution that:—
“‘No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorise
or give Congress the power to abolish or interfere within any State
with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held
to labour or service by the laws of the said State.’
“Upon the recommendation, however, of Mr. Lincoln, made in a special
message in April, 1862, Congress passed another joint resolution
offering pecuniary aid from the General Government to induce the
States to adopt ‘general abolishment of slavery.’
“Mr. Lincoln expressed the sentiment of the North, which enabled him
to carry on the war successfully, when, on the 22nd August, 1862, he
said:
“‘My paramount object is to save the Union, and not to save or destroy
slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would
do it. If I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and
if I could do it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would
also do that.’
“The slaves in the States at war with the Federal Government were
freed as a military and not as a political measure. The Federal
Government did not free the slaves in Delaware, Maryland, and
Kentucky. The results of the war rendered slavery impracticable, but
that was all.
“The truth is that the South could at any time during the war have
secured the institution of slavery at the sacrifice of the right of
secession. That sacrifice she would not voluntarily make, and she lost
both her sovereignty and her slaves. She was the unfortunate,
innocent, last holder of a dishonoured bill, and the emitters of it
turned upon her and called to the world to see how they would punish
her for holding it.
“EDWARD MCCRADY, JR.”
To this it may be added that, under the old territorial laws of
Illinois, persons were allowed to bring slaves into the Territory under
the name of indentured servants. As such they might be held in bondage
for a term of ninety-nine years or less. This was in direct violation of
the spirit of the ordinance of 1787, which interdicted slavery or
involuntary servitude in all the territory north of the Ohio River. The
first Illinois State Constitution, adopted in 1818, prohibited the
further introduction of slaves, but did not abolish this species of
slavery by liberating the victims of the old Territorial enactments.
Thus slavery existed in Illinois in defiance of the ordinance of 1787
until the adoption of the Constitution of 1848, which contained the
following provision:—“There shall be neither slavery nor involuntary
servitude in this State, except as a punishment for crime.” After the
adoption of the Constitution of 1818, the first Legislature re-enacted
the law “respecting free negroes, mulattoes, servants, and slaves” of
Territorial times. No severer law was to be found in any slave State. It
forbade negroes or mulattoes to settle in the State without certificates
of freedom. No person was to employ any negro or mulatto without such
certificate, under a penalty of $1.50 for each day. To harbour any slave
or servant, or hinder the owner in retaking a slave, was made a felony,
punishable by restitution or a fine of two-fold value, and by a whipping
not to exceed thirty stripes. Every black or mulatto without a proper
certificate was subject to arrest as a runaway slave, to be advertised
for six weeks by the sheriff, when, if not reclaimed or his freedom
established, he was sold for one year, after which he was entitled to a
freedom certificate. Any slave or servant found ten miles from home
without permit was liable to arrest and thirty-five stripes, on the
order of a justice. For misbehaving to his master or family he was
punishable with the lash. Indeed, punishment with the lash to the number
of thirty-nine and forty stripes was prescribed for each of a long list
of offences, real or of legal construction. Even after the adoption of
the Constitution of 1848, which required the General Assembly at its
first session to pass such laws as should effectually prohibit free
persons of colour from immigrating to, or settling in this State, and
should prohibit the owners of slaves from bringing them there for the
purpose of setting them free, the Legislature passed an Act, February
12th, 1853, which imposed on every such coloured person a fine of $50.
If the fine was not paid forthwith he was to be advertised and sold to
any one who would pay the fine and costs for the shortest period of such
person’s service. A case under this law was carried up to the Supreme
Court, and decided, so late as 1864, to be valid. Other provisions of
these enactments, which were known as the Black Laws, were almost
equally detestable. On February 7th, 1865, they were repealed. Had it
not been for these Black Laws the census of Illinois would not be
blotted with an enrolment of “168 slaves” in 1810; 917 in 1820; 747 in
1830; and 331 in 1840—the last census that carries such a stain.
Fortunately, the masters and people at large were better than their
laws.
D.—THE GROWTH OF THE COLOURED RACE.
The following table shows the white and coloured populations of the
whole of the United States at the various decennial periods from 1790 to
the present time:—
─────┬──────────┬─────────────────────
Year.│ Total │ Coloured.
│ White. │
„ │ „ │ Free. │ Slaves.
