services, how could we, more than the commander of the West, General
Fremont, influence the policy of the administration to our liberation or
emancipation from prejudice and slavery? No, my friends, your reason must
answer, no!—no fighting will emancipate you from prejudice. Will any one
tell me that to-day a poor man, of little or no intellectual cultivation,
from the Independent Government of Hayti, will be more respected in this
or any country than one of the native born of this country, of our color?
Did they not wield both fire and sword fiercely, to desperation, for the
liberties they now enjoy? But to command respect, wealth and education
must do it—_they_ will do more towards destroying that prejudice which
darkens our existence than all the fighting we can effect under the most
favorable circumstances.
Mr. G. tells us that we should make ourselves felt. In that I agree with
him; but may we not question the manner in which we can do it the more
effectually.
I am told the object of the exhibitors at the Great Exhibition in London,
the World’s Fair, in 1851, was to make themselves felt by the exhibition
of their great advancement in Art and Science; the object of those
nations contributing their quota by invitation, was the same. The Fair
was, we are told, a complete success. That should satisfy us, that the
cultivation of peace, of arts and science, will go equally as far as an
unsuccessful war, to produce that high respect we are advised to fight
for. I, for one, am satisfied that other means of making ourselves felt,
at less sacrifice of existence and more beneficial to the desired end,
than wielding the sword, can be found. That impression that awards us
credit, and challenges not only competition as equals, but commands that
respect which an array or force of arms, situated as we are, can never
force upon this or any nation whose interests are immediately identified
with the institution of slavery—and the safety of that depending to an
extent upon the crushing despotism and deprivations visited upon those
dangerous to its progress or stability—is what we want to make ourselves
felt. No unarmed, ununiformed masses of colored men, parading through
the streets, will ever produce or tend to produce such impression.
Mr. G. takes this stand: (I give his own language, word for word, as
follows:) “Now I maintain that, for all practical purposes, whatever
be the turn of the war, preparation on our part, by the most efficient
knowledge of military art and discipline, is one of the most positive
demands of the times.”
As an off-set to that position, I here take my stand: That the
encouragement of every pursuit of industry and education, aside from war
matters, are deserving and should (more especially at this time while the
usurpers of our rights and liberties are engaged in desperate conflict)
meet our most vigorous and undivided cöoperation! That that policy,
adopted, realized, and perfected, alone can produce the requisite means
to establish our claim to the respect we need; to open the many avenues
of wealth, prominence, political and civil equality, without which, no
display of military drill, of hordes of unarmed or armed men, ignorant of
every other necessary qualification as serviceable citizens, will command.
Momentary admiration for exhibitions of well drilled men and military
tactics, which I believe would follow, would create sensation among the
sight-lovers who swarm in all thickly populated districts; but that
indelible impression, mighty to move the hearts of men to action, but
when moved, calls forth imperishable convictions, lasting as time itself,
must emanate from something deeper, more reliable, than brute force or
the chance life of military campaigning, of soldiers ungarnished by the
more essential qualities that make the man the citizen. As to military
displays creating respect by efficient drill, especially among us, I
have my doubts. The most ignorant, unprincipled desperado, or tyrant,
or usurper, that disgraces humanity by his villainy, may be the most
perfectly disciplined soldier, may be daring, regardless of danger either
to limb or life—his daring may create admiration, but his infamous
character, as a man of dishonorable proclivities, dissipation and
barbarity, will blast his reputation, however bravely won on the field of
battle.
Mr. G. says: “Had every State in the Union taken active steps in the
direction of forming regiments of color, we should now, instead of
numbering eight regiments, of about eight thousand five hundred men,
have numbered seventy-five thousand, besides awakening an interest,
at home and abroad, that no vacillating policy of the half-hearted
semi-secessionists of the North could have suppressed. It would have
relieved the administration of so much room for cavil on the slavery
question, and colored men’s right to bear arms,” &c., &c.
Permit me to ask of any candid thinker, who, perhaps, is better informed
than myself on this matter, whether the States can independently force
any number of men upon the General Government contrary to the wish
or will of the constituted authorities, who I suppose have the power
of either accepting or rejecting white or colored men, as prudence,
interest, or necessity dictates, or who were disqualified by legal
restrictions?
If the States cannot constitutionally do this, would not then the
encouragement of raising those regiments environ the administration in
complications, and force that cavil which friend G. would obviate?
Mr. Green also informs us that “the evidences of God’s demands upon our
patriotism as warriors, are so strong, that none need mistake them.” I
have yet to see the evidences of God’s will or demands upon us in that
direction, to take up arms for our own destruction, to destroy our bond
brother, or to assist those who are contending in spirit against His
righteous mandates, the principle of which is “Love thy neighbor as
thyself.” If, then, the result of that policy advocated by Mr. G. cannot
effect the desired end he would have, we must, if ever entertaining it,
abandon it at once, and pursue that policy which reason teaches is not
only the safest but the wisest.
I am satisfied, that recruiting, drilling or fighting, will never break
this innate prejudice imbedded in the hearts of this nation.
