If this was a handicap in 1916, what must it have been in 1865? Forty

one years before this Negro scholar discovered the handicap, the South,

in attempting to readjust itself to the consequences of defeat and

the overthrow of its industrial system, had legislated to preserve

that acquaintanceship by a system of apprenticeship, which if it was

calculated to work out the problem very slowly; yet was calculated

to produce something superior even to the free persons of color that

slavery had evolved, a worthy product which no Negro or Northern

scholar has ever had the patience to think about. Little as the author

of this study knows about the free persons of color whom the South

reared; yet it is not fair to accuse them of what Pickens is absolutely

justified in stating with regard to the mass of Southern colored

citizens who were the product of Congressional Reconstruction. Pickens

indeed is refreshingly frank in this respect and so much so that the

Negroes will avoid his book. It will not be found advertised in any

list of the National Association for the Advancement of the Colored

Race. He is dangerously near William Hannibal Thomas in the following:

“Till this day the Negro is seldom frank to the white man in America.

He says what he does not mean; he means what he does not say. I

have heard Negro speakers address mixed audiences of white and

colored persons and both white and black go away rejoicing, each

side thinking that the speaker had spoken their opinions, altho the

opinions of the blacks were very different from those of the whites,

even contradictory. This is one reason for the great misconception in

the white race respecting the desires, ambitions and sentiments of the

black.”[361]

But in the year which followed that in which Pickens’s book was

published the United States entered the World War.

Before discussing the effect of that great adventure upon the Negro

minority of one-tenth of the population of the United States, the force

which swung the whole should have some slight consideration, and from

the pen of a political opponent, the editor of the greatest Republican

paper of the West this is pictured as follows:

“Our chief admiration for Mr. Wilson is for the manner in which he

drove the war activities once we were committed. That determination

was evolved from his character. He used conscription. He furnished

the Allies with what they needed—men, money and materials in the

amounts needed. Weakness at this time might have ruined us. A man less

determined to have his own way, less impervious to what was said of

him, might have flinched at conscripting soldiers. He might have tried

to fight the war with volunteers. He might even have tried to fight

it with money and materials. He might have tried to spare the nation

human sacrifices or to limit the expenditure of human life. Then we

should have entered a losing war and have been among the losers, just

in time to be in the wreckage. Conscription was his big decision and

whether he realized it or not was his most dangerous one. Hughes might

have had serious draft riots. From Wilson the people took the draft

with hardly a murmur, and the war was won right then. The President

did not allow the people to draw back from a drop in the cup. He

took their money. He spent it without a thought for the waste of it.

There had to be waste. He put the United States behind the Allies with

a promise of the last man and the last dollar. It required courage,

intelligence and character; and all the ruggedness and wilfulness of

Mr. Wilson’s temperament served the country as it needed to be served.

Those were the high moments of his career. He sent 2,000,000 men to

France before the astonished Germans thought that it was possible

to do so. He had 2,000,000 in America training camps and more were

being drafted. Then also from the White House came the thunders of

rhetoric which stupefied the German people behind their armies and

disintegrated them in the rear of their fighting forces. As American

divisions put the pressure on German divisions, Mr. Wilson’s words

destroyed the morale of the German people who had been steadfast; and

the war was won.”[362]

But he did more, a Southerner, conscious of the deep prejudices of

his own section and against the protests of many State officials,

he determined that a certain proportion of colored men should have

training as officers; nor did he permit this military training to be

stopped even after the Houston riot, when for the second time Negro

soldiery shot up a Southern city. Those who were guilty were court

martialed promptly; but to the surprise of not a few of the Negro

aspirants for office, the training of Negro officers proceeded. Again

not quoting from a friend; but taking a Negro’s statement we note:

“As many as 1200 men became commissioned officers ... Negro nurses

were authorized by the War Department for service in base hospitals at

six army camps—Funston, Sherman, Zachary Taylor and Dodge, and women

served as canteen workers in France and in charge of hostess houses

in the United States. Sixty Negro men served as chaplains, 350 as

Y. M. C. A. secretaries and others in special capacities.... In the

whole matter of the War the depressing incident was the Court Martial

of sixty-three members of the Twenty Fourth Infantry, U. S. A. on

trial for rioting and the murder of seventeen people at Houston Texas,

August 23rd, 1917. As a result of it thirteen of the defendants were

hanged, December 11th, forty-nine sentences to imprisonment for life,

four for imprisonment for shorter terms and four were acquitted.”[363]

President Wilson’s action in this matter was a vindication of President

Roosevelt’s action in the previous riot at Brownsville and a stern

condemnation of the sentimentalists, white and black whose strictures

upon Roosevelt had led the Negro soldiery to harbor the amazing idea,

that troops of any color could take the law into their own hands and

make Zaberns in America, on a scale beyond the wildest imaginations of

any War Lord’s minions, in Europe.

FOOTNOTES:

[352] Warne, Immigrant Invasion, p. 174.

[353] The New Republic, June 24, 1916.

[354] Ibid. July 1, 1916.

[355] _News and Courier_, December 17, 1916.

[356] Rhett’s Oration on Calhoun, Pamphlets Vol. 8 p. 151 Johnston

C.L.S.

[357] Bureau U. S. Census 1910 Bulletin 129, p. 64.

[358] R. R. Wright Jr. Letter _News and Courier_, November 6, 1916.

[359] Pickens, The New Negro, p. 18.

[360] Ibid. p. 228.

[361] Ibid. p. 37.

[362] _Chicago Tribune._

[363] Brawley, Short History of American Negro, p. 357.

CHAPTER XV

In the year immediately following the end of the great World War armed

clashes between whites and Negroes in the United States occurred in

the great cities of the North and West, Washington, Chicago and Omaha

and also in the State of Arkansas. These race riots drew comment from

whites and Negroes. Prior to these riots in the time of peace, there

had been others during the World War at Chester and Philadelphia,

in the State of Pennsylvania and one in Illinois at East St. Louis.

Both Dr. DuBois, the president of “The National Association for the

Advancement of the Colored People,” and the colored minister Wright,

whose article on Negro migration has been alluded to, gave advice. It

is interesting to compare their utterances. The communication of the

minister is first cited.

“To my dear Brethren and Friends:

Permit me to say this word to you in this time of most serious

anxiety. You have read of the riots in St. Louis, Philadelphia, and

Chester, Pennsylvania during the Great World War and in Washington

and Chicago since the close. When the facts have been finally sifted,

they have always shown that the colored people did not start these

riots. They were started by whites in every instance. If there are

to be riots in the future I want to say to my people let it be as it

has been in the past, that you shall not be the instigators of them.

It is to the everlasting disgrace of these Northern cities as it has

been of certain Southern cities, that these riots have been started

by whites, and that white policemen who should be the first to uphold

the law have, in nearly every instance assisted the mobs. Now is the

time for all of us to keep our wits: to do nothing wrong, which may be

any excuse for riot. Let men and women go about their work quietly,

attending to their business. Keep away from saloons and places where

there is gambling. More trouble starts in these places than anywhere

else. Avoid arguments. Make no boasts. Make no threats. Attack no man

nor woman without due provocation, and under no circumstances hurt

a child. Don’t tell anybody what the Negroes are going to do to the

whites. For we do not want war; we want peace. Our safety is in peace.

Don’t loaf in the streets; do not needlessly encounter gangs of white

boys. A gang of boys from 15 to 20 years is generally irresponsible. A

gang of white toughs will delight to ‘jump’ a lone Negro, especially

if they number eight or a dozen and believe the Negro is unarmed;

and it is foolish to give them the chance. In trading as nearly as

possible get the right change before paying your bill; know what you

want, where you can trade with your own people, where you are not

liable to get into a dispute. Don’t go to white theatres, white ice

cream places, white banks or white stores, where you can find colored

to serve you just as well. In other words don’t spend your hard

earned money where you are in danger of being beaten up. Don’t carry

concealed weapons—its against the law. Now I am not urging cowardice.

I am urging common sense. I am urging law and order. Protect your

home, protect your wife and children, with your life, if necessary. If

a man crosses your threshold after you or your family, the law allows

you to protect your home even if you have to kill the intruder. Obey

the law but do not go hunting for trouble. Avoid it. Do not be afraid

or lose heart because of these riots. They are merely symptoms of the

protest of your entrance into a higher sphere of American citizenship.

They are the dark hours before morning which have always come just

before the burst of a new civic light. Some people see this light

and they provoke these riots endeavoring to stop it from coming. But

God is working. Things will be better for the Negro. We want full

citizenship ballot, equal school facilities and everything else. We

fought for them. We will have them; we must not yield. The greater

part of the best thinking white people, North and South know we are

entitled to all we ask. They know we will get it. In their hearts

they are for us though they may fear the lower elements who are trying

to stir up trouble to keep us from getting our rights. But they will

fail just as they failed to keep us from our freedom. God is with us.

They cannot defeat God. So I say to you stand aside, stand prepared,

provoke no riot; just let God do his work. He may permit a few riots

just to force the Negroes closer together. He lets the hoodlums kill a

few in order to teach the many that WE MUST GET TOGETHER. But he does

not mean that we shall be defeated—if we trust him. Let us learn the

lesson He is teaching us. Remember a riot may break out in any place.

Let pastors caution peace, prayer and preparedness. Let us provoke

no trouble. Let us urge our congregations to keep level heads and do

nothing that is unlawful.

