In the autumn of 1890 I was commissioned
by The Times to go to the southern part of the
United States in order to study upon the spot
the conditions of the very extraordinary social
problem which has gradually arisen there during
the past two hundred years, and which has
assumed new and peculiar importance since the
manumission of the negroes and “coloured”
people, and the nominal extension to them of all
the privileges of American citizenship. For this
study I was in some degree prepared, not only
by a long-indulged fondness for the subject, but
also by a previous residence in the United States.
The result of my inquiries took the form of a series
of ten letters, which appeared in The Times in
November and December, 1890, and in January
viiiof the present year. These letters, with considerable
additions, and with such corrections as fuller
knowledge and the kind assistance of numerous
correspondents have suggested, are now reprinted.
They embrace, I think, a fair and comprehensive
view of the problem in all its most significant
aspects. I have conversed, without prejudice,
with whites and with blacks, with Republicans and
with Democrats, with men who are in office, and
with men who are anxious to find themselves
there; and I have not consciously closed my
ears to any argument from any quarter. This
volume, therefore, may, I trust, be accepted as
containing a true account of a state of affairs
which is without parallel in the history of modern
civilisation, and which is, no doubt, destined to
exercise a momentous, and possibly a terrible,
influence upon the future of America.
Briefly summarised, the situation in the South
is as follows. The inhabitants, black and white,
have all been given equal rights by the amended
Constitution of the Union. Each man of full age
is as much a citizen as his fellow. That is the
ixview of the law, from Maine to California. But
in the South there are several millions of people
whose veins contain more or less negro blood.
A generation ago these people, or their parents,
were, almost without exception, slaves in the
hands of the Southern whites. A great revolution
was effected. The black suddenly ceased to
be a slave; and, within a few years, he was presented
not only with his freedom, but also, in
theory at least, with all the privileges that were
previously the sole possession of the white. This
raising of the black from the depths of slavery to
the heights of citizenship was the work of outside
forces. It was not done by the Southern white,
nor, save as regards mere manumission, was it
done with his approval or consent. He was not
in a position to resist the will of the victorious
North. Indeed, the North imperiously forced its
will upon him, and even used as its agents the
very blacks who had but just been liberated from
bondage. This policy created bad blood between
whites and blacks. From the moment of its full
enforcement harmonious working between blacks
xand whites in the field of politics, and in most
other spheres, became impossible. The Southern
white assumed a sullenly rebellious attitude. He
determined that he would render a dead letter
the grant of citizenship to the black; and to a
very large extent he has done so. But, in the
meantime, the black, in certain districts, has
been increasing more rapidly than the white;
and to-day, in some of those districts, he actually
outnumbers him, while in others he equals him,
and will outnumber him in the early future.
Still, nevertheless—even where he is in a conclusive
minority—the Southern white persists in
his dogged resolution not to allow the black to
meddle with the machinery of government, not to
permit him for an instant to wear the full robe of
citizenship that has been presented to him by the
North. This is the bare kernel of the situation.
Hitherto the black has, upon the whole, meekly
submitted to this illegal deprivation of his rights.
Can he be expected to submit for ever? Or will
he some day attempt by force to seize that to
which he is by law entitled? Should he ever do
xithis, either alone or backed by all the resources of
the North, there will be a scene of horror such
as the South never witnessed in the darkest
days of the Civil War. So much is absolutely
certain.
What follows aspires to be an impartial review
not only of the present aspects but also of the
past history of the complex problem which has
thus been created. It includes, also, a humble
suggestion for the permanent solution of that
problem. I have attempted to show, firstly,
where the problem exists in its most pressing and
dangerous form; secondly, the reasons which
impel the South to refuse to constitutionally solve
the problem by allowing the majority to rule;
thirdly, the intolerable position of the Southern
black; and, fourthly, the intolerable position of
the Southern white. The position of all parties
concerned naturally demands that some way out
of the difficulty should be invented. I have,
therefore, gone on to show, fifthly, what solutions
have been advocated, and why they must all be
ineffective; and, sixthly, what appears to me to
xiibe the best, the most just, and the only radical
solution.
This solution is one which, I admit, I almost
despair of seeing carried out. The peaceable
removal of the negroes from the United States,
and their establishment across the ocean in a
country and in circumstances that would be
propitious not only to their own development
but also to the development of their barbarous
kindred, are measures which would involve very
great expense. But it is not, I believe, on the
score of expense that the average American is
likely to reject the scheme. His great inheritance
provides him with wealth more than sufficient
to enable him to pay all his debts, including
those huge ones which he owes to the black.
He is much more likely to adopt a characteristic
attitude such as he has adopted in the past
towards many other threatening questions. One
of the most distinguished of living American
statesmen said to me in November last: “If my
country should ever come to frightful disaster,
it will be, I am convinced, because it is the
xiiiincurable habit of my countrymen to cherish
the belief that they are so much the special
care of Providence that it would be superfluous,
on their part, to take even simple and ordinary
precautions for their own protection.”
xiv
Black America.
1
The total population of the United States, exclusive
of Alaska and of the Indian Territory,
was, according to the official returns of the Tenth
Census, 50,155,783. This Census was taken as
long ago as 1880; but it is, and will for some
time continue to be, the latest enumeration concerning
which full statistical details are in possession
of the world. An Eleventh Census was
taken in June, 1890. This, so far as has as yet
been ascertained, fixes the population of the great
Republic at 62,622,250.[1] The details of it are,
however, still unknown. We are altogether in
the dark as to how many of the people are males
and how many females, how many white and how
many coloured; and months, if not years, may be
expected to elapse before the hard-working Census
Bureau at Washington shall find itself in a position
to enlighten us upon these and other particular
points of interest. But there is no reason
2to suppose that the full details of the Eleventh
Census will, when they are published, greatly
surprise the statistical experts who have made a
special study of the increase of American population
in the past and of its probable increase in
the future; nor are there any signs that the results
of the Eleventh Census will, upon one point of
special significance, be much more reassuring than
were those of the Tenth. That point of special
significance is the rate of increase of the coloured
people in certain extensive sections of the old
slave-holding States of the South. This rate of
increase has hitherto been vastly superior to that
of the white people in the same districts, and is
a thing of no new growth. The four States,
Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and
Georgia, were numbered for the first time in
1790. Their white and coloured populations in
that year and in the year 1880, and the rates of
increase per cent. during the ninety intermediate
years, are shown in the following tables:—
While, therefore, in the ninety years the white
population of the four States has grown from
923,385 to only 2,956,111, the coloured population
has grown from 549,597 to 2,492,358. In other
words, while the whites have increased only
220·1 per cent., the blacks have increased 353·4
per cent., and the latter have been continuing to
increase with superior speed in face of the facts
that now for more than a generation black immigration
has practically ceased, and that the
black race is considerably shorter-lived than the
white. It is remarkable, too, that in each of the
four States the rate of increase has been greater
among the blacks than among the whites.
In only the above-mentioned four of the eight
old Slave States of the South was there a Census
in 1790. The first census of Mississippi was
taken in 1800, of Louisiana in 1810, of Alabama
in 1820, and of Florida in 1830. The first
enumerations of the eight States showed a total
white population of 1,066,711; the Census of
41880 showed the white population to be 4,695,253,
an increase of 340·2 per cent. On the other
hand, the first enumerations of the eight States
showed a coloured population of but 654,308,
while the Census of 1880 showed a coloured
population of no less than 4,353,097, or an
increase of 563·7 per cent. Whereas, therefore, at
the earliest enumerations the blacks formed only
about 38 per cent. of the population, they formed
in 1880 about 48 per cent. In short, in these
States, and in the period under review, the blacks
steadily drew ever nearer and nearer to the attainment
of a numerical majority. In 1860 they
were still nearly half a million behind the whites.
To-day, in the eight old Slave States of the South
the whites and the blacks are practically equal
in numbers, and in several individual States the
blacks have a formidable and growing majority.
It is in these last States most particularly
that what is known as the Negro Problem constitutes
the most serious and complex social
question of the hour. For most of the other
States of the Union the problem possesses as yet
only a secondary interest. The total number of
negroes and coloured people in the whole of the
United States in 1880 was 6,580,793. Of these,
4,353,097 lived, as has been seen, in the eight
old Slave States of the South, and there formed
5practically one-half of the population; 1,660,674
lived in the seven border States, Delaware, Maryland,
Kentucky, Missouri, Arkansas, Texas, and
Tennessee, with 7,132,457 white fellow-citizens
around them; and the remaining 567,022 were
all but lost among the 31,575,260 whites—not to
mention the Chinese and Indians—in the rest of
the Union. So sparse, indeed, is the negro
population, save in the fifteen States that have
been named, that it need not be considered as a
factor of any weight whatever; but in those
fifteen States it is an ever-present force that
demands recognition by all political parties. The
fifteen States may be thus grouped:—
Population, 1880.
