LECTURE.

MR. PRESIDENT,--In asking you to consider the Question of Caste, I

open a great subject of immediate practical interest. Happily, Slavery

no longer exists to disturb the peace of our Republic; but it is not

yet dead in other lands, while among us the impious pretension of this

great wrong still survives against the African because he is black and

against the Chinese because he is yellow. Here is nothing less than the

claim of hereditary power from color; and it assumes that human beings

cast in the same mould with ourselves, and in all respects _men_, with

the same title of manhood that we have, may be shut out from Equal

Rights on account of the skin. Such is the pretension, plainly stated.

On other occasions it has been my duty to show how inconsistent is this

pretension with our character as a Republic, and with the promises of

our fathers,--all of which I consider it never out of order to say and

to urge. But my present purpose is rather to show how inconsistent it

is with that sublime truth, being part of God’s law for the government

of the world, which teaches the Unity of the Human Family, and its

final harmony on earth. In this law, which is both commandment and

promise, I find duties and hopes,--perpetual duties never to be

postponed, and perpetual hopes never to be abandoned, so long as Man is

Man.

Believing in this law, and profoundly convinced that by the blessing

of God it will all be fulfilled on earth, it is easy to see how

unreasonable is a claim of power founded on any unchangeable physical

incident derived from birth. Because man is black, because man is

yellow, he is none the less Man; because man is white, he is none the

more Man. By this great title he is universal heir to all that Man can

claim. Because he is Man, and not on account of color, he enters into

possession of the promised dominion over the animal kingdom,--“over the

fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living

thing that moveth upon the earth.” But this equal copartnership without

distinction of color symbolizes equal copartnership in all the Rights

of Man.

* * * * *

As I enter upon this important theme, I confess an unwelcome

impediment, partly from the prevailing prejudice of color, which has

become with many what is sometimes called a second nature, and partly

from the little faith among men in the future development of the race.

The cry, “A white man’s government,” which is such an insult to human

nature, has influence in the work of degradation. Accustomed to this

effrontery, people do not see its ineffable absurdity, which is made

conspicuous, if they simply consider the figure our fathers would

have cut, had they declared the equal rights of _white_ men, and not

the equal rights of _men_. The great Declaration was axiomatic and

self-evident because universal; confined to a class, it would have

been neither. Hearkening to this disgusting cry, people close the soul

to all the quickening voices, whether of prophet, poet, or philosopher,

by which we are encouraged to persevere; nor do they heed the best

lessons of science.

I begin by declaring an unalterable faith in the Future, which nothing

can diminish or impair. Other things I may renounce, but this I cannot.

Throughout a life of controversy and opposition, frequently in a small

minority, sometimes almost alone, I have never for a moment doubted

the final fulfilment of the great promises for Humanity without which

this world would be a continuing chaos. To me it was clear from the

beginning, even in the early darkness, and then in the bloody mists

of war, that Slavery must yield to well-directed efforts against it;

and now it is equally clear that every kindred pretension must yield

likewise, until all are in the full fruition of those equal rights

which are the crown of life on earth. Nor can this great triumph be

restricted to our Republic. Wherever men are gathered into nations,

wherever Civilization extends her beneficent sway, there will it be

manifest. Against this lofty truth the assaults of the adversary are no

better than the arrows of barbarians vainly shot at the sun. Still it

moves, and it will move until all rejoice in its beams. The “all-hail

Hereafter,” in which the poet pictures personal success, is a feeble

expression for that transcendent Future where man shall be conqueror,

not only over nations, but over himself, subduing pride of birth,

prejudice of class, pretension of Caste.

* * * * *

The assurances of the Future are strengthened, when I look at

Government and see how its character constantly improves as it comes

within the sphere of knowledge. Men must know before they can act

wisely; and this simple rule is applicable alike to individuals and

communities. “Go, my son,” said the Swedish Chancellor, “and see

with what little wisdom the world is governed.”[113] Down to his day

government was little more than an expedient, a device, a trick, for

the aggrandizement of a class, of a few, or, it may be, of one. Calling

itself Commonwealth, it was so in name only. There were classes always,

and egotism was the prevailing law. Macchiavelli, the much-quoted

herald of modern politics, insisted that all governments, whether

monarchical or republican, owed their origin or reformation to a

single lawgiver, like Lycurgus or Solon.[114] If this was true in his

day, it is not in ours. In the presence of an enlightened people, a

single lawgiver, or an aristocracy of lawgivers, is impossible, while

government becomes the rule of all for the good of all,--not the One

Man Power, so constant in history,--not the Triumvirate, sometimes

occurring,--not an Oligarchy, which is the rule of a few,--not an

Aristocracy, which is the rule of a class,--not any combination,

howsoever accepted, sanctioning exclusions,--but the whole body of

the people, without exclusion of any kind, or, in the great words

of Abraham Lincoln at Gettysburg, “government of the people, by the

people, and for the people.”[115]

Thus far government has been at best an Art, like alchemy or astrology,

where ministers exercised a subtle power, or speculators tried

imaginative experiments, seeking some philosopher’s-stone at the

expense of the people. Though in many respects still an Art only, it is

fast becoming a Science founded on principles and laws from which there

can be no just departure. As a science, it is determined by knowledge,

like any other science, aided by that universal handmaid, the

philosophy of induction. From a succession of particulars the general

rule is deduced; and this is as true of government as of chemistry or

astronomy. Nor do I see reason to doubt, that, in the evolution of

events, the time is at hand when government will be subordinated to

unquestionable truth, making diversity of opinion as impossible in

this lofty science as it is now impossible in other sciences already

mastered by man. Science accomplishes part only of its beneficent work,

when it brings physical nature within its domain. That other nature

found in Man must be brought within the same domain. And is it true

that man can look into the unfathomable Universe, there to measure suns

and stars, that he can penetrate the uncounted ages of the earth’s

existence, reading everywhere the inscriptions upon its rocks, but that

he cannot look into himself, or penetrate his own nature, to measure

human capacities and read the inscriptions upon the human soul? I do

not believe it. What is already accomplished in such large measure

for the world of matter will yet be accomplished for that other world

of Humanity; and then it will appear, by a law as precise as any in

chemistry or astronomy, that just government stands only on the consent

of the governed, that all men must be equal before the law of man as

they are equal before the law of God, and that any discrimination

founded on the accident of birth is inconsistent with that true science

of government which is simply the science of justice on earth.

One of our teachers, who has shed much light on the science of

government,--I refer to Professor Lieber, of New York,--shows that the

State is what he calls “a _jural_ society,” precisely as the Church is

a religious society, and an insurance company a financial society.[116]

The term is felicitous as it is suggestive. Above the State rises the

image of Justice, lofty, blindfold, with balance in hand. There it

stands in colossal form with constant lesson of Equal Rights for All,

while under its inspiration government proceeds according to laws which

cannot be disobeyed with impunity, and Providence is behind to sustain

the righteous hand. In proportion as men are wise, they recognize these

laws and confess the exalted science.

“Know thyself” is the Heaven-descended injunction which ancient piety

inscribed in letters of gold in the temple at Delphi.[117] The famous

oracle is mute, but the divine injunction survives; nor is it alone.

Saint Augustine impresses it in his own eloquent way, when he says,

“Men go to admire the heights of mountains, and the great waves of

the sea, and the widest flow of rivers, and the compass of the ocean,

and the circuits of the stars, _and leave themselves behind_.”[118]

Following the early mandate, thus seconded by the most persuasive of

the Christian Fathers, man will consider his place in the universe and

his relations to his brother man. Looking into his soul, he will there

find the great irreversible Law of Right, universal for the nation as

for himself, commanding to do unto others as we would have them do

unto us; and under the safeguard of this universal law I now place the

rights of all mankind. It is little that I can do; but, taking counsel

of my desires, I am not without hope of contributing something to that

just judgment which shall blast the effrontery of Caste as doubly

offensive, not only to the idea of a Republic, but to Human Nature

itself.