Yours in Christian bonds,

R. R. Wright, Jr.

Editor of the Christian Recorder.”[364]

The appeal of DuBois is more dramatic:

“Brothers we are on the Great Deep. We have cast off on the vast

voyage which will lead to Freedom or Death. For three centuries we

have suffered and cowered. No race ever gave Passive Resistance and

Submission to Evil longer, more piteous trial. Today we raise the

terrible weapon of Self Defense. When the murderer comes he shall

no longer strike us in the back. When the armed lynchers gather, we

too must gather armed. When the mob moves we propose to meet it with

bricks and clubs and guns. But we must tread here with solemn caution.

We must never let justifiable self defense against individuals become

blind and lawless offense against all white folk. We must not seek

reform by violence. We must not seek vengeance. Vengeance is Mine

saith the Lord; or to put it otherwise—only infinite Justice and

Knowledge can assign blame in this poor world and we ourselves are

sinful men, struggling desperately with our own crime and ignorance.

We must defend ourselves, our homes, our wives and children against

the lawless without stint or hesitation; but we must carefully and

scrupulously avoid on our own part bitter and unjustifiable aggression

against anybody. The line is difficult to draw. In the South the

Police and Public Opinion back the mob and the least resistance on

the part of the innocent black victim is nearly always construed as

a lawless attack on society and government. In the North the Police

and the Public will dodge and falter, but in the end they will back

the Right when the truth is made clear to them. But whether the

line between just resistance and angry retaliation is hard or easy,

we must draw it carefully, not in wild resentment, but in grim and

sober consideration; and when back of the impregnable fortress of the

Divine Right of Self Defense, which is sanctioned by every law of God

and man, in every land, civilized or uncivilized, we must take our

unfaltering stand. Honor, endless and undying Honor, to every man,

black or white, who in Houston, East St. Louis, Washington and Chicago

gave his life for Civilization and Order. If the United States is to

be a Land of Law, we would live humbly and peaceably in it—working,

singing, learning and dreaming to make it and ourselves nobler and

better; if it is to be a Land of Mobs and Lynchers, we might as well

die today as tomorrow.

‘And how can a man die better

Than facing fearful odds

For the ashes of his fathers

And the temples of his Gods?’

The Crisis (New York) September.”[365]

In a consideration of these two utterances, if it be conceded that in

point of literary excellence, DuBois’s appeal is superior, yet that

does not establish that in his call he better plays the part of leader

than the Negro minister, first quoted, whose exhortation to his race,

unlike that of DuBois, is in no way overstrained, nor pitched too high

for the humblest, if possessed of rudimentary intelligence, to grasp.

The detailed instructions in Wright’s publication, simple as they are,

contain wisdom, the wisdom which crieth out in the streets from of old;

while if the comparison instituted, by DuBois between the Northern

and the Southern whites, in respect to the police and public opinion

in the two sections, is true, it is passing strange, that unlike the

Negro minister, he is not found advising the migration from the worse

to the better section, as far as the needs of his race are concerned.

If in the North, even if justice moves limpingly as he describes; yet

according to him justice does move. And for the poor and oppressed what

gain can out-weigh justice? But there is a graver comparison to be

instituted between these calls. DuBois in his publication exclaims:

“Honor, endless and undying Honor, to every man, black or white who

in Houston, East St. Louis, Washington and Chicago gave his life for

Civilization and Order.”

Now whatever wrongs or supposed wrongs the Negro soldiery suffered

in Houston, can it be reasonably contended that they, armed by the

Federal Government and enlisting to be under its orders, in breaking

away from the control of their superior officers and with weapons put

in their hands for other purposes, in any way assisted civilization

and order by precipitating themselves upon the white population in an

attempt to shoot up the city? If he does so claim then he is worse

than the Negro soldiery who so acted, or those Negroes and whites,

no matter who they were, who criticised Roosevelt’s action in the

Brownsville matter. No matter to what lofty station Roosevelt’s critics

may have been advanced; no matter what service they may claim to have

rendered peace and civilization, their weakness in that first instance

induced the graver breach, for which, under President Wilson, as

commander-in-chief, the Negro soldiery were courtmartialed and punished

for their excesses at Houston. Yet while the perusal of DuBois’s call,

as above, does not convey a positive stand for or against the Negro

soldiery and is open to the criticism which appears in Pickens’s book:

“Till this day the Negro is seldom frank to the white man. He says

what he does not mean; he means what he does not say,”—

apparently his view changed. As editor of The Crisis, Dr. DuBois upon

the occasion of the Chicago riots as above noted honored every man,

black or white, who, in either Houston or Chicago, gave his life for

civilization and order; later he expressed the following, which is

nothing more nor less than a justification of the behavior of the Negro

soldiery at Houston:

“Six years ago December 11, at 7:17 in the morning, thirteen American

Negro soldiers were murdered on the scaffold by the American

government to satisfy the blood-lust of Texas, on account of the

Houston riot.”[366]

Now, how does this exhibit this extremely gifted man, as a leader of

his race? In the roar and blaze of the Chicago riot, in 1919 he was

for “Honor, endless and undying Honor to every man black or white in

Houston ... who gave his life for civilization and order”; but by the

end of 1920, the executed Negro soldiers had become martyrs, murdered

by the government.

But in justice to this most excitable man, it must be admitted that

there can be found whites of cultivation and intellect just as wild.

Take the case of Dr. H. J. Seligman.

With all the insufferable conceit of a certain class of white, he

appropriates the work of Negroes, (easily recognized by those who have

heard their most intelligent speakers), denatures it of the humor which

makes its appeal and presents it to the public, as his own indictment

of the South. “The Southern dogma colors the rest of the country,” he

says. Yet he admits—“In so far as the South is concerned, conditions

improve as the Negro moves out.” Another writer, Stephen Graham, starts

his book with crediting to the Negro slaves emancipated in 1863 the

“twelve millions out of a total of a hundred millions of all races

blending in America.”[367] As the census postdating his book gives

only 10,389,328 Negroes for 1920, and as in all reason nearly two

millions of these may be argued to be the progeny of the free persons

of color of 1860, the contribution to the race from the class of

colored person invariably ignored by English and Northern writers must

approach almost a third. But that is not sensational. So journeying

through Virginia, Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, Louisiana

and Mississippi, visiting Negroes, accepting their hospitality and

practicing social equality, Graham most inconsiderately denounces their

smell and, because he failed to reach and establish any spiritual

touch, in his attempt to address them, stupidly decides there was none

to be attained. Expressing the belief that the Negroes of New York

and Chicago were firmer in flesh and will than those in the South and

yield more hope for the race in the light of the extra prosperity and

happiness of the Northern Negroes, he nevertheless crawls back to the

feet of Northern prejudice with the declaration against the migration

of the Negroes from the South to the North and the consequent even

distribution over the whole of the country, because it would take

“hundreds of years to even them out” and “they would probably crowd

more and more into the large cities and be as much involved in evil

conditions, as they were in the South.” Can it be possible that there

are nothing but evil conditions in the great cities of the North and

West? Is it not the belief of the Northern authorities, that what the

Negro needs is education? What education is equal to residence in these

great pulses of our civilization? Has not Mr. Graham, himself attested

“the extra prosperity and happiness of the Northern Negroes?” Why then

attempt to throw doubts on the benefits to the Negro from diffusion? It

might as well be faced without any more squirming. It is inevitable. By

the law of compensation, that section of our great country, which for

a hundred years or more has represented to the admiring world all the

virtue, intelligence and civilization of the United States, especially

in its treatment of the colored race will have to endeavor to live up

to its reputation. The aspiring Negro is not going to be denied that

contact with the most advanced civilization of this country, which

those who freed him owe to him. If he crowds into the great cities,

it is because there he finds its most advertised display, and so the

most active and energetic push into it with some contempt for their

feeble self elected leaders, who have preached against or kept quiet

concerning it.

For three decades prior to the war between the States, the Southern

States of the Union had made railroad development secondary to

the Negro question. Constituting as they did in area at that time

fully one-half of the States; peopled with 3,575,634 whites and

2,176,127 Negroes, they had been led to base their civilization on

the substratum of an inferior race, putting that wild conception even

above the Federal Union, that great experiment in government, which

they had been most instrumental in framing. After their overthrow,

Reconstruction raised the spectre of the Negro outstripping the

whites in the South and almost assuredly in the lower South. And what

establishes the wonderful clearness of the vision of the Negro, William

Hannibal Thomas, was his ability, two years before the overthrow of

Reconstruction, to see through the mists of 1874, which so completely

shrouded the vision of Judge Albion Tourgee as late as 1888 in his

“Appeal to Caesar.”

For Thomas realized, from the outset, that the Negro majority of South

Carolina could not last.

In the hundred years which have elapsed since 1820, the proportion of

the Negro population to the whites in the United States, as a whole,

has dropped from 19 per cent to 9.9 per cent, the whites rising from

81 per cent to 90.1 per cent. With regard to the Negro population in

the Southern States as compared with the rest of the United States,

the proportion in the South has dropped from 92.5 per cent to 84.2 per

cent, the percentage of the rest of the United States rising from 8

per cent to 15.98 per cent. But while it is treated as a movement of

one hundred years, as far as the South is concerned, on account of the

unknown accretions prior to 1860 through the illicit slave trade and

the magnetic attraction of Reconstruction, it could be more accurately

represented as a movement of forty years.

In the five great States of Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi

and Louisiana, embracing an area of about 224,960 square miles of

contiguous territory, the white population had risen from 4,112,564

in 1880, to 7,444,218 in 1920; while in the same period the Negro

population had increased from 2,408,654 only to 3,223,791. But what is

even more striking is the fact that in the last decade there has been

an actual decrease of 143,288 in the Negro population of this Southern

area.