Percentage of Coloured.
White.
Coloured.
A
Missouri
2,022,826
145,350
6·7
Kentucky
1,377,179
271,451
16·4
Delaware
120,160
26,442
18·1
Maryland
724,693
210,230
22·4
Texas
1,197,237
393,384
24·7
Tennessee
1,138,831
403,151
26·1
Arkansas
591,531
210,666
26·2
B
North Carolina
867,242
531,277
37·9
Virginia
880,858
631,616
41·7
Georgia
816,906
725,133
47·0
Florida
142,605
126,690
47·1
Alabama
662,185
600,103
47·5
C
Louisiana
454,954
483,655
51·4
Mississippi
479,398
650,291
57·5
South Carolina
391,105
604,332
60·6
6In the States grouped under A, or, at least,
in portions of them, the negro question occasionally
assumes importance, though it is normally
dormant. That it is not more often to the fore
appears to result mainly from the political apathy
or stupidity of the coloured population, which is
frequently in a position, acting with organisation
and method, to affect the balance of parties.
In the States grouped under B the power of the
negro is, theoretically, considerably greater. He
has a vote in North Carolina if he be an actual
citizen and not a convict; in Virginia if he be
an actual citizen and not a lunatic, idiot, convict,
duellist, or soldier; in Georgia if he be an
actual taxpaying citizen and not a lunatic, idiot,
or criminal; in Florida if he be a United States
citizen, or have declared an intention of becoming
one, and if he be not a lunatic, idiot,
criminal, duellist, or bettor on elections; and in
Alabama if he be a citizen, or have declared an
intention of becoming one, and if he be not an
idiot, an Indian, or a person convicted of crime.
In none of these States is it definitely required
that the negro voter shall be able to read or
write; in only one is it required that he shall
be even a taxpayer. The general requisites are
merely manhood, a certain length of residence,
and registration. Finally, in the States grouped
7under C, the negro is, if only he cared, and
were permitted, to exercise his franchise, all-powerful.
In Louisiana the qualification for the
suffrage at present excludes no male citizen who,
being of age, is not an idiot, lunatic, or criminal.
In Mississippi the law is equally generous. In
South Carolina the male citizen who is of age
may vote unless he be a lunatic, an inmate of an
asylum, almshouse, or prison, a duellist, or a
soldier. There is no property or taxpaying qualification.
The fifteenth amendment to the Constitution
of the United States declares that “the
right of the citizens of the United States to vote
shall not be denied or abridged by the United
States or any State on account of race, colour, or
previous condition of servitude;” and the spirit of
that amendment is, in theory, most fully honoured
by all the Commonwealths. So completely is this
the case that in 1880 the voting populations of
the three States (C) were officially returned as:—
White.
Coloured.
Louisiana
108,810
107,977
Mississippi
108,254
130,278
South Carolina
86,900
118,889
The slight coloured voting inferiority in
Louisiana in 1880 is attributable to the high rate
8of infant and child mortality among the negroes
as compared with the whites. It probably exists
no longer. There is now, almost beyond question,
a very considerable coloured voting majority in all
these States, and probably a slight one in Alabama
as well. The American Constitution recognises
the right of the majority to rule. The impartial
observer, therefore, might expect to find the government
of Louisiana, Mississippi, and South Carolina,
and possibly also of Alabama, almost, if not
entirely, in the hands of the negro and coloured
majority; but upon his arrival in the South he
finds no trace of anything of the kind. He finds,
on the contrary, that the white man rules as
supremely as he did in the days of slavery. The
black man is permitted to have little or nothing
to say upon the point; he is simply thrust on
one side. At every political crisis the cry of the
minority is, “This is a white man’s question,”
and the cry is generally uttered in such a tone
as to effectually warn off the black man from
meddling with the matter.
I purpose later to show by what methods the
white man attains his object when the usual cry
fails to produce the whole of the expected result.
I purpose also to show some of the reasons that
are advanced by the Southern white man for his
consistent refusal to countenance any negro
9interference in the affairs of State. For the
present I confine myself to indicating the situation
as it is and as it will be, and to suggesting
that the existing white supremacy, whether it be
for good or for evil, cannot continue indefinitely,
and must eventually give place, either by free
concession or as a tribute to brute force, to a new
order of things.
Not only in Louisiana, Mississippi, and South
Carolina, as wholes, is there a negro majority
among the population, a similar majority exists
in nearly all the low-lying portions of the Southern
States, from the Chesapeake to Florida and from
Florida to the borders of Mexico, and especially
in those low-lying districts that are removed
from the great towns.[2] The face of the country
consists, speaking broadly, of hill-tracts, and of
cities, where the whites are in a majority, and of
lowlands, where the blacks are numerically
supreme; and there are obvious natural reasons
at the bottom of this division of the races. Heat
is irksome to the Anglo-Saxon and correspondingly
grateful to the negro. Trade, mining, and
manufactures attract the white man; agriculture
and tillage are preferred by the black. In the
undrained lowlands the negro constitution defies
fevers and other ills that often weaken if they
10do not actually prove fatal to the white man’s
health. And so, apart from questions of births
and deaths, some parts of the Southern States
tend to every year become blacker, while others
as steadily become whiter.
And the process which is initiated by geographical
and climatic considerations is regularly
aided by economical ones. The white man
cannot compete as a labourer, or even as an
artisan, upon equal terms with the black. He
needs higher pay and better food. In black
centres, therefore, the poor white man finds
himself daily becoming more and more out of his
element. Ordinary petty village trades, such as
cobbling, tailoring, smithery, and carpentry, are
thus, throughout the South, falling very much
into the hands of the negroes; while the poor
white men, who once had a monopoly of such
humble pursuits, are going elsewhere in search
of employment. They go, not to the uplands
and cities of the South, but to the North, and,
above all, to the new West, where every working
man with strong arms, a good head, and an
honest heart, has to-day the most brilliant of
prospects.
The blacks, on the other hand, move about
very little. They appreciate such little comforts
as they have been able to gather around them
11since their manumission, and neither the cold
North nor the half-settled West has any charms
for them. They have at present no strong
ambitions and very few wants. In the estimation
of ninety-nine out of a hundred of them
a cabin in sunny South Carolina is a much more
desirable thing than a five-storeyed house in New
York or Chicago, and immeasurably preferable
to a store in Nebraska or a hut in Wyoming.
Moreover, the black likes to be among his black
kinsmen. A white man may occasionally persuade
himself to regard a negro as his brother, in
theory at least. The black man cares little for
theory, and bluntly recognises the white man as
a person of alien and, upon the whole, objectionable
character from surface to core. And even
the most sympathetic white man prefers, in
practice, to be surrounded by a white majority
rather than by a black, especially when he is at
home in the bosom of his family.
These considerations, almost as much as the
superior fecundity and fewer wants of the negro,
are leading the Black Belt of the South to become
blacker than ever. White immigration has almost
ceased; white emigration is growing. In 1880,
as has been shown, there were 391,105 whites and
604,332 blacks in South Carolina. Of these only
7,686, or ·7 per cent., were of foreign birth.
12Twenty years before, the number of foreign-born
people in the State had been 9,986, and in 1870
it had been 8,074. In the eight old Slave States
of the South (B and C) there were, in 1860,
148,662 foreign-born residents, in 1870 but
123,931, and in 1880 only 119,686; while of
persons born out of the States, but within the
United States, there were 1,813 less in 1880 than in
1870. These are facts which, even if taken alone,
are of deep significance. Still more striking, however,
are some estimates which have been drawn
up for me by a distinguished statistical expert at
Washington, and which show the probable numerical
aspect of the race question in the eight old
Slave States in the near future. Several years
ago Professor E. W. Gilliam published a forecast
of the developments of the present situation. His
estimate of the rate of increase of the Southern
whites and negroes was somewhat more alarmist
than that which I am now able to give. The
new estimate is based upon the general, though
not upon the detailed, results of the Census of
1890; and as it also makes allowance for the often
alleged imperfections of the Census of 1870, I
think that it may be accepted as, upon the whole,
a better one than that of Mr. Gilliam, or, indeed,
than any that has yet been attempted. I feel
bound to mention Mr. Gilliam’s name in connection
13with this matter, for his tables have been very
widely quoted, and have been made the foundation
of much discussion and speculation. I only
reject them because I have others which are the
results of fuller and later knowledge. Mr. Gilliam’s
views on some unfortunately less changeable aspects
of the race question remain to-day as true
and as valuable as when they were committed to
paper seven years ago, and I hope to quote them
when, after having completed the dry statistical
survey of the whole subject, I proceed to deal
with the difficulties and dangers of the Southern
problem. Here, in the meantime, is my informant’s
estimate of the white and coloured populations
of the Black Belt States in the years 1900
and 1910 respectively:—
1900.