─────┼──────────┼──────────┼──────────
1790 │ 3,172,006│ 59,527│ 697,681
1800 │ 4,306,446│ 108,437│ 893,602
1810 │ 5,862,073│ 186,446│ 1,191,362
1820 │ 7,862,166│ 233,634│ 1,538,022
1830 │10,537,378│ 319,599│ 2,009,043
1840 │14,195,805│ 386,293│ 2,487,355
1850 │19,553,068│ 434,495│ 3,204,313
1860 │26,922,537│ 488,070│ 3,953,760
1870 │33,589,377│ 4,880,009│ none
1880 │43,402,970│ 6,580,793│ none
1890 │ │ │ none
─────┴──────────┴──────────┴──────────
INDEX.
Abolition of slavery, 19
Adams, J. A., 52
Advantages of getting rid of the negro, 208, 209
Africa for the negro, 195, 201, etc.
African Colonisation Society, The, 183
African Steamship Co., The, 210
Aims, Necessity for providing the emigrant with, 197, 200, 204
Anderson, J. W., 43
Alabama, Reconstruction in, 32
Amendment XIII., 19, 21, 67
—— XIV., 25, 35, 67
—— XV., 39, 64, 67, 86, 151, 153, 154
American institutions unsuited for the negro, 196, 198
Anglo-Saxon antipathy to miscegenation, 169
“Appeal to Cæsar, An,” 90
“Appeal to Pharaoh, An,” 131, 165, 175, 178, 211
Argentine, Suggested migration to the, 189, 190
Arkansas, Cotton raised in, 194
—— _Democrat_ quoted, 192
Arms, Length of the negro’s, 69
Arrest of Democratic Legislators, 61
Arrest, Illegal, 51
Assisted emigration for the negro, 200
Atlanta _Constitution_ quoted, 73, 192
Augusta _Chronicle_ quoted, 128
Ballot, American system of, 81
——, Unsuitability of the negro for the, 86
Bancroft, Mr., 227
Barbers’ shops, Race prejudice in, 102
Barksdale, E., 23, 53
Barnwell, J. W., 214
Bassett, E. D., 163
_Belford’s Magazine_ quoted, 167
Belgians, H.M. the King of the, 203, 204
Bigelow, J. and P., 214
Birmingham _Age-Herald_ quoted, 190
Black Belt? What is the, 9
—— blood, Prejudice against, 87
—— Parliament, A, 41
Blank resignations, 59
Blyden, Dr. E. W., 189, 193
Board of Registration, The, 57
Boston _Advertiser_ quoted, 97
—— _Herald_ quoted, 72, 112
—— _Transcript_ quoted, The, 164
Brain, Weight of the negro’s, 69
Bruce, B. K., 162
Buckalew, Mr., 28
Buenos Ayres _Prensa_ quoted, 190
—— _Standard_ quoted, 190
Bullock, Governor, 50
Bureau, Freedmen’s, 25, 27
Butler, Senator, 196, 199
Cable, G. W., 91, 93, 102, 214
Call, Senator, 197, 199
Cardozo, Mr., 49
Carpet-baggers, 27, 33, 39, 52, 55, 141
Caste, Colour, 218
Census, Eleventh, 1
——, First, 3, 4
——, Tenth, 1 _et seq._
Chamberlain, Governor D. H., 46
Charleston _Budget_ quoted, 95
—— _News and Courier_ quoted, 80, 96, 102, 104, 105, 106, 120, 192,
194, 224
—— _Sun_ quoted, 226
—— _World_ quoted, 136
Chicago _Herald_ quoted, 101
Childishness of the negro, 199, 200
Church, A. M. E., 86
Cincinnati, Race prejudice at, 98
Civilisation of Africa by the negro, 201, 202, 203, 204
Civil Rights Bill, The, 65, 68
Clay, Henry, 183
Cleveland _Gazette_ quoted, 195
“Cobb on Slavery” quoted, 225
Colour caste, 217
Coloured majority, States having a, 5
—— men, Prominent, 162
—— National League and Voodooism, The, 113
—— people, _see also under_ Mulatto, Octoroon, etc.