At the same time in the five great States of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois,

Michigan and Wisconsin the Negro population has risen to 514,589, and

to the East of the great Northwest, in the Middle States and New

England 709,453 were found to be; while West of the Mississippi river,

outside of the old South, into a region, which before the war between

the States was prairie and almost unexplored mountain and desert,

314,879 Negroes have moved. Yet in the South they still constitute 26

per cent of the population to only 3 per cent outside, in the rest of

the Union.

Mr. Graham’s impression, however, that it will “take hundreds of years

to even them out” is a hasty and illconsidered judgment. Louisiana,

which forty years ago had a colored majority of 28,707, had by the

Census of 1920 a white majority of 396,360. Georgia had increased its

white majority from 90,773 in 1880 to 482,749 in 1920; while the great

cotton planting State of Alabama had raised its majority in the same

period from 62,083 to 546,972. Considering what the Census figures

show for Virginia, suffering as no State suffered from the war between

the States, engaged in by her for no purpose of sustaining a black

substratum for her civilization; but for a purpose identical with that

which the civilized world acclaimed for Belgium and supporting the

shock of war with a courage and devotion not surpassed by France in the

Great War, she was shorn of about a third of her area and four-tenths

of her white population, in utter defiance of the Constitution; but,

now with a white majority which has risen from 57.5 per cent to 70.1

per cent, she is in a healthier condition than the portion which was

carved out of her flank. The gain of North Carolina is even greater.

Taking the whole South, we find, that from 1880 to 1920 the white

population has increased from 12,309,087 to 25,016,579; while during

the same period the colored has only risen from 6,013,215 to 8,801,753.

It is true that by the Census of 1920 two Southern States, Mississippi

and South Carolina still each had a colored majority; but one which had

shrunk from 213,227 to only 46,181 in South Carolina and from 170,893

in Mississippi to 81,262; the percentage of whites in South Carolina

being 48.6 per cent and in Mississippi 48.3 per cent.[368]

Until the Census of 1930 is published we shall not know positively;

but in this, the fifth year since the last census, all available

information seems to indicate that in both States the white minority

has been converted into a white majority. By the census of the United

States for 1920 in the 875,670 square miles which constitute the

Southern States there were 25,016,579 whites and 8,801,753 colored

inhabitants; while the remaining 2,150,600 square miles of the Union

held 70,925,032 whites and 1,552,402 Negroes, with 109,966 under

strictly Federal control at Washington. But again, North of the

Northern line of the United States extends a region greater in area

than the United States in which as indicated by the Canadian census

of 1921 there are only 8,750,643 inhabitants. The door of opportunity

therefore still remains open to the Negro in America and his inability

to see this, throughout the fifty eight years of his freedom in which

it has been accessible to him by foot, while handicapped by their

ignorance of our wants, our customs and our language, the impoverished

whites of Europe have crossed the three thousand miles of water which

barred them, offers the most striking proof of the Negro’s lack of

capacity to help himself.

Perhaps, in justice to the Negroes as a whole, it should be noted that

in no race that has ever existed has it been easier to use the supposed

leaders against the true interests of the masses, than is apparent in

the history of the Negroes. Yet even these, as they now clash with

each other, emit some sparks of political intelligence. Meanwhile the

masses are growing more accustomed to judge for themselves. Northern

environment has not been without its effect upon them. They are taking

something from it and they are going to give something to it.

In the Northwest, in all probability, they are in the next decade apt

to gather in such numbers, as to affect both the South and Canada,

although in exactly opposite ways. To a considerable extent what

The New Republic foresaw in 1916 is coming to pass; but in somewhat

quicker movement than that paper anticipated. The last great effort

to induce them to remain in the South their “natural home” has been

made. It has utterly failed. They are steadily moving out and diffusion

is proceeding without any of the ills so continuously alleged as

inseparable with such a movement.

And now to this last effort, the comments upon it and what may be

called the first Negro Crusade, we should pay some attention, and then

close with an allusion to the most helpful discussion ever instituted

concerning the Negro.

FOOTNOTES:

[364] Kerlin, The Voice of the Negro, p. 21.

[365] Ibid. p. 20.

[366] The Crisis, December 1923, p. 59.

[367] Graham, Children of the Slaves, Preface.

[368] U. S. Census Pop. by Color, 1920.

CHAPTER XVI

At Birmingham, Alabama, President Harding spoke on the Negro question,

October 25, 1921. Elected president by the greatest majority which had

ever placed a president in power, his remarks, if not very profoundly

wise, were unquestionably bravely frank. His position was that unless

there should “be recognition of the absolute divergence in things

social and racial,” there might be “occasion for great and permanent

differentiation.” To quote him in such passages as most clearly and

unequivocally expressed his views, he will be found to have said:

Men of different races may well stand uncompromisingly against any

suggestion of social equality. Indeed it would be helpful to have

the word equality eliminated from this consideration, to have it

accepted on both sides that this is not a question of social equality

but a question of recognizing a fundamental, eternal and inescapable

difference. We shall have made real progress when we develop an

attitude in the public and community thought of both races which

recognizes the difference.[369]

To this he added, as if replying to some unexpressed utterance, altho’

he was the sole speaker:

I would accept that a black man cannot be a white man and that he

does not need and should not aspire to be as much like a white man as

possible in order to accomplish the best that is possible for him.[370]

In these two utterances President Harding put himself in accord with

Abraham Lincoln and in opposition to Theodore Roosevelt’s dinner to

Booker Washington, and, from this, he drew near to what is supposed to

be the teaching of Booker Washington:

“I would say let the black man vote when he is fit to vote.... I have

no sympathy with the half baked altruism that would overstock us with

doctors and lawyers of whatever color and leave us in need of people

fit and willing to do the manual work of a work-a-day world.”[371]

From these generalizations, after quoting from F. D. Lugard a paragraph

which even a Philadelphia lawyer would be puzzled to unravel, in which

it is declared that while there shall be equality in the paths of

knowledge and culture and equal admiration and opportunity, yet each

must pursue his own inherited traditions, and while agreeing to be

spiritually equal diverge physically and materially, the President

reached the piece-de-resistance of his discourse:

“It is probable that as a nation we have come to the end of the period

of very rapid increase in our population. Restricted immigration

will reduce the rate of increase and force us back upon our older

population to find people to do the simpler physically harder manual

tasks. This will require some difficult adjustments. In anticipation

of such a condition the South may well recognize that the North and

West are likely to continue their drains upon its colored population,

and that if the South wishes to keep its fields producing and its

industry still expanding it will have to compete for the services of

the colored man.”[372]

To this, the most important part of the President’s remarks, while

complimenting the tone and spirit of the whole, the same paper in

which Carlyle McKinley in 1889 sought to reveal to the South its true

policy, thus replied:

“The South would be glad to see a considerable part of the negro

population in this section find homes in other sections.”[373]

The comment of that Northern publication which had, as has been shown,

most intelligently discussed the migration of the Negroes from the

South to the North and West in 1916, was to the effect that while the

President’s scheme had much to recommend it as far as the spirit was

concerned, yet—

“The South knows as President Harding ought to know that you can’t

draw a sharp line between politics and social life. The offices of a

State are in most parts of America positions of social leadership.

With complete political equality the State of Mississippi might

easily elect a Negro as governor. Would such a result be accepted

by Mississippi as devoid of social significance? The race problem

unfortunately is not one that admits of easy general solutions.”[374]

The President’s speech appeared about the time at which Dr. DuBois

returned from the second of the Pan-African congresses in Europe,

which he had been mainly instrumental in convening and at which there

were Negroes and mulattoes from West and South Africa, British Guiana,

Grenada, Jamaica, Nigeria and the Gold Coast; Indians from India and

East Africa; colored men from London; and twenty-five American Negroes.

There were meetings at London, Brussels and Paris.

The London congress over which presided a distinguished English

administrator, later Secretary of State for India, Sir Sidney Olivier,

was mild, the chairman making no attempt to control the findings. But

at Brussels, where—

“the black Senegalese, Blaise Diagne, French Deputy and High

Commissioner of African troops—”[375]

presided—

DuBois says—

“We sensed the fear about us in a war land with nerves still

taut.”[376]

It seems Oswald Garrison Villard, with that refreshing conceit which

tempts him to discuss any subject whether he knows anything about it

or not, had been ignorantly denouncing conscription, imposed on French

Negroes.

With infinitely superior political acumen the London congress under the

leadership of DuBois, or certainly with his approval, claimed the right

to bear it equally with white Frenchmen, as long as France recognized

racial equality; but when DuBois at Brussels, after a few days of

harmless palaver—

“rose the last afternoon and read in French and English the

resolutions of London—”[377]

there was some stir. This is the scene, as depicted by DuBois:

“Diagne, the Senegales Frenchman who presided was beside himself with

excitement after the resolutions were read; as under secretary of the

French government; as ranking Negro of greater France, and perhaps

as a successful investor in French Colonial enterprises he was

undoubtedly in a difficult position. Possibly he was bound by actual

promises to France and Belgium. His French was almost too swift for my

ears, but his meaning was clear; he felt that the cause of the black

man had been compromised by black American radicals; he especially

denounced our demand for ‘the restoration of the ancient common

ownership of the land in Africa’ as rank communism.”[378]

Dr. DuBois does not explain wherein it was not; but contents himself

with declaring that Diagne used his power as chairman and prevented

a vote, the question being referred to the French congress. Later in

conversation with DuBois, Diagne declared that he had “only sought to

prevent the assassination of a race.”

