exceedingly effective, holding the balance of power, as it did, in
choosing white Democratic governors, congressmen, state legislators,
city and county officers. This went well for awhile, but white
office-seekers soon began to fear this Colored balance of power. They
wanted their certainty of a majority of the white vote to guarantee
their office; so the Georgia legislature passed a law making it legal to
have primaries to nominate candidates for office and also throwing such
safeguards about the management of primaries as aimed to secure lawful
practices on these occasions. Here was a perfectly harmless movement,
apparently harmless. The next step was made by the Democratic party
assembled in State Convention when it decided that candidates for state
and county officers on the Democratic ticket should be nominated by a
primary, but leaving the conduct of the primary to the community in
which it might be held, provided this should not run counter to the
primary law as passed by the State. Here too, was a perfectly fair and
harmless provision, apparently fair and apparently harmless. But the way
was then open for the primary to take on a local coloring. In
communities where the colored vote was an embarrassment, the Democratic
party there decided to have a _white_ primary. In one of these
communities a colored man that I know went to vote at the primary. He
was a "good Negro" a very good Negro, his goodness dating back to the
time when the "Yankees" were about to confiscate his master's cotton and
he claimed the cotton as his. Even this transaction did not enlarge his
cranium, and after saving his master thousands of dollars and gradually
amassing a fortune for himself, he still knew how to approach his former
master from the kitchen door. Well, this good Negro went to cast his
ballot. The courteous man at the polls said: "George, this is a
Democratic primary." "Yes," said George, "but I am a Democrat." "Well,"
said the courteous gentleman, "but George, this is a _white_ primary."
This colored man found himself without a Republican for whom he might
vote, and was informed that the Democratic party was a close corporation
so far as the Colored man was concerned. This is quite interesting when
I tell you that white Republicans, avowedly Republicans, have not only
been permitted but even requested to participate in the primaries of the
Democratic and Populist parties.
The reason for the elasticity of the primary is quite evident, that is,
why Colored people are allowed to take part in the primary in one
community and not in another, or why they are allowed at one time to
vote and at another time in that same community are not allowed to vote.
The purpose is to have the Colored voters as a harmless balance of power
between the Democrats and any other party that may show strength, that
is, to have the Colored man to settle disputes among white people
without becoming obstreperous because of this valuable assistance. There
were some communities where the Populists used the Colored voter to
defeat Democrats and others where the Democrats used this vote to defeat
Populists. Of the State as a whole, it may be said that Populism was
defeated by the Colored voters espousing the Democratic side. And be it
said to the common sense and good reason of many Democrats that this
fact is acknowledged and to an extent appreciated by the party now in
power--to the extent at least of staving off any further
disfranchisement measures thus far.
But the most flagrant high-handedness and palpable confession of purpose
on the part of white people with reference to our citizenship rights is
to be found in a state legislative enactment that looks to the municipal
management of two Georgia towns where the Colored voters are so
overwhelmingly in the majority that ordinary subterfuges would not
fulfill the requirement. Darien and St. Mary's are two coast towns with
a large Colored population. The mayor and aldermen are not elected by
the voters in these towns; but, instead, these towns enjoy the unique
distinction of being managed by officials appointed by the governor of
the State. What is more simple; what more high-handed; what more
un-Democratic and subversive of national principles of government than
this?
Now let us ask the question: Can the Colored man cast his ballot in
Georgia?
In the first place, any party of any race may hold a primary.
Second, any man of any party or race may vote in the _general_ election
for any candidate he may wish.
Let us ask next, whether these ballots will be counted? That depends
entirely upon whether the need is to count them or destroy them; or
furthermore, to count them as ballots for some one for whom they were
not cast. The election boards and the management at the polls are not
bipartisan and the party in power may do what it chooses.
We raise the question now whether it is for our best interest
economically to exercise the franchise? Do men vote to help their
economic interests? Are not taxation and other fiscal policies settled
by the ballot? May not property be enhanced or lessened in value by
voters? Colored people have some real estate and securities, but their
practical capital is their labor; yet they have not the least power, the
real power, of influencing legislation in reference to a single labor
measure that may arise, although in Georgia nearly half the population
is colored and in the laboring class the colored people are in the
majority. Now suppose, as white union labor in the South grows stronger,
it should influence such legislation as would eliminate colored labor
where it came into competition with white labor, the colored laborer
would be politically powerless to resist this legislation. Now is this a
mere idle dream when we reflect that within the past few months a Texas
legislator introduced a bill to confine Colored labor to the farm
whenever it was found in city and town communities to be competing with
white labor.
Then there is another side that really has its argument, effective,
though perhaps not very logical. The fact that we are, as a people,
laborers and not capitalists, makes us, as any other people similarly
placed would be, under obligation to the capitalist who, in our case,
are white. The point is made that to enter politics against the wishes
of this people would raise such antagonism as to lower our earning
power. Hence we are told to keep out of politics until we get a better
money basis. Here we stand between two difficulties, staying out of
politics might jeopard our earning and entering politics might jeopard
our earnings. Many honest and thoughtful white and colored men stand on
both sides of this question.
Now, is it educationally best for us to vote? This question requires
some amplifying. Do we mean what educational value comes from this
training in citizenship? If so, then certainly the value is great. There
was a time when we knew conditions in our state and town, but so little
influence does a Colored man have in politics now that I do not even
know the name of the alderman in my ward, although I am a registered
voter, have paid my poll tax and voted for President Roosevelt. I know
of nothing more benumbing to us as citizens than this deprivation. Men
who are philosophic may consider matters that are not of material
concern, but the average person does not load his mind and spend his
time with things that, for one reason or another, have no concern for
him. Any discussion as to the fitness and honesty of municipal and state
candidates hardly touches me, as I know I cannot lift a finger to
promote the interests of any one of them. I have no voice.
There is another position from which this question may be viewed and
that is whether the advantages from schools would be lessened or
increased from participation in politics. It is quite evident that
without the ballot any people are suppliant and must beg rather than
make a manly demand. But, assuming that the lack of the ballot has
become a condition with us, would a demand or threat about our ballot
result in a counter threat that if we forced the issue, we should not
only be denied our ballot, but that for our arrogance the appropriation
for Colored public schools would be cut down and we should receive only
what we paid in as our share of the school tax? This too, is no dream;
but has actually been considered by colored men as a possible reason for
not causing such antagonism as would arise from Colored men endeavoring
to enter aggressively into politics again.
What now about fears for disfranchisement such as has been compassed by
the revised constitutions in many Southern states? Some one may say that
there is no difference between constitutional disfranchisement and that
_quasi_ disfranchisement effective for all practical purposes such as we
have spoken of as now obtaining in Georgia. There is a tremendous
difference. If a wave of civic righteousness should sweep over those
states still without constitutional disfranchisement, the primaries
would be a very slight embarrassment to those willing to do right by all
races alike; while in the states possessing constitutional
disfranchisement, the reactionaries would have such means of stopping
fair play and honest elections free for all, that they could easily
check the purpose of the fair-minded citizens for a long while.
Now, do we really have to fear disfranchisement? I say disfranchisement
must at all times be feared and be guarded against as far as it lies
within our power in an honorable and manly way to hold it off. Just at
the time North Carolina and Maryland seemed most secure to us we found
ourselves deprived of our rights; and it may be safely stated that
whenever on a specific occasion the Colored vote exerts the balance of
power over any considerable area, there disfranchisement may be feared.
We need to fear disfranchisement because it is founded upon the spirit
of injustice and that same spirit fosters it. So palpable is this, that
the South bewails the fact. Governor Warfield in speaking about the
repeal of the Fifteenth amendment says: "The privilege to vote could
then be bestowed without respect to the expedient of unwise
constitutional amendments that strain the conscience of our best people
and arouse criticism." Yet the repeal of the Fifteenth amendment would
not relieve those apostles of disfranchisement of the odium of violating
the spirit of truly American democracy and of setting at naught that
mighty decision on human rights that was rendered by the bloody
arbitrament of war--Disfranchisement of whatever sort, if designed to
embarrass a citizen because of his race, must always "strain the
conscience of our best people."
Does Georgia show any signs of the disfranchising spirit? We fear it
does. The State Legislature now expects some measure of this sort at
each session, and in recent years has not been disappointed, although
good sense has thus far triumphed. Then again men in high places,
congressmen and at least one of our U. S. Senators from Georgia have
begun to say some things that may easily be construed as an advocacy of
disfranchisement. It occurs to me that the marked difference between the
condition in my boyhood and to-day is this: then the opposition was to
Republicans, to-day it is to Negroes. It is not a party line, but a race
line.
Now the white primary has not done all that was claimed for it. In the
first place it has not purified elections. Far from doing away with the
purchase and sale of votes, it has, by lowering the supply, relatively
increased the demand and brought up the price to a really fancy figure.