1910.
White.
Coloured.
White.
Coloured.
North Carolina
1,010,000
865,000
1,100,000
1,020,000
Virginia
985,000
835,000
1,050,000
965,000
Georgia
1,060,000
1,090,000
1,190,000
1,310,000
Florida
295,000
245,000
380,000
340,000
Alabama
870,000
935,000
1,000,000
1,125,000
Louisiana
582,000
755,000
655,000
915,000
Mississippi
645,000
840,000
750,000
965,000
South Carolina
465,000
875,000
510,000
1,055,000
5,912,000
6,440,000
6,635,000
7,695,000
12,352,000
14,330,000
14As illustrating the moderation of this estimate, it
is worth while adding that Professor Gilliam,
writing in 1883, was of opinion that, from 1880
onwards, the whites in the South might be expected
to increase at the rate of 2 per cent. per
annum, and to double their numbers in thirty-five
years, and that the blacks in the South might be
expected to increase at the rate of 3½ per cent.
per annum and to double their numbers in twenty
years. These formulæ would give to the eight
old Slave States about 9,390,000 whites in 1915,
and about 17,400,000 blacks in 1920. The actual
rate of increase is, however, a comparatively unimportant
matter. The significant fact of the
situation is that in three or four of the eight
States the coloured population already outnumbers
the white, and that in every one of the remaining
four or five States the existing white majority has
been for years growing smaller and smaller, and
bids fair within a very short period to disappear
entirely, and to make place for an overwhelming
and ever-growing black majority.
At present, even in South Carolina, which is
the “blackest” State in the Union, the white, and
the white alone, rules. He seized power, in self-defence
it is true, by fraud and violence, and he
retains it by deception and intimidation; yet,
strange to say, even the most respected and (in
15ordinary dealings) upright white people of the
South excuse and defend this course of procedure;
and, stranger still, very many honourable citizens
of the North, Republicans as well as Democrats,
do not hesitate to declare, “If I were a Southern
white man I should act as the Southern white men
do.” The cardinal principle of the political creed
of 99 per cent. of the Southern whites is that the
white man must rule at all costs and at all hazards.
In comparison with this principle every other
article of political faith dwindles into ridiculous
insignificance. White domination is a living question
that dwarfs tariff reform, protection, free
trade, and the very pales of party. The white
who does not believe in it above all else is regarded
as a traitor and an outcast. The race
question is, in the South, the sole question of
burning interest. If you be sound on that question
you are one of the elect; if you be unsound,
you take rank as a pariah or as a lunatic.
After the War of Secession the North complacently
folded its hands and announced that the
race problem had been for ever disposed of. It
soon learned that such had not been precisely
the case. Then, after making an ill-advised and
spasmodic effort at settlement, it declared that
the race problem was no longer its affair, and
that it might be left to solve itself. But since
16then years have elapsed, and the question still
remains unsettled, paralysing the South, menacing
the whole Union, and liable at any moment to
involve hundreds of thousands of miles of territory
and millions of human lives in a catastrophe
scarcely inferior to that of the great Civil War.
Is it not time, then, for something to be done
towards freeing the South from the incubus of
the situation, and the North from the danger that
lurks still along the line which, less than a generation
ago, saw Federal and Confederate striving in
vain to settle this very question?
It may be asked: Why cannot the South submit
itself to the operation of those principles by
which the North is governed? Why not allow the
majority—no matter what may be its hue—to
rule?
The answer is that the experiment has been
to some extent tried, and has utterly failed. The
history of the attempt and of the failure is given
in the following chapter. The outlines of that
history must be studied by every one who aspires
to understand the nature and difficulties of the
Southern problem as it exists to-day. I do not,
therefore, apologise for setting forth at some
length the gloomy narrative of one of the most
extraordinary episodes in the modern history of
any civilised country. If I needed further excuse,
17I might find it in the fact that my story, though
it deals with events of comparatively recent occurrence
and of a very terrible character, is unknown
to the majority of Englishmen. Even in the
North it is now well-nigh forgotten; and only in
the long-suffering South are the hideous lessons of
it still fully remembered.
CHAPTER II. THE EX-SLAVE AS MASTER.
19
The Civil War ended in 1865, and the Confederacy
lay crushed and dead. With it died
slavery in the United States. The Slavery Question
was, of course, the fons et origo of the war,
but it was by no means the sole, or even the ostensible,
point at issue between North and South.
Nor was anything beyond the mere manumission
of the slave ever involved in the slavery question.
The North did not fight that the manumitted slave
might be placed on terms of perfect equality with
the white man, or even that he might obtain the
franchise. It fought, so far as slavery was concerned,
for manumission, and for nothing else;
and it gained its point. The point is expressed in
the Amendment XIII. to the Constitution, which
declares that “neither slavery nor involuntary
servitude, except as a punishment for crime,
whereof the party shall have been duly convicted,
shall exist within the United States or any
place subject to their jurisdiction.”
20And it may be said at once that there is now
nowhere in the United States any party which
regrets that slavery has been abolished, or which
would restore it to-morrow, even if it were able
to do so by a stroke of the pen. Yet there is,
and always has been, not merely in the South, but
also in the North and West, a very powerful
party which is of opinion that the manumitted
slave and the uneducated negro and coloured man
ought not to be placed on terms of perfect equality
with the white man, and ought not to be permitted
to exercise the franchise. Indeed, the
slave’s emancipation, as well as his citizenship,
was effected as a tribute to military and political,
rather than to moral, exigencies. Writing to
W. S. Speer, on October 23rd, 1860, Mr. Lincoln
said:—
“I appreciate your motive when you suggest the propriety
of my writing for the public something disclaiming all intention
to interfere with slaves or slavery in the States; but in
my judgment it would do no good. I have already done this
many, many times, and it is in print and open to all who
will read.”
And, writing to Mr. Lincoln on December 26th
following, Mr. Seward said:—
“I met on Monday my Republican associates on the
Committee of Thirteen, and afterwards the whole Committee.
With the unanimous consent of our section, I offered three
21propositions which seemed to me to cover the ground of the
suggestion made by you through Mr. Weed, as I understood it.
First, that the Constitution should never be altered so as to
authorise Congress to abolish or interfere with slavery in the
States. This was accepted.”
This attitude of the Republican leaders changed
as the war went on; but even then the giving
to the negro of full political rights and perfect
equality was not contemplated. Amendment
XIII. says nothing on that head, and Mr.
Lincoln, in his last days, expressed himself as
opposed to such a wholesale measure. But, the
South having been conquered, means had to be
devised for keeping it for a time under political
subjection, and no means were more obvious or
ready to hand than, firstly, a military occupation,
with all that such occupation entails; and,
secondly, the extension of the suffrage and of the
full rights of citizenship to the people who, up to
the time of the war, had been slaves. These
people, not two or three per cent. of whom
possessed the simplest rudiments of education,
naturally looked upon the North as a Heavensent
deliverer, and were in consequence anxious,
when they obtained the suffrage, to support
their Northern friends. Thus they were Republicans
almost to a man. The Southern whites
were, and still are, with nearly equal unanimity,
22Democrats. In the North, so far as my observation
enables me to judge, the Republican party
enfolds the majority of the brains and ability of
the population. In the South, beyond all doubt,
the Democratic party is the party of knowledge
and mental power. And in the South, moreover,
so far as educated white men are concerned, it is
practically the only party. There are Southern
Republicans; but they are, almost without exception,
negroes, coloured people, or the lowest and
most ignorant class of whites.
At first, the process of “reconstructing” the
ex-Confederate States was not made to involve the
employment of the liberated slave as an agent for
the subjection of his former master; but as time
went on the black man’s obvious utility was perceived.
The following sketch will show how the
eight old Slave States in which there was, and
still is, the largest negro and coloured element,
passed from the condition in which they found
themselves at the end of the war to the condition
in which they are at the present moment. The
particulars concerning Alabama are mainly summarised
from a paper by Mr. Hilary A. Herbert,
member of Congress for that State; those concerning
North Carolina from a paper by Mr.