In his final analysis of the congress at Paris, DuBois says:

“France recognizes Negro equality, not only in theory but in practice,

she has for the most part enfranchised her civilized Negro citizens.

But what she recognizes is the equal right of her citizens black and

white to exploit by modern industrial methods her laboring classes

black and white; and the crying danger to black France is that its

educated and voting leaders will join in the industrial robbery of

Africa, rather than lead its masses to education and culture.”[379]

DuBois thought Diagne and Candace, while unwavering defenders of

racial opportunity, education for and the franchise for the civilized,

“curiously timid” when the industrial problems of Africa “were”

approached. Well so was the Negro, Martin R. Delany, candidate for

lieutenant governor of South Carolina in 1874. He had had advantages

for studying the African problems which Dr. DuBois had possibly not

enjoyed to the same degree. Delany in his younger days had been an

African explorer and, even if he had not penetrated very deeply into

“The Dark Continent,” had seen the African Negro in his lair. He and

his younger co-laborer for reform in South Carolina, William Hannibal

Thomas, ex-Union soldier from Ohio, as has been narrated, supported

the candidacy of Judge Green for governor of South Carolina, in 1874,

against the brilliant white Carpet-Bagger Daniel H. Chamberlain and

his lieutenant, the even less reputable black Carpet-Bagger, R. B.

Elliott. But while Thomas accepted Chamberlain, in 1876, as a changed

man, with regard to Chamberlain’s accompaniment, Delany, who had been

in South Carolina since 1865, eleven years to Thomas’s three, was still

“curiously timid.”

DuBois later enlarged his experience by a trip to Africa and, before

that, possibly may have been moved by the work of a French Negro

scholar who had made some mark in the literary world and occasioned

some stir in French colonial politics, just after the Pan-African

congress. But upon his return from these in 1921 DuBois at once

addressed himself to the consideration of President Harding’s

Birmingham speech.

With a curious sympathy for the man, Harding, and a display of rank

ingratitude to that white leader who had dared to do more for the

Negro, than Harding thought became a white man, DuBois declared:

“The President made a braver, clearer utterance than Theodore

Roosevelt ever dared to make or than William H. Taft or William

McKinley ever dreamed of....

Mr. Harding meant that the American Negro must acknowledge that it was

wrong and a disgrace for Booker T. Washington to dine with President

Roosevelt.”[380]

Although thus praising the President and with a wholly gratuitous sneer

at the dead Roosevelt who had dared the “disgrace” and suffered for

it, the Doctor asserted Harding’s “braver clearer utterance” was “an

inconceivably dangerous and undemocratic demand,” which he disposes of

with one sweep of his pen, which not only wiped out Harding’s speech;

but also brushed away the basis upon which John Stuart Mill erected his

political economy, to wit—“the first impulse of mankind is to follow

and obey, servitude rather than freedom is their natural state.”

Not so in the view of Dr. DuBois:

“No system of social uplift which begins by denying the manhood of a

man can end by giving him a free ballot, a real education and a just

wage.”[381]

In reply to this it may be said, that when the Negroes are thoroughly

diffused throughout the United States, they are apt to get as free a

ballot as the whites and proportionately the same education; but when

all who labor, white or black, get a just wage, the millennium will

have arrived and the capitalistic lion will be lying down with the

horny headed laboring lamb.

It cannot be denied, however, that Dr. DuBois stirred up some comment

with his congresses and those who believe in the exhortation—“let

there be light” will be interested in the French and German utterances

thereon.

The Paris Temps, generally considered the organ of the French

government, editorializes in these words:

“It is the claims of the wiser group which must be studied.... The

road will be long for Negroes in the League of Nations toward the

liberation modest though it is, whose program they have elaborated in

their Congress. But there is nothing to keep us French from putting

into immediate practice some articles at least of this program to

start with.”[382]

This is a world wide echo of Hayne’s Speech on the floor of the United

States Senate just about a century earlier. It is also to some extent

an endorsement of Diagne, whom DuBois had criticised as “curiously

timid.” The portrait of the remarkable Senegalese who played such an

Ajax to DuBois’s ambitious Hector does not appear; but an entire front

page of The Crisis is given to Maran, the Black Thersites of the race.

If DuBois would accept Diagne as the leader of the Negro people some

results might come; but the Negro in DuBois will scarcely permit this.

He might accept the far less able white, Oswald Garrison Villard. But

no Negro.

The German comment on the congress is less cautious than the French but

points in the same direction:

“The Congress was called by Dr. Burghardt DuBois, an American mulatto

who has been prominent in his native country for many years as a race

agitator. Its purpose was to draw together all Negro organizations

throughout the world. The agenda included: the segregation of the

colored races; the race problem in England, America and South Africa;

and a future programme....

The attendance at London and Brussels was very small, but some four

hundred delegates from every portion of the world participated in the

proceedings at Paris.... At the London session the radical ideas of

DuBois, which approached those of Garvey were in the ascendant and

force was preached as a possible alternative to attain the ends which

the Negroes have in view.... At Brussels, Deputy Diagne, a member of

the French Parliament from Senegal, presided. When he saw that radical

ideas were likely to prevail there also, he arbitrarily terminated

the session. At Paris the programme was cut and dried.... The

newspapers gave full and sympathetic reports of the sessions. France

by this stroke of diplomacy attained her purpose. Under the skilful

leadership of the French deputy Diagne, the Congress adopted a more

moderate programme of evolution instead of revolution, culminating in

a platform demanding equality of all civilized men without distinction

of race; a systematic plan for educating the colored races; liberty

for the natives to retain their own religion and manners; restoration

of native titles to their former lands and to its produce; the

establishment of an international institute to study and record the

development of the black race; the protection of the black race by

the League of Nations; and the creation of a separate section in the

International Labor Bureau to deal with Negro labor.”[383]

In this report it is claimed both the United States and England are

handled harshly, while France is praised. It seems Sir Harry Johnston

is, to some degree, in accord with this praise of France, at the

expense of his own country, his opinion being:

“All in all, I am of the opinion that the French nation since 1871 has

dealt with the Negro problem in Africa and in tropical America more

wisely, prudently and successfully than we English have done.”[384]

It is this very fluent gifted linguist, in all probability, who is

responsible for the picturesque conclusion:

“Finally it is perfectly certain that the race question is the rock

upon which the British Empire will be wrecked or the corner stone upon

which the greatest political structure in the history of the world

will be erected.”[385]

But if from a representative of Imperial Germany, the only country

which ever enacted as a part of its organic law the principle of

Nullification, it surpasses in grandiosity and positiveness of

statement the dictum of Calhoun in 1837:

“We have for the last 12 years been going through a great and

dangerous juncture. The passage is almost made and, if no new cause

of difficulty should intervene, it will be successfully made. I, at

present, see none but the abolition question, which however, I fear

is destined to shake the country to its centre.... For the first time

the bold ground has been taken that slaves have a right to petition

Congress ... itself emancipation.... Our fate as a people is bound

up in the question. If we yield, we will be extirpated; but if we

successfully resist, we will be the greatest and most flourishing

people of modern time. It is the best substratum of population in the

world and one on which great and flourishing Commonwealths may be most

easily and safely reared.”[386]

We of the South know, we did not successfully resist emancipation; were

not extirpated; but do form part of “the greatest and most flourishing

people of modern time.” We must realize that, no matter what was the

price paid for it, emancipation was salvation for the South. It was a

deliverance from the “body of death,” Reviewing our history, we find

that in the same year that Calhoun, the greatest disruptive force in

our politics, pronounced the dictum last quoted, a comparatively young

and unknown politician, destined to be the greatest cementing force of

the Union, declared—

“That the institution of slavery is founded on both injustice and bad

policy; but that the promulgation of abolition doctrines tends rather

to promote than to abate its evils.”[387]

In discussing this utterance of Lincoln, his latest biographer,

Mr. Stephenson, who declares it reveals the dawn of his intellect,

beautifully pictures how—

“arise the two ideas, the faith in a mighty governing power; the equal

faith that it should use its might with infinite tenderness; that it

should be slow to compel results.”[388]

Going back ten years before the dawn of Lincoln’s intellect, and four

prior to the declaration that the Negro question was, as he, Calhoun,

saw it an African slave substratum on which great and flourishing

commonwealths could be most easily and safely reared, Hayne, on the

floor of the United States Senate, voiced in his own words, Lincoln’s

subsequently sponsored thought.

Harken to Hayne:

“Thus, Sir, it appears that the Almighty in the wise order of his

providence has marked out the course of events, which will not only

remove all danger, but gradually and effectually and in his own good

time accomplish our deliverance from what gentleman are pleased to

consider as the curse of the land.”[389]

In 1827, it is apparent that the Negro question was a different

question than it later became to the South; and that the strengthening

and possible spread of slavery was in some measure due to Calhoun’s

devotion to it, over and above all other questions, even before

Nullification, is evidenced by his letter to Maxcy in 1830:

“I consider the Tariff, but as the occasion rather than the real cause

of the present unhappy state of things.”[390]

Strange to state, even at that early date, he writes of the South

possibly being compelled to “rebel,” to preserve her “peculiar

institution.”

Fortunately for the Lower South, Lincoln and not Seward was elected

president in 1860; for had Seward been raised to that position of

preeminence, in all human probability the seven States of South

Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and

Texas would have been allowed to secede and attempt the experiment of

government involved therein, with a population of 2,619,116 whites,

36,861 free persons of color, many of whom were slave owners, and

2,312,372 Negro slaves.