In the second place it has failed to do that for which it was ostensibly
introduced especially to do, namely; to put into office those men most
eminently fitted by ability and character to administer the office to
which they might be chosen. On the contrary, primary elections have been
questioned on the ground of fraud; and the mayor of one very prominent
Georgia city has been arrested for drunkenness. Then why is the primary
kept? Well, the "fixers" for instance, can more easily fix things. With
the Colored man's vote eliminated, the work becomes simplified and even
though the amount of money spent illegally may now be more than the
total amount in the days when colored as well as white were in the
market yet those interested in "fixing" elections can now work with more
assurance; and promises may more easily be carried out in the matter of
delivering the goods.
For instance, I know of a city election where the voters in one ward
were so evenly divided and the candidates had calculated their strength
so accurately, that one candidate felt safe in buying three white votes
at the rate of one hundred ten dollars. Large corporations may now
operate easily in state and city; and some of the most flagrant cases of
political jobbery that have been charged against Reconstruction rule are
easily equalled by the bare-faced graft and bribery by which large
business interests win their way through the assistance of white voters.
What are the possibilities of white aspirants bolting the primary? It is
my impression that they are fewer than they were twenty years ago. Judge
Gartrell once ran independently against Alexander Stephens for Governor
and Judge Emory Speer in his younger days ran on an independent ticket;
but such a step on the part of a candidate means outlawry for life.
Speer was read into the Republican party, Thomas Watson into the
Populist; and since the exile of such giants, the small fry find it easy
to be good and not to lift their heads in rebellion, no matter what
rascality has compassed their defeat at the Primary. No. It is my
impression that the primary is more firmly established to-day than when
it was first started. White unity has become white slavery; and while
the yoke galls, the white aspirant prefers the yoke to extermination.
But, suppose there should be a general Democratic "rough house" and the
colored vote should be called in to quell the disturbance, the Colored
voter would have no guarantee that such would mean his return to
political standing. On the contrary, it might, as in several states,
cause the passage of constitutional disfranchisement that would make his
last state worse than the former. Our status is truly unenviable, and
the ground on which we stand is exceedingly uncertain.
I desire now to treat more fully what has already been touched upon: Why
do the Republicans not nominate candidates for state, county and city
offices and make a general canvass? There are two classes of Colored
men, those who think the party should and those who think it should not.
Unfortunately each of these classes makes severe charges against the
other with reference to this matter. I much prefer to accept the
explanations of both as honest. The following are at least some of the
reasons for not making a canvass: first, it is difficult to get
desirable men to accept the nomination; second, it would be still more
difficult to secure sufficient funds to pay the ordinary and perfectly
legitimate expenses of a campaign; third, the injustice of the party in
power would make a fair election an impossibility. Hence a candidate
would be doomed to defeat from the moment of his nomination and the fact
that he and the party would know this, would make the campaign lifeless,
futile and perfunctory. Fourth, the prominence of Colored people in
politics and the extra trouble to which they would put the ascendant
party might result in still further curtailment of the few rights still
left to us.
To all of this the side that clamors or appears to clamor for a ticket
says: You assume too much, you see ghosts. Yet supposing the worst, it
is far better to keep Colored voters organized for several reasons:
first, because the organization gives a valuable training in citizenship
that cannot be gained by standing aloof and waiting for better things;
second, because if an opening should come suddenly, the Colored people
would be better able to decide quickly and intelligently where to throw
their strength solidly on one side or another for their own best
interests and the interests of the government; thirdly, because a show
of opposition to existing political injustice and repression would
relieve us of the charge of indifference to our condition and would
strengthen the courage of those who might champion our cause--our
efficient, powerful champions, who have grown doubtful about our real
manhood. I believe in the honesty of both these classes of colored men;
and it is exceedingly difficult for a man, living in the midst of these
conditions and knowing the temperament, attitude and unlimited power of
the white people, to say which one of these two courses is the more
rational and helpful to pursue.
What have the Colored people lost through disfranchisement? They have
lost the privilege of influencing legislation, since the legislator
feels under no obligation to them. The "Jim Crow" car law, the separate
tax bill and almost any other bill may be passed so far as pressure from
Colored people is concerned. A very clear case is the public library in
Atlanta which is supported by the taxes of all citizens, yet not a
single Colored person may enter that library to read or borrow a book.
Some months ago Mr. Carnegie offered the city ten thousand dollars for a
library for the Colored people on the condition that the city furnish a
lot and agree to appropriate one thousand dollars _per annum_ for the
maintenance of the library. The whole matter has been tabled and the
Colored people have no redress, since their mayor and aldermen were
elected without the Colored vote. Do you suppose the city of Atlanta
would have refused so paltry a favor, if its city council were dependent
upon our vote?
Not only have we lost influence among the law makers but among those who
interpret the law and administer justice. Neither judge nor jury has to
consult the Colored man's wish. This independence of us makes the court
a place of injustice as frequently as of justice, and policemen may be
cruel with impunity.
Then too, the chain-gang with its revolting influences on men and women,
boys and girls; the lack of Negro reformatories in some places where
they do exist for white boys find much of their meaning in the fact that
the Colored voter cannot make sentiment and bring things to pass through
the ballot. We have had the "Jim Crow" law forced upon us, our public
schools have become poorer in equipment and teaching force, and the
salary of teachers has been lowered.
In a word, the loss of the franchise has changed our status to such a
degree that we no longer demand, but beg and supplicate even for those
fundamental needs, without which education and general improvement would
be very doubtful.
Now are there some things to be effected that are regarded as of more
vital interest to Colored people at present than the ballot? In the face
of what has already been said, this seems almost an unnecessary
question, since the ballot is no abstract thing, no merely academic
theory, but a vital agent in the promotion of improvement and happiness.
Yet as obvious as all this seems, when people have already lost the
ballot they may ask this question: Are there some things to be effected
that are of more vital interest to Colored people at present than the
ballot?
I heard a sweet-spirited Colored man say at the conclusion of his
remarks one day--he was a college president and is now in Heaven away
from this turmoil--well I heard him say: "I have come to the conclusion
that all we can do in this country is to take what the white man gives
us." An eminent Colored preacher said recently in my hearing: "You can't
drive these white folks, you must knuckle to them and you can get
anything you want." Within the last two months an interesting white
southern clergyman in his exhortation to Colored people to be good
Negroes, told them not to get mad about "Jim Crow" cars and to be slow
to urge their rights. Said he: "You Colored people are undertaking a
heavy task when you attempt to reform the Anglo-Saxon." Now our present
needs are numerous and vital, many growing out of the curtailment of
privileges, a condition made possible through our lack of the ballot.
Many Colored men believe that we can get these needs supplied most
quickly and surely by begging and not resorting to a futile ballot;
many, moreover, think that the voting would retard the granting of these
much needed privileges. On the other hand, others say our condition
grows steadily worse and our only redress, our only hope, is in the
ballot.
Now what do I believe about all this? I believe that we ought to vote,
and I vote on every public question when the privilege is accorded me. I
believe that our leaders ought to give us the opportunity to vote and
let us stand forth as men, whether successful or not, willing to do all
within our power to be full-fledged citizens. Certainly our attitude
ought never to allow the white people to say: the Negro cares nothing
for the franchise and does not exercise it when he does have the
opportunity. What are we waiting for? Not more education, I hope. And
here I must remind you that one thing is much over-talked: the
forwardness of the Colored child and the backwardness of the white child
in the matter of getting an education. Colored children are not being
fitted as are white for their responsibilities. A real intellectual
awakening is going on among the whites of the South--more and better
school houses, better teachers and longer school terms; and the white
children are learning with avidity. The Colored children are getting
poor school houses, poorer teachers, more poorly paid teachers and
shorter school terms; and we cannot change this disparity by begging the
state and city. Unless we force better things for ourselves by the
ballot or go into our own pockets, the next generation of colored voters
will be relatively less prepared for the educational qualification in
comparison with the white voter than the Colored voters of to-day. Oh!
you say: "Pessimist, looking on the dark side." Away with that
contemptible sentimentality and aversion to ugly facts that make some of
my people call a man a pessimist every time he lifts a warning voice. I
know the white country school house and the Colored country school
house. There is a tremendous difference.
Now I believe in education, but I also believe in manhood; and any
education bought at the price of manhood is worthless and a mill-stone
about the neck. I believe in the ballot as a developer of manhood and as
it procures the right of men. I believe in the ballot in spite of
threats of disfranchisement, if we use this ballot. I see no difference
in purpose between the states that have outrightly disfranchised us and
those states that do it stealthily or by indirection.
I believe that the purpose of all is the same: a hatred for Colored
people and a determination to have white supremacy at any cost of life
and honor. I do not think Northern sentiment is a deterring force,
though I think Northern sentiment _could_ become a deterring force to
disfranchisement. In the face of all this, why _delay_ voting in the
hope of better things; better _welcome_ disfranchisement as _men_ than
_suffer_ from it as _cowards_.