Zebulon B. Vance, United States Senator for that
State; those concerning South Carolina from a
23paper by Mr. John J. Hemphill, member of
Congress for that State; those concerning Georgia
from a paper by Mr. Henry G. Turner, member
of Congress for that State; those concerning
Florida from a paper by Mr. Samuel Pasco,
United States Senator for that State; those concerning
Virginia from a paper by Mr. Robert
Stiles, a distinguished Virginian; those concerning
Mississippi from a paper by Mr. Ethelbert
Barksdale, ex-member of Congress for that State;
and those concerning Louisiana from a paper by
Mr. B. J. Sage. These papers, with others, were
collected and published during the past year by
Mr. Hilary A. Herbert at Baltimore, under the
general title of “Why the Solid South?”[3] and
they form, I think, the most instructive key that
has yet been fitted to the great question, “Why
are the United States practically two nations?”
I have had the honour of meeting several of the
writers, and I believe them to be all men of
uprightness and fairness. I have added numerous
illustrative details which have been supplied to
me from other trustworthy sources, which, however,
I need not here catalogue.
3. “Why the Solid South? or, Reconstruction and its Results.”
Baltimore: R. H. Woodward and Co. 1899.
After the close of the war, each of the vanquished
States received from the President a
24provisional governor, who had authority to call
a convention to frame a constitution of government.
The States soon recognised the new
situation. Under the new order of things the
suffrage was still confined to white men, and
senators and representatives were duly elected,
and awaited permission to act. They were
almost all Democrats. This fact had its effect
upon the Republicans, and when the Thirty-ninth
Congress opened in December, 1865, Mr. Thad.
Stevens, who thenceforth took the lead in the
matter, said:—“According to my judgment,
they” (the insurrectionary States) “ought never
to be recognised as capable of acting in the
Union, or of being counted as valid States, until
the Constitution shall have been so amended as
to make it what its makers intended, and so as to
secure perpetual ascendency to the party of the
Union.”
Mr. Stevens’ plans were two—to reduce the representation
to which the late slave-holding States
were entitled under the Constitution, and to enfranchise
blacks and disenfranchise whites. But
even so late as 1865–6 the North was not prepared
to grant negro suffrage. Pennsylvania, Ohio,
Connecticut, and other States, would have none
of it. It was agreed, however, in February,
1866, that neither House should admit any member
25from the late Insurrectionary States until the
report of a joint committee which had been
appointed to consider the question of reconstruction
should be received.
This was a declaration of war upon President
Johnson’s plan of pacification, but President
Johnson did not give way. He vetoed a Bill to
confer many rights—not including suffrage—upon
the freedmen, because, in his opinion, it
was unconstitutional. Then followed the struggle
over the proposed Amendment XIV. to the Constitution,
an amendment which apportioned representatives
in Congress upon the basis of the
voting population, and which provided that no
person should hold office under the United States
who, having taken an oath as a Federal or State
officer to support the Constitution, had subsequently
engaged in war against the Union.
This struggle led to much bad blood, in spite of
the fact that the amendment in its original form
did not pass.
Still worse feeling was stirred up by the
action of the Freedmen’s Bureau agents in the
South. The Freedmen’s Bureau had been established
in 1865 to act as the guardian of freedmen,
with power to make their contracts, settle their
disputes with employers, and care for them
generally. Many of the agents of this Bureau
26traded upon their position, and, with a view to
furthering their own political aspirations, deliberately
fomented race hatreds. They widely
disseminated among the freedmen a belief that
the lands of their former owners were, at least to
some extent, to be divided among the ex-slaves;
and, said General Grant, “the effect of the belief
in the division of lands is idleness and accumulation
in camps, towns, and cities.” A more
salutary lesson would have been that in the sweat
of his face must a man earn his bread; but this
the agents, as a mass, did not teach. On the
contrary, they demoralised the labour situation
in the South, and, later, nearly all of them took
advantage of, and reaped profit from, the demoralisation
which they had created. Their ranks
supplied an enormous number of candidates for
office.
In the meanwhile the joint committee on reconstruction
was at work. It consisted of twelve
Republicans and only three Democrats; and on the
sub-committee, which collected evidence respecting
the condition of Virginia, North Carolina,
South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi,
and Arkansas, there was no Democrat at all.
The situation in those and the other Southern
States was confessedly not good. The ex-Confederate
soldiers had returned home demoralised
27by defeat, and found four millions of slaves
demoralised by sudden manumission and by the
action of the Freedmen’s Bureau agents; and,
naturally, there was much friction between the
races. But the committee’s report of the nature
and amount of that friction was greatly exaggerated.
As to the State of Alabama, only five
witnesses were examined, all of them being
Republican politicians of notoriously partisan
character. These witnesses had everything to
gain and nothing to lose by “reconstruction”;
and, as a matter of fact, when “reconstruction”
followed, one of them became Governor of his
State, a second a Senator in Congress, a third a
permanent official at Washington, a fourth a
Circuit Judge in Alabama, and the fifth a Judge
of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia.
It may not have been propter hoc, but it was
certainly post hoc, and the coincidence is suspicious.
Upon the strength of the report the ex-Confederate
States were held to be out of the Union.
Their exact status remained to be determined by
the voice of the North, as expressed at the polls.
The elections were held in due course; and on
the first Monday in December, 1866, the Republicans
came back to the last session of the Thirty-ninth
Congress flushed with victory. They had
28a majority of thirty-one in the Senate and of
ninety-four in the House.
But President Johnson, with his vetoes, still
stood firm; and “for the purpose of securing the
fruits of the victories gained” the impeachment
of the President was determined upon. I need
not go into the circumstances of that impeachment,
the ultimate excuse for which was the
dismissal of Mr. Stanton from the Secretaryship
of War. Suffice it to say that Congress took
steps for “the extension of the suffrage to the
coloured race in the district of Columbia, both as
a right and as an example.”
Mr. Buckalew, of Pennsylvania, discussing the
Bill, said, fairly enough, “Our ancestors placed
suffrage on the broad common-sense principle
that it should be lodged in, and exercised by,
those who could use it most wisely, and most
safely, and most efficiently to serve the ends for
which Government was instituted,” and “not
upon any abstract or transcendental notion of
human rights which ignored the existing facts of
social life. I shall not vote to degrade suffrage.
I shall not vote to pollute and corrupt the foundations
of political power, either in my own State
or in any other.” On the other hand, Senator
Sumner declared, “Now, to my mind, nothing is
clearer than the absolute necessity of suffrage for
29all coloured persons in the disorganised States.”
(This was in reference to an informal understanding
that the late Confederate States were to share
the fate of the district of Columbia.) “It will
not,” he continued, “be enough if you give it to
those who read and write. You will not in this
way acquire the voting force which you need
there for the protection of Unionists, whether
white or black. You will not secure the new
allies who are essential to the national cause.”
The Bill, thus cynically supported, passed;
but on January 7th, 1867, was vetoed by the
President. The Republican majority, however,
was not to be balked. In spite of the facts that
all resistance to Federal authority in the South
had long since ceased, and that, according to a
decision of Mr. Justice Nelson, of the Supreme
Court, States in which the civil government had
been restored under the pacific Presidential plan
were entitled to all the rights of States in the
Union—in spite of these facts Congress solemnly
decided that the war was not over; and in March,
1867, it passed the celebrated Reconstruction Acts,
in face of the President’s veto. These Acts
annulled the State Governments then in operation;
divided the States into military districts,
and placed them under martial law; enfranchised
the negroes; disenfranchised all, whether pardoned
30or not, who had participated in the war against
the Union, if they had previously held any executive,
legislative, or judicial office under the State
or general Government; and provided for the
calling of conventions, the framing and adopting
of State constitutions, and the election of State
officials. In the interim the military commanders
were given absolute power, death sentences only
being subject to the approval of the President.
This action of the Republicans was far from
being in accordance with the just and statesmanlike
principles of Lincoln, who, writing in 1862
to Governor Shepley, in Louisiana, said that only
respectable citizens of Louisiana, voted for by
other respectable citizens, were wanted as representatives
in Washington. “To send,” he continued,
“a parcel of Northern men here, elected,
as would be understood, and perhaps justly so, at
the point of the bayonet, would be disgraceful
and outrageous.” In less than five years party
spirit had blinded even great Republicans to
these dictates of generosity and far-seeing patriotism.
Garfield so far forgot his usually chivalrous
character as to say exultingly, “This Bill
sets out by laying its hands on the rebel governments
and taking the very breath of life out of
them; in the next place it puts the bayonet at
the breast of every rebel in the South; in the
31next place it leaves in the hands of Congress,
utterly and absolutely, the work of reconstruction.”
Now, indeed, the ex-Confederate States were
about to pay dearly for their faults in the past.