That the colored population would have increased rapidly is a

reasonable conclusion. Virginia, North Carolina, Kentucky, and

Tennessee, in all probability, would have speedily divested themselves

of a great proportion of the 1,324,166 slaves they held and, even if

such Southern statesmen as Leonidas Washington Spratt had not been

able to reopen the African slave trade, the smuggling in of slaves on

a greater and greater increasing scale would have been a consequence.

Slavery being the corner stone of the new political structure, it

would have been natural that the view of Governor Seabrook, that slave

holding Negroes should be admitted to the ballot, would have eventually

prevailed. War might have come between the large and small sections

of North America from some frontier incident concerning Arkansas,

the Indian Territory or Mexico; but it could scarcely have been the

pulverizing conflict which the Lower South sustained by the two and

a half million additional whites of Virginia, North Carolina and

Tennessee, maintained for four years of desperate struggle.

Each year that the conflict was delayed would have found the States

which remained in the old Union stronger and whiter, sickling the

seceded States with railroads and quite possibly drawing Canada into

their orbit; for as Sir Charles Dilke has pointed out in his Problems

of Greater Britain, published when the annexation of Canada was still a

debatable question—

“a fact often overlooked in England is that hitherto the western

centres of population of British North America have been more

intimately connected with districts lying South of them across the

American frontier than with places East and West of them, within the

Canadian border.”[391]

The days of the “Little Englanders” were only then passing, when the

colonies had almost been considered a nuisance.

But whether the region mapped out now as Winnipeg, Alberta and the

other wheat areas of the Canadian West might have been attached to the

great white Union in the sixties, if undisturbed by war and moving

with continuingly accelerated industrial development or not, the Union

would have become whiter, as the Lower South darkened; and Calhoun’s

“substratum” theory would have there been tested to the fullest extent

and risk.

From this Lincoln’s adroit political play induced the Lower South, by

firing on the flag, to save itself, unknowingly. By the invasion of

Virginia he forced that State, as well as North Carolina and Tennessee,

into the Confederacy, against which, in 1862, he drew the weapon of

emancipation without the least idea as to how deep it must cut. For it

has proven to be a two edged sword.

Nothing more clearly reveals Lincoln’s ignorance of the inevitable

consequences of emancipation, than his message to Congress in December,

1862:

“But it is dreaded that the freed people will swarm forth and cover

the whole land. Are they not already in the land? Will liberation make

them more numerous? Equally distributed among the whites of the whole

country and there would be but one colored to seven whites. Could the

one in any way disturb the seven?... But why should emancipation

South send the free people North? People of any color seldom run

unless there be something to run from. Heretofore to some extent

they have fled North from bondage and destitution. But if gradual

emancipation and deportation be adopted they will have neither to flee

from.... And in any event cannot the North decide for itself whether

to receive them?”[392]

If this was the Great Emancipator’s view of emancipation, what wonder

that the “Southern color psychosis” should spread like measles, from

contact alone.

The Congressional Reconstructionists thought that they had won in

the war between the States what has since been styled euphoniously,

“a sphere of influence,” a subject people to sell goods to. But the

mass of Northern and Western whites, true Americans, sickened of

the excesses of Congressional Reconstruction. The Federal troops

were withdrawn on the order of a true patriot, Rutherford B. Hayes,

President of the United States, and not of a section.

Chastened and disciplined by their fall from power, the most energetic

and industrious, the boldest and most assertive Negroes have, since

1876, been steadily moving into the mammoth cities of the North and

West, to there build up in the segregated districts, groups of New

Negroes, as the Report of the Chicago riot shows “more perfect thro

suffering.”

By a joint committee of blacks and whites that riot has been discussed

and that makes the discussion the more valuable.

In that great city of two and a half million of inhabitants, after ten

days of riot, bloodshed, arson and murder, in response to the appeal

of representative citizens, Governor Lowden appointed an emergency

committee to study the underlying causes of the riot of 1919 and to

make recommendations. According to the Census of 1920 there were then

in Chicago 109,458 Negroes. The chairman of the committee was Edgar

A. Bancroft, a leading lawyer, subsequently appointed by President

Coolidge Ambassador to Japan. The vice chairman was Dr. Francis W.

Sheppardson, at one time of the University of Chicago. The most

prominent Negro on the Committee was Robert S. Abbott, proprietor of

the greatest and most influential Negro paper in the United States,

_The Chicago Defender_. The report was published in 1922. It indicates

38 persons killed in the riot, 15 whites and 23 Negroes. Of the 527

injured, 178 were white, 342 Negroes, the race denomination of 17 not

being established.

For the 38 deaths, there were nine presentments for murder returned,

four persons being convicted.

While it is stated that the merciless bombing of Negro households was

due to a systematic campaign conducted by the press against Negroes

buying properties to one side of the district in which 90 per cent of

the Negro population reside, that they moved, (on account of their

increase), towards the side to which they did go, rather than in the

opposite direction, the report says—

“may be explained partly by the hostility which the Irish and Polish

groups had often shown to Negroes.”[393]

That Negroes were killed deliberately, as a business measure,

in response to propaganda against them simply as Negroes, is an

unavoidable conclusion. Extracts from “The Property Owners Journal”

show that again and again there was an attempt to appeal to a “Higher

Law” than the law of the land. It seems to have been the law of greed.

Here is an extract:

“Any property owner who sells property anywhere in our district to

undesirables is an enemy to the white owner and should be discovered

and punished.... The Negro is using the Constitution and its legal

rights to abuse the moral rights of the white.”[394]

Following this hypocritical appeal, 58 houses, bought by Negroes,

were bombed, the residence of Jesse Binga, a Negro banker having been

bombed six times without breaking down his firm determination to

stand the storm. The house of a Negro woman was bombed three times.

Her home had been attacked in the riots and the front door battered

down; but, upon calling on the police, she and her husband were by

them arrested, altho’ later acquitted. The report charges gross and

continuous exaggeration during the riot, in which it is distinctly

stated that the Chicago Tribune led, although it is also stated, that

the paper owned by one of the committee, in one instance, could hardly

have been surpassed. That this last statement should have been made,

speaks volumes for the fairness of the committee and the member of

the committee thus concurring with the stricture on himself. It also

states, of the paper published by Robert S. Abbott, “The Defender”:

“It is probably no exaggeration to say that the Defender’s policy

prompted thousands of restless Negroes to venture North, where there

were assured of its protection and championship of their cause.”[395]

The Governor in his FOREWORD states that the report shows “that the

presence of Negroes in large numbers in our great cities is not a

menace in itself.” Incidents cited showed high courage and efficiency

on the part of Negro policeman and the exhibition of a stern sense of

duty controlling race prejudice.

The report says:

“It is clear that migrant Negroes are not returning South. On the

contrary there is a small but continuous stream of migration to the

industrial centres of the North. No great numbers of Negroes returned

to the South even during the trying unemployment period in the early

part of 1921.”[396]

Sustaining the country’s stand against the unrestricted immigration of

the ante bellum period, just about this time, the New Republic asserted:

“If we can hold the gates closed for another decade, these abuses

are bound to go. Not everybody in America would like this. Nor would

everybody in America be pleased with another natural consequence

of restriction, that it will draw more and more Negroes out of the

rural South, especially the lynching belt for common labor in the

industries.”[397]

In his FOREWORD to the Chicago report, Governor Lowden places himself

in absolute opposition to Lincoln. He says:

“Our race problem must be solved in harmony with the fundamental

law of the nation and with its free institutions. These prevent any

deportation of the Negro as well as any restriction of his freedom of

movement within the United States.”[398]

But the report of the Chicago riot contains much more than an

expression of the views of the committee as to the cause of that

outburst of savagery. In its 667 pages are the views of many Negroes on

the greatest variety of subjects. The first article of the belief of

the members of the Negro Urban League of Chicago is—

“I realize that our soldiers have learned new habits of self-respect

and cleanliness.”[399]

That is a short sentence, but it contains much.

Here is another which indicates that the Negro will not only learn much

from the Northern and Western white man; but also teach him a bit. It

is not very sweetly expressed, but it is well worth pondering for all

that:

“There is one trait, and I might say only one, that I take off my

hat to the southern ‘Cracker’ for, and that is his respect and high

regard for women. While he hasn’t much for the other fellow’s (the

Negro’s) wives and daughters, yet he respects his own. We must set

a good example for him and respect all women, regardless of race,

color or creed. Then you will win the admiration of all civilized

people. Men who do not respect and honor their women are not worthy of

citizenship.”[400]

Only one trait, but what an important one!

FOOTNOTES:

[369] Harding’s Speech at Birmingham, _News and Courier_, Oct. 27, 1921.

[370] Ibid.

[371] Ibid.

[372] Ibid.

[373] _News and Courier_, Editorial, October 27, 1921.

[374] The New Republic, November 9, 1921.

[375] DuBois, The New Republic, December 7, 1921.

[376] Ibid.

[377] Ibid.

[378] Ibid.

[379] Ibid.

[380] The Crisis, December, 1921, p. 53.

[381] Ibid. p. 55.

[382] Ibid. p. 64.

[383] Asmis, The Living Age, February 4, 1922, p. 261.

[384] Ibid. p. 262.

[385] Ibid.

[386] Jameson, Calhoun’s Correspondence, p. 368.

[387] Stephenson, Lincoln, p. 32.

[388] Ibid. p. 35.

[389] Jervey, Robert Y. Hayne and His Times, p. 207.