The Potentiality of the Negro Vote, North and West--_JOHN L. LOVE_
The potential voting strength of the Negro population in the United
States is, according to the last census, three times as great as was
that of the white population in 1775 when the Declaration of
Independence published to the world the modern, though sound, practical
and eminently safe political creed that governments derive their just
powers from the consent of the governed. The number of Negro males of
voting age is approximately three millions, a number equal to the entire
white population at the beginning of the war for Independence. The total
Negro population in the United States in 1900 was three times larger
than was the total white population which battled against King George
and the British Parliament for the purpose of securing a voice in the
choice of those who levy taxes and enact the laws whose weight and
obligation fall equally upon the whole body of citizens.
In the North Atlantic, the North Central, and the Western census
divisions of the United States, the potential voting strength of the
Negroes is more than a quarter million. It is larger than was the
combined prohibition and socialist vote in 1900 and exceeds by nearly a
hundred thousand the total combined vote cast for the present governors
of the four states of Mississippi, South Carolina, Louisiana and
Alabama. In many sections of the North and West the Negro population is
sparse and scattering, varying all the way from one in Scott County in
Indiana to 63,000 in Philadelphia. Yet in many localities where there is
almost an even balance of the two chief parties, the Negro vote is
competent to decide the results of election. In the states of Delaware
Indiana, Ohio, Connecticut, New Jersey, and several districts in New
York, Massachusetts, and Illinois, a united, coherent Negro vote may
frequently determine both local and national elections. This is shown by
the returns in 1902 for Congressional election in four districts in
Indiana, two in New Jersey, four in Ohio, and two in Massachusetts and
Connecticut, where the Negro vote was of sufficient size to have thrown
the election to either party. In state and local elections where party
fealty is not always so strong as in national elections, owing to
dissatisfaction with both men and measures, the potentiality of the
Negro vote can be made very real and effective as well as respectable.
The municipal wards and legislative districts in the large commercial
and manufacturing centers of the North and West furnish undoubted
opportunities for the Negro vote to make itself felt and to win regard
and respect as far away as the United States Senate.
The foregoing facts and considerations suggest interesting possibilities
and, in view of the conditions affecting the political, civil, and
economic well being of the people of color in the United States, they
create a demand and an obligation with reference to the use of which the
Negro voter should make of his right of the franchise.
The chief tenet of modern political philosophy is that the participation
of the people in the government is the only way by which their liberties
can be guaranteed and their economic and industrial happiness
safeguarded. Out of this conviction which has taken hold of men almost
everywhere has resulted in the universal movement towards democracy. The
democratic triumph which has marked the past hundred years and has been
accompanied by marvelous achievements of human endeavor--achievements
which could not have been accomplished except under conditions of
freedom--has not been won without stupendous struggle and temporary
defeats and disappointments. At every forward step, the movement has
encountered unrelenting and seemingly irresistible opposition of
privilege. Even here in the United States where, barring absurd
contradictions, the spirit of democracy began so conspicuously to assert
itself under the fostering genius of Jefferson, skillful and powerful
resistance has been constant and implacable. Aristocratic privilege,
intrenched in power, has grudgingly given way to the demands of manhood
rights, and manhood suffrage, and even to-day, in the attempt to
rehabilitate itself, it is bold enough to make the ridiculous assertion
that the right of suffrage, even in a republican form of government, is
not a natural and inherent right of citizenship, but merely a privilege
to be granted or withheld at pleasure by a select few for whose assumed
authority no power on earth or in heaven is responsible.
Whatever opinions may be entertained contrary to the doctrine and
increasing practice of government by the consent of the governed, the
fact is undeniable that as man has gained and exercised the right of
participation in government, special privilege for the few has had to
give way to the condition of equal opportunity for all. Abuses have been
swept away and the door of opportunity has been opened for all. Thus has
the ballot proven to be man's sure and effective weapon of defense
against tyranny and proscriptive government.
All classes of our varied population, with possibly one exception, have
recognized this truth and have acted in accordance with it. German,
Irish, Jew; artisan, farmer and merchant--all have found the ballot a
remedy for social, economic, and political ills that have had their
origin in unjust laws or the partial administration of law. All have
used it with wonderful effect towards the betterment of their condition.
Grievances of one group have been allied with those of another group;
industrial discontent growing out of capitalistic wrongs, political
distempers due to governmental abuses or the enforcement of
discriminatory laws; the deep seated consciousness of ethnic injustice
in the industrial or political scheme--all have combined and arrayed
themselves for redress which every branch of the political machinery has
in the end endeavored to grant. The demands of the Slavonic yeomanry of
the Northwest that a check be placed upon railroad combinations are not
less effective in securing compliance than those of the merchants and
shippers of our commercial centers that just and equal rates of
transportation shall be enforced. The underground toilers of the mining
regions of Pennsylvania and Illinois know that their grievances will
receive the same respectful attention and consideration as the mandates
of the coal barons, and they systematically scrutinize the attitude and
the actions of public servants and hold them to a strict performance of
promise and duty in so far as their rights and interests are concerned.
Thus it is that in the United States as in all representative
governments the ballot is the surest means of securing a "square deal;"
and it is incumbent upon the three hundred thousand Negro voters of the
north and west to recognize its value and to make the same use of it as
is made by all other aggrieved elements of the body politic.
A catalogue of the wrongs and injuries suffered by the Negro citizens of
the United States, first on account of discriminatory and proscriptive
legislation; secondly, on account of the failure to enforce the laws
designed to uphold and protect their citizenship; and thirdly, on
account of the most palpable and outrageous violation of the sacred
rights of life, liberty and property, make the "long train of abuses and
usurpations" committed, according to the Declaration of Independence, by
the King of Great Britain against his colonies in America appear as the
gentle chastisements of a benificent ruler. Of all the complex elements
of American citizenship, the Negro is the solitary victim of legal,
social, industrial, and political discrimination. He alone is singled
out by the law for disparagement which fact encourages and enforces the
multitude of civil and industrial discriminations and injuries that tend
to deprive him of the respectability due not only to a citizen but to
man. To the tax levy, to the obligation to bear arms for the common
defense as well as to all other mandates of the government, he is
equally amenable with other citizens; but he is excepted from a full
share of the benefits of citizenship. In all stations of society and in
all departments of government, his protests fall upon deaf or
indifferent ears, and the very sufferings and wrongs which he suffers
are frequently made the text for sermonizings on his short-comings. If
the homilies published from the pulpits, in the press, and even
sometimes from the higher branches of the government are to be believed,
the Negro is the most unsaintly citizen of the republic, in spite of the
fact that he seldom commits "the robust crimes of the whites" or has the
chance to defraud the government, to wreck financial institutions, or
rob widows and orphans.
The burden of these outrages lies heavily upon the hearts and minds of
the black men of America, yet the remedy, if they could but realize it,
lies largely within their power. Throughout the republic, every man
identified with the Negro race, though he may not be personally or
locally subjected directly to the humiliations and wrongs which oppress
and degrade the great mass of his kind, feels their bitter sting and
resents them. In public assemblies, upon the public highways and common
carriers, in the drawing room and around the secrecy of the fireside,
the fact of injustice is the one inevitable and irrepressible theme of
conversation and reflection; and the perennial and ever present question
in the minds of all, whether of low or high degree, is _By what means
can the situation be altered?_ Men of different opinions are endeavoring
more or less honestly to answer the question, but one of the surest and
quickest means is at the command of the three hundred thousand Negro
voters of the north and west, who have it in their power by an
intelligent, united, and courageous exercise of their high privilege and
right to demand the same respect and consideration for their interest
and well being as any other class of men who register their wills at the
ballot-box.
Thaddeus Stevens once said that control of republics depends upon
numbers and not upon the quality of the citizens. In the last analysis
this is true, but in all governments by parties the smaller number is
often more important than the larger. The strength of the Negro vote in
the North and West in times of party crises consists not so much in the
number of that vote as in the use which is made of it. In thirty
northern and western cities, it can very effectively contribute to the
improvement of existing conditions. It is wonderfully powerful, if
intelligently directed, in the cities of Boston, Baltimore, Chicago,
Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, Philadelphia, Pittsburg and New York.
The effectiveness of this vote depends more upon the use which is made
of it in local and state elections than in national elections. The bonds
which unite the interests of the local, state and national officials and
politicians are very real and subtle--the weakest point being always the
local politician. His election and success often turns upon less than a
score of votes and consequently he is not inclined to disdain a single
voter. His interests are inseparably connected with the interests and
ambitions of the men who occupy luxurious berths in Congress and in the
national or state government. In all matters concerning the interests of
the Negro, the local politician's position can be known and his actions
are open to close view. When his acts do not accord or square with the
interest of the colored voter, he can be left to find other friends and
supporters.