* * * * *

Already you are prepared to condemn Caste, when you understand its real

character. To this end, let me carry you to that ancient India, with

its population of more than a hundred and eighty millions, where this

artificial discrimination, born of impossible fable, was for ages the

dominating institution of society,--being, in fact, what Slavery was in

our Rebellion, the corner-stone of the whole structure.

The Portuguese were the first of European nations to form

establishments in India, and therefore through them was the civilized

world first acquainted with its peculiar institutions. But I know no

monument of their presence there, and no contribution from them to our

knowledge of the country, so enduring as the word Caste, or, in the

Portuguese language, _Casta_, by which they designated those rigid

orders or ranks into which the people of India were divided. The term

originally applied by them has been adopted in the other languages of

Europe, where it signifies primarily the orders or ranks of India,

but by natural extension any separate and fixed order of society. In

the latter sense Caste is now constantly employed. The word is too

modern, however, for our classical English literature, or for that most

authentic record of our language, the Dictionary of Dr. Johnson, when

it first saw the light in 1755.

Though the word was unknown in earlier times, the hereditary

discrimination it describes entered into the political system of

modern Europe, where people were distributed into classes, and the

son succeeded to the condition of his father, whether of privilege or

disability,--the son of a noble being a noble with great privileges,

the son of a mechanic being a mechanic with great disabilities. And

this inherited condition was applicable even to the special labor of

the father; nor was there any business beyond its tyrannical control.

According to Macaulay, “the tinkers formed an hereditary caste.”[119]

The father of John Bunyan was a tinker, and the son inherited the

position. The French Revolution did much to shake this irrational

system; yet in many parts of Europe, down to this day, the son

emancipates himself with difficulty from the class in which he is

born. But just in proportion to the triumph of Equality does Caste

disappear.

This institution is essentially barbarous, and therefore appears

in barbarous ages, or in countries not yet relieved from the early

incubus. It flourished side by side with the sculptured bulls and

cuneïform characters of Assyria, side by side with the pyramids and

hieroglyphics of Egypt. It showed itself under the ambitious sway of

Persia, and even in the much-praised Cecropian era of Attica. In all

these countries Caste was organized, differing somewhat in divisions,

but hereditary in character. And the same phenomenon arrested the

attention of the conquering Spaniards in Peru. The system had two

distinct elements: first, separation, with rank and privilege, or their

opposite, with degradation and disability; secondly, descent from

father to son, so that it was perpetual separation from generation to

generation.[120]

* * * * *

In Hindustan, this dreadful system, which, under the name of Order,

is the organization of disorder, has prolonged itself to our day, so

as to be a living admonition to mankind. That we may shun the evil it

entails, in whatever shape, I now endeavor to expose its true character.

The regular castes of India are four in number, called in Sanscrit

_varnas_, or _colors_, although it does not appear that by nature they

were of different colors. Their origin will be found in the sacred

law-book of the Hindoos, the “Ordinances of Menu,” where it is recorded

that the Creator caused the Brahmin, the Cshatriya, the Vaisya,

and the Sudra, so named from _Scripture_, _Protection_, _Wealth_,

and _Labor_, to proceed from his mouth, his arm, his thigh, and his

foot, appointing separate duties for each class. To the Brahmin,

proceeding from the mouth, was allotted the duty of reading the Veda

and of teaching it; to the Cshatriya, proceeding from the arm, the

duty of soldier; to the Vaisya, proceeding from the thigh, the duty of

cultivating the land and keeping herds of cattle; and to the Sudra,

proceeding from the foot, was appointed the chief duty of serving the

other classes without depreciating their worth. Such was the original

assignment of parts; but, under the operation of natural laws, those

already elevated increased their importance, while those already

degraded sank lower. Ascent from an inferior class was absolutely

impossible: as well might a vegetable become a man. The distinction was

perpetuated by the injunction that each should marry only in his own

class, with sanguinary penalties upon any attempted amalgamation.

The Brahmin was child of rank and privilege; the Sudra, child of

degradation and disability. Omitting the two intermediate classes,

soldiers and husbandmen, look for one moment at the two extremes, as

described by the sacred volume.

The Brahmin is constantly hailed as first-born, and, by right, chief

of the whole creation. This eminence is declared in various terms.

Thus it is said, “When a Brahmin springs to light, he is born above

the world”; and then again, “Whatever exists in the universe is all

in effect the wealth of the Brahmin.” As he engrosses the favor of

the Deity, so is he entitled to the veneration of mortals; and thus,

“whether learned or ignorant, he is a powerful divinity, even as fire

is a powerful divinity, whether consecrated or common.” Immunities

of all kinds cluster about him. Not for the most insufferable crime

can he be touched in person or property; nor can he be called to pay

taxes, while all other classes must bestow their wealth upon him. Such

is the Brahmin, with these privileges crystallized in his blood from

generation to generation.

On the other hand is the Sudra, who is the contrast in all particulars.

As much as the Brahmin is object of constant veneration, so is the

Sudra object of constant contempt. As one is exalted above Humanity,

so is the other degraded below it. The life of the Sudra is servile,

but according to the sacred volume he was created by the Self-Existent

especially to serve the Brahmin. Everywhere his degradation is

manifest. He holds no property which a Brahmin may not seize. The

crime he commits is visited with the most condign punishment, beyond

that allotted to other classes subject to punishment. The least

disrespect to a Brahmin is terribly avenged. For presuming to sit

on a Brahmin’s carpet, the penalty is branding and banishment, or

maiming; for contumelious words to a Brahmin, it is an iron style

ten fingers long thrust red-hot into the mouth; and for offering

instruction to a Brahmin, it is nothing less than hot oil poured into

mouth and ears. Such is the Sudra; and this fearful degradation, with

all its disabilities, is crystallized in his blood from generation to

generation.

Below these is another more degraded even than the Sudra, being the

outcast, with no place in either of the four regular castes, and known

commonly as the Pariah. Here is another term imported into familiar

usage to signify generally those on whom society has set its ban.

No person of the regular castes holds communication with the Pariah.

His presence is contaminating. Milk, and even water, is defiled by

his passing shadow, and cannot be used until purified. The Brahmin

sometimes puts him to death at sight. In well-known language of our

country, once applied to another people, he has no rights which a

Brahmin is bound to respect.[121]

Such a system, so shocking to the natural sense, has been denounced

by all who have considered it, whether on the spot or at a

distance,--unless I except the excellent historian Robertson, who seems

to find apologies for it, as men among us find apologies for the caste

which sends its lengthening shadow across our Republic. I might take

your time until late in the evening unfolding its obvious evil, as

exposed by those who have witnessed its operation. This testimony is

collected in a work entitled “Caste opposed to Christianity,” by Rev.

Joseph Roberts, and published in London in 1847. I give brief specimens

only. A Hindoo converted to Christianity exposes its demoralizing

influence, when he says, “Caste is the stronghold of pride, which makes

a man think of himself more highly than he ought to think”; and so also

another converted Hindoo, when he says, “Caste makes a man think that

he is holier than another, and that he has some inherent virtue which

another has not”; and still another converted Hindoo, when he says,

“Caste is part and parcel of idolatry and all heathen abomination.”

But no testimony surpasses that of the eminent Reginald Heber, the

Bishop of Calcutta, when he declares that it is “a system which tends,

more than anything else the Devil has yet invented, to destroy the

feelings of general benevolence, and to make nine tenths of mankind

the hopeless slaves of the remainder.”[122] Under these protests, and

the growing influence of Christianity, the system is so far mitigated,

that, according to an able writer whose soul is enlisted against it,

“the distinctions are felt on certain limited occasions only.”[123]

These are the words of James Mill, interesting always as the author

of the best work on India, and the father of John Stuart Mill. It is

now admitted, that, under constraint of necessity, the member of a

superior caste may descend to the pursuits of an inferior caste. The

lofty Brahmin engages in traffic, yet he cannot touch “leather”; for

contact with this article of commerce is polluting. But I am obliged to

add that no modification leaving “distinctions” transmissible with the

blood can be adequate. So long as these continue, the natural harmonies

of society are disturbed and man is degraded. The system in its mildest

form can have nothing but evil; for it is a constant violation of

primal truth, and a constant obstruction to that progress which is the

appointed destiny of man.