Colour line in the North, The, 181, 182
Coloured race, Increase of the, 232
Colour, The significance of racial, 167
Columbia, Abolition of negro suffrage in, 74
Columbia, Negro suffrage in, 28
Columbia, S.C., Extravagance at, 40
Compensation of the negro, 207
Cone on Race Colour, Mr., 167
Confederate States held to be out of the Union, Ex-, 27, 29
Congo, American negroes for the, 203, 204, 211, 212
——, Advantages of the, 211
Congress may limit the suffrage, 86
——, Thirty-ninth, 24, 27
Connecticut, Slavery in, 227
Constitution, _see_ Amendments
Constitutional Conventions, 30
Conventions, Constitutional, 30
Corbin, Judge, 33, 34
Corruption in South Carolina, 44
——, Official, 36
—— of negro-Republican party, 58
Cost of negro emigration, 207
Cotton raised by white and by negro labour, 194
Cotton fields, The negro not necessary in the, 191, 192
“Counting out,” 80
Cranium, The negro, 70
Criminality of the negro, 114
“Cuffy, Old,” 36
Curtis, G. W., 71
“Cyclopædia of Political Science” quoted, 52
Dangers of the situation, 16, 143
Darnell, Prof. S. B., 172
Death-rate of the white and the negro, 3
Debt of the U.S. to the negro, 185, 186, 189, 198, 205
—— of the United States, 206
Democrat, The Southern white is a, 22
Democratic Legislators arrested, 61
Depew, C. M., 214
Diseases of negroes, 108
Disenfranchisement of ex-Confederates, 29, 54
Douglas, Senator, 172
Douglass, Mr. Fredk., 98, 163
Drummond, Prof., 179
Duty of the United States, 210, 213
Edgington, Col. T. B., 153
Edmunds, Senator, 75
Education as a suggested panacea, 157, 161, 164, 165
Education, Negro, 75, 116
Eight-box Law, The, 82, 83
Election at Mount Pleasant, An, 84
Elections, Fraudulent, 33, 50, 78–85
—— of 1886, 27
Elliott, R. B., 163
Emancipation a failure, 125
—— destructive of miscegenation, 177
—— in the North, 225
Emigration as a panacea, 181
——, Cost of negro, 207
—— from the South, White, 10, 11
——, Futile plans of, 184
——, The negro’s willingness for, 187, etc.
—— the only cure, 182, 188, 189
Enfranchisement of the negro, 29
Equality a hopeless dream, 155
Equity of pre-Reconstruction legislation in Virginia, 52
Eustis, Senator, 83
Expulsion by force impracticable, 198
Extermination of the negro, 155
Extravagance, Negro-Republican, 39
—— of the Reconstruction Era, 59
Eyes, Peculiarity of the negro’s, 69
Facial angle, The negro’s, 69
Farmer’s Alliance, The, 84, 145
Fleet, Governor Warmoth’s, 58
Florida, Reconstruction in, 50
Foreign birth in the South, People of, 11, 12
Forgery of an Act of the Florida Legislature, 50
_Forum_ quoted, The, 96, 193, 217
_Frankfurter Zeitung_ quoted, The, 224
Fraud, Apologists for white, 15
—— at elections, 33, 50, 78–85
——, The white rules by, 14, 15
Freedman, The liberties of the, 91
Freedmen’s Bureau, 25, 39
Froude on negro inferiority, 88
—— on race pride, 172
—— on the Haytian negro, 158
—— on the negro in San Domingo, 159, 160
Fulkerson, H. S., 115
Fulton, Dr., 142
Gaillard destroys registration books, 84
Galveston _News_ quoted, 192
Garfield on Reconstruction, 30
Georgia, Cost of General Assembly in, 49
——, Murder in, 96, 99
——, Negro ownership in, 120, 121, 122, etc.