In the second place, the effectiveness and potentiality of the Negro
vote in the North and West depends upon an absolute and courageous
disregard of traditions. There are times when party fealty may be both
proper and commendable. There is to be sure a great deal of hypocrisy
and humbuggery in our political parties, yet back of these they do stand
for certain great and vital principles. When the latter are put to the
test our fealty may properly be demanded, but under normal conditions,
when stress and strife of class and selfish interests, invidious
discriminations and outrageous injustice prevail, the only safe and
prudent course for the individual or class of individuals to pursue is
absolute independence of parties and uncompromising devotion to the
paramount interest. When we cannot act advantageously, we may act
punitively, so that the public servant may know that if he ignores or
hypocritically juggles with our interests, he will be held to a strict
accountability. If on the eve of an election the party or the individual
candidate attempts to cajole by a statement of principles or policy
which is ignored after a successful contest, reprisal should be swift
and terrible as soon as the opportunity permits.
In the third place, the Negro vote of the North and West needs, if it
does not at present lack, intelligent, honest, straightforward, and
unselfish leadership. Until it has this, its potentiality will be _nil_.
To impute dishonesty or insincerity to those who from time to time act
in the role of leaders of the Negro voters would be unpardonably
reprehensible. Men generally act according to their light and it is not
an uncommon observation that the average public man gets his light
through the medium of a self-interested reflector. Amid the competitions
and conflicts, the struggle for place and temporary power and emoluments
which characterize all phases of modern life and especially political
life in the United States, the calm, clear-eyed, far-seeing man is rare.
Yet men of unusual foresight, of clear perception of the fundamental and
vital issues with the tact and ability to gain an advantage and an
uncompromising determination to hold what has been gained--such is the
type of men needed to make the Negro vote potent. The leadership which
boasts of its capacity to keep silent under terrible wrongs is not
calculated to carry the race far on the road towards real and permanent
betterment.
Redress of political wrongs is not the fruit of grim and sanctimonious
silence. Whenever it has come, it has been forced by long, continuous
and implacable outcry, and Negro leadership must follow the example of
men in other lands and in other times who fearlessly cried out against
the wrongs which their people suffered. In "The Making of England," John
Richard Green states that the Roman conquerors were able to completely
subjugate and enslave the Britons because they were able to make terms
with their leaders. The finest skill of the dominant element in
governments founded upon tyranny has always been employed in making
terms with the leaders of the oppressed.
Silence has its part in our fight and many times the cause has been lost
because of failure to observe it, but it is not silence in respect to
wrongs. Neither upon battlefields nor in the mad clash of passions and
ambitions that mark the control of states is victory won or success
achieved by a boisterous parade of the plan of attack. In the subtle
operation of American political methods, silence is the sphinx that
baffles the most astute and insinuating politician. The silent vote is a
greater dread to the party leaders than was the sword to Damocles.
The Negro ballot has almost lost its potency on account of the
unconcerned cocksureness of one political party that the other side will
not get the benefit of it. The party managers have no concern about the
certainty of the Negro vote and therefore spend all of their effort in
trying to satisfy the demands of the other elements and are never able
to know whether or not they have succeeded until the vote is counted.
They fear the silent vote. It is thoughtful, analytic, decisive. It
scans, records, and registers every dodge, retreat, and juggle which the
honorable candidate or the party has been guilty of in matters which
concern it.
In the exercise of the suffrage, the Negro voter has never been
indifferent to the best and noblest interests of the republic. For more
than forty years he has voted with the majority of his fellow countrymen
on all the great questions which have divided the people. This he has
done out of regard more for what men have considered the welfare of the
country than for what he has deemed advantageous to himself. There is
now a need of a change. He must now consider his well-being and safety
identical with the well-being and safety of the republic and must
require all men who seek his vote to consider it likewise.
To-day we are on the eve of a great national festival. The peaceful
succession of government is a boon not enjoyed by all the peoples of the
world. It is an event which deservedly appeals to the enthusiasm and
civic pride of the nation. From all corners of the state have come
delegations of citizens representing all classes, who come not only to
honor and grace by their presence the event but, I believe, to pay
honest and manly tribute to a man who is beloved and trusted by the
whole American people. His battles against civic wrongs and in behalf of
weaker classes and his policy of "all men up and no men down," not only
make him the paragon of public officials, but a lovable and trusted man.
Among the throngs that shall honor him and in turn be honored in the
escort which will make the Avenue the most splendid pageant which can
adorn any modern government, none will march more proudly than the brave
and valiant regiment of black men who, with him whom they honor, risked
all and won glory on the field of San Juan. Yet by the laws of the land
and by the policy of the government, their rights and their manhood are
not on a parity with those of other citizens who with less desert shall
follow in his train. It is the possibility of such a state of affairs,
that the Negro vote of the North and West, yea the great body of all
good citizens must exercise itself to prevent.
Migration and Distribution of the Negro Population as Affecting the
Elective Franchise--_KELLY MILLER_
Population lies at the basis of all human problems. The first command
given by the Creator to the human race was to multiply and replenish the
earth. The growth and expansion of the Negro population in the United
States must be the controlling factor in the many complex problems to
which his presence gives rise. In order to gain adequate as well as
accurate knowledge on this subject, it is necessary to take a
comprehensive view of its progress since its transplantation in America.
It is well known that the first ship load of African slaves was landed
at Jamestown, Va. in 1619. This original handful augmented by fresh
importation and by its own rapid multiplication had swollen to three
quarters of a million when the first Census was taken in 1790. The
following table will reveal the essential facts as to the expansion of
this population.
_TABLE_ 6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
NEGRO POPULATION OF THE UNITED STATES.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
YEAR. NUMBER OF DECENNIAL PER CENT OF PER CENT OF
NEGROES. INCREASE. INCR. TOTAL
POPUL.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
1790 757,208 - - 19.27
--------------------------------------------------------------------
1800 1,002,037 244,829 32.33 18.18
--------------------------------------------------------------------
1810 1,377,808 375,771 37.50 19.03
--------------------------------------------------------------------
1820 1,771,656 393,848 28.50 18.39
--------------------------------------------------------------------
1830 2,328,642 556,986 31.44 18.10
--------------------------------------------------------------------
1840 2,873,648 545,006 23.44 16.84
--------------------------------------------------------------------
1850 3,683,808 765,169 26.63 15.69
--------------------------------------------------------------------
1860 4,441,830 803,022 14.13 14.13
--------------------------------------------------------------------
1870 4,880,009 438,179 9.87 11.68
--------------------------------------------------------------------
1880 6,580,793 1,700,784 34.85 13.12
--------------------------------------------------------------------
1890 7,470,040 889,247 13.51 11.93
--------------------------------------------------------------------
1900 8,840,789 1,370,749 18.35 11.57
--------------------------------------------------------------------
There are certain noticeable irregularities in this table, due in part
to known disturbing causes, and in part to imperfections in census
methods. It is thus seen that the Negro constitutes a rapidly increasing
element, though a slowly diminishing minority of the total population.
This relative diminution is due wholly to the influx of white
immigrants, more than 14,000,000 of whom have come to our shores since
1860. If the two races should continue to grow at the same relative rate
of increase as during the last decade, according to the law of
diminishing ratios, it would require more than one hundred years to
reduce the Negro to one-tenth of the total population. So far as any
practical calculation is concerned, we may regard this as an irreducible
minimum. So long as the Negro constitutes one-tenth of the entire body
of the American people we may expect to have the race problem, both in
its general and in its political features.
From the foundation of our government the Negro has constituted a
serious political problem, mainly because of his unequal geographical
distribution. If agricultural and economic conditions had been uniform,
and the slaves had been evenly scattered over the whole area, the
political phase of the race problem would have been far different from
what it is and has been throughout our national life. The fact that the
bulk of this race has been congested in one section has constituted the
cause of political friction from the foundation of the Constitution till
the present hour. This population persists in remaining in that section
where it was most thickly planted by the institution of slavery. The
center of gravity is still moving slowly towards the gulf of Mexico.
Ninety-two per cent of the race is still found in the sixteen states
where slavery prevailed at the outbreak of the civil war. The coastal
states, from Maryland to Texas, contain three-fourths of the total
number.
While there has been a steady stream of Negro immigration towards the
North and West, yet it has not been sufficient to materially affect the
mass tendency. It would seem, on first view, that the Negro who
complains so bitterly against political restrictions in the South would
rush to the freer conditions of the North as a gas from a denser to a
rarer medium. But political and civil freedom offered by the North are
more than off-set by industrial restrictions and by the inertia of a
population devoid of the pioneer spirit. The warm blooded, warm hearted
child of the tropics is chilled alike by the rigid climate and frigid
social atmosphere that prevail in the higher latitudes. In all New
England there are fewer Negroes than are to be found in a single county
in Tennessee.