They had fought, and had poured forth blood and
treasure; they had been beaten, and they had
submitted, but they were not forgiven. They
had enslaved the black. Henceforth, for a season,
the black, ignorant, unscrupulous, dissolute, and
corrupt, was to enslave them.
What I have written so far applies equally
to all the Southern States. The miserable
fortunes of each individual State from the time
of the passing of the Reconstruction Acts have
next to be followed. I will endeavour to be
brief, but no study of the negro question in the
United States can, as has been said, be perfect, or
even comprehensible, without some allusion to
the terrible penalty that was exacted from a
brave but vanquished people in and after 1867.
The States were one and all Democratic. By
June, 1868, eight out of the eleven were represented
in both branches of Congress. Of the
representatives, all but two were Republicans; of
the Senators, not one was a Democrat; and one-half
of the whole were Northerners, who had
been elected by means such as Mr. Lincoln, in
321862, had declared to be disgraceful and outrageous.
In 1871, when all the States had been
reconstructed, the South was represented at
Washington by seventy Republicans and only
fifteen Democrats.
RECONSTRUCTION IN ALABAMA.
In Alabama, as elsewhere, a working and
fairly satisfactory Government had been summarily
overthrown by the Reconstruction Acts.
It now made way for a Republican Government
dominated by negroes, most of whom could
neither read nor express an intelligent opinion on
any current topic. The negroes almost to a man
were Republican, and so violent was unreasoning
party feeling among them that a few blacks who
were Democrats were expelled from their
churches. There was a negro majority in the
Convention which was elected in 1867 to frame a
new Constitution; and, although it was required
that for the ratification of the Constitution a
majority of the registered electors of the State
should vote, the new Constitution was ratified by
Congress, in defiance of the fact that the
necessary majority had not voted. Under the
new Constitution began an era of Republican
control of an avowedly Democratic State, with
33twenty-six negroes in the House and one in the
Senate. During this period legislators, as one of
their number is reported to have said, “sold their
votes for prices that would have disgraced a
negro in the time of slavery.” Money was obtained
for public works, but never legitimately
expended, and the only people to profit were
the Northern “carpet-baggers” and the Southern
negroes, many of whom were not even taxpayers.
A state of strife and ill-feeling was
sedulously kept up between the races, and jobbery
and corruption were universal and unveiled.
After the elections of 1872, so outrageous were
the frauds on the part of the managers that both
Democrats and Republicans claimed the victory,
and for a season there were rival Legislatures in
existence. The Democrats, however, submitted,
in presence of United States’ troops.
All kinds of most incompetent men were
appointed to judicial positions. For example, the
first judge of the criminal court at Selma was
one Corbin, an old Virginian, who had never
practised law. Its first clerk was Roderick
Thomas, a coloured man, who until after his
manumission was wholly without education.
When Corbin left the Bench, Thomas succeeded
him, and another coloured man, as ignorant as
Thomas, succeeded to the position of clerk.
34Here is an extract, illustrative of the character of
Corbin, from that eccentric judge’s charge to the
grand jury on July 27th, 1874:—
“Time was, and not very distantly, gentlemen, when this
charge was done up and delivered in grand old style: when
grand old judges, robed in costly black silk gowns and coiffured
with huge old periwigs, swelling out their august personages,
were escorted into the Court-rooms by obsequious sheriffs,
bearing high before them and with stately step their blazoned
insignia of offices.... Fair ladies and courtly old dames
of pinguid proportions, in rich and rustling silk brocades,
flocked to grace the Court-room with their enchanting presence
and to hear the august, gowned, and periwigged old judges
ventilate their classic literature and their cultivated oratory in
the grandiloquent old charge.”
Corbin quarrelled with his party, which got
rid of him. His characteristic comment was that
the Republicans were “a parcel of pigs; as soon
as one got an ear of corn the others took after
him to get it away.”
Such appointments as his were some of the
fruits of ignorant negro dominion in Alabama.
They exasperated the Democrats, who, in spite of
much that is not creditable to them, are, and
ever since the war have been, the most respectable
party in the State. In less than seven years
this negro domination rendered the State bankrupt
and the population furious. The elections
of 1874 were, in consequence, attended by much
35regretable fraud and violence, and, by some
means, a Democratic majority was obtained. It
has kept itself in office ever since; it has remodelled
the Constitution; it has brought back
economy and, I believe, honesty in the administration
of the public funds; it has largely reduced
the State indebtedness, and it has wholly
restored the public credit. It may have gained
and preserved its object by discreditable means,
but it has not abused its power, and to-day, save
for the black shadow of the Race Question,
Alabama flourishes.
RECONSTRUCTION IN NORTH CAROLINA.
North Carolina fared much as did Alabama.
Under the Reconstruction Acts and Amendment
XIV. her most intelligent voters were proscribed,
and power fell into the hands of plunderers and
adventurers. The result of the voting for the
Constitutional Convention in 1867 was that one
hundred and ten Republicans and only ten Democrats
were returned by a notoriously Democratic
State; and the new Constitution of 1868 introduced
an era of despotism and fraud. The
negroes were permitted to vote before they were
legally entitled to the suffrage, and in the new
Senate there were thirty-eight Republicans and
36twelve Democrats, while in the House there were
eighty Republicans and forty Democrats. Several
of the negro members of the Legislature were
unable to read. At every opportunity these men
robbed the State and trifled with its credit. There
was open corruption and universal bribery. There
was formed a political “ring,” which demanded,
and generally received, 10 per cent. on all appropriations
passed by the Legislature. Lavish
entertainments were given and paid for out of
public money. “A regular bar was established
in the Capitol, and it was said that, with somewhat
less publicity, some of its rooms were devoted
to the purposes of prostitution. Decency fled
abashed; the spectacle of coarse, ignorant negroes
sitting at table, drinking champagne and smoking
Havannah cigars, was not uncommon.
“I cannot refrain,” continues Mr. Vance,
“from telling a story which I have heard of one,
old ‘Cuffy,’ who was a member of that body,
and a shining light in the movement of progress—one
who, in the language of Mr. Hoar, had his
‘face turned towards the morning light.’ A
friend, going to see him one night at his rooms,
found him sitting at a table, by the dim light of
a tallow dip, laboriously counting a pile of money,
and chuckling to himself. ‘Why,’ said his visitor,
‘what amuses you so, Uncle Cuffy?’ ‘Well,
37boss,’ he replied, grinning from ear to ear, ‘I’se
been sold in my life ’leven times, an’, fo’ de
Lord, dis is de fust time I eber got de money.’”
The boldness of the robbers of the State was
extraordinary. On one occasion they obtained
authority for an issue of bonds to the amount
of nearly £3,000,000 sterling, for the construction
of a railway. These bonds were all
issued, but not so much as a single yard of the
line was ever laid down. Yet the people submitted
patiently, until what was known as the
Schoffner Act was passed. This, under the
pretence of suppressing internal disorders, authorised
the Governor, at his discretion, to declare
any county in a state of insurrection, to proclaim
martial law, and to try accused persons by drumhead
court-martial. It also authorised the raising
of two regiments of troops, one of which was
composed of negroes, and the other of which was
made up of white desperadoes, under the command
of the infamous Kirk. The proceedings under
this Act were of such a terrorising nature that the
whole country took alarm. Many Republicans,
black and white, joined the Democrats; at the
elections of 1870, after a shorter reconstruction
period than fell to the lot of many other States,
the Democrats successfully reasserted themselves,
and North Carolina was redeemed. She has not
38since recovered her financial position, but she
bids fair to do so.
RECONSTRUCTION IN SOUTH CAROLINA.
So cruelly did South Carolina suffer during the
era of reconstruction, and so completely was she
abased, that before the period of her sufferings
ended she became known as the “Prostrate
State.” Her best white citizens being disfranchised,
she could not make her real voice
heard, and, in 1867, the election of delegates to
the Convention for the framing of a new constitution
for her resulted in the return of sixty-three
negroes or coloured people and but thirty-four
whites. The latter were, almost without
exception, either Northern adventurers or Southern
renegades; the former were, as a body, as ignorant
as it is possible to conceive. In 1868 the constitution
which had been drawn up by this strange
Convention was adopted, chiefly upon the strength
of the votes of the negroes who were not then
legally enfranchised, but who, nevertheless, were
encouraged by the Republican managers to go to
the polls.
Under the new constitution a General Assembly
was elected. It included seventy-two whites
and eighty-five coloured men or negroes, and of
39the total number one hundred and thirty-six were
Republicans and only twenty-one Democrats.
All this happened in spite of the fact that Amendment
XV. to the United States Constitution, the
amendment which conferred the franchise upon
the negro, was not ratified until March 30, 1870.