——, Race prejudice in, 94
——, Reconstruction in, 49
Gibbs, Senator, 139
Gibson, Senator, 197, 199
Gilder, R. W., 214
Gilham on negro inferiority, 88, 89
—— on the growth of negro population, 12, 13, 14
Gouldsboro, Riot at, 94
Governors, Power of the Military, 30
Grady, H. W., 165
Grant, President, 26
Greenville _News_ quoted, 105, 192, 208
Growth of negro population, Estimated, 12, 13
Hamilton, Rev. J. W., 172
Hampton, Governor Wade, 46, 49, 197, 198
_Harper’s Weekly_ quoted, 71
Harris, G. E., 56
Hart, Governor, O. B., 51
Haskell, General, 84, 145
Hayti, Condition of, 158, 203
Healthiness of the South, General, 147
Hemphill, J. J., 23
Herbert, H. A., 22, 23
Hoar quoted, Mr., 36
Hoffman House, Race prejudice at the, 98
Holmes, Dr. O. W., 226
Hotels, Race prejudice at, 97, 98, 105
Hubbard, J. B., 43
Hybridism and sterility, 179
Ice-cream shops, Race prejudice in, 100
Idle class of whites peculiar to U.S.A., 148
Ignorance of the negroes, 33, 36, 73
—— of the Southern white, 149
Illegal arrests, 61
Illinois, Slavery in, 230
Illiteracy, Negro, 21
——, Statistics of, 117
Increase among the negroes, Rate of, 2, 233
Indebtedness of America to the negro, 198, 205
Inequality of the races, 20, 199
Infant mortality among the blacks, 8, 108
Ingalls, Senator, 80, 85
Instep, The negro’s, 70
Intimidation at Jackson, 95
——, Republican, 37
Intolerance excused, White, 73
Jefferson, President Thomas, 145, 182, 183, 184
Johnson, President, 25, 28, 29
Johnston, Professor Alexander, 52
Jones, A. O., 48
Judges, Dependency of the, 59
——, Ignorance of, 52
Judge’s charge, A queer, 34
Kellogg, W. P., 60, 61, 62
King, Senator Rufus, 184, 185
Kirk, Colonel, 37
Knott, Dr. J. C., 179
Ku-Klux Klan, The, 77
Lagos, American negroes in, 210
Langston, J. U., 163
“Lark heel,” The negro’s, 70
Laws, Danger of enforcing the, 66
——, Importance of the, 128
Lecky on the New England Slave Trade, 228
Lee, Governor, 208
——, Rev. T. S., 187
Legislature of South Carolina, The, 39, etc.
Liberia, Condition of, 160
——, Establishment of, 183
Limitation of Suffrage, Suggested, 154
Lincoln, President, 229
—— on miscegenation, 172
—— on negro inferiority, 88
—— on slavery, 20
—— on the suffrage, 30
Lopez not more powerful than Warmoth, 60
Lottery, The Louisiana, 62
Louisiana Lottery, The, 62
——, Reconstruction in, 56
——, Riot in, 94
Louisville _Courier Journal_ quoted, 132
Luxury of negro legislators, 39, 54
Lynching, 96, 116, 132, 133, 134, 135, 142
McCrady, Letter from Mr. Edward, 224–231
Machinery inimical to the negro, 194
Macon _Telegraph_ quoted, 99
M‘Kinley, C., 214
Maltreatment of the blacks, 94
Manumission a political measure, 19
——, Lincoln’s views on, 20
——, Seward’s views on, 19
Marriage, Negro avoidance of, 110
Martial Law in the South, 29
Massachusetts, Slavery in, 225, 226
Mean whites, 148
Memphis _Avalanche_ quoted, 191
Mexico, Suggested emigration to, 189
Middle passage, Horrors of the, 186
Military Governors, 23, 24
Military Governors, Power of the, 30
—— Rule in the South, 21
Militia, A coloured, 37, 42, 43, 46, 58
Minority, Rule of the, 8
Miscegenation, 217, etc.