[390] Bassett, Andrew Jackson, Vol. II p. 547.

[391] Dilke, Problems of Greater Britain, p. 20.

[392] Munford, Virginia’s Attitude, Slavery and Secession, p. 173.

[393] Negro in Chicago, p. 8.

[394] Ibid. p. 121.

[395] Ibid. p. 92.

[396] Ibid. p. 105.

[397] The New Republic, February 14, 1923.

[398] Negro in Chicago, p. XXIII.

[399] Ibid. p. 193.

[400] Ibid. p. 306.

CHAPTER XVII

Passing from the report of the Negro riot in Chicago, of 1919 to the

Negro Year Book for the same date, we find therein the assertion, that

the aggregate wealth of the 10,300,000 Negroes in the United States, at

that date, was estimated at $1,100,000,000.

Whatever the wealth or progress of the Negroes in the United States

is asserted to be, at any time, it is customary to allude to it, as

that much in excess of nothing at the time of Emancipation. The Negro

writers in particular are prone to claim this. This has been, in some

degree, shown in this study to be incorrect; but it may be well to go a

little further into the matter.

In the year 1860 the 4,441,800 colored persons in the United States

consisted of 488,070 free persons of color and 3,953,730 Negro and

mulatto slaves. The 488,070 free persons of color were about evenly

divided between the Northern and the Southern States. They possessed

property. What was the probable value of their holdings?

The Census of 1860 shows, that in the city of Charleston, South

Carolina, there were 3,237 free persons of color and that 357 of them

returned property for taxation, on which they paid $12,015.60 in taxes,

mainly upon real estate, probably about seven-eighths of the whole. But

they also paid taxes on income and business, as well as head taxes on

the slaves they owned and upon their horses, carriages and dogs. With

the generally accepted average value for slaves and a safe valuation

for horse-flesh, as the value of the real estate is disclosed, we

can calculate that the aggregate wealth of the free persons of color

in Charleston, S. C., in 1860 must have been about $888,650. Unless

there was some particular advantage, materially, in a residence, by

free persons of color, in that State and city most identified with “the

peculiar institution,” the per capita established can be extended to

the whole population of this class in the United States, at that date;

which would have accordingly amounted to about $133,989,231.

Of course there may have been greater wealth among the free persons of

color in Charleston than in the rest of the State of South Carolina;

but for the same reason there would have been still greater wealth in

New Orleans and the greater cities of the North, where real estate was

necessarily of greater value with a greater growth.

As the free persons of color had more than quadrupled in the six

decades ending in 1860, what reason is there to think that, inured to

the responsibilities of freedom, their rate of increase, after the

emancipation of the mass of slaves, should have materially lessened?

With the Negro slaves emancipated in mass it would be different; and

therefore it is not at all unlikely, that of the $1,100,000,000 owned

in 1919 by the entire Negro population of the United States, something

like $535,957,124 should be credited to the descendants of the free

persons of color, best equipped at the outset to reap their share

of the wealth the War between the States brought to the North and

West, rather than to the greater number of the emancipated remaining

in the impoverished South and suffering with the whites the evils of

Congressional Reconstruction. That it took the South until 1890 to

regain in material wealth what they had lost between 1861 and 1876,

while in the same period the advance in material gain in the North and

West was the envy of the world, but clinches the argument.

Selfishness is, however, not infrequently the accompaniment of

increasing prosperity and, therefore, it should not surprise any

thoughtful individual to note, that the cultured DuBois and not a few

of his white acclaimers look somewhat askance at the steady movement of

the Southern Negroes out of the South and into the North and West.

This is not the attitude, however, of that Negro whose name heads the

report of the committee on the Chicago riot.

Robert S. Abbott comes nearer the Biblical description of the owner

of the vineyard. He wishes to share with the laborers of his race the

fields he has garnered so successfully with his weekly paper, the

“Chicago Defender” and therefore whatever may be his extravagances of

expression, he seems to be the most unselfish leader the Negroes have.

In thus turning to the weekly rather than attempting the more ambitious

daily, the Negroes show a clear-sightedness to their credit.

“Negro papers are published weekly because they cannot compete with

the daily papers in providing any part of the public with news from

day to day.”[401]

This is a very simple statement, but it contains a great amount of

wisdom.

For that part of humanity which lacks wealth the weekly paper is a

great protector. The news passes thro’ a filterer. It gives the honest

editor and publisher an opportunity to scrutinize that which the fierce

competition for the daily item of news may hardly permit.

The call for copy is not infrequently a call of distress. To fill

a void may bring about a hasty selection of cartoon plate, by no

means hastily prepared; but possibly for just such a contingency.

These so selected, not seldom undo the effect of an editorial, while

much masquerading as news, but in reality propaganda, may be hastily

slapped into the forms around two o’clock in the morning. The Negroes,

therefore, in clinging to weeklies “are wiser in their generation than

the children of light.”

Happily for humanity, sentimentality destroyed slavery of the Negroes

in the United States; but the result was an intense stimulation of

economic slavery of whites and blacks, by the simple process of letting

in from Europe masses of whites, many of whom were below the standards

of numbers of American Negroes. That having been checked, the Negro

laborer in every line must now measure himself against the Slav and the

Latin. In physical power he is superior to the Latin; but the Latin

makes up for it in greater pertinacity and orderliness of method. While

the statement will probably be received with derision, the training of

the slave by the Southern slave-holder and the working of the Negro by

the Southerner is not at the driving pace at which the North and West

move, and under that spur the Northern Negro becomes a more efficient

tool. But North or South the mass has been helped more than hindered

by that which a cultivated young Negro addressing one of the leading

educational institutions of the United States thus described:

“The savage and the child, to rise to higher things must feel the

power of a stronger hand. This is the special blessing of the American

Negro and has in forty years set him centuries ahead of his Haytien

brother, who has been self governing for one hundred years.”[402]

Even if he has since recanted, this was the view of William Pickens

in 1903, when awarded the Ten Eyck Prize at Yale University. But if

the Negro is affected by the presence of the white to the Negro’s

betterment, it is only fair and just to quote a Southern opinion with

regard to the reverse.

Only two years later than the award to Pickens at Yale University,

a Southern scholar published “The Coming Crisis”; which despite the

fact that it is written in flawless English, exhibits a symmetry of

composition which is altogether admirable, and advances views held

today by a vast number, not a few of whom have achieved some reputation

in the discussion of them less intelligently than Mr. Pinckney in 1905,

his book, nevertheless, at that date, fell absolutely flat. What Mr.

Pinckney discerned before the World War others can now also see. His

view of the Negro problem was not in accord with the view of the author

of this study. He would have been surprised to hear that it could have

been thought to be in accord with that of Abraham Lincoln, to a great

degree, altho’ with some differences. But in Pinckney’s discussion the

Negro is merely incidental to the subject which is to him so inspiring

as to be visualized in a passage worth pondering:

“It seems probable that the history of the United States is calculated

to furnish more complete and more striking illustration of the

working of political principles than was ever furnished to the world

before. It is an experiment on so grand a scale and interests so

gigantic are at stake that enthusiasm itself is overwhelmed in the

contemplation. It was too much to hope for, that such an experiment

should be successful from the start. Not so lightly might the latest

and greatest blessing to mankind, the gift of rational liberty, be

wrested from reluctant nature. Not without thorns and blood and agony

might such a crown be won. Were the reward to be more easily obtained,

possibly those who won it would have proved unworthy to enjoy it.

Let those remember this that fear for the fate of the Republic. So

will their hearts be filled afresh with courage. So from within will

well up new healing streams of hope, balm of hurt minds, refreshing,

comfortable. To fall from grace is to learn the pathway of salvation

and, like the prodigal son, to become a partaker of joys before

unknown.”[403]

Nowhere can be found a more delicate satire, than the chapter in his

book which is entitled “Salary and Sentiment—Reason and Revenue.” There

is also very clear and convincing reasoning. But it is in regard to

what Mr. Pinckney has to say of the presence of the Negroes in the

South that reference now is had.

In opposition to the view of Wade Hampton, M. C. Butler and Carlyle

McKinley, according to Mr. Pinckney:

“The States themselves must control the Negro question, or the

American system is at an end. Effort on the part of the Federal

Government to control or even to tamper with this matter must at all

times result, as it has hitherto invariably resulted, in riot and

anarchy. Thus, as far as the South is concerned, the very highest

sanctions possible are by natural law attached to strict observance

of the true constitutional construction. To travel the constitutional

path is safety and happiness; to wander from it is instant anarchy.

... The purpose is to protect all local affairs against intrusion from

without, but among those affairs first and foremost has always stood

the Negro Question, in which there can be no hesitation, choice or

possibility of alternative. Thus the smaller matter of the presence of

the Negro is included in the larger class of matters which comprise

the whole range of local interests.... The Negro is thus the (wholly

unconscious) means of illustrating the necessity for constitutional

self government. His presence effectually prevents the South from

departing for an instant from the Constitutional pathway. Cuffy must

be remembered if the Republic is to be saved.”[404]

This is in agreement with the view, that the Southern States are

Democratic, because the presence of the Negro, now freed, forces them

to be so.

There may be truth in that; but it may be, that they are and have been

Democratic in spite of the Negro.