The admiration we might win by bravery, &c., when brought into action as
soldiers, might easily be overshadowed by one act or false accusation,
brought against us by those jealous of our gallant exploits when in
active service.
With all respect for Mr. Green’s literary accomplishments and
scholar-like production, he is still in the dark, and may with propriety
cry out, as one in times gone by, “Lord! that I may receive my sight.”
Supposing that we, with one accord, enter upon that fallacious policy
of raising regiments for the war, could we do it without it becoming a
public feature, noticeable by foes as well as friends?
With Southern emissaries thronging our hotels, thoroughfares, stores,
&c., would not the Confederates be likely to gain this important
information with equal facility as they obtain other news that enables
them to counterbalance every move made by the national forces? If we
admit this, why may we not, from the knowledge we have of their (the
Southerners’) disposition, believe that, as a direful retaliation, they
would arm their free and enslaved colored men, and compel them to fight
against us on the field of battle, while such patriots as A. M. G., who
we could not well afford to lose, would have the unpleasant duty assigned
to him and his associates in arms of destroying those whom he might now
benefit by adopting a policy contrary to the misguided suicidal course he
so eloquently advocates. If I have the honor to be termed “one of those
unfortunates who are willing to wait and see the salvation of God,” by
Mr. G., I accept the conferred honor with many thanks.
The wisdom of the course I advocate, and that advocated by A. M. G.,
time alone will decide. Patiently, however, I abide time, clinging to my
avowed policy, humbly trusting in Him who I have every reason to think
has taken the cause of the oppressed of our people in this land out of
our weak hands, and has or is about to answer our many appeals in His own
glorious way, while we continue to lift our hearts, our hands, in praise
and thanksgiving to His holy name.
R. H. V.
IV.
REPLY.
From the Anglo-African, November 9 and 16, 1861.
MR. EDITOR:
Absence from home has prevented my notice of the rejoinder of your able
correspondent, R. H. V., on the War policy. I now avail myself of a
leisure hour to reply. I am one of those who believe that truth loses
nothing from investigation, and it is at all times the most pleasant and
agreeable feature in the honest investigation of truth to know that your
opponent can properly appreciate honor, candor and gentlemanly generosity
for the views of his antagonist. My friend, your correspondent R. H. V.,
seems largely to possess those characteristic traits of a gentleman and
scholar. I am pleased to find my antagonist on this question, of that
progressive class of minds, who can honorably differ with his fellows,
without condescending to that hateful and disgusting virulence manifested
of late among the ancient leaders of our people, in very high circles. I
think among us boys, (as our more ancient leaders are wont to term us,)
this practical fact of itself develops progress. My friend thinks that
so far as my declamation is concerned, my arguments may do very well;
but he wants facts to make it appear that my position is tenable. I am
willing to submit our previous articles, respectively, to the arbitration
of those who have read them, and abide their decision as to whose
arguments are the most self-evident, and whose position is sustained by
the greatest number of facts. I think that a careful comparison of the
articles and the premises on which they are based, will prove my friend’s
production quite as liberally bereft of that important auxiliary in
debate (proof) as my own iridescent missive. Invidious distinctions among
the colored people of this continent have done more to keep us oppressed
than all other efforts of white men combined. By this rule we have ever
been unable to wring from this government the acknowledgment of black
genius, adequate to the successful competition of whites, in governmental
power. White men have ever made us believe that the interests of black
men in Mexico, Hayti, Jamaica, Canada, and even in Africa, were really as
dissimilar to the interests of colored Americans, as is the difference in
the respective statures of the giraffe and dormouse. All these countries
offered very superior advantages to colored men of genius, long before
American diplomacy and American prejudice had the power to influence
them against us. But this stand-still policy, and this reasoning upon
the false and prejudiced suggestions of our oppressors and misguided
friends, has been the successful drawback to every well-directed plan of
concentrated effort for our elevation, such as would have been adopted
with successful results by any other people similarly situated. Had we
obeyed the dictates of reason, and the offer of those people made to
us years ago, instead of now going to California to black boots, wait
at tables, and wash spittoons, our leading men might have been large
contractors, land owners, and citizens to all intents and purposes;
while the secondary class of our people might have filled very enviable
positions in contrast to what they now fill in that country; for, you
remember, that the acquisition of territory from Mexico changed none of
her laws relating to her resident citizens in any part of the territory
ceded to, or purchased by, the United States. What, then, kept us from
joining with the English and French emigrants in California before the
war?—becoming citizens under the law of Mexico, and forcing the United
States, by the laws of nations, to respect that position to the present
day, as she does blacker men and less cultivated than two-thirds of the
colored people of the United States—who cannot even enjoy their oath
against one of those fellows, black though he be, if he happen to be a
Mexican? The reason is obvious; white men, seeing the result of such a
measure, denied our identity of interest with the colored people favored
by the laws of Mexico and California; and though Mexico entreated us
to make our home with them, (as Hayti now entreats us from the same
reasons,) we objected. Our leading men, reasoning upon this absurd
theory of prejudiced white men, counseled us to stand still and see the
salvation of God; but instead of the analogy being carried out, and we
seeing our oppressors declining in strength, as did Israel, we see them
day by day growing stronger; until they had made that blessed land of
Freedom as odious from their accursed prejudice as any other part of
the United States, and now these same leaders cease to counsel standing
still, but counsel our going to California. In the name of heaven, I ask,
for what should we now go there? They say, to better their condition and
make a living; I say to become worse slaves and menials than us they
leave behind. This is the stand-still policy I am at variance with;
standing still till all advantages are lost, and we are left in the same
darkness and degradation that a brilliant epoch in the history of our
country has found us, and is compelled to leave us, because we refuse
to get up and run with the world to the great issue to which she is
tending—universal Freedom. There is no such thing as stand still in this
nineteenth century; you must progress backward or forward; the world is
rushing on; he or they who will not move with her, must be crushed by her
onward march.