—— as a suggested panacea, 157, 165, 178
——, Causes of, 175
——, Illegal, 106
—— is now rare, 174, 175
——, Lincoln on, 172
—— unnatural, 166
——, one-sided, 177
Mississippi, Cotton raised in, 194
——, Intimidation in, 95
——, Reconstruction in, 52
Missouri, Race prejudice in, 103
Mitchell, J. A. D., 195, 196
Moloney, Sir Alfred, 210
Montgomery _Herald_ quoted, The, 141
Morals of Southern whites, 143, 176
—— of the negroes, 110
Morgan, Senator, 197, 199
Morrill, Senator, 75
Mortality, _see also_ Death-rate
—— among the negroes, 109, 147
——, Infant, 8
Moses, Franklin J., 44, 45, 46, 47, 49
Mount Pleasant, An Election at, 83, 84
Mulatto, The, 174, 178 _et seq._
—— a bad citizen, The, 163, 177, 179, 180
—— children, Rarity of, 174
—— communities, 176
—— decreasing in numbers, 163
——, Intelligence of, 162
——, Short life of the, 179
——, The future of the, 213
—— unhealthiness, 178
Murder as a political factor, 77
—— in Alabama, 104, 136
—— in Georgia, 105, 133, 136
—— in Indiana, 137
—— in Kentucky, 137
—— in Louisiana, 105
—— in North Carolina, 135
—— in South Carolina, 97, 136
—— in Tennessee, 136
—— near Robins, 95
Nashville _American_ quoted, 192
_Nation_ quoted, The New York, 224, 228
Navy, Race prejudice in the American, 98
Negro, _see also_ Coloured Mulatto, Octoroon
——, Advantages of getting rid of the, 208, 209
——, Aims of the, 68
—— as a child, The, 199
—— as a worker, The, 139
—— at the polls, The, 77
—— avoidance of marriage, 110
—— can be dispensed with, 193
—— cannot govern, The, 161
—— childishness, 76, 199
—— colonisation, Causes of failure of, 183
—— —— Society of Augusta, 189
—— criminality, 114
——, Death-rate of the, 3
——, Debt of the United States to the, 185, 186, 189
——, Diseases of the, 108
—— education, 75, 116
—— emigration, Cost of, 207
——, Employments of the, 9, 10
——, Enforced inferiority of the, 71
—— enfranchisement, 29
——, Expectations of the extinction of the, 152
——, Extermination of the, 155
—— Government intolerable, 64
——, His unambitious nature, 11
——, How far the White depends upon the, 146
—— Ignorance, 33
——, Illiteracy of the, 21
——, Increase of the, 2
—— inferiority, Lincoln on, 88
—— ——, Froude on, 88
—— ——, Gilliam on, 88, 89
—— ——, Tourgée on, 89, 90
—— in sickness, Provision for the, 75
—— legislators, Vices of, 36
——, Material position of the, 119, 125
—— mortality, 109
—— must be assisted to emigrate, The, 200
—— must be governed, The, 200, 202
—— newspapers, 98, 120, 138, 141
——, Physical peculiarities of the, 69
——, Repression of the, 8
—— rule, 31, etc.
—— schools, 119
——, Social position of the, 65, 87
—— soldiers during the war, 186
—— suffrage advocated by Sumner, 28
—— suffrage in Columbia, 28
—— —— —— ——, Abolition of, 74
—— ——, Lincoln on, 21
—— ——, Opposition to, 24
—— tendency to relapse to barbarism, 168
——,” “The, 115
——, The South can spare the, 190
——, The White’s attitude towards the, 75, 140
—— threats to the Whites, 138, 142
——, Unhealthy habits of the, 108
——: Why he may not rule, 16
—— Venality, 33
Negrophobia in the North, 73, 74
Negro’s readiness to migrate, 187, etc.
Negroes are but small farmers, 192
——, Infant mortality among, 107
——, Morals of the, 110
——, Prominent, 162
—— unable to govern, 54
—— voting before they have the suffrage, 35
Nelson, Mr. Justice, 29
New England slave trade, The, 228
—— Hampshire, Slavery in, 226
—— Jersey, Slavery in, 227
—— Orleans, Coloured ownership in, 121
—— ——, _Picayune_ quoted, 97, 192
—— —— _Republican_ subsidised, 59
—— ——, Riot at, 61
—— —— _Times-Democrat_ quoted, 121, 191
—— York _Evening Post_ quoted, 99, 102
—— —— _Herald_ quoted, 99
—— ——, Race prejudice in, 97, 102
—— —— Slavery in, 228
—— —— _Star_ quoted, 96
—— —— _Tribune_ quoted, 108, 156
—— —— _World_ quoted, 98
Nicholls, Governor, 62
_North American Review_ quoted, 85, 171
North and South compared, 73
North Carolina, Reconstruction in, 35
North, Slavery in the, 224, etc.