* * * * *

Change now the scene,--from ancient India, and the shadow of unknown

centuries, to our Republic, born on yesterday. How unlike in venerable

antiquity! How like in the pretension of Caste! Here the caste

claiming hereditary rank and privilege is white, the caste doomed

to hereditary degradation and disability is black or yellow; and it

is gravely asserted that this difference of color marks difference

of race, which in itself justifies the discrimination. To save this

enormity of claim from indignant reprobation, it is insisted that the

varieties of men do not proceed from a common stock,--that they are

different in origin,--that this difference is perpetuated in their

respective capacities; and the apology concludes with the practical

assumption, that the white man is a superior caste not unlike the

Brahmin, while the black man is an inferior caste not unlike the

Sudra, sometimes even the Pariah; nor is the yellow man exempted from

this same insulting proscription. When I consider how for a long time

the African was shut out from testifying in court, even when seeking

redress for the grossest outrage, and how at this time in some places

the Chinese is also shut out from testifying in court, each seems to

have been little better than the Pariah. In stating this assumption of

superiority, which I do not exaggerate, I open a question of surpassing

interest, whether in science, government, or religion.

Here I must not forget that some, who admit the common origin of all

men, insist that the African is descended from Ham, son of Noah,

through Canaan, cursed by Noah to be servant of his brethren, and that

therefore he may be degraded even to slavery. But this apology is not

original with us. Nobles in Poland seized upon it to justify their

lordly pretensions, calling their serfs, though white, descendants of

Ham.[124] But whether employed by Pole or American, it is worthy only

of derision. I do not know that this apology is invoked for maltreating

the Chinese, although he is descended from Ham as much as the Pole.

* * * * *

Two passages of Scripture, one in the Old Testament and the other in

the New, both governing this question, attest the Unity of the Human

Family. The first is in that sublime chapter of Genesis, where, amidst

the wonders of Creation, it is said: “So God created man in His own

image; in the image of God created He him; male and female created

He them. And God blessed them; and God said unto them, Be fruitful

and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it.”[125] The other

passage is from that great sermon of Saint Paul, when, standing in the

midst of Mars Hill, he proclaimed to the men of Athens, and through

them to all mankind, that God “hath made of _one blood_ all nations

of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth.”[126] If, as is

sometimes argued, there be ambiguity in the account of the Creation, or

if in any way its authority has been impaired by scientific criticism,

there is nothing of the kind to detract from the sermon of Saint Paul,

which must continue forevermore venerable and beautiful.

* * * * *

Appealing from these texts, the apologists hurry to Science; and there

I follow. But I must compress into paragraphs what might fill volumes.

Ethnology, to which we repair, is a science of recent origin,

exhibiting the different races or varieties of Man in their relations

with each other, as that other science, Anthropology, exhibits Man

in his relation to the animal world. Nature and History are our

authorities, but all science and all knowledge are tributary. Perhaps

no other theme is grander; for it is the very beginning of human

history, in which all nations and men have a common interest. Its

vastness is increased, when we consider that it embraces properly not

only the origin, distribution, and capacity of Man, but his destiny on

earth,--stretching into the infinite past, stretching also into the

infinite future, and thus spanning Humanity.

The subject is entirely modern. Hippocrates, one of our ancient

masters, has left a treatise on “Air, Water, and Place,” where

climatic influences are recognized; but nobody in Antiquity studied

the varieties of our race, or regarded its origin except mythically.

The discovery of America, and the later circumnavigation of the globe,

followed by the development of the sciences generally, prepared the way

for this new science.

* * * * *

It is obvious to the most superficial observer that there are divisions

or varieties in the Human Family, commonly called Races; but the most

careful explorations of Science leave the number uncertain. These

differences are in Color and in Skull,--also in Language. Of these

the most obvious is Color; but here, again, the varieties multiply

in proportion as we consider transitional or intermediate hues. Two

great teachers in the last century--Linnæus, of whom it was said, “God

created, Linnæus classified,” _Deus creavit, Linnæus disposuit_,[127]

and Kant, a sincere and penetrating seeker of truth--were content

with four,--white, copper, tawny or olive, and black,--corresponding

geographically to European, American, Asiatic, and African. Buffon,

in his eloquent portraiture, recognizes five, with geographical

designations. He was followed by Blumenbach, who also recognizes

five, with the names which have become so famous since,--Caucasian,

Mongolian, Ethiopian, American, and Malay. Here first appears the

popular, but deceptive term, Caucasian; for nobody supposes now

that the white cradle was on Caucasus, which is best known to

English-speaking people by the verse of Shakespeare, making it anything

but Eden,--

“Oh, who can hold a fire in his hand

By thinking on the frosty Caucasus?”[128]

Blumenbach was an able and honest inquirer; and if his nomenclature is

defective, it is only another illustration of the adage, that nothing

is at the same time invented and perfected.

If I mention other attempts, it is only to show how Science hesitates

before this great problem. Cuvier reduces the Family to three,

with branches or subdivisions, and lends his great authority to

the term Caucasian, which he adopts from Blumenbach. Lesson began

with three, according to color,--white, yellow, and black; but

afterwards recognized six,--white, bistre, orange, yellow, red,

black,--represented respectively by European, Hindoo, Malay, Mongolian,

American, and Negro, African and Asiatic. Desmoulins makes eleven.

Bory de Saint-Vincent adds to Desmoulins. Broc adds to Saint-Vincent.

The London “Ethnological Journal” makes no less than sixty-three,

of which twenty-eight varieties are intellectual and thirty-five

physical; and we are told[129] that thirty varieties of Caucasian alone

are recognized on the monuments of ancient Egypt, as they appear in

the magnificent works of Rosellini and Lepsius. Our own countryman,

Pickering,--whose experience was gained on the Exploring Expedition

of Captain Wilkes,--in his work on “The Races of Man and their

Geographical Distribution,” enumerates eleven varieties of Man, divided

into four groups, according to color,--white, brown, blackish-brown,

and black. In his opinion, “there is no middle ground between the

admission of eleven distinct species in the Human Family and the

reduction to one.”[130]

The Dutch anatomist, Camper, distinguishes the Human Family by the

facial angle, ranging from eighty degrees, in the European, down to

seventy degrees, in the Negro.[131] This attempt was continued by

Virey, who divides Man into two species: the first with a facial angle

of 85° to 90°, including Caucasian, Mongolian, and copper-colored

American; and the second with a facial angle of 75° to 82°, including

dark-brown Malay, blackish Hottentot and Papuan, and the Negro.

Prichard, whose voluminous works constitute an ethnological mine,

finds, chiefly from the skull, seven varieties, which he calls (1.)

Iranian, from Iran, the primeval seat in Persia of the Aryan race,

embracing the Caucasian of Blumenbach with some Asiatic and African

nations; (2.) Turanian or Mongolian; (3.) American, including

Esquimaux; (4.) Hottentot and Bushman; (5.) Negro; (6.) Papuan, or

woolly-haired Polynesian; (7.) Australian. The same industrious

observer finds three principal varieties in the conformation of the

head, corresponding respectively to Savage, Nomadic, and Civilized Man.

In the savage African and Australian the jaw is prolonged forward,

constituting what he calls, by an expressive term, _prognathous_. In

the nomadic Mongolian the skull is pyramidal and the face broad. In

Civilized Man the skull is oval or elliptical. But the naturalist

records that there are forms of transition, as nations approach to

civilization or relapse into barbarism.

Thus does the Human Skull refuse any definitive answer. There are

varieties of skull, as of color; but the question remains, to what

extent they attest original diversity. Equally vain is the attempt to

obtain a guide in the form of the human pelvis. But every such attempt

and its failure have their lesson.