General R. K. Scott, of Ohio, an ex-officer of
the Freedmen’s Bureau, was chosen Governor,
and, almost immediately, the black majority,
assisted by the white Republican carpet-baggers,
began to tyrannise over the white Democrats,
and to exploit the State in their own private
interests.
An Act passed in 1869 abolished the long-established
rule of evidence that all men shall
be considered innocent until proved guilty, and
expressly directed that if the person whose
rights under the Act were alleged to have been
denied happened to be coloured, then the burden
of proof would be on the defendant; so that any
person or corporation named in the Act, if simply
accused by a person of colour, was thereby to be
presumed to be guilty, and was liable to be subjected
to heavy penalties upon this mere accusation,
without a particle of proof by the plaintiff
or any other witness.
As for the extravagance of the new rulers, it
was unlimited. When they first met in legislative
40assembly, in 1868, they used the same building
which the whites had occupied before them, and
they furnished it inexpensively. But as soon as
they realised their power, they exhibited their
luxurious tastes, and furnished anew the legislative
halls in the State House. For clocks that had
cost 8s. 6d. they substituted clocks that cost £120;
for spittoons that had cost 1s. 8d. they substituted
spittoons that cost £1 14s.; for benches that had
cost 16s. 6d. they substituted crimson sofas that
cost £40; for chairs that had cost 4s. 2d. they
substituted crimson plush gothic chairs that cost
£12; for desks that had cost £2 they substituted
desks that cost £35; and for looking-glasses that
had cost 16s. 6d. they substituted mirrors that
cost £120. The furnishing of the hall of the
House of Representatives of this impoverished
State cost £19,000. The same hall has recently
been very nicely refurnished for £612. At
least forty bed-rooms were furnished at the
public expense, some of them three times over.
A restaurant was also maintained in one of the
committee rooms of the Capitol at Columbia,
and there officials and their friends and relatives
helped themselves, without stint, to food, liquors,
and cigars, at the cost of the taxpayer. For
six years this restaurant was kept open every
day from eight o’clock on one morning until
41three o’clock on the next. In a single session
the restaurant swallowed up £25,000.
Nor was this by any means all. In 1873 Mr.
J. S. Pike, late United States Minister to Holland,
a Republican, and originally a staunch Abolitionist,
wrote a little book[4] on the situation
in South Carolina. His testimony cannot be
challenged. He, at least, was no Southern
Democrat, full of hatred to “niggers,” and to
all the works of the North; and the picture
that he painted is one which shows corruption,
extravagance, and legislative wickedness such as
never prevailed even in Hayti in its worst days.
Describing “A Black Parliament,” he says:—
“Here, then, is the outcome, the ripe, perfected fruit of
the boasted civilisation of the South after 200 years of experience.
A white community that had gradually risen from
small beginnings till it grew into wealth, culture, and refinement,
and became accomplished in all the arts of civilisation;
that successfully asserted its resistance to a foreign tyranny
by deeds of conspicuous valour; that achieved liberty and independence
through the fire and tempest of civil war, and
illustrated itself in the councils of the nation by orators and
statesmen worthy of any age or nation—such a community is
then reduced to this. It lies prostrate in the dust, ruled over
by this strange conglomerate, gathered from the ranks of its
own servile population.... In the place of this old
aristocratic society stands the rude form of the most ignorant
42democracy that mankind ever saw invested with the functions
of government. It is the dregs of the population habited in
the robes of their intelligent predecessors, and asserting over
them the rule of ignorance and corruption through the inexorable
machinery of a majority of numbers. It is barbarism
overwhelming civilisation by physical force.... We will
enter the House of Representatives. Here sit 124 members;
of these twenty-three are white men, representing the remains
of the old civilisation.... These twenty-three white
men are but the observers, the enforced auditors, of the dull
and clumsy imitation of a deliberative body, whose appearance
in their present capacity is at once a wonder and a shame to
modern civilisation.... The Speaker is black, the clerk
is black, the door-keepers are black, the little pages are black,
the Chairman of the Ways and Means is black, and the
chaplain is coal-black. At some of the desks sit coloured men
whose types it would be hard to find outside of Congo; whose
costumes, visages, attitudes, and expressions only befit the
forecastle of a buccaneer.”
Such were the rulers of a State that then
contained over 300,000 white men and women.
In 1869 an exclusively coloured militia was
organised, and, by the end of 1870, 96,000 men
were enrolled in it. To fourteen regiments of
these men arms and ammunition were issued
before the re-election of General Scott in 1870;
they officially attended political meetings and were
paid for their services there, and they were confessedly
enrolled and used for political purposes.
An armed constabulary was maintained for the
43same objects. On June 25, 1870, J. W. Anderson,
a deputy-constable, reported to his chief:—
“We can carry the county (York) if we get constables
enough, by encouraging the militia, and
frightening the poor white men. I am going
into the campaign for Scott.” And on July
8, 1870, Joseph Crews, a deputy-constable, reported
from Laurens county:—“We are going to
have a hard campaign up here, and we must have
more constables. I will carry the election here
with the militia if the constables will work with
me. I am giving out ammunition all the time.
Tell Scott he is all right here now.” Again,
testifying before a legislative committee in 1877,
J. B. Hubbard, the Chief Constable, said:—
“It was understood that by arming the coloured militia
and keeping some of the most influential officers under pay, a
full vote would be brought out for the Republicans, and the
Democracy, or many of the weak-kneed Democrats, intimidated.
At the time the militia was organised, there was, comparatively
speaking, but little lawlessness. The militia, being organised
and armed, caused an increase of crime and bloodshed in
most of the counties, in proportion to their numbers and the
number of arms and amount of ammunition furnished them.”
Governor Scott spent £75,000 of public
money in the advancement of his candidature,
and his majority of 30,000 votes was due entirely
to terrorism and bribery. In 1871 it
44was discovered that the Financial Board had
illegally issued several millions of State bonds,
and there was a movement for the impeachment
of Scott, who was a member of the Board. To
save himself Scott issued three warrants upon
the Armed Force Fund, leaving the amounts
blank, and gave them to two of his political
associates. The warrants were afterwards filled
up for £9,729, and the money was used to bribe
members of the Legislature, the result being that
the Governor escaped. In the meantime, so outrageous
was the waste of public money, and so
unabashed the general corruption, that several outbreaks
occurred. These were suppressed by a
suspension in certain counties of the writ of habeas
corpus; but there is no doubt that they represented
chiefly the efforts of honest citizens to protect
themselves when they found that the Government
did not protect them.
Mr. Franklin J. Moses, jun., succeeded General
Scott as Governor, in 1872; and under him corruption
grew more rampant than ever. Writing
soon after that person had assumed office, Mr.
J. S. Pike said:—
“The whole of the late Administration ... was a
morass of rottenness, and the present Administration was
born of the corruptions of that.... There seems to be
no hope, therefore, that the villainies of the past will be
45speedily uncovered. The present Governor was Speaker of the
last House, and he is credited with having issued during his
term of office over $400,000 (£80,000) of pay certificates,
which are still unredeemed and for which there is no appropriation,
but which must be saddled on the taxpayers sooner or
later.... Taxation is not in the least diminished; and
nearly $2,000,000 per annum are raised for State expenses
where $400,000 formerly sufficed.... The new Governor
has the reputation of spending $30,000 to $40,000 a year on a
salary of $3,500; but his financial operations are taken as a
matter of course, and only referred to with a slight shrug
of the shoulders.... The total amount of the stationery
bill of the House for the twenty years preceding 1861 averaged
$400 (£80) per annum. Last year it was $16,000 (£3,200)....
It is bad enough to have the decency and intelligence
and property of the State subjected to the domination of its
ignorant black pauper multitude, but it becomes unendurable
when to that ignorance the worst vices are superadded.”
Moses’s rule was far worse than Scott’s.
There was more waste, more corruption, and
more lawlessness. In 1874 a committee was
appointed to represent the state of affairs to the
President; but Moses and his fellows learnt betimes
of this intention, and, having misappropriated
£500 of public money for the purpose,
were able to checkmate the move. It is impossible
here to go into details of the various
legislative and political scandals of the period.
So venal was Moses, and so notoriously did he
sell his power, that, more than once, judges
46announced from the bench their unwillingness to
put the people to the expense and trouble of convicting
criminals for the Governor to pardon.
Governor D. H. Chamberlain, a well-meaning
and honest Republican, succeeded this miscreant
in 1874; yet he proved too weak to control his
party. Owing to the action of a remnant of
Scott’s negro militia, a bloody riot occurred in
Edgefield county in January, 1875; and in his
treatment of this event, as well as in his attempts
to lessen the public expenditure, Mr. Chamberlain
showed that he was animated by the best
desires; but in 1875 his efforts to ensure the
purity and integrity of the Bench were circumvented
by a conspiracy among his followers; and
among the judges then chosen was the infamous
ex-Governor Moses. Mr. Chamberlain refused
to commission him, and the man never served.