_TABLE_ 7
------------------------------------------------------------------
SECTION. POPULATION. INCREASE, 1890 RATE OF INCR.
TO 1900
------------------------------------------------------------------
United States 8,840,789 1,370,749 18.35
------------------------------------------------------------------
Georgia 1,034,813 175,998 20.50
------------------------------------------------------------------
Mississippi 907,630 165,071 22.20
------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama 827,307 148,818 21.90
------------------------------------------------------------------
So. Carolina 782,321 93,387 13.60
------------------------------------------------------------------
31 Northern 759,788 181,876 31.50
States
------------------------------------------------------------------
We learn from this table that there are four states in the union, each
of which contains a larger number of Negroes than all the 31 free states
combined. While such free states show a much more rapid decennial
increase than any of the far south states, still the total increment
scarcely exceeds that of the single state of Georgia. These figures
reveal no mad hegira to a fairer and better land. The increase in the
Northern states is due almost wholly to immigration from the South. It
is entirely probable that the Negro population, left to itself, would
not be a self sustaining quantity in the higher latitudes. During the
last decade there was an absolute decline of the Negro population in
Vermont, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, New Mexico, Nevada,
Oregon and California.
The political significance of this Northern movement is out of all
proportion to its absolute weight. It is only in the North that the
Negro vote has dynamic power. In several of the border states, this vote
is at present unhampered, but there is no guarantee of future security.
In Mississippi there are 197,936 Negro males of voting age, but this
potential vote does not affect the choice of a single official of that
state. The black vote of that commonwealth is as completely nullified as
the last two amendments had never been appended to our national
constitution. On the other hand the 5,193 adult Negro males in Mich. are
accounted of considerable consequence in the political equation of that
state. In the Northern and Western states where men feel free to align
themselves according to conviction, the two parties are so nearly even
that the Negro vote constitutes the balance of power. Owing to unusual
political conditions, which cannot be counted on to continue, the last
three presidential elections were practically one-sided. The Republican
party triumphed by a margin that far exceeded the entire Negro
Contingent. It is only in several of the border states that this vote
could in any way have affected the fate of presidential electors. The
Negro vote, however, has been quite effective in state elections, and in
the choice of congressmen. As the parties gravitate to normal
conditions, the Negro vote will again become the balance of power in the
controlling states of the North. At the beginning of every campaign each
party feels that it has a chance of success. At such times the black
vote looms up large and significant. In national affairs the colored
vote usually adheres to the party of Lincoln and Sumner. As the margin
between the two parties is a shifting and uncertain quantity, the rapid
increase of the Negro vote in the Northern States becomes a matter of
great political importance.
_TABLE_ 8
----------------------------------------------
NEGRO MALES OF VOTING AGE IN THE NORTHERN
STATES.
----------------------------------------------
STATE. 1890. 1900.
----------------------------------------------
Pennsylvania 34,873 51,668
----------------------------------------------
New York 24,231 31,425
----------------------------------------------
Illinois 18,200 29,762
----------------------------------------------
Ohio 25,922 31,235
----------------------------------------------
Indiana 13,079 18,186
----------------------------------------------
New Jersey 14,564 21,474
----------------------------------------------
Massachusetts 7,967 10,456
----------------------------------------------
Rhode Island 2,261 2,765
----------------------------------------------
Connecticut 3,497 4,576
----------------------------------------------
Kansas 12,543 14,695
----------------------------------------------
Michigan - 5,193
----------------------------------------------
These figures tell their own story when we consider the normal relation
between the two parties in these several states. It is also interesting
to note that the Negroes in the North are found very largely in the
cities. This makes this vote of considerable importance in municipal
elections. There is, however, a tendency on the part of this vote to
distribute itself between the two parties in purely municipal and local
matters, which to a great degree neutralizes its special significance.
_TABLE_ 9
--------------------------------
NEGRO VOTERS IN NORTHERN
CITIES, 1900.
--------------------------------
CITY NEGROES OF
VOTING AGE
--------------------------------
Philadelphia 20,095
--------------------------------
New York 18,651
--------------------------------
Chicago 12,424
--------------------------------
Pittsburg 6,541
--------------------------------
Indianapolis 5,200
--------------------------------
Boston 4,441
--------------------------------
Cincinnati 4,997
--------------------------------
Detroit 1,732
--------------------------------
The most effective use that the Negro in the North can make of his
political privilege is to uphold civic righteousness in municipal
affairs, and to support those men and measures pledged to support the
integrity of the constitution and its vital amendments.
The Negro and His Citizenship--_FRANCIS J. GRIMKE_
ACTS 22:25-29.--_And when they had tied him up with the thongs,
Paul said unto the centurion that stood by, Is it lawful for you
to scourge a man that is a Roman and uncondemned? And when the
centurion heard it, he went to the chief captain and told him,
saying, What art thou about to do? for this man is a Roman. And
the chief captain came and said unto him, Tell me, art thou a
Roman? And he said, Yea. And the chief captain answered, With a
great sum obtained I this citizenship. But Paul said, But I am a
Roman born. They then that were about to examine him straightway
departed from him: and the chief captain also was afraid when he
knew that he was a Roman, and because he had bound him._
In this passage attention is directed to four things: To the fact that
Paul was a Roman citizen; to the fact that he was about to be treated in
a way that was forbidden by his citizenship; to the fact that he stood
up for his rights as a Roman citizen; and to the fact that those who
were about to infringe upon his rights were restrained, were overawed.
I. Attention is directed to the fact that Paul was a Roman citizen.
Citizenship was a possession that was very highly esteemed, and that was
obtained in several ways,--by birth, by purchase, as a reward for
distinguished military services, and as a favor. Paul's came to him by
inheritance; his father before him had been a Roman citizen: how it came
to the father we do not know. At one time the price paid for it was very
great. The chief captain, in the narrative of which our text is a part,
tells us that he obtained his with a great sum; and therefore he seemed
surprised to think that a man in Paul's circumstances should have it. At
first he seemed a little incredulous, but it was only for a moment. The
penalty for falsely claiming to be a Roman citizen was death; this fact
together with the whole bearing of the apostle finally left no doubt in
his mind: he accepted his statement.
It was not only a great honor to be a Roman citizen, but it carried with
it many rights and privileges that were not enjoyed by others. These
rights were either private or public,--_Jus Quiritium_, and _Jus
Civitatis_. Among Private Rights, was the Right of Liberty. This secured
him against imprisonment without trial; exemption from all degrading
punishments, such as scourging and crucifixion; the right of appeal to
the emperor after sentence by an inferior magistrate or tribunal, in any
part of the empire; and also the right to be sent to Rome for trial
before the emperor, if charged with a capital offence.
Among Public Rights belonging to Roman citizens the following may be
mentioned: (1) The right of being enrolled in the censor's book, called,
_Jus Census_. (2) The right of serving in the army, called, _Jus
Militiae_. At first only citizens of the empire were permitted to engage
in military operations, to bear arms and fight in its behalf. (3) The
right to vote in the different assemblies of the people, called, _Jus
Suffragii_. This has always been and is to-day one of the most important
functions of citizenship, and one that should be highly prized and
sacredly guarded. (4) The right of bearing public offices in the state.
There were many other rights enjoyed by Roman citizens, but I will not
take the time to enumerate them: these are sufficient to show us the
value, the importance of Roman citizenship; and this citizenship the
apostle Paul was invested with, with all the rights and privileges which
were involved in it. On one occasion he said, "I am a citizen of no mean
city," referring to Tarsus, which was one of the free cities of Asia
Minor; but more than that, as he tells us here, he was a citizen of the
empire.
II. Attention is called to the fact that Paul was about to be treated in
a way that was forbidden by his citizenship; that was contrary to Roman
law. He had gone up to Jerusalem to attend the feast of Pentecost. After
meeting the brethren and rehearsing to them the wonderful things which
God had wrought through his ministry among the Gentiles, they
congratulated him upon his success, but said to him: "Thou seest,
brother, how many thousands there are among the Jews of them that have
believed; and they are all zealous for the law: and they have been
informed concerning thee, that thou teachest all the Jews who are among
the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their
children neither to walk after the customs. What is it therefore? they
will certainly hear that thou art come. Do therefore this that we say to
thee: We have four men that have a vow on them; these take, and purify
thyself with them, and be at charges for them, that they may shave their
heads: and all shall know that there is no truth in the things whereof
they have been informed concerning thee but that thou thyself walkest
orderly, keeping the law." It was in compliance with this request, that
Paul went into the temple to do as he was asked to do: and while there
was seen by certain Jews of Asia, i. e., the province of Asia, who at
once stirred up the multitude and laid hands on him, crying out, "Men of
Israel, help: This is the man that teacheth all men everywhere against
the people, and the law, and this place; and moreover he brought Greeks
also into the temple and hath defiled this holy place." It was like
touching a match to a powder magazine. The people were aroused.