The publication of the List of Tax-Payers in Charleston, “The Hot-Bed

of Secession”, in 1860 was an illustration of the thorough-going

democracy of the place and the people, at that time. It was an open

display of the strength and weakness of each and every governmental

burden bearer, and of the burdens imposed. What could be more

democratic than that? There was a tax of 1.4 per cent on real estate;

a tax of 1.4 per cent on stocks of goods. There was no tax on bonds

and no tax on stock, because, without interest or dividends, the scrip

is mere paper. But there was a tax on interest and dividends of 2.5

per cent; the same on gross income; commissions; annuities and gross

receipts of all commercial agencies. On premiums of insurance there

was a tax of 1.25 per cent. On capital in shipping, as it should have

been, the tax was light, only .75 per cent; for shipping is the very

life of a seaport. But it was also gainful, so it was taxed for some of

its gain. The foolish idea of absolute exemption was avoided. Luxuries

were taxed fairly, in the additional head taxes. The carriage drawn

by two horses was taxed a third more than the carriage drawn by one.

Sulkeys were taxed lower than one horse carriages and horses and mules

lower still. Slaves were taxed, but the head tax of $3 per slave, when

it is realized that some sold for $1200 apiece was indefensibly light

compared to the tax on horse-flesh and property of that kind. One per

cent on a Negro to ten per cent on a mule by the average value and

lessening with the increase of value of either was an immense incentive

to slave-holding. With apparently this one exception, in the absence of

that procrustean bed, the uniform rate, upon which all property which

cannot be concealed is now stretched, the wealthy paid according to

their wealth, the poor according to their poverty; but all, who had

anything, contributed to the general welfare, and bore a fair share of

the general burden.

That is the real reason why they fought so long and well. For instance

on $385,000 of real estate, 28 slaves, 1 carriage and 2 horses, Otis

Mills and Otis Mills & Co. paid a tax of $5,524. On $281,000 of real

estate, 14 slaves, a carriage and 2 horses, William Aiken paid a tax of

$4,027.40. On $101,500 of real estate, $2,724.16, interest on bonds, 3

slaves and $45,000 of shipping, the estate of James Adger paid a tax

of $1,835.60. On $15,000 of real estate, $1,982 interest on bonds,

$14,642 commissions, 14 slaves, 1 carriage, 3 horses and 2 dogs, Wm.

C. Bee and Wm. C. Bee & Co. paid a tax of $732.60. On a stock of goods

$16,000, commissions $9,000, Jeffords & Co. paid a tax of $449. On

$8,000 shipping, $4,600 income and 3 slaves E. Lafitte & Co. paid a tax

of $184. On a stock of goods of $1,000, Samuel P. Lawrence paid a tax

of $14. On 1 slave Mrs. M. S. H. Godber paid a tax of $3. On $200 of

real estate Dr. Charles M. Hitchcock paid a tax of $1.80. On a stock

of goods valued at $100, C. H. Brunson paid a tax of $1.40. The tax

imposed on the manufacture of gas light was lighter than that imposed

on shipping; but it was gainful and on a capital of $755,700 the

Company paid a tax $3,778.50.[405]

That the condition of the Southern States was incalculably improved

by the abolition of slavery is the firm belief of the author of this

study. But that from the tax legislation that followed, the morals of

all have suffered tremendously, is the belief of many, with which he

agrees.

The presence of the Negroes in the masses in which they still remained

in the South after emancipation retarded even the remarkable recovery

that the South has made. In this year of 1925, the first in a century

in which the white population of South Carolina has exceeded in numbers

the colored, it is apparent that the small industries of country life

are becoming distinctly more gainful. Why? With lessening mass the

Negro is feeling the effect of environment. He is less of a pilferer.

And with less friction and consequent material gain, wider opens the

door to literature and art.

That there is an immense educational power in art has again and again

been demonstrated by artists who have had a purpose deeper than—“Art

for art’s sake.”

As an illustration, one cannot fail to note that while the educated

Negroes of the North could not possibly take at the hands of a Negro

Union soldier, who had fought for the freedom of the race and gone

thro’ the days of Congressional Reconstruction without a stain, as

a distinct Legislative leader, a faithful description of the great

mass of Negroes in the South, they acclaimed the French Negro author

of “Batouala,” whose realistic novel of the Negro in Africa while

criticising severely their white French rulers, damns the Negroes,

even more so. The book is not only interesting, it is instructive to

those who need the instruction; and the increasing numbers of educated

Negroes at the North needed just such a book, in order to show them

what they were rescued from in Africa.

Rene Maran says:

“My book is not a polemic. It comes by chance when its hour strikes.

The Negro Question is of the present. Who made it that? Why the

Americans.”

Describing French Colonial Africa, he quotes, the Senegalese, Diagne:

“—the best settlers have been not the professional colonials, but the

European troops from the trenches.”[406]

This is in the preface.

The book opens with the awakening of the hero “Batouala” in the hut in

which he sleeps with his eighth and favorite wife, Yassiguindjia. It

recalls another awakening in another realistic piece of literature,

“Old Bram” in “The Black Border.” The only difference is between the

awakening of a wolf and the awakening of an old watch dog, “the friend

of man,” a tamed wolf. The story revolves around the politics and

desires of Batouala, Bissibingui and Yassiguindjia. Batouala is a wolf

who cares for the pack; Bissibingui, a young wolf, as fierce, who cares

but for himself and his desires. Yassiguindjia can only be described by

one of the items with which she was purchased.

In “The Black Border” it is true we are in South Carolina, along the

coast; but, as has been eloquently stated by a Scotch South Carolinian,

in that region “there is Africa in every breath we draw.” With

artistic power Maran pictures the sounds of the African dawn.

“Daylight broke. Although heavy with sleep still, Batouala—Batouala,

the Mokoundji, chief of so many villages—was quite conscious of these

sounds. He yawned, shivered and stretched himself. Should he go to

sleep again? Should he get up? God! Why get up? He did not even wish

to know why....

“Now merely to get up—didn’t that require an enormous effort? In

itself a perfectly simple decision, so it seemed. As a matter of fact

it was hard; for getting up and working were one and the same thing,

at least to the whites.... Life is short. Work is for those who will

never understand life. Doing nothing does not degrade a man. In the

eyes of one who sees things truly, it differs from laziness. As for

him, Batouala, until it was proved to the contrary, he would believe

that to do nothing was simply to profit by everything that surrounds

us. To live from day to day without thought of yesterday or care for

the morrow, without looking ahead—that was perfect.”[407]

What a perfect picture of the Negro without “the power of a stronger

hand,” which William Pickens saw so clearly the need of in 1903. And

the philosophy of it! Moved to visit Africa in 1924, Dr. DuBois makes a

discovery:

“I began to notice it as I entered Southern France. I formulated it in

Portugal. I knew it as a great truth one Sunday in Liberia. And the

great truth was this: Efficiency and happiness do not go together in

modern culture.... And laziness; divine, eternal languor is right and

good and true.”[408]

The Doctor praises the “manners” of the Africans.

“Their manners were better than those of Park Lane or Park Avenue,

Rittenhouse Square or the North Shore.... The primitive black man is

courteous and dignified.... Wherefore shall we all take to the Big

Bush? No I prefer New York.”[409]

As to the great truth, happiness depends upon what is in the soul of

the man, not upon his surroundings.

But Batouala while he disliked work could exert himself to hunt or

fight. His grievance was that which has moved men more than any other

thro’ all the ages. He and his people were too heavily taxed. He

gathered the people together and harangued them.

“A drunken crowd pressed up behind the group of which Batouala was the

centre. They reviled the whites. Batouala was right, a thousand times

right. Of old before the coming of the whites, they had lived happily.

They had worked a little for themselves, they had eaten and drunk and

slept. From time to time they had had bloody palavers and had plucked

the livers from the dead to eat their courage and incorporate it in

themselves. Such had been the happy days of old, before the coming of

the whites.”[410]

Then follows a description of the great dance.

“Bissibingui was the handsomest of all. The strongest too. His

muscles stood out. His eyes glowed like the brush on fire.... What

had gone before was nothing. All the preceding noises and outcries,

the confused dancing had only been a preparation for what was to

come—the dance of love, scarcely ever danced but on this evening,

when they were permitted to indulge in debauchery and crime....

Couples formed.... It was the immense joy of brutes loosed from all

control.... A couple dancing fell to the ground.

Suddenly his fingers twitching about a knife in his hand, Batouala,

the Mokoundji rushed upon this couple. He was foaming. His fist was

raised for the blow. More nimble than monkeys, Bissibingui and

Yassiguindjia leapt out of his reach. He pursued them. Ah, these

children of a dog had the impudence to desire each other before his

very eyes. He’d have the skin of that strumpet. As for Bissibingui ...

Ah, wouldn’t the women make fun of him then. Yassiguindjia! The idea!

Hadn’t he bought her with seven waist cloths, a box of salt, three

copper collars, a bitch, four pots, six hens, twenty she goats, forty

big baskets of millet, and a girl slave! Ah, he’d make Yassiguindjia

take the test poison.”[411]

But the arrival of the commandant saves the guilty couple. Batouala,

however, still plots the life of Bissibingui, who is plotting the

robbery of his own people, as one of the commandant’s soldiery. In

the great hunt Batouala hurls a javelin at his rival, misses him and

is himself struck down by an infuriated passing panther. So the dark

patriot falls and the black scalawag wins. It is an impressive picture

of African life, the men, the women and the conjugality.

Turn we now to the coast of South Carolina, where in “The Black

Border,” the scene is laid, for “Jim Moultrie’s Divorce,” the deepest

in discernment of all the life like sketches of that moving book.

Jim, too, was a great hunter, an unwearied pursuer. No animal. But a

black man. A believer in divorce, as almost all Negroes in America are,

even in South Carolina, where the law refuses it.