The circumstances of his choice, however, aroused
the country, and determined the people to oust
the Republicans. At the elections of 1876 they
chose as their Governor General Wade Hampton,
and put Democrats and white men into all official
and representative positions. In this election
there were fraud and violence on both sides;
but, while the Democrats were fighting for their
liberty, and almost for their lives, the Republicans
were fighting mainly for office alone. And
47the victors have not, upon the whole, abused their
victory. They have introduced administrative
economy; they have restored the credit of their
State; they have cared for education and general
progress; and they have brought back a fair measure
of peace and a large one of prosperity.
And here I should add one word more concerning
Moses. After his fall from power he became
a criminal of the vulgarest character. In
1881 he was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment
for fraud to the amount of $25; in 1884 he
was sentenced to three months’ imprisonment for
swindling; in 1885 he was sentenced to six
months’ imprisonment for fraud to the amount of
$34; and in the same year he was sent to prison
for three years for five other fraudulent transactions.
After his release he was arrested for stealing
overcoats from the hall of a New York house.
He was apparently an incorrigible scoundrel first
and last.
In 1877 a committee was appointed by the
Legislature of South Carolina to inquire into and
report upon the scandals of the period from 1867
to 1876. I cannot resist the temptation of
making a few extracts from the report:—
“If the simple statement was made that Senators and
Members of the House were furnished with everything they
48desired, from swaddling clothes and cradle to the coffin of the
undertaker, from brogans to chignons, from finest extracts to
best wines and liquors, and that all was paid for by the State,
it would create a smile of doubt and derision; but when we
make the statement, and prove it by several witnesses and by
vouchers found in the offices of the Clerks of the Senate and
House, all must, with sorrow, admit the truthfulness of the
report.
“A. O. Jones, Clerk of the House, testifies that supplies
were furnished under the head of ‘legislative expenses,’
‘sundries,’ and ‘stationery,’ and included refreshments for
committee rooms, groceries, clocks, horses, carriages, dry goods,
furniture of every description, and miscellaneous articles of
merchandise for the personal use of the members.
“It is shown that on March 4, 1872, Solomon furnished the
Senate with $1,631 worth of wines and liquors, and on the 7th
day of the same month with $1,852 75c. worth.
“Whilst fraud, bribery, and corruption were rife in every
department of the State Government, nothing equalled the
infamy attending the management of public printing....
From 1868 to 1876 the sums paid for public printing
amounted to $1,326,589 (£265,318)—a sum largely in excess
of the cost of public printing from the establishment of the
State Government up to 1868.... The public printing
in this State cost $450,000 (£90,000) in one year, and exceeded
the cost of like work in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania,
Ohio, Maryland, and New York by $122,932 (£24,588).”
The Committee gives a list of the names of
twenty-two Senators and Representatives who
received sums varying from £10 to £1,000 under
what was called the “division and silence
arrangement,” and it also gives a list of those
49who were bribed to vote for these enormous
appropriations. Governor Moses received £4,000,
Mr. Cardozo (treasurer) received £2,500, and so
on. It is not surprising that under so iniquitous
a system the State printing bill, which, during
the seventy-eight years ending 1868 had been
but £121,800, mounted up in the eight years
(1868–76) to £265,318. During the negro-Republican
era of reconstruction South Carolina’s
monthly printing bill averaged £11,133; during
General Wade Hampton’s administration it averaged
£103.
RECONSTRUCTION IN GEORGIA.
In Georgia the reconstruction period was
likewise full of fraud and corruption. In one
short session the pay and mileage allowances of
members and officers of the General Assembly
amounted to $979,055, or £195,811, and there
were no fewer than one hundred and four clerks,
or nearly one clerk to every two members. Between
1868 and 1870 the State debt increased
from $5,827,000 to $18,183,000, and the State
bonds became almost unmarketable, while all
public works either fell to ruin or were “run”
by, and mainly for the benefit of, unscrupulous
adventurers of the worst type. During
50his term of three years Governor Bullock, the
Reconstruction Governor, pardoned three hundred
and forty-six offenders against the law, some of
whom actually received pardon before trial.
Indeed, seven pardons before trial were granted
to one man, who pleaded them to seven separate
indictments. The elections of December, 1870,
put an end to this. The Democratic victory was
overwhelming, and, before the Deputies of the
people could confront him, Bullock had resigned
office and fled the State. Since that moment
prosperity has revived.
RECONSTRUCTION IN FLORIDA.
In Florida, the first Reconstruction Governor,
Harrison Reed, very nearly doubled the State
expenditure during his four years of office. Railway
and legislative scandals were common. From
Governor downwards every official seemed to be
equally corrupt and equally devoid of patriotism.
On one occasion an Act of the Legislature was
forged; and, armed with it, the Governor claimed,
but failed to obtain, some agricultural land scrip
that was in the hands of the Treasury at Washington.
The ballot-boxes were tampered with, and
the election returns falsified. In the meantime
the State Treasury was often so empty that even
51telegraph charges could not be paid. The second
Reconstruction Governor, O. B. Hart, who assumed
office in 1873, realised the deplorable
condition of affairs, but proved powerless to effect
reforms. People were kidnapped, really that
they might be unable to vote, but professedly
in order that they might appear as witnesses in
distant courts of justice. A similar process was,
on at least one occasion, applied to members of
the State Senate, two of whom were arrested and
carried to Jacksonville, in order that they might
not imperil by their votes the nefarious schemes
of their Republican colleagues. The elections of
1876 placed the Democrats in power and introduced
a new and more reputable era.
RECONSTRUCTION IN VIRGINIA.
During the reconstruction period Virginia’s
sufferings were less painful and considerably
briefer than were those of most of the other old
slave States with which I am dealing. Such
misfortunes as she experienced were attributable,
nevertheless, to causes exactly the same as those
which brought South Carolina to the lowest
depths of misery and degradation. In Virginia,
as elsewhere, the reconstruction laws disfranchised
the majority of the best native whites and
52handed over the country to the tender mercies of
ignorant blacks, prompted by unscrupulous carpet-baggers.
Yet in Virginia the process known as
reconstruction seems to have been singularly
uncalled for save as a purely party measure. It
was not needed for the protection of the negroes.
Professor Alexander Johnston, in the “Cyclopædia
of Political Science,” calls attention to the
conspicuous equity of the Virginia statute, made
after the war but before reconstruction, for the
regulation of contracts between blacks and whites.
Reconstruction was needed only for the preservation
of Republican power. It ended in 1870,
but while it lasted it had a very bad effect upon
all the institutions of the State, and especially
upon the judiciary. Says Mr. Robert Stiles:—“The
writer has appeared in a circuit court of
Virginia before a bench upon which sat a so-called
Judge, who had the day before been a
clerk in a village grocery store, and who was not
better fitted for the dignity and duty devolved
upon him than the average grocery clerk would
be.”
RECONSTRUCTION IN MISSISSIPPI.
In Mississippi the period was much longer and
much more severe and stormy. It was Mr. John
Q. Adams, of Massachusetts, who, describing
53the treatment during this time of the vanquished
and resigned Southerners, said that the
Northerners scorned the protests of the ex-Confederates,
“repelled their aid, insulted their
misery, and inflicted on them an abasement which
they felt to be intolerable in posting over them
their slaves of yesterday to secure their pledge
of submission to the Constitution of the United
States.” The South, therefore, was by no means
alone in feeling that she was aggrieved.
In Mississippi, as in other States, a Convention
met after the passing of the Reconstruction Acts
to draw up a new State Constitution. The Convention
was of the usual “black and tan” complexion,
and in the qualities of ignorance, corruption,
and depravity was almost all that the
imagination can conceive. “It was,” says Mr.
Ethelbert Barksdale, “a fool’s paradise for the
negroes, who undertook to perform what they
were incapable of doing; and, as to their mercenary
white leaders, the stream of purpose which
ran through all their actions was plunder and
revenge. Not one of the authors and abettors of
the plan was actuated by a higher motive than
party success. Not one of them believed that it
would promote the restoration of the Union to
substitute the rule of knaves and negroes for the
State Governments which they had overthrown.
54They knew the depravity of the white renegades
whom they had commissioned to do this work,
and they knew, to employ the language of a
Northern statesman and Union soldier, that
‘in the whole historic period of the world the
negro race had never established or maintained
a Government for themselves.’”