Instantly there was a response to the call; and dragging the apostle out
of the temple they were in the act of beating him to death, when the
chief captain, learning of the tumult, rushed down with a squad of
soldiers and rescuing him, brought him into the castle. The next day
with a view of ascertaining what the trouble was, the real ground of
complaint against the apostle, the chief captain proposed to examine him
by scourging, and issued orders to that effect. In obedience to this
order the apostle was stripped and actually tied up. The process of
examination proposed was very severe. The culprit was stripped and tied
in a bending posture to a pillar, or stretched on a frame, and the
punishment was inflicted with a scourge made of leathern thongs weighted
with sharp pieces of bone or lead, the object being to extort from the
sufferer a confession of his guilt or the information desired.
If the chief captain had understood the Hebrew language, and could have
followed the address of the apostle which was delivered on the steps of
the palace, he would have understood what the trouble was, without
attempting to resort to this brutal method of finding out; but evidently
he did not. Everything indicated, however, that it was something very
serious, judging from their treatment of him, and from the intense
excitement which his words produced upon them, and hence, he was all the
more anxious to find out. If the apostle was guilty of any offence
against the law, it was the duty of the chief captain to take cognizance
of it, and to punish him accordingly, but if he was innocent, if he had
in no way transgressed the law, it was his duty to release him. The law
also provided how the guilt or innocence of an accused person was to be
ascertained; and it was the duty of the chief captain to have followed
the course prescribed by the law; but it is clear from the narrative
that he had determined upon another course: the prisoner is ordered to
be scourged, instead of calling upon those who had assaulted him to make
their charges, and to substantiate them, and then giving the apostle an
opportunity of defending himself.
III. Attention is directed in the text to the fact, that the apostle
stood up manfully for his rights. After they had tied him up, as if
waiting to see just how far they would go, and just as the process of
scourging was about to begin, he challenged their right to proceed: he
said to the centurion, who was standing by, and who was there as the
representative of the chief captain, to see that the scourging was
properly done, and to make note of what he confessed,--he said to this
man: "Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman, and
uncondemned?" The law expressly forbade the scourging of Roman citizens;
it was an indignity to which no Roman citizen was to be subjected. This
was what was known as the Porcian law, and took its name from Porcius,
the Tribune through whose influence its adoption was secured. And this
is the law to which the apostle here appeals, whose protection he
invokes. Paul, as a Roman citizen, not only knew what his rights were,
but he stood up for his rights. He insists here upon being treated, as
he was entitled to be treated, as a citizen of the empire. They are
about to scourge him, contrary to law, and he says to them, Stop; you
have no right to treat me in this way, intimating and they evidently
understood it, that if they did not desist, they would hear from him; he
would bring the matter to the attention of the emperor.
This is not the only place where Paul falls back upon his rights as a
Roman citizen. He did the same thing a little later on. He was removed
from Jerusalem to Caesarea, as you will remember, where he remained a
prisoner for two years. During that time he was frequently placed on
trial before various officials,--before Felix, before Festus, before
Agrippa. It was during one of these hearings, that Festus the governor,
in order to curry favor with the Jews, intimated that he might be sent
back to Jerusalem to be tried: and doubtless this was his intention,
having entered into a secret arrangement with the enemies of the
apostle, who had resolved to kill him at the first opportunity. This
they felt that they would have a better chance of doing if they could
only induce the governor to return him to Jerusalem. The apostle, of
course, knew all this; he knew how intensely they hated him, and what
their plans and purposes were, and he was determined not to be entrapped
in this way. The record is: "Paul said in his defence, 'Neither against
the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar have I
sinned at all.' But Festus, desiring to gain favor with the Jews,
answered Paul and said, 'Wilt thou go up to Jerusalem, and there be
judged of these things before me?' But Paul said, 'I am standing before
Caesar's judgment-seat, where I ought to be judged: to the Jews have I
done no wrong, as thou also very well knowest. If then I am a wrong
doer, and have committed anything worthy of death, I refuse not to die;
but if none of these things is true whereof these accuse me, no man can
give me up to them. I appeal unto Caesar.' Then Festus, when he had
conferred with the council, answered, 'Thou hast appealed unto Caesar,
unto Caesar thou shalt go.'"
One of the great privileges of a Roman citizen was the right of appeal;
the right of being heard directly by the emperor, of taking his case out
of the hands of all inferior judicatories, up to the highest: and this
is the right which the apostle here avails himself of. It was the only
thing that saved him from being turned over by a corrupt official into
the hands of his enemies; and it forcibly illustrates the importance of
citizenship. Had he not been a Roman citizen clothed with the sacred
right of appeal he would have been basely sacrificed to the malice of
his enemies; or, though he had been a Roman citizen, if he had cowardly
surrendered his right, if he had failed to exercise it, he would have
equally perished; but the apostle stood upon his right, and so succeeded
in thwarting the purposes of his enemies.
IV. Attention is directed in the text to the fact, that those who were
about to scourge this man, were restrained by the knowledge of the fact
that he was a Roman citizen. The moment they became aware of this fact;
at the mere mention of that sacred name, citizen, everything came to a
stand still; the uplifted hand, ready to smite, is arrested, and we find
the centurion running off, in great excitement in search of the chief
captain, and saying to him, "What are you about? Do you know that this
man is a Roman?" and we see the chief captain coming in great haste and
saying to the apostle, "What? can it be possible! Are you really a
Roman?" "Yes," said the apostle, "I am; and my father before me was."
The chief captain is astonished; yea, more, fear takes hold of him; he
becomes suddenly alarmed.
There are two things in this incident that are worthy of note: first,
this indignity that was offered to the apostle was through ignorance. It
was not known that he was a Roman citizen. The law was violated, but it
was not purposely done. It was not the intention of the chief captain to
ignore the rights involved in citizenship; for he himself was a Roman
citizen, and was interested in maintaining those rights. And, second, to
trample upon the rights of a Roman citizen was a very grave offense, a
very serious matter; and it became a serious matter because back of this
citizenship was the whole power of the empire. These rights were
carefully guarded, were rigidly enforced, so that the term, Roman
citizen, was everywhere respected. No one could infringe those rights
with impunity: hence you will notice what is said here, "The chief
captain was afraid when he knew that he was a Roman because he had bound
him." He recognized at once the gravity of the offense. That was old
pagan Rome; but under its rule citizenship meant something; it was a
sacred thing; back of it stood the strong arm of the Government to give
efficacy, power to it. This man was afraid when he realized what he had
done; and that is the feeling which outraged citizenship ought
everywhere to inspire. It ought to mean something; and there ought to be
power somewhere to enforce its meaning.
But it is not of Roman citizenship that I desire to speak at this time,
but rather of American citizenship, and of that citizenship as it
pertains to ourselves. In the providence of God we are citizens of this
great Republic. The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution declares:
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to
the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the
State wherein they reside." Under this provision of the Constitution we
are all citizens; and we have earned the right to be citizens. We have
lived here as long as any other class in the Republic; we have worked as
hard as any other class to develop the country; and we have fought as
bravely as any other class in the defense of the Republic. If length of
residence, if unstinted toil, if great sacrifices of blood, if the
laying of one's self on the country's altar in the hour of peril, of
danger, give any claim to citizenship, then our claim is beyond dispute;
for all these things are true of us.
We are _citizens_ of this great Republic: and citizenship is a sacred
thing: I hope we realize it. It is a thing to be prized; to be highly
esteemed. It has come to us after 250 years of slavery, of unrequited
toil; it has come to us after a sanguinary conflict, in which billions
of treasure and rivers of blood were poured out; it has come to us as a
boon from the nation at a time when it had reached its loftiest moral
development; when its moral sense was quickened as it had never been
before, and when it stood as it had never stood before upon the great
principles enunciated in the Declaration of Independence, not as
glittering generalities, but as great realities: it was at that sublime
period in our history, when the national conscience was at work; when
the men who were in charge of affairs were men who stood for
righteousness; when the great issues before the country were moral
issues, issues involving human rights,--that the nation saw fit to
abolish slavery and to decree the citizenship of all men, black and
white alike. When we think of what this citizenship has cost, in blood
and treasure; of the noble men through whose influence it was brought
about; and of the fact that it came to us from the Nation when it was at
its best, when it was living up to its highest light, and to its noblest
conceptions of right and duty,--we ought to prize it, to set a high
value upon it.
And we ought to show our appreciation of it: (1). By being good
citizens; by doing everything in our power to develop ourselves along
right lines, intellectually, morally, spiritually, and also materially:
and to do everything in our power to promote the general good;
everything that will help to make for municipal, state, and national
righteousness. We are to remember that we are part of a great whole, and
that the whole will be affected by our conduct, either for good or bad.