There remains one other criterion: I mean Language. And here the

testimony is such as to disturb all divisions founded on Color or

Skull; for it is ascertained that people differing in these respects

speak languages having a common origin. The ancient Sanscrit, sometimes

called the most elaborate of human dialects, has yielded its secret to

philological research, and now stands forth the mother tongue of the

European nations. It is difficult to measure the importance of this

revelation; for, while not decisive on the main question, it increases

our difficulty in accepting any postulate of original diversity.[132]

And now the question arises, How are these varieties to be regarded in

the light of science? Are they aboriginal and from the beginning,--or

are they super-induced by secondary causes, of which the record is lost

in the extended night preceding our historic day? Here the authorities

are divided. On the one side, we are reminded that within the period

of recognized chronology no perceptible change has occurred in any of

these varieties,--that on the earliest monuments of Egypt the African

is pictured precisely as we see him now, even to that servitude from

which among us he is happily released,--and it is insisted that no

known influences of climate or place are sufficient to explain such

transformations from an aboriginal type, while plural types are in

conformity with the analogies of the animal and vegetable world. On the

other side, we are reminded, that, whatever may be the difficulties

from supposing a common centre of Creation, there are greater still

in supposing plural centres,--that it is easier to understand one

creation than many,[133]--that geographical science makes us acquainted

with intermediate gradations of color and conformation in which the

great contrasts disappear,--that, even within the last half-century

and in Europe, people have tended to lose their national physiognomy

and run into a common type, thus attesting subjection to transforming

influences,--that, after accepting the races already described, there

are other varieties, national, family, and individual, not less

difficult of explanation,--and it is insisted, that, whatever these

varieties, be they few or many, there is among them all _an overruling

Unity_, by which they are constituted one and the same cosmopolitan

species, endowed with speech, reason, conscience, and the hope of

immortality, knitting all together in a common Humanity, and, amidst

all seeming differences, making all as near to each other as they are

far apart from every other created thing, while to every one is given

that great first instrument of civilization, the human hand, by which

the earth is tilled, cities built, history written, and the stars

measured;--and this unquestionable Unity is pronounced all-sufficient

evidence of a common origin.

In considering this great question, do all inquirers sufficiently

recognize the element of Time? Obviously the sphere of operation is

enlarged in proportion to the time employed. Everything is possible

with time. Confining ourselves to recognized chronology, existing

varieties cannot be reconciled with that unity found in a common

origin. What are the six thousand years of Hebrew time, what are

the twenty-two thousand years of human annals sanctioned by the

learning and piety of Bunsen,[134] for the consummation of these

transformations? And this longest period, how brief for the completion

of those two marvellous languages, Sanscrit and Greek, which at the

earliest dawn of authentic history were already so perfect! Considering

the infinitudes of astronomy, and those other infinitudes of geology,

it is not unreasonable to claim an antiquity for Primeval Man compared

with which all the years of authentic history are a span. With such

incalculable opportunity, amidst unknown changes of Nature where heat

and cold strove for mastery, no transformation consistent with the

preservation of the characteristic species was impossible. Egypt is

not alone in its Sphinx, perplexing mortals with perpetual enigma.

Science is our Sphinx, and its enigma is Man and his varieties on

earth: to which I answer, “Time.”

Nor is it unreasonable to suppose that at the Creation conditions were

stamped upon man, making transformations natural. Because unnatural

according to observation during the brief period of historic time, it

does not follow that they are not strictly according to law. The famous

Calculating Engine of Charles Babbage, the distinguished mathematician,

as described in his remarkable “Bridgewater Treatise,” where Science

vindicates anew the ways of Providence to man, supplies an illustration

which is not without instruction. This machine, with a power almost

miraculous, was so adjusted as to produce a series of natural numbers

in regular order from unity to a number expressed by one hundred

millions and one,--100,000,001,--when another series was commenced,

regulated by a different law, which continued until at a certain number

the series was again changed; and all these changes in the immense

progression proceeded from a propulsion at the beginning.[135] Any

simple observer, finding that the series stretched onwards through

successive millions, would have no hesitation in concluding from the

vast induction that it must proceed always according to the same law;

and yet it was not so. But the Calculating Engine is only a contrivance

of human skill. And cannot the Creator do as much? That is a very

inadequate conception of the Almighty Power creating the universe and

placing man in it, which supposes, according to the language of Sir

John Herschel, the eminent astronomer, that “His combinations are

exhausted upon any one of the theatres of their former exercise.”[136]

Thus far we know not the law of the series which governed Primeval Man.

Who can say that after lapse of time changes did not occur, always in

obedience to conditions stamped upon him at the Creation?

A simpler illustration carries us to the same result. A cog-wheel,

so common in machinery, operates ordinarily by the cogs on its rim;

but the wheel may be so constructed, that, after a certain series of

rotations, another set of cogs is presented, inducing a different

motion. All can see how, in conformity with preëxisting law, a change

may occur in the operations of the machine. But it was not less easy

for the Creator to fix His law at the beginning, according to which the

evolutions of this world proceed. And thus are we brought back to the

conclusion, so often announced, that unity of origin must not be set

aside simply because existing varieties of Man cannot be sufficiently

explained by known laws, operating during that brief period which we

call History.

In considering this great question, there are authorities which cannot

be disregarded. Count them or weigh them, it is the same. I adduce a

few only, beginning with Latham, the ethnologist, who insists,--

“(1.) That, as a matter of fact, the languages of the earth’s

surface are referable to one common origin; (2.) that, as a

matter of logic, this common origin of language is _primâ

facie_ evidence of a common origin for those who speak it.”[137]

The great French geographer and circumnavigator, Dumont d’Urville,

testifies thus:--

“I see on the whole surface of the globe only three types or

divisions of mankind which seem to me to merit the title of

distinct races: the white, more or less colored with red; the

yellow, inclining to different tints of copper or bronze; and

the black.--I share in the opinion which refers these three

races to one and the same primitive stock, and which places

their common cradle on the central plateau of Asia.”[138]

Buffon, the brilliant naturalist, whose work is one of the French

classics, thus records his judgment:--

“All concurs to prove that the human race is not composed of

species essentially different among themselves,--that, on

the contrary, there was originally but a single species of

men, who, in multiplying and spreading over all the surface

of the globe, have undergone different changes through the

influence of climate, difference of food, difference in the

manner of living, epidemic maladies, and the infinitely varied

intermixture of individuals more or less alike.”[139]

Another authority, avoiding the question of origin, has given a summary

full of instruction and beauty. I refer to Alexander von Humboldt,

the life-long companion of every science, to whom all science was

revealed,--who studied Man in both hemispheres, and ever afterwards,

throughout his long and glorious career, continued the pursuit.

Adopting the words of the great German anatomist, Johannes Müller,

that “the different races of mankind are forms of one sole species, by

the union of two individuals of which descendants are propagated,”[140]

and criticizing the popular classifications of Blumenbach and Prichard

as wanting “typical sharpness” or “well-established principle,” the

author of “Cosmos” insists that “the distribution of mankind is only

a distribution into _varieties_, which are commonly designated by

the somewhat indefinite term _races_,” and then announces the grand

conclusion:--

“Whilst we maintain the unity of the human species, we at the

same time repel the depressing assumption of superior and

inferior races of men. There are nations more susceptible of

cultivation, more highly civilized, more ennobled by mental

cultivation, than others, _but none in themselves nobler than

others_.”[141]

Such is the testimony of Science by one of its greatest masters.

Rarely have better words been uttered. Nor should it be said longer

that Science is silent. Humboldt has spoken. And what he said is much

in little,--most simple, but most comprehensive; for, while asserting

the Unity of the Human Family, he repels that disheartening pretension

of Caste which I insist shall find no place in our political system.

Through him Science is enlisted for the Equal Rights of All.

Whatever the judgment on the unity of origin, where, from the nature

of the case, there can be no final human testimony, it is a source of

infinite consolation that we can anchor to that other unity found in

a common organization, a common nature, and a common destiny, being

at once physical, moral, and prophetic. This is the true Unity of the

Human Family. In all essentials constituting Humanity, in all that

makes Man, all varieties of the human species are one and the same.