Northern Ascendency, 24
Octoroon, White prejudice against the, 175
Oppression of the Southern Whites, 31
Orangeburg _Plain Speaker_ quoted, 98
_Othello_ in the South, 217
Outrage in Alabama, 134
—— in Georgia, 133, 134
—— in Kentucky, 132
—— in Maryland, 134
—— in South Carolina, 133
—— in Tennessee, 134
Outrages by negroes on women, 116, 132, 133, 134, 142
Packard, Governor, 62
Pardons given before trial, 50
Pasco, S., 23
Penalties for teaching a slave, 116
Pennsylvania, Slavery in, 227
Pension-roll of the United States, 207
Philadelphia _Evening Telegram_ quoted, 95
Pike, J. S., 41, 44
Pinchback, Governor, 60, 163
Pittsburg _Dispatch_ quoted, 95
——, Race prejudice at, 222
Politics, Effect of the situation upon, 144
Politics in the South, 21, 24
Polls, The negro at the, 77
Population of the South, 216
Post, U. S. A., Major, 214
_Presbyterian Quarterly_ quoted, 165
Printing in South Carolina, Cost of public, 48, 49
——, Republican monopoly of, 58
Property, The negro as a holder of, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124
Proportions of white and coloured, 5
Prostrate State, The, 38, 41
Puberty, Change in the negro at, 76
Public Funds, Waste of, 44
—— Offices, Race prejudice in, 102
Qualifications for the suffrage, 6
Race antagonism increases, 90
—— hatred, 26
—— prejudice, 72
—— —— at Cincinnati, 98
—— —— at hotels, 97, 98, 105
—— —— at ice-cream shops, 100
—— —— at Pittsburg, 222
—— —— at railway stations, 102
—— —— at Saratoga, 97
—— —— in barber-shops, 102
—— —— in Missouri, 105
—— —— in New York, 97, 102
—— —— in public offices, 102
—— —— in restaurants, 98
—— —— in schools, 100, 101
—— —— in the American Navy, 98
—— —— in the Church, 96, 103, 156
—— —— on railways, 99, 101, 102, 103
—— —— on the gallows, 96
Race pride, Froude on, 172
—— Problem, Its supposed settlement by the Civil War, 15
—— question, Importance of the, 68
Races, Irregularity of the, 20
Race war, 129, 209
Racial colour, 167
—— inequality, 106
—— separation beneficial, 198
Railways, Race prejudice on, 99, 101, 102, 103
—— stations, Race prejudice at, 102
Raleigh _State Chronicle_ quoted, 165
Ratification of Amendment XV., 151
Rawling, S. J. E., 214
Reconstruction, 22, etc.
—— Acts, 29
—— a political measure, 52, 53
——, Garfield on, 30
—— in Alabama, 32
—— in Florida, 50
—— in Georgia, 49
—— in Louisiana, 56
—— in Mississippi, 52
—— in North Carolina, 35
—— in South Carolina, 38
—— in Virginia, 51
——, Joint Committee on, 26
——, Lincoln on, 30, 31
Reed, Governor Harrison, 50
Registration books destroyed, 84
—— Certificates, Loss of, 80
——, The Board of, 57, 61, 62
Religious race prejudice, 156
Repeal of Amendment XV., Suggested, 153
Representation of States in Congress, 24
Repression of the Negro, 8
Republican majority in the Thirty-Ninth Congress, 28
_Republican_, New Orleans, 59
Republican, The negro is a, 21
Restaurants, Race prejudice at, 98
Returning Board, _see_ Registration, The Board of.
Rhode Island, Slavery in, 227
Richardson, Governor J. P., 82
Richmond _Dispatch_ quoted, 192
Riot at Gouldsboro’, 94
—— at New Orleans, 61
Roosevelt, T., 214
Sage, B. J., 23, 58, 60
St. Louis _Republic_ quoted, 98
San Domingo, Condition of, 159, 160
Saratoga, Race prejudice at, 97
Savannah _Times_ quoted, 103
Schoffner Act, The, 37
Schools for negroes, 119
——, Race prejudice in, 100, 101
Scomp, Professor, 193
Scott, General R. K., 39, 42, 43, 44
Selma _Independent_ quoted, 138
—— _Times_ quoted, 100
Separation of the races beneficial, 198
Seward on Manumission, 20
Shakespeare and race questions, 217, etc.