At the end of a cold blustering day in February, after pushing his

clumsy dug-out canoe into every creek and lead of the Jehossee marshes,

to flush ducks for the white sportsman who had hired him, at sun set

he is turning home. How the picture appeals to us of the coast.

“Far up the river, like low hung stars, twinkled the watch fires of a

great timber raft outward bound for the estuary of the North Edisto.

From a distant plantation came the sweet lu-la-lu of a happy Negro

freed from work. The raft borne upon the bosom of the strong ebb

tide, neared rapidly, and around its fires, built on earth covered

platforms, the negro raftsmen talked and laughed as they cooked their

supper and the flames lighted the face and magnified the figure of the

black steersman who stood by the great sweep oar, with which at the

stern of the raft, he guided its course down stream.

For an hour Jim had silently bucked the tide, impelling the boat under

the powerful strokes of his paddle, alternately left and right.

‘What are you thinking of Jim?’

‘Study ’bout ’ooman, suh.’ (A short silence).

‘Ooman shishuh cuntrady t’ing, dem nebbuh know w’en dem well off. You

kin feed dem, you kin pit clo’es puntop dem back, you kin pit shoo

’puntop dem feet, you kin pit hat ’puntop dem head, you kin pit money

een dem han’, en’ still yet oonah nebbuh know de ’ooman, nebbuh know

w’en dem min’ gwine sattify. Dem fuhrebbuh duh lookout fuh trubble.

Ef dem ent meet trubble duh paat’, dem gwine hunt fuhr’um duh ’ood. I

dunkyuh how soeb’uh fudduh de trubble dey, dem gwine fin ’um. Ef dem

cyan’ see ’e track fuh trail ’um, dem gwine pit dem nose een de du’t

en’ try fuh smell ’um, but dem gwine fin’um. I duh study ’pun dat wife

I nyuse fuh hab, name Mary. Look how him done, w’en him hab no cajun!

You yeddy ’bout me trubble, enty suh? Lemme tell you. One Sat’d’y

night I gone home frum de ribbuh. I tek two duck’, bakin, flour en’

sugar en’ tea, den I pit fibe dolluh’ een Mary’ lap. Enty you know,

suh, dat is big money fuh t’row een nigguh’ lap? W’en I binnuh boy

en’ you t’row uh ’ooman fifty cent, ’e t’ink ’e rich, but I bin all

dat week wid one cump’ny uh dese yuh rich Nyankee buckruh’ dat Mr.

FitzSimmon hab yuh fuh shoot, en’ dem buckruh’ t’row me fibe dolluh

bill same lukkuh dem bin dime’! W’en I t’row de money in de ’ooman’

lap, en pit de todduh t’ing wuh I fetch ’pun de flo’, Mary nebbuh

crack ’e teet’. I ax ’um ’smattuh mek ’um stan ’so? ’E mek ansuh,

’nutt’n’. Nex’ day de ’ooman keep on same fashi’n. ’E nebbuh crack

’e bre’t. I quizzit ’um ’gen. I ax ’um ’smattuh ’long ’um. Him say,

‘nutt’n’. Den I say ‘berry well den.’ Monday mawnin’ I tek me gun, I

call me dog en’ den I talk to de ’ooman. I say, ‘Mary, I gwine duh

ribbuh, en’ I gwine come back Sat’d’y two week’. I dunnoh ’smattuh mek

you stan’so, but I know suh de debble dey een you. No ’ooman ’puntop

dis ribbuh hab mo’ den you, no ’ooman get so much, but I yent able fuh

lib dis way ’long no ’ooman wuh ti ’up ’e mout’, en w’en I cum back

las’ Sat’d’y two week’ I gwine’ tarry gate you one mo’ time, en’ I

gwine ax you ’smattuh mek you stan’ so, en if oonah still een de same

min ’ez now, den me nuh you paa’t.”[412]

The obstinate silence of the woman is related and the parting in

silence. Then follows the attempt of the woman to appease him, her

jealousy gone. His refusal. His resentment that she should have

believed an idle lie. His determination that it was too late. And then

the last two lines, which hold so much.

“Have you another wife Jim?”

“I had dat gal you see wid me dis mawnin’ een Mr. Fitz-Simmun’ yaa’d.

Him ent wut’!”[413]

Jim Moultrie’s conceptions as to conjugality might be improved upon;

but they are certainly cycles ahead of Batouala’s. It is in the

sketches this book contains and in the altogether admirable “Duel in

Cummings” that we find the Southern coast country Negro as he is,

most observant, not lacking in a homely philosophy, and, as Thomas,

the Ohio Negro, noted (altho’ utterly lacking it himself) a creature

of infinite humor. Whence does he derive it? He seems to lose it to

some extent as he moves out of the coast region. But he becomes more

efficient. He has benefited immensely by his sojourn in America. He

ought to take more interest in his race elsewhere than the cultivated

members seem to. It is good for the Negroes of the United States that

numbers should continue to move into the Northern and Western States.

It is providing a most interesting experiment. The urban Negro dwellers

of the great cities of the North and West are furnishing a most

interesting illustration of that mysterious power which leads humanity

to its betterment. By the Census of 1920, in the great city of New

York there were 152,467 Negroes. By the estimates of the Department

of Commerce for July, 1923, this had been increased to 183,248.[414]

Unless the migratory movement has slowed down as that estimate is for

July 1, 1923, the Negro population of New York, today must be 194,445,

with that of Philadelphia at 163,248 and Chicago at 148,326. There is

no urban Negro population of these figures anywhere in the Southern

States. The nearest would be New Orleans where the Negro population may

be 107,530. But in addition in the great cities which stretch along and

thro’ the rich and populous territory between New York and Chicago up

to the borders of Canada the Negro population is steadily increasing.

Detroit at the very door of Canada holds a Negro population greater

than that of any Southern city except New Orleans; for Baltimore is

practically a Northern city now.

While the urban Negro population of the Southern States appears to

be increasing it is scarcely increasing at the rate at which it is

increasing in the great section of the North above described and as

has been shown in not a few States of the South the Negro population

as a whole is decreasing slightly; while the white population is

increasing actively. But the civilization of the Southern whites has

been handicapped by the weight of the Negro population which it has

carried for a century and more. It should not bear any more than its

fair proportion of that load and in the natural movement of the Negroes

from the South up to the north central portion of the Union and to some

extent into Canada, by the amalgamation of Negroes and mulattoes, a

brown people affected by the civilization of these sections, differing

in some degrees from the darker Negroes who will more slowly develop

in the Southern States, will show in their progress what the North and

West can do to improve them. With ever lessening numbers in the South,

they will the better respond to their environment, which will be the

better for such lessening. The result will be the advance of all to a

better condition and a higher plane of thought.

FOOTNOTES:

[401] Negro in Chicago, p. 567.

[402] Yale Lit. Magazine, p. 237.

[403] Pinckney, The Coming Crisis, p. 61.

[404] Ibid. p. 58.

[405] Evans & Cogswell; List of Taxpayers Charleston, S. C. 1860.

[406] Rene Maran, Batouala, pp. 10, 12.

[407] Ibid. pp. 22, 24.

[408] The Nation, December 17, 1924, p. 675.

[409] Ibid.

[410] Rene Maran, Batouala, p. 90.

[411] Ibid. pp. 98, 103, 105, 106, 107.

[412] Gonzales, The Black Border, pp. 212, 213, 214.

[413] Ibid. p. 215.

[414] Department of Commerce, Estimates of population, p. 138.

Transcriber’s Notes

pg 10 Changed: the assent of their constitutents

to: the assent of their constituents

pg 20 Changed: accompained by an ever increasing investment

to: accompanied by an ever increasing investment

pg 55 Changed: so lamentable an occurence

to: so lamentable an occurrence

pg 76 Changed: promotion of this homogeniety

to: promotion of this homogeneity

pg 110 Changed: did’nt have a leg to stand upon

to: didn’t have a leg to stand upon

pg 126 Changed: they were slighly surprised

to: they were slightly surprised

pg 131 Changed: assailants with five casulties

to: assailants with five casualties

pg 133 Changed: has in its revoluntionary progress

to: has in its revolutionary progress

pg 146 Changed: whatever it may me called

to: whatever it may be called

pg 150 Changed: peace between ‘the two countires

to: peace between ‘the two countries

pg 152 Changed: the ruling politicial leaders

to: the ruling political leaders

pg 158 Changed: comparitively small price

to: comparatively small price

pg 160 Changed: securing wealth and properity

to: securing wealth and prosperity

pg 163 Changed: who declared of this colored offical

to: who declared of this colored official

pg 174 Changed: more properous and progressive

to: more prosperous and progressive

pg 174 Changed: attain the full statue

to: attain the full stature

pg 175 Changed: enlightment and progress

to: enlightenment and progress

pg 178 Changed: Five yeare before Booker Washington

to: Five years before Booker Washington

pg 196 Changed: Lower South the responsibilty

to: Lower South the responsibility

pg 197 Changed: preventitive of the breaking up

to: preventative of the breaking up

pg 197 Changed: seven-eighths of Caucasion blood

to: seven-eighths of Caucasian blood

pg 203 Changed: all hopes of social eqality

to: all hopes of social equality

pg 233 Changed: which if taken generaly

to: which if taken generally

pg 243 Changed: Iimmigration Facts and Figures

to: Immigration Facts and Figures

pg 305 Changed: Meanwhile the mass are growing

to: Meanwhile the masses are growing

pg 338 Changed: eternal langour is right and good

to: eternal languor is right and good