There is no real difference between them. The variance, whether of

complexion, configuration, or language, is external and superficial

only, like the dress we wear. Here all knowledge and every science

concur. Anatomy, physiology, psychology, history, the equal promises to

all men, testify. Look at Man on the dissecting table, and he is always

the same, no matter in what color he is clad,--same limbs, same bones,

same proportions, same structure, same upright stature. Look at Man in

the world, and you will find him in nature always the same,--modified

only by the civilization about him. There is no human being, black or

yellow, who may not apply to himself the language of Shakespeare’s

Jew:--

“Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions,

senses, affections, passions?--fed with the same food, hurt

with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed

by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and

summer as a Christian is? If you prick us, do we not bleed? If

you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not

die?”[142]

Look at Man in his destiny here or hereafter, so far as it can be

penetrated by mortal vision, and who will venture to claim for any

variety or class exclusive prerogatives on earth or in heaven? Where is

this preposterous pretender? God has given to all the same longevity,

marking a common mortality,--the same cosmopolitan character, marking

citizenship everywhere,--and the same capacity for improvement,

marking that tendency sometimes called the perfectibility of the race;

and He has given to all alike the same promise of immortal life. By

these tokens is Man known everywhere to be Man, and by these tokens is

he everywhere entitled to the Rights of Man.

* * * * *

There is a lesson in the Dog,--is there not? Who does not admire that

fidelity which makes this animal ally and friend of man, following

him over the whole earth, in every climate, under all influences of

sky, cosmopolitan as himself, in prosperity and adversity always

true,--and then, by beautiful fable, transported to another world,

where the association of life is prolonged to man, while “his faithful

dog shall bear him company”?[143] The dog of Ulysses dying for joy at

his master’s return, when all Ithaca had forgotten the long-absent

lord, is not the only instance. But who has heard that this wonderful

instinct makes any discrimination of manhood? It is to Man that the dog

is faithful; nor does it matter of what condition, whether the child

of wealth or the rough shepherd tending his flocks; nor does it matter

of what complexion, whether Caucasian white, or Ethiopian black, or

Mongolian yellow. It is enough that the master is Man; and thus, even

through the instincts of a brute, does Nature testify to that Unity of

the Human Family by virtue of which all are alike in rights.

* * * * *

Experts in Ethnology are earnest to recognize this other Unity on

which I now insist. Our own Agassiz, who is the most illustrious of

the masters not accepting the unity of origin, is careful to add,

“that the moral question of Brotherhood among men” is not affected by

this dissent; and he announces “that Unity is not only compatible with

diversity of origin, but that it is the universal law of Nature.”[144]

This other Unity found an eloquent representative in William von

Humboldt, not less eminent as philologist than his brother as

naturalist, who proclaims our Common Humanity to be the dominant idea

of history, more and more extending its empire, “striving to remove the

barriers which prejudice and limited views of every kind have erected

amongst men, and to treat all mankind, without reference to religion,

nation, or color, as one Fraternity, one great community”; and he

concludes by announcing “the recognition of the bond of Humanity” as

“one of the noblest leading principles in the history of mankind.”[145]

And these grand words are adopted by Alexander von Humboldt,[146] so

that the philologist and the naturalist unite in this cause. Thus in

every direction do we find new testimony against the pretension of

Caste.

We are told that “a little learning is a dangerous thing.” If this be

ever true, it cannot be better illustrated than by that sciolism which

from the varieties of the human species would overthrow that sublime

Unity which is the first law of Creation. As well overthrow Creation

itself. There is no great intelligence which does not witness to this

law. Bacon, Newton, Leibnitz, Descartes all testify. Laplace, from

the heights of his knowledge, teaches that the curve described by a

simple particle of air or vapor is regulated by a law as certain as

the orbits of the planets; and is not Man the equal subject of certain

law? God rejoices in Unity. It is with Him a universal law, applicable

to all above and below, from the sun in the heavens to the soul of

man. Not one law for one group of stars, and one law for one group of

men,--but one law for all stars, and one law for all men. The saying of

Plato, that “God geometrizes,”[147] is only another expression for the

certainty and universality of this law. Aristotle follows Plato, when,

borrowing an illustration from the well-known requirements of the Greek

drama, he announces, that “in Nature nothing is unconnected or out of

place, as in a bad tragedy.”[148] But Caste is unconnected and out of

place. It is a perpetual discord, a prolonged jar,--contrary to the

first principle of the Universe.

Only when we consider the universality of the Moral Law can we

fully appreciate the grandeur of this Unity. The great philosopher

of Germany, Kant, declared that there were two things filling him

always with admiration,--the starry heavens above, and the moral law

within.[149] Well might the two be joined together; for in that moral

law, with a home in every bosom, is a vastness and beauty commensurate

with the Universe. Every human being carries a universe in himself; but

here, as in that other universe, is the same prevailing law of Unity,

in harmony with which the starry heavens move in their spheres and men

are constrained to the duties of life. The stars must obey; so must

men. This obedience brings the whole Human Family into harmony with

each other, and also with the Creator. And here, again, we behold the

grandeur of the system, while new harmonies unfold. Religion takes up

the lesson, and the daily prayer, “Our Father who art in Heaven,” is

the daily witness to the Brotherhood of Man. God is Universal Father;

then are we all brothers. If not all children of Adam, we are all

children of God,--if not all from the same father on earth, we are all

from the same Father in Heaven; and this affecting relationship, which

knows no distinction of race or color, is more vital and ennobling than

any monopoly. Here, once more, is that universal law which forbids

Caste, speaking not only with the voice of Science, but of Religion

also,--praying, pleading, protesting, in the name of a Common Father,

against such wrong and insult to our brother man. In beautiful harmony

are those words of promise, “I will make a _man_ more precious than

fine gold, even a man than the golden wedge of Ophir.”[150] Against

this lofty recognition of a common humanity, how mean the pretension of

Caste!

* * * * *

Assuming this common humanity, it is difficult to see how reason

can resist the conclusion, that in the lapse of time there must

be a common, universal civilization, which every nation and every

people will share. None too low, none too inaccessible for its

kindred embrace. Amidst the differences which now exist, and in the

contemplation of nations and peoples infinitely various in condition,

with the barbarian still claiming an extensive empire, with the savage

still claiming a whole continent and islands of the sea, I cannot

doubt the certain triumph of this great law. Believing in God, I

believe also in Man, through whose God-given energies all this will be

accomplished. Was he not told at the beginning, with the blessing of

God upon him, “_Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth,

and subdue it_”? All of which I am sure will be done. Why this common

humanity, why this common brotherhood, if the inheritance is for

Brahmins only? Why the injunction to multiply and subdue the earth,

if there are to be Sudras and Pariahs always? Why this sublime law of

Unity, holding the universe in its grasp, if Man alone is left beyond

its reach?

I have already founded the Unity of the Human Family partly on the

common destiny, and I now insist that this common destiny is attested

by the unquestionable Unity of the Human Family. They are parts of

one system, complements of each other. Why this unity, if there be no

common destiny? How this common destiny, if there be no unity? Assuming

the unity, then is the common destiny a necessary consequence, under

the law appointed for man.

The skeptic is disturbed, because thus far in our brief chronology this

common civilization has not been developed; but to my mind it is plain

that much has been done, making the rest certain, through the same

incessant influences, under the great law of Human Progress.

That European civilization which has already pushed its conquests in

every quarter of the globe is a lesson to mankind. Beginning with small

communities, it has proceeded stage by stage, extending to larger,

until it embraced nations and distant places,--and now stamps itself

ineffaceably upon increasing multitudes, making them, under God,

pioneers in the grand march of Humanity.

* * * * *

Europe had her dark ages when there was a night with “darkness

visible,” and there was an earlier period in the history of each nation

when Man was not less savage than now in the very heart of Africa; but

the European has emerged, and at last stands in a world of light. Take

any of the nations whose development belongs to modern times, and the

original degradation can be exhibited in authentic colors. There is

England, whose present civilization is in many respects so finished;

but when the conquering Cæsar, only fifty-five years before the birth

of Christ, landed on this unknown island, her people were painted

savages, with a cruel religion, and a conjugal system which was an

incestuous concubinage.[151] His authentic report places this condition

beyond question; and thus knowing her original degradation and her

present transformation after eighteen centuries, we have the terms

for a question in the Rule of Three. Given the original degradation

and present transformation of England, how long will it take for the

degradation of other lands to experience a similar transformation?

Add also present agencies of civilization, to which England was for

centuries a stranger.