If we live right, if we fear God and keep his commandments, and train
our children to do the same, we ennoble our citizenship; we become a
part of the great conservative force of society, a positive blessing to
the community, the state, the nation. It is especially important for us,
in view of the strong prejudice against us, the disposition to view us
with a critical eye, to hold up and magnify our short-comings, that we
be particularly concerned to be constantly manifesting, evidencing our
good citizenship by allying ourselves only with the things that are
true, and just, and pure, and lovely, and of good report. We ought not
to lose sight of the fact that the strongest fight that is being made
against us to-day is by those who are doing most to discredit us, to
array public sentiment against us,--those who are parading our
short-comings and imperfections, who are giving the greatest publicity,
the widest circulation to them. There are persons in this country, who
are determined, and who never lose an opportunity to blacken our good
name. Dr. DuBois, in that splendid document of his, "Credo," said among
other things, "I believe in the Devil and his angels, who wantonly work
to narrow the opportunity of struggling human beings, especially if they
be black; who spit in the faces of the fallen, strike them that cannot
strike again, believe the worst and work to prove it, hating the image
which their Maker stamped on a brother's soul." And this is one of the
conditions that confront us in this country, and that we must not lose
sight of. The fact that there is this determination on the part of our
enemies to prove that we are utterly unworthy of this great boon of
citizenship, should have the effect of creating within us a counter
determination to show that we are worthy,--to do our level best in every
sphere of life. Now I do not mean by this to say that we are not proving
ourselves to be good citizens; for we are: a great many of us are; but I
have called attention to it because I feel that it ought to be
emphasized; that we need to feel more keenly and more widely than is
felt, the meaning of this great boon and the demand which it makes upon
us. It is a challenge to every man to live a straightforward, upright,
worthy life. And what is needed is, not only that _we_, who have had
exceptional opportunities, should feel this way, but that the great mass
of our people should be educated to feel the same, to be animated by the
same spirit. And _we_ are to be their educators; it is through _us_ that
this spirit is to descend upon them, and take possession of them. If
this citizenship means anything, it means that we should be concerned
about everything which makes for law, for order, for good government,
for individual, municipal, state, and national purity and righteousness;
it means that each one of us ought to be a living example of the best
type of what a citizen ought to be.
But this is not all: if we value our citizenship we will not only seek
to make the most of ourselves, to live on the highest plane but we will
also stand up manfully for our rights under that citizenship. I have no
patience with those who preach civil and political self-effacement. I
never have believed in that pernicious doctrine, and never will. When
you have effaced a man, civilly and politically, in a government like
our own, what is he? What does he amount to? Who cares for him? What
rights has he which any other class is bound to respect? He is a mere
nonentity, entitled to no consideration, and with no refuge to which he
can fly in the hour of his need. To be civilly and politically effaced
is to be civilly and politically dead; and to be civilly and politically
dead is to be at the mercy of any and every political party or
organization, and to be under the iron heel of the worst elements in the
community without any means of redress.
We are _citizens_ of this Republic: and I want to direct attention to
this fact for a moment; and I am glad of the opportunity of doing it at
this time, when we are in the midst of celebrating the inauguration of
our President. I thank God for the man at the White House; for his
courage; for his high sense of righteousness; for the many splendid
things which he has said; and for the noble stand which he has taken on
human rights; on equality of opportunity; on the open door for every man
in the Republic irrespective of race or color. I rejoice in the fact
that we have such a President. I commend him heartily for what he has
done. I hope he will do more; I hope there are yet larger things in
store for this race through him. But whether he does more or not; or
whatever may be his future policy, or the future policy of the leaders
of either of the great political parties, or the rank and file of those
parties, it cannot, it will not affect in the least, our attitude in
regard to our rights under the Constitution. We are citizens, clothed
with citizenship rights; and, there is no thought or intention on our
part of ever surrendering a single one of them. Whatever others may
think of it, or desire in regard to it, we do not propose to retreat a
single inch, to give up for one moment the struggle. I say, _we_ and in
this, I believe I speak for those who represent the sentiment that is
taking more and more firmly hold of the heart of this race. I belong to
what may be called the radical wing of the race, on the race question: I
do not believe in compromises; in surrendering, or acquiescing, even
temporarily, in the deprivation of a single right, out of deference to
an unrighteous public sentiment. I believe with Lowell,
"They enslave their children's children,
Who make compromise with sin."
And this, I believe, at heart, is the sentiment of the race; at least,
it is the sentiment of some of us. There is where we have taken our
stand and there is where we propose to stand to the end. What belongs to
us as citizens we want; and we are not going to be satisfied with
anything less. We are in this country, and we are here to stay. There is
no prospect of our ever leaving it. This is our home, as it has been the
home of our ancestors for generations, and will be the home of our
children, and of our children's children, for all time. It is of the
greatest importance to us, therefore, that our status in it, as it is
permanently fixed, should be, not that of a proscribed class, but that
of full citizenship with every right, civil and political, accorded to
us that is accorded to other citizens of the Republic. This is the thing
that we are to insist upon; this is the evil against which we are to
guard.
What our enemies are seeking to effect is to make this a white man's
government; to fix permanently our status in it, as one of civil and
political inferiority. The issue is sharply drawn; and it is for us to
say whether we will be thus reduced, whether such shall be our permanent
status or not. One thing we may be assured of: such will surely be our
fate unless we clearly comprehend the issue, and set ourselves earnestly
to work to counteract the movement, by resisting in every legitimate way
its consummation, and by using our influence to create a counter public
sentiment.
What are some of these citizenship rights for which we should earnestly
contend?
(1) The right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. In one
section of this country, at least, and the area is growing, and is fast
including others, the life of a Negro isn't worth as much as that of a
dog. He may be shot down, murdered, strung up to a tree, burnt to death,
by any white ruffian, or band of lawbreakers and murderers with
impunity. The color of his skin gives any white man liberty to maltreat
him, to trample upon him. He has no rights which white men are bound to
respect. If he goes to law, there is no redress; his appeals avail
nothing with judge and jury. That is a condition of things that we ought
not to rest satisfied under. As long as the life of a black man is not
just as sacred as that of a white man, in every section of the Republic;
as long as wrongs perpetrated upon him are treated with greater leniency
than wrongs perpetrated upon white men, his status is not the same as
that of the white man; and as long as it is not the same an injustice is
done him, which he ought to resist; against which he ought to protest,
and continue to protest.
(2) Another citizenship right is that of receiving equal accommodations
on all common carriers and in all hostelries; on railroads, steamboats,
in hotels, restaurants, and in all public places. When we travel,
whatever we are able to pay for we are entitled to, just as other
citizens are. To-day this is largely denied us. The hotels are not open
to us; the restaurants are not open to us, even the little ten cent
lunch counters, in this the capital city of the nation, are not open to
us: we are shut out from all such places, and shut out because of the
color of our skin. If we attempt to travel, and turn our faces
southward, we must ride in Jim Crow cars; we must be segregated, shut up
in a little compartment by ourselves. The privilege which we once
enjoyed without stint of taking a sleeper or Pullman car, even that now
is being taken from us. One state has even gone so far as to make it
unlawful to sell a ticket to a person of color on a sleeper. That is the
state of Georgia; a State that has in it Atlanta University, and Clark
University, and the Atlanta Baptist College, and Spelman Seminary, and
the Gammon Theological Seminary, and Haines Institute, and many other
schools of learning; a State that has within its borders some of the
very best type of Negroes in this country. The meaning of all this,
don't let us misunderstand: it is a part of the general policy, which is
being vigorously pushed by our enemies, to fix our status as one of
inferiority, by shutting us out from certain privileges. The whole thing
is wrong. Such invidious distinctions ought not to be permitted in a
republic. It is inconsistent with citizenship. Everything ought to be
open to all citizens alike:--railroad cars, hotels, restaurants,
steamboats, the schools and colleges of the land: our public schools
ought to be open to all the children alike. There ought not be separate
schools for the whites, and separate schools for blacks: all the
children of the Republic ought to be educated together; and sooner or
later it is bound to come to that. Some one has said, "It isn't so much
the Jim Crow car, as it is the Jim Crow Negro in the car." The fallacy
of this statement, and its attempted mitigation or justification of the
Jim Crow car, lies in the fact that the Jim Crow car has nothing
whatever to do with the Jim Crow Negro. It was not instituted for him,
but for all Negroes, whether Jim Crow or not: in fact, it was designed,
particularly, not for the Jim Crow Negro, but for the intelligent,
progressive, self-respecting Negro. If there are Jim Crow Negroes among
us we owe them a duty; we ought to seek to improve them, to lift them to
higher levels; but while we are doing this, don't let us forget that
there is a Jim Crow car, and what it stands for. It stands for a hostile
public sentiment; it is a part of a concerted plan which seeks to
degrade us, to rob us of our rights, to deprive us of privileges enjoyed
by other citizens, because of the color of our skin. If there were no
Jim Crow Negroes, we would have the Jim Crow car all the same. We should
fight the Jim Crow cars, therefore, not only because of the personal
discomfort to which we are subjected in travelling, but also because of
the general system of which it is a part,--a system which seeks to
establish a double citizenship in the Republic, based upon race and
color; the one superior to the other, and carrying with it privileges
which are denied to the other.
(3) Another citizenship right is that of serving in the Army and Navy;
the right to take up arms and to fight in behalf of the country. This is
our right, and we have exercised it, and are still exercising it. We
have fought in all the wars of the Republic; and are represented to-day
in both Army and Navy. We have made a glorious record for ourselves in
this respect. There is no better soldier in the Army of the Republic,
than the black soldier. This right has not been denied us, but let us,
nevertheless, keep our eyes on it. There are some things even here that
need to be looked into. It has been many years since we have had a
representative in the great Naval or Military school of the country; and
there have been some rumors about limiting the aspirations of Negroes in
the Army, of not permitting them to advance beyond a certain point. If
there is such a thought or intention on the part of those in authority,
it must be resisted. The Negro must be free--in the Army, in the
Navy,--in every part of the Army and Navy,--as other citizens are free;
to advance according to his merit. His color must not be allowed to
operate against him.
(4) Another citizen right is that of suffrage, the right of the ballot;
the right to have part in the government; to say who shall make the laws
and who shall execute them; and what the laws shall be; the right to
have an opinion, and to have that opinion counted in determining what
shall be and what shall not be. This is one of the greatest of rights.
In a republic citizenship means very little without it. It is this which
marks the difference between a representative government, a government
of the people, by the people, and for the people, and a despotism, an
absolute monarchy. The glory of the age in which we live is the triumph
of democracy; and what is the triumph of democracy but the right of the
_people_ to say who shall rule; and how is the will of the people
expressed? Through the ballot; at the polls. The ballot therefore is the
symbol of the sovereignty of the people. If we are to be sovereign
citizens of the Republic therefore, this right to vote must be
preserved. The old despotic idea of government was, that some people
were born to rule, and that others were born to be ruled; and the idea
that exists in the minds of some people in this country, in democratic
America, in face of the affirmation of the Declaration of Independence,
that all men are born free and equal, is that in this country, there are
some people who are born to rule, and others who are born to be ruled;
and that the people who are born to rule are the whites, and those who
are born to be ruled are the blacks: hence the effort that is being made
to divest us of this symbol of sovereignty,--the ballot. Let us not be
deceived; let us give no heed to any teaching, never mind from what
source it may come, which seeks to minimize the importance of the
ballot. What difference does it make whether we vote or not? I have
heard some weak-kneed, time-serving representatives of our own race say;
and the thought has been caught up by the men in the south who have been
seeking to rob us of our rights, and by those in the North who have been
playing into their hands; and they have said, Yes, What difference does
it make? Are you not just as well off without it? What difference does
it make? It makes all the difference in the world: the difference
between a sovereign citizen of the Republic, and one who has been
stripped of his sovereignty; between one who has a say in what is going
on, and one who has not; between one who is ruled with his consent, and
one who is ruled without it. If we are just as well off without the
ballot, how is it that the white man is not just as well off without it?
And if he is unwilling to give it up, why should he ask us to give it
up? Why should we give it up? If he needs it in order to protect
himself, much more do we, for we are weaker than he is, and need all the
more the power which comes from the ballot.
(5) Another citizenship right is, that of holding office, the right to
be voted for, and of being appointed to positions of honor and trust by
the executive power. This is also a right that belongs to us, and that
we must contend for. It is one of our rights that is now being
especially contested in the South. The Negro must not be appointed to
any office, is the demand of Southern white sentiment. I am glad that
the President has not yielded wholly to that sentiment. The fight which
he made in the Crum case was a notable one, and clearly indicated that
he was not willing to shut that door of opportunity to the Negro; that
he was not willing to take the position that a man was to be debarred
from public office simply because of the color of his skin. That was the
right position for him to take, and the only one that was consistent
with his oath of office, and his position as President of _all_ the
people. I hope that he will continue to act upon that principle; and
that he will do more than he has done. There is room for improvement in
this direction. A few more appointments of colored men in the North, as
well as in the South, would be a good thing. It ought to be done. The
right of colored men to receive appointments ought to be clearly and
distinctly emphasized by multiplying those appointments. There is
nothing like an object lesson in impressing the truth. I hope that the
President will give us many such object lessons during the next four
years.
The right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; the right to
receive equal accommodation on railroads, steamboats, in hotels,
restaurants, and in all public places of amusement; the right to be
represented in the Army and Navy; the right to vote; the right to hold
office: these are some of our citizenship rights, for which we should
earnestly contend. Sometimes, we are told, that it would be better to
say less about our rights, and more about our duties. No one feels more
the importance of emphasizing our duties than I do,--I think I have done
about as much of it as anybody,--but among the duties that I have always
emphasized, and still emphasize, is the duty of standing up squarely and
uncompromisingly for our rights. When we are contending for the truth;
when we are resisting the encroachments of those who are seeking to
despoil us of our birth-right as citizens; when we are keeping up the
agitation for equal civil and political privileges in this country, are
we not in the line of duty? If not, where is the line? Duties? Yes. Let
us have our duties preached to us,--line upon line, and precept upon
precept, here a little and there a little; but at the same time don't
let us forget that we have also _rights_ under the Constitution, and to
see to it that we stand up for them; that we resist to the very last
ditch those who would rob us of them. And in doing this, let us remember
that we are called to it by the stern voice of Duty, which is the voice
of God; and that we need not apologize for our action.
And now in conclusion but a word more and then I am done. The fight
before us is a long one. You will not live, nor will I live to see the
triumph of the principles for which we are contending; let us not become
discouraged however. Things look pretty dark at times, but it isn't all
dark. Now and then there are gleams of light, which indicate the coming
of a better day. There are forces working _for_ us, as well as against
us; and with what we can do for ourselves, we need not despair.
"Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord;
He is trampling out the vintage where the grapes
of wrath are stored!
He has loosed the fateful lightning of his terrible swift sword;
His truth is marching on.
He has sounded forth the trumpet that shall never call retreat;
He is sifting out the hearts of men before his judgment seat;
O, be swift, my soul, to answer him! be jubilant, my feet!
While God is marching on."
Let us take courage; let us gird up our loins; let us stand at our post;
let us be true to duty; let us hold ourselves to the highest; let us
have nothing to do with the unfruitful works of darkness; let us be
temperate, industrious, thrifty; let us do with our might what our hands
find to do; let us trust in God, and do the right: and then, whether the
struggle be long or short, there can be no doubt as to the final issue.
We shall come out victorious; we shall be accorded every right belonging
to us under the Constitution, and every avenue of opportunity will be
opened to us, as to other citizens of the Republic. The future is
largely in our own hands. If we allow ourselves to be permanently
despoiled of our rights; to be reduced to a position of civil and
political inferiority, the fault will be, not "in our stars," as
Shakespeare has expressed it, "but in ourselves." Others can help us;
others will help us, as they have already done; but the final outcome
will depend mainly upon what we do _for_ ourselves, and _with_
ourselves. If we are to grow in the elements that make for a strong,
intelligent, virtuous manhood and womanhood, _we_ have got to see to it,
to be concerned about it; to be more deeply concerned about it than
anybody else. And so, if the agitation for equality of rights and
opportunities in this country is to be kept up, and it ought to be kept
up, _we_ are the ones to see to it. As long as there are wrongs to be
redressed, from which we are suffering, we ought not to be silent, ought
not for our sake as well as for the sake of the nation at large.
Whatever can be done to develop ourselves; whatever can be done to
create a healthy and righteous public sentiment in our behalf; whatever
can be done to check the encroachments of our enemies upon our rights,
_we_ must do it, whether others do or not. May God help us all to
realize this, and to address ourselves earnestly to the work that lies
before us.
"Be strong!
We are not here to play, to dream, to drift.
We have hard work to do, and loads to lift.
Shun not the struggle; face it. Tis God's gift."
Transcriber's Note
This is one group of papers from a series of papers presented to the
American Negro Academy. Founded by Alexander Crummell in March 1897,
with 40 of the leading black scholars and writers of the day, the
Academy's purpose was to promote literature, science and art, foster
higher education and high culture, and to defend the Negro aginst racist
attacks. The Academy was active until 1924.
This project was scanned from a facsimile reprint included in a
collection of all 22 Occasional Papers of the American Negro Academy.
Original spelling varieties have been maintained; tables and footnotes
were renumbered.