The Convention was very deliberate in its
action. Its members lived in a state of luxury
unknown to their previous habits. They voted
themselves $10 (£2) a day, and paid their
innumerable hangers-on correspondingly high
wages; and, although the body cost about
£100,000 sterling while it sat, it would have cost
far more but for the inexorable attitude of the
commanding general, who, in the interregnum,
was practically dictator.
The Constitution which the Convention drew
up was promptly rejected at the polls, and was
only ratified in a modified form upon the holding
of a second election in 1869. As originally
devised it would have excluded half the intelligent
white population from all offices, and would
even have actually and permanently disfranchised
anyone who during the war had charitably
contributed to the relief of sick and suffering
Confederate soldiers.
The first election under the Amended Constitution
55returned a Legislature four-fifths composed
of negroes and carpet-baggers, and the negroes
had a majority. The immediate consequences
were that corruption began to regulate every
public and legislative transaction, and that the
State started on a career which led it with daily
accelerating speed in the direction of ruin.
Within six years 6,400,000 acres of land were
adjudged forfeited for non-payment of the taxes
which were necessary to support the extravagance
and folly of the ruling clique. Thenceforward,
until, at least, these lands were redeemed, taxation
fell with correspondingly increased weight upon
the rest of the unfortunate State. And so matters
went from bad to worse until, after years of
tyranny, waste, and extravagance on the part of
their governors, the whites could submit no
longer.
From a taxpayers’ petition addressed to the
Legislature on January 4th, 1875, I extract the
following:—
“To show the extraordinary and rapid increase of taxation
imposed on this impoverished people, these particulars are
cited:—In 1869 the State levy was 10 cents on the hundred
dollars of assessed value of lands. For the year 1871 it was
four times as great. For 1872 it was four times as great.
For the year 1873 it was eight and a half times as great. For
the year 1874 it was fourteen times as great.... In
56many counties the increase in the county levies has been still
greater.”
At this crisis Mr. George E. Harris, a Republican
ex-Attorney-General and member of Congress,
wrote:—“The people are in a state of exasperation,
and in their poverty and desperation they
are in arms against the burden of taxes levied and
collected on their property.” But the petition
was laughed at by those who were profiting by
the misery of the citizens. The people, therefore,
roused themselves, and, partially, it may
be, by violence and fraud, but wholly in self-defence,
rescued the State at the elections of 1875
from its abasement. Since then there has been
no important break in the steady financial, agricultural,
educational, and industrial improvement
of Mississippi.
RECONSTRUCTION IN LOUISIANA.
Louisiana, alas, fared much worse than Mississippi—worse,
in fact, than any of the old slave
States; for even in South Carolina the agony was
not so bloody.
The Constitutional Convention of 1867 was
elected on a registration list which had been so
manipulated as to show only 45,218 white voters
to 84,436 black ones; and at the legislative
57elections of 1868 the successful candidates were
chiefly negroes. Indeed, in the Senate there
were but about half a dozen whites.
To the summit of this mass of ignorance and
corruption a creature named Henry C. Warmoth
at once climbed. By arts which can best be compared
with those of the political schemer in a
burlesque, he had already ingratiated himself
with the negroes; and he had little difficulty in
inducing his protégés to make him the first Reconstruction
Governor of Louisiana.
Warmoth originally went to Louisiana in the
Federal Army, from which he is said to have
been dismissed for good cause. He should appear
in history as one of the very worst of the
carpet-baggers; yet he was a man of, in some
respects, a remarkable character. From his
earliest assumption of power he took measures
not merely to render himself supreme, but also to
render himself irremovable. He was “inaugurated”
in July, 1868. Democratic members of
the Legislature were, with very few exceptions,
excluded by the operation of a test oath imposed
by the majority; all election machinery and the
disposal of nearly all important offices were entrusted
to the hands and sole will of the
Governor; and a Board of Registration was
appointed, the object of which was to ensure that
58elections should result favourably to the party in
power. Warmoth, whenever he made a considerable
appointment, adopted the precaution of
simultaneously obtaining from the appointee a
resignation in blank; so that rebellious or
troublesome officials could always be summarily
got rid of by the simple act on the part of the
Governor of filling up the blank forms. So complete
in time became Warmoth’s system that,
says Mr. B. J. Sage, “a practically unanimous
people could not have driven the Republicans out,
save by a popular uprising.”
Of the members of the Legislature only ten
among the dominant party were taxpayers; and,
consequently, the House was not in the slightest
degree of sympathy with the people, who soon
began to be burdened with a taxation such as had
before been undreamt of. Corruption and bribery
reigned supreme, “and the knaves, to avoid
any possible danger, refused to pass any bribery
law, so that it was no crime to bribe a public
official.” To assist himself and his fellows in controlling
elections, Warmoth raised what was in
fact, though not in name, a standing army, and
subsequently a small fleet; and he caused the
establishment in all parishes of Republican newspaper
organs, to the conductors of which was
given a monopoly of printing the laws and public
59advertisements. The State expenditure rose to
five times its normal level; the cost of the short
session of 1871 amounted to £1,230 sterling per
legislator; and the State debt, of course, increased
rapidly and alarmingly, until proportionately to
the population it became, within only a year and
a half, very much larger than that of any State in
the Union. Bonds were issued for all kinds of
fraudulent objects—many at a rate as high as 8 per
cent.; and all sorts of valuable privileges and
franchises were given away to the favourites of
the men in power. In fact, the State was plundered
wholesale and in every direction. It is
calculated that Louisiana was the loser in these
years of the equivalent of about £24,000,000
sterling, or of more than half the total estimated
wealth of the State.
Warmoth’s own share of the spoils was large,
but its exact amount can never be ascertained.
Up to the time of his accession the average
printing expenses of the State had been about
$37,000 (£7,400 a year). During the first two
years and a half of Warmoth’s rule the New
Orleans Republican, in which he was the principal
shareholder, received $1,140,881 (£228,170) for
public printing. Warmoth also took upon himself
the appointment of the judges—from whom
he exacted the usual blank resignations; and thus
60with an army, a navy, a press, a bench, a legislature,
and election managers all securely, as he
believed, tethered to his chariot, he was absolute
dictator.
He found his justification in the elections of
1870, which went exactly as he willed them to go.
Not even Lopez in Paraguay was more powerful
than Warmoth in Louisiana. “But,” says Mr.
Sage, “over the spoils arose the inevitable quarrel,
and the two factions that formed went heartily
into their only good work, which was to acquaint
Louisiana and the world with their rascalities
and infamy, and make manifest the gross wrong
of Congressional reconstruction.” For over two
years the Warmothites and the anti-Warmothites
fought, often in arms, frequently with much
bloodshed; and in 1872–73 the State was in a
condition of disgraceful anarchy, which was in
nowise ended by the substitution of Pinchback,
the Lieutenant Governor, for Warmoth, and by
the impeachment of the latter; for by that time
another Governor, who claimed to have been
properly elected, was in the field in the person of
Mr. W. P. Kellogg. Kellogg was sustained by
United States troops; but, although there were
many riots and much bloodshed on his behalf, he
was never popularly recognised. In one riot
alone sixty-three persons were killed.
61Kellogg was worse even than Warmoth had
been. In 1874 the whites organised themselves
for their protection under the style of the White
League. Their attempt to arm themselves led to
a bloody battle at New Orleans, in which forty
people were killed and 100 wounded. Immediately
afterwards Kellogg was overthrown; but he
was re-seated by the Federal forces. At the 1874
elections the Democratic whites again swept the
State; but Warmoth’s cunningly devised Returning
Board, which still existed, neutralised the
results by summarily rejecting nearly half the
successful opposition candidates, and by thus
manufacturing another Republican Legislature.
Indeed, a number of Democratic members of the
House were actually arrested by Federal troops.
A Congressional Committee, it is true, afterwards
recognised the illegality of these acts, and reinstated
a majority of the Democrats, but the policy
of the committee did not reconcile the State with
Kellogg and with his numerous other enormities.
For example, the Governor illegally arrested between
500 and 600 persons at various times,
generally on blank warrants; and in every instance
in which any of these cases were investigated
in Court the charges were dismissed.
The struggle of 1874 had not satisfied Kellogg
that there was a point beyond which he should
62not go in his requests for Federal assistance. He
determined to make further requests, with a view
to securely intrenching his party during the
elections of 1876. Once more, however, and in
spite of wholesale bribery on the other side, the
Democrats swept the State; and again the results
were neutralised by the operations of the old
infamous Returning Board. Renewed anarchy,
with two Governors and two Governments,
followed. One Government—that of Packard,
the Republican leader—was unable, nevertheless,