This instance is so important as to justify details. When Britain

was first revealed to the commercial enterprise of Tyre, her people,

according to Macaulay, “were little superior to the natives of

the Sandwich Islands.”[152] The historian must mean, when those

islands were first discovered by Captain Cook. Prichard, our best

authority, supposes them “nearly on a level with the New-Zealanders

or Tahitians of the present day, or perhaps not very superior to the

Australians,”[153] which is very low indeed. There was but little

change, if any, when they became known to the Romans. They are

pictured as large and tall, excelling the Gauls in stature, but less

robust, and, according to the geographer Strabo, with crooked legs

and unshapely figures.[154] Northward were the Caledonians,--also

Britons,--tattooing their bodies, dwelling in tents, savage in

manners, and with a moral degradation kindred to that of the Southern

Britons.[155] Across the Channel were the Irish, whose reported

condition was even more terrible.[156] According to Cæsar, most in

the interior of Britain never sowed corn, but lived on milk and

flesh, and were clad in skins; but he notes that all colored their

bodies with a cerulean dye, “making them more horrid to the sight

in battle”; and he then relates, that societies of ten or twelve,

brothers and brothers, parents and children, had wives in common.[157]

Their religious observances were such as became this savage life.

Here was the sanctuary of the Druids, whose absolute and peculiar

power was sustained by inhuman rites. On rude, but terrible altars,

in the gloom of the forest, human victims were sacrificed,--while

from the blood, as it coursed under the knife of the priest, there

was a divination of future events.[158] There was no industry, and

no production, except slaves too illiterate for the Roman market.

Imagination pictured strange things. One province was reported where

“the ground was covered with serpents, and the air was such that no man

could inhale it and live.”[159] In the polite circles of the Empire the

whole region excited a fearful horror, which has been aptly likened to

that of the early Ionians for “the Straits of Scylla and the city of

the Læstrygonian cannibals.”[160] The historian records with a sigh,

that “no magnificent remains of Latian porches and aqueducts are to be

found” here,--that “no writer of British birth is reckoned among the

masters of Latian poetry and eloquence.”[161]

And this was England at the beginning. Long afterwards, when centuries

had intervened, the savage was improved into the barbarian. But from

one authentic instance learn the rest. The trade in slaves was active,

and English peddlers bought up children throughout the country, while

the people, greedy of the price, sold their own relations, sometimes

their own offspring.[162] In similar barbarism, all Jews and their

gains were the absolute property of the king; and this law, beginning

with Edward the Confessor, was enforced under successive monarchs, one

of them making a mortgage of all Jews to his brother as security for a

debt.[163] Nothing worse is now said of Africa.

Progress was slow. When in 1435 the Italian Æneas Sylvius,

afterwards Pope Pius the Second, visited this island, it was to

his eyes most forlorn. Houses in cities were in large part built

without lime. Cottages had no other door than a bull-hide. Food was

coarse,--sometimes, in place of bread, the bark of trees; and white

bread was such a rarity among the people as to be a curiosity.[164]

When afterwards, under Henry the Eighth, civilization had begun, the

condition of the people was deplorable. There was no such thing among

them as comfort, while plague and sweating-sickness prevailed. The

learned and ingenious Erasmus, who was an honored guest in England at

this time, refers much to the filthiness of the houses. The floors he

describes as commonly of clay strewn with rushes, in the renewal of

which those at the bottom sometimes remained undisturbed for twenty

years, retaining filth unmentionable,--“_sputa, vomitus, mictum canum

et hominum, projectam cervisiam et piscium reliquias, aliasque sordes

non nominandas_.”[165] I quote the words of this eminent observer. The

traveller from the interior of Africa would hardly make a worse report.

Such was England. But this story of savagery and barbarism is not

peculiar to that country. I might take other countries, one by one, and

exhibit the original degradation and the present elevation. I might

take France. I content myself with one instance only. An authentic

incident of French history, recorded by a contemporary witness, and

associated with famous names in the last century, shows the little

recognition at that time of a common humanity. And this story concerns

a lady, remarkable among her sex for various talent, and especially

as a mathematician, and the French translator of Newton,--Madame

Duchâtelet. This great lady, the friend of Voltaire, found no

difficulty in undressing before the men-servants of her household, not

considering it well-proved that such persons were of the Human Family.

This curious revelation of manners, which arrested the attention of

De Tocqueville in his remarkable studies on the origin of the French

Revolution,[166] if reported from Africa, would be recognized as

marking a most perverse barbarism.

* * * * *

These are illustrations only, which might be multiplied and extended

indefinitely, but they are sufficient. Here, within a limited sphere,

obvious to all, is the operation of that law which governs Universal

Man. Progress here prefigures progress everywhere; nay, progress here

is the first stage in the world’s progress. Nobody doubts the progress

of England; nobody doubts the progress of France; nobody doubts the

progress of the European Family, wherever distributed, in all quarters

of the globe. But must not the same law under which these have been

elevated exert its equal influence on the whole Family of Man? Is it

not with people as with individuals? Some arrive early, others tardily.

Who has not observed, that, independently of original endowment, the

progress of the individual depends upon the influences about him?

Surrounded by opportunity and trained with care, he grows into the type

of Civilized Man; but, on the other hand, shut out from opportunity and

neglected by the world, he remains stationary, always a man, entitled

from his manhood to Equal Rights, but an example of inferiority, if

not of degradation. Unquestionably it is the same with a people. Here,

again, opportunity and a training hand are needed.

To the inquiry, How is this destiny to be accomplished? I answer,

Simply by recognizing the law of Unity, and acting accordingly. The law

is plain; obey it. Let each people obey the law at home; its extension

abroad will follow. The standard at home will become the standard

everywhere. The harmony at home will become the harmony of mankind.

Drive Caste from this Republic, and it will be, like Cain, “a fugitive

and a vagabond in the earth.”

* * * * *

Therefore do I now plead for our Common Humanity in all lands.

Especially do I plead for the African, not only among us, but in his

own vast, mysterious home, where for unknown centuries he has been the

prey of the spoiler. He may be barbarous, perhaps savage; but so have

others been, who are now in the full enjoyment of civilization. If you

are above him in any respect, then by your superiority are you bound to

be his helper. Where much is given much is required; and this is the

law for a nation, as for an individual.

The unhappy condition of Africa, a stranger to civilization, is often

invoked against a Common Humanity. Here again is that sciolism which

is the inseparable ally of every ignoble pretension. It is easy to

explain this condition without yielding to a theory inconsistent with

God’s Providence. The key is found in her geographical character,

affording few facilities for intercommunication abroad or at home.

Ocean and river are the natural allies of civilization, as England will

attest; for such was their early influence, that Cæsar, on landing,

remarked the superior condition of the people on the coast.[167]

Europe, indented by seas on the south and north, and penetrated

by considerable rivers, will attest also. The great geographer,

Carl Ritter, who has placed the whole globe in the illumination of

geographical science, shows that the relation of interior spaces to the

extent of coast has a measurable influence on civilization: and here is

the secret of Africa. While all Asia is five times as large as Europe,

and Africa more than three times as large, the littoral margins have a

different proportion. Asia has 30,800 miles of coast; Europe 17,200;

and Africa only 14,000. For every 156 square miles of the European

continent there is one mile of coast, while in Africa one mile of coast

corresponds to 623 square miles of continent. The relative extension of

coast in Europe is four times greater than in Africa. Asia is in the

middle between the two extremes, having for every 459 square miles one

mile of coast; and so also is Asia between the two in civilization.

There is still another difference, with corresponding advantage to

Europe. One third part of Europe is in the nature of ramification from

the mass, furnishing additional opportunities; whereas Africa is a

solid, impenetrable continent, without ramifications, without opening

gulfs or navigable rivers, except the Nile, which once witnessed the

famous Egyptian civilization.[168] And now, in addition to all these

opportunities by water, Europe has others not less important from a

reticulation of railways, bringing all parts together, while Africa is

without these new-born civilizers. All these things are apparent and

beyond question; nor can their influence be doubted. And thus is the

condition of Africa explained without an insult to her people or any

new apology for Caste.

The attempt to disparage the African as inferior to other men, except

in present condition, shows that same ever-present sciolism. Does

Humboldt repel the assumption of superiority, and beautifully insist

that no people are “in themselves nobler than others”?[169] Then all

are men, all are brothers, of the same Human Family, with superficial

and transitional differences only. Plainly, no differences can make

one color superior to another. And looking carefully at the African,

in the seclusion and isolation of his native home, we see sufficient

reason for that condition which is the chief argument against him.

It is doubtful if any people has become civilized without extraneous

help. Britain was savage when Roman civilization intervened; so was

Gaul. Cadmus brought letters to Greece; and what is the story of

Prometheus, who stole fire from Heaven, but an illustration of this

law? The African has not stolen fire; no Cadmus has brought letters

to him; no Roman civilization has been extended over his continent.

Meanwhile left to savage life, he has been a perpetual victim, hunted

down at home to feed the bloody maw of Slavery, and then transported

to another hemisphere, always a slave. In such condition Nature has

had small opportunity for development. No kindly influences have

surrounded his home; no voice of encouragement has cheered his path;

no prospect of trust or honor has awakened his ambition. His life has

been a Dead Sea, where apples of Sodom floated. And yet his story is

not without passages which quicken admiration and give assurance for

the Future,--at times melting to tenderness, and at times inspiring

to rage, that these children of God, with so much of His best gifts,

should be so wronged by their brother man.

The ancient poet tells us that there were heroes before

Agamemnon,[170]--that is, before the poet came to praise. Who knows

the heroes of those vast unvisited recesses where there is no history

and only short-lived tradition? But among those transported to this

hemisphere heroes have not been wanting. Nowhere in history was the

heroical character more conspicuous than in our fugitive slaves. Their

story, transferred to Greece or Rome, would be a much-admired chapter,

from which youth would derive new passion for Liberty. The story of the

African in our late war would be another chapter, awakening kindred

emotion. But it is in a slave of the West Indies, whose parents were

stolen from Africa, that we find an example of genius and wisdom,

courage and character, with all the elements of general and ruler.

The name borne by this remarkable person as slave was Toussaint, but

his success in forcing an _opening_ everywhere secured for him the

addition of “l’Ouverture,” making his name Toussaint l’Ouverture,

Toussaint _the Opening_, by which he takes his place in history. He was

opener for his people, whom he advanced from Slavery to Freedom, and

then sank under the power of Napoleon, who sent an army and fleet to

subdue him.[171] More than Agamemnon, or any chief before Troy,--more

than Spartacus, the renowned leader of the servile insurrection which

made Rome tremble,--he was a hero, endowed with a higher nature and

better faculties; but he was an African, jet black in complexion. The

height that he reached is the measure of his people. Call it high-water

mark, if you will; but this is the true line for judgment, and not the

low-water mark of Slavery, which is always adopted by the apologists

for Caste. Toussaint l’Ouverture is the actual standard by which the

African must be judged.

When studied where he is chiefly seen,--not in the affairs of

government, but in daily life,--the African awakens attachment and

respect. The will of Mr. Upshur, Secretary of State under President

Tyler, describes a typical character. Here are the remarkable words:--

“I emancipate and set free my servant, David Rich, and direct

my executors to give him _one hundred dollars_. I recommend

him, in the strongest manner, to the respect, esteem, and

confidence of any community in which he may happen to live.

He has been my slave for twenty-four years, during which time

he has been trusted to every extent, and in every respect.

My confidence in him has been unbounded; his relation to

myself and family has always been such as to afford him daily

opportunities to deceive and injure us, and yet he has never

been detected in a serious fault, nor even in an intentional

breach of the decorums of his station. His intelligence is

of a high order, his integrity above all suspicion, and his

sense of right and propriety always correct and even delicate

and refined. I feel that he is justly entitled to carry this

certificate from me into the new relations which he now must

form. It is due to his long and most faithful services, and

to the sincere and steady friendship which I bear him. In the

uninterrupted and confidential intercourse of twenty-four

years, I have never given, nor had occasion to give him, an

unpleasant word. I know no man who has fewer faults or more

excellences than he.”[172]

The man thus portrayed was an African, whose only school was Slavery.

Here again is the standard of this people.

Nor is there failure in loftiness of character. With heroism more

beautiful than that of Mutius Scævola, a slave in Louisiana, as long

ago as 1753, being compelled to be executioner, cut off his right

hand with an axe, that he might avoid taking the life of his brother

slave.[173]

The apologist for Caste will be astonished to know, but it is none the

less true, that the capacity of the African in scholarship and science

is better attested than that of anybody claiming to be his master.

What modern slave-master has taught the Latin like Juan Latino at

Seville, in Spain,--written it like Capitein at the Hague, or Williams

at Jamaica,--gained academic honors like those accorded to Amo by

the University of Wittenberg? What modern slave-master has equalled

in science Banneker of Maryland, who, in his admirable letter to

Jefferson, avows himself “of the African race, and in that color which

is natural to them, of the deepest dye”?[174] These instances are all

from the admirable work of the good Bishop Grégoire, “De la Littérature

des Nègres.”[175] Recent experience attests the singular aptitude of

the African for knowledge, and his delight in its acquisition. Nor is

there any doubt of his delight in doing good. The beneficent system

of Sunday Schools in New York is traced to an African woman, who

first attempted this work, and her school was for all alike, without

distinction of color.[176]

To the unquestionable capacity of the African must be added simplicity,

amenity, good-nature, generosity, fidelity. Mahometans, who know

him well, recognize his superior fidelity. And such also is the

report of travellers not besotted by Slavery, from Mungo Park to

Livingstone, who testify also to tenderness for parents, respect for

the aged, hospitality, and patriarchal virtues reviving the traditions

of primitive life. “Strike me, but do not curse my mother,” said

an African slave to his master.[177] And Leo Africanus, the early

traveller, describes a chief at Timbuctoo, “very black in complexion,

but most fair in mind and disposition.”[178] Others dwell on his

Christian character, and especially his susceptibility to those

influences which are peculiarly Christian,--so that Saint Bernard could

say of him, “_Felix Nigredo, quæ mentis candorem parit_.”[179] Of all

people he is the mildest and most sympathetic. Hate is a plant of

difficult growth in his bosom. How often has he returned the harshness

of his master with care and protection! The African, more than the

European, is formed by Nature for the Christian graces.

It is easy to picture another age, when the virtues which ennoble

the African will return to bless the people who now discredit him,

and Christianity will receive a new development. In the Providence

of God the more precocious and harder nature of the North is called

to make the first advance. Civilization begins through knowledge. An

active intelligence performs the part of opening the way. But it may

be according to the same Providence, that the gentler people, elevated

in knowledge, will teach their teachers what knowledge alone cannot

impart, and the African shall more than repay all that he receives.

The pioneer intelligence of Europe going to blend with the gentleness

of Africa will be a blessed sight, but not more blessed than the

gentleness of Africa returning to blend with that same intelligence at

home. Under such combined influences men will not only know and do, but

they will feel also; so that knowledge in all its departments, and life

in all its activities, will have the triumphant inspiration of Human

Brotherhood.

* * * * *

In this work there is no room for prejudice, timidity, or despair.

Reason, courage, and hope are our allies, while the bountiful

agencies of Civilization open the way. Time and space, ancient tyrants

keeping people apart, are now overcome. There is nothing of aspiration

for Universal Man which is not within the reach of well-directed

effort,--no matter in what unknown recess of continent, no matter on

what distant island of the sea. Wherever Man exists, there are the

capacities of manhood, with that greatest of all, the capacity for

improvement; and the civilization we have reached supplies the means.

As in determining the function of Government, so here again is the

necessity of knowledge. Man must know himself, and that law of Unity

appointed for the Human Family. Such is the true light for our steps.

Here are guidance and safety. Who can measure the value of knowledge?

What imagination can grasp its infinite power? As well measure the sun

in its glory. The friendly lamp in our streets is more than the police.

Light in the world is more than armies or navies. Where its rays

penetrate, there has civilization begun. Not the earth, but the sun, is

the centre of our system; and the noon-day effulgence in which we live

and move symbolizes that other effulgence which is found in knowledge.

Great powers are at hand, ministers of human progress. I name

two only: first, the printing-press; and, secondly, the means of

intercommunication, whether by navigation or railways, represented

by the steam-engine. By these civilization is extended and secured.

It is not only carried forward, but fixed so that there can be no

return,--like the wheel of an Alpine railway, which cannot fall back.

Every rotation is a sure advance. Here is what Greece and Rome never

knew, and more than Greece and Rome have contributed to man. By the

side of these two simple agencies how small all that has come to us

from these two politest nations of Antiquity! We can better spare

Greece and Rome than the printing-press and steam-engine. Not a triumph

in literature, art, or jurisprudence, from the story of Homer and the

odes of Horace to the statue of Apollo and the bust of Augustus, from

the eloquence of Demosthenes and Cicero to that Roman Law which has

become the law of the world, that must not yield in value to these

two immeasurable possessions. To the printing-press and steam-engine

add now their youthful handmaid, the electric telegraph, whose swift

and delicate fingers weave the thread by which nations are brought

into instant communion, while great cities, like London and Paris, New

York and San Francisco, become suburbs to each other, and all mankind

feel together the throb of joy or sorrow. Through these incomparable

agencies is knowledge made coextensive with space and time on earth. No

distance of place or epoch it will not pervade. Thus every achievement

in thought or science, every discovery by which Man is elevated,

becomes the common property of the whole Human Family. There can be

no monopoly. Sooner or later all enjoy the triumph. Standing on the

shoulders of the Past, Man stands also on the shoulders of every

science discovered, every art advanced, every truth declared. There is

no height of culture or of virtue--if virtue itself be not the highest

culture--which may not be reached. There is no excellence of government

or society which may not be grasped. Where is the stopping-place?

Where the goal? One obstacle is overcome only to find another, which

is overcome, and then another also, in the ascending scale of human

improvement.

And then shall be fulfilled the great words of prophecy, which men have

read so long with hope darkened by despair: “The earth shall be full

of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea”; “it shall

come that I will gather all nations and tongues, and they shall come

and see my glory.”[180] The promises of Christianity, in harmony with

the promises of Science, and more beautiful still, will become the

realities of earth; and that precious example wherein is the way of

life will be another noon-day sun for guidance and safety.

* * * * *

The question _How?_ is followed by that other question _When?_ The

answer is easy. Not at once; not by any sudden conquest; not in

the lifetime of any individual man; not in any way which does not

recognize Nature as co-worker. It is by constant, incessant, unceasing

activity in conformity with law that Nature works; and so in these

world-subduing operations Man can be successful only in harmony with

Nature. Because in our brief pilgrimage we are not permitted to witness

the transcendent glory, it is none the less certain. The peaceful

conquest will proceed, and every day must contribute its fruits.

At the beginning of the last century Russia was a barbarous country,

shut out from opportunities of improvement. Authentic report attests

its condition. Through contact with Europe it was vitalized. The

life-giving principle circulated, and this vast empire felt the change.

Exposed to European contact at one point only, here the influence

began; but the native energies of the people, under the guidance of a

powerful ruler, responded to this influence, and Russia came within the

widening circle of European civilization. Why may not this experience

be repeated elsewhere, and distant places feel the same beneficent

power?

To help in this work it is not necessary to be emperor or king.

Everybody can do something, for to everybody is given something to do;

and it is by this accumulation of activities, by this succession of

atoms, that the result is accomplished. I use trivial illustrations,

when I remind you that the coral-reef on which navies are wrecked

is the work of the multitudinous insect,--that the unyielding stone

is worn away by drops; but this is the law of Nature, under which

no influence is lost. Water and air both testify to the slightest

movement. Not a ripple stirred by the passing breeze or by the

freighted ship cleaving the sea, which is not prolonged to a thousand

shores, leaving behind an endless progeny, so long as ocean endures.

Not a wave of air set in motion by the human voice, which is not

prolonged likewise into unknown space. But these watery and aërial

pulses typify the acts of Man. Not a thing done, not a word said,

which does not help or hinder the grand, the beautiful, the holy

consummation. And the influence is in proportion to the individual or

nation from whom it proceeds. God forbid that our nation should send

through all time that defiance of human nature which is found in Caste!

There are two passages of the New Testament which are to me of infinite

significance. We read them often, perhaps, without comprehending their

value. The first is with regard to leaven, when the Saviour said,

“The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven”;[181] and then Saint Paul,

taking up the image, on two different occasions, repeats, “A little

leaven leaveneth the whole lump.”[182] In this homely illustration we

see what is accomplished by a small influence. A little changes all.

Here again are the acts of Man typified. All that we do is leaven; all

that our country does is leaven. Everybody in his sphere contributes

leaven, and helps his country to contribute that mighty leaven which

will leaven the whole mighty lump. The other passage--difficult to

childhood, though afterwards recognized as a faithful record of human

experience--is where we are told, “For whosoever hath, to him shall

be given, and he shall have more abundance.”[183] Here to me is a

new incentive to duty. Because the world inclines to those who have,

therefore must we study to serve those who have not, that we may

counteract the worldly tendency. Give to the poor and lowly, give to

the outcast, give to those degraded by their fellow-men, that they may

be elevated in the scale of Humanity,--assured that what we give is not

only valuable in itself, but the beginning of other acquisitions,--that

the knowledge we convey makes other knowledge easy,--that the right we

recognize helps to secure all the Rights of Man. Give to the African

only his due, and straightway the promised abundance will follow.

* * * * *

In leaving this question, which I have opened to you so imperfectly, I

am impressed anew with its grandeur. The best interests of our country

and the best interests of mankind are involved in the answer. Let

Caste prevail, and Civilization is thwarted. Let Caste be trampled

out, and there will be a triumph which will make this Republic more

than ever an example. The good influence will extend in prolonged

pulsations, reaching the most distant shores. Not a land which will

not feel the spread, just in proportion to its necessities. Above all,

Africa will feel it; and the surpassing duty which Civilization owes to

this whole continent, where man has so long degraded his fellow-man,

will begin to be discharged, while the voice of the Great Shepherd is

heard among its people.

In the large interests beyond, I would not lose sight of the practical

interests at home. It is important for our domestic peace, not to speak

of our good name as a Republic, that this question should be settled.

Long enough has its shadow rested upon us, and now it lowers from an

opposite quarter. How often have I said in other places that nothing

can be settled which is not right! And now I say that there can be no

settlement here except in harmony with our declared principles and with

universal truth. To this end Caste must be forbidden. “Haply for I am

black,” said Othello; “Haply for I am yellow,” repeats the Chinese: all

of which may be ground for personal like or dislike, but not for any

denial of rights, or any exclusion from that equal copartnership which

is the promise of the Republic to all men.

Here, as always, the highest safety is in doing right. Justice is ever

practical, ever politic; it is the best practice, the best policy.

Whatever reason shows to be just cannot, when reduced to practice,

produce other than good. And now I simply ask you to be just. To

those who find peril in the growing multitudes admitted to citizenship

I reply, that our Republic assumed these responsibilities when it

declared the equal rights of all men, and that just government stands

only on the consent of the governed. Hospitality of citizenship is

the law of its being. This is its great first principle; this is the

talisman of its empire. Would you conquer Nature, follow Nature; and

here, would you conquer physical diversities, follow that moral law

declared by our fathers, which is the highest law of Nature, and

supreme above all men. Welcome, then, to the stranger hurrying from

opposite shores, across two great oceans,--from the East, from the

West,--with the sun, against the sun! Here he cannot be stranger.

If the Chinese come for labor only, we have the advantage of their

wonderful and docile industry. If they come for citizenship, then do

they offer the pledge of incorporation in our Republic, filling it

with increase. Nor is there peril in the gifts they bring. As all

rivers are lost in the sea, which shows no sign of their presence, so

will all peoples be lost in the widening confines of our Republic,

with an ocean-bound continent for its unparalleled expanse, and one

harmonious citizenship, where all are equal in rights, for its gentle

and impartial sway.