Shaw University, 204
Sherman, Senator, 75
Shepard, Colonel, 203
Shepley, Governor, 30
Sickness, Provision for the negro in, 75, 109
Silent South,” “The, 91
Silloway, T., 226
Skin, Peculiarities of the negro’s, 70
_Skipjack_, Log of H.M.S., 186
Slave, Illiteracy of the, 21
——, Penalties for teaching a, 116
Slavery, Abolition of, 19
—— in Connecticut, 227
—— —— Illinois, 230
—— —— Massachusetts, 225, 226
—— —— New Hampshire, 226
—— —— —— Jersey, 227
—— ——, Abolition of, New York, 227
—— —— Pennsylvania, 227
—— —— Rhode Island, 227
—— —— Vermont, 225
——, Lincoln on, 20
—— not the origin of the war, 19
—— said to be the only logical position for the negro, 164
Slaves in 1790, 225
Smith, Adam, 227
——, Dr. S. M., 165
——, E. B., 214
Snider, Professor J. D., 218
Snyder, Rev. J., 217
Social position of the negro, 87
—— equality said to be disclaimed by both races, 99
Solid South, The, 23
South Carolina, Cotton raised in, 194
—— ——, Inquiry into Scandals in, 47
—— ——, Murder in, 95, 97
—— ——, Reconstruction in, 38
—— Carolinian Statute of Ignorance, 116
——, Deterioration of the, 139, 191
——, General healthiness of the, 147
——, Military Rule in the, 21
——, Politics of the, 21, 24
——, Population of the, 216
——, The negro not indispensable to the, 190, etc.
——? Why the solid, 23
Southern Question, What is the, 71
Spain, Suggested negotiations with, 197
Speer, W. S., 20
Stanley, H. M., 199, 211, 213
Stanton, Secretary, 28
State House, Siege of the Louisiana, 62
States having a coloured majority, 5
Sterility and hybridism, 179
Stevens, T., 24
Stiles, R., 23, 52
Stokes, Colonel, 192
Suffrage, Negro, 21
—— in Columbia, Negro, 28
——, Lincoln on the, 30
——, Negroes voted before they had the, 35
——, Northern opposition to the, 24
——, Possible limitation of the, 86
——, Qualifications for the, 6
——, Suggested limitation of, 154
——, The negro not enamoured of the, 203
Sumner advocates negro suffrage, 28
Superstition, Negro, 112
Supremacy, White, 77
Supreme court, Decision of the, 65, 66, 68
Surrender, as a suggested panacea, 158
Tanner, Rev. Dr. B. T., 171, 173, 174
Taxation, Excessive, 55
Taylor, C. H. J., 183
Tennessee, Race prejudice in, 96
Texas, Cotton raised in, 194
——, Negro ownership in, 119
Thomas, Judge, 33
Thompson, J. E. W., 163
Tillman, Governor, 84, 145
_Times_ quoted, 199, 227
Tissue-ballots, 78
Tourgée, Judge, 118, 152, 161, 173
Trade jealousy in the North, 182
Troops, United States, 61, 62
Tucker, Rev. Dr. 110
Tupper, Dr. H. M., 204
Turner, Bishop H. M., 188
——, H. G., 23
Union divided, The, 209, 214
——, Ex-confederate States held to be out of the, 27
Vance, Z. B., 23, 36
Vermont, Slavery in, 225
Vetoes, President Johnson’s, 28, 29
Vices of negro legislators, 36
Virginia, Reconstruction in, 51
Voodooism, 112, 114
“Vote early and often,” 80
Voters, Qualifications of, 6
Voters, tampering with, 77 _et seq._
Voting populations, 7
War, The South after the, 22, 26 etc.
Warmoth, H. C., 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63
Warrants of Arrest, Blank, 61
Waste of Public Funds, 44
Wealth of the United States, 206
Whipping of negroes, 104
White intolerance excused, 73
White supremacy, 77, 85
White, The negro’s treatment by the 75
White, Ignorance of the Southern, 149
White people are enough for the South, 191, 192
White women to the negro, Attitude of the Southern, 141, 142, 177
Whites assumed without evidence to be guilty, 39
Whites, Depravity of the, 54
Whites, Increase of the Southern, 2
Whites, Idle class of peculiar to U.S., 148
Whites, Oppression of the Southern, 31
Williams, Col. G. W., 203
Williams, Rev. Isaac, 112
Wilson’s “Rise and Fall of Slave Power,” 227
Women, Their position in the Black Belt, 131 _et seq._, 141, 177
PRINTED BY CASSELL & COMPANY, LIMITED, LA BELLE SAUVAGE, LONDON, E.C.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES
● Typos fixed; non-standard spelling and dialect retained.
● Used numbers for footnotes.
● Enclosed italics font in _underscores_.
● HTML alt text was added for images that didn’t have captions.