My friend says he has yet to learn that these are practically established
facts; “that grasping the sword will emancipate us from prejudice and
slavery.” Indeed, he asks: “Will the proposition bear questioning?” I
answer, yes, in the most positive sense, because four-fifths of all the
emancipations from these evils among men have been brought about by this
means. The Israelites were carried away captives seven times by Pharoah,
Tiglath-Pilaser, Shalmanezer, Nebuchadnezer, and finally, by Titus. These
men forced them to serve as slaves and vassals, not only to themselves,
but to their successors in Egypt, Babylon, Assyria, and Persia, over
which empires they respectively held dominion. The Israelites groaned and
prayed to God, lifting their windows towards the city of the great King
three times a day—but never were released in five out of seven cases,
till they grasped the sword, and like Samson, cried to God for strength
to drive it to the hilt. In one of the other cases of the seven, God
himself, by the use of elements more destructive and desolating than the
sword, effected the purpose by a national slaughter. My comment on all
these Bible transactions may be found in the writings of the Prophets
Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, and Hosea. A careful study of these
inspired writers, and the chronological history of the Jews through all
those years of their servitude and degradation, develops the fact that
the special direction of God, by the mouth of his prophets, is decidedly
at variance with my friend’s peace measures and neutral policy, in a
war against the greatest moral, social, and intellectual antagonist to
human progress that now curses the civilized world. Turning from sacred
history to more recent dates, I am taught by the modern historian that
the vassals and slaves of the entire continent of Europe, a few centuries
ago, are now its free citizens—made free by the power of their own
strength, contending often against fearful odds for the advancement of
the cause of human suffrage. The once lowest castes of Hindostan are now
the free gentoos of that empire. The slaves that built the pyramids of
Egypt are now, it is true, the degraded but free Moslem of that land.
The Mexicans that Cortez found in that country, working as slaves of
the emperors and priesthood, are now the free population of Mexico.
The slaves of England, France, and Spain, in the West Indies, are now
the independent Haytians, the citizens of the Dominican Republic, and
the British West Indies. Now let me ask by what special interposition
of Providence, aside from the general rule of grasping the sword, have
these changes been brought about? The answer comes back from the earliest
antiquity, that the universal rule for Emancipation, Equality and
Enfranchisement, whether it be to the Jewish slaves of antiquity, the
Roman slaves, the Grecian helots, the German feudal vassals, the serfs of
Russia, the Indian slaves of Mexico and Central America, or the African
slaves of the West India Islands, the one, the all-prevailing influence
for removing these accursed systems of tyranny and oppression is, and
ever has been, an appeal to the sword, wielded by strong and energetic
arms and minds, aided and guided by that Omnipotence that is ever on the
side of justice, and who directs the blow so as to spread terror and
dismay among the oppressors of a crushed and bleeding race, the outraged
struggling victims of injustice and wrong. So will God help us if we
conform to this universal rule; and cease to cling to this abstract rule
of “stand still and see the salvation,” etc., which, after all, never can
be applied to our case at present, for the Israelites had done what we
have steadily refused to do, _i. e._, they had spoiled their oppressors,
and were marching out of their land in rank and file. Are we willing to
do likewise? Then, again, it was only when they had gone to the last
extremity of human effort, and were about to turn back to slavery, and to
be buried in Egypt, that Moses gave the command to stand still, etc. Now,
I am willing to grant my friend the full benefit of this one isolated
case in support of his theory, as far as it goes—when we have performed
our part as faithfully even as those to whom it was addressed. When the
slaves have raised the standard of rebellion against their masters,
and have broken every yoke, and then, by some great impending danger,
are about to yield and go back again to slavery, I, like Moses, rather
than retrograde, would readily counsel standing still, at least for a
while. When we of the North, by indefatigable exertion (and sacrifice,
if required) have armed and equipped ourselves, and become proficient in
all that pertains to self-defence, as men in our condition should be,
and then find ourselves environed with some of the difficulties that
my friend predicts would follow such a significant result, and we, like
Israel, are about turning back to our present unhappy and insignificant
condition, I, for one, should steadfastly counsel standing still with
fixed bayonets and torn cartridges, to see the salvation of God; which I
verily believe would be seen, if we followed those general rules to which
I cling, notwithstanding the enemy’s prëeminence of position, superior
numerical strength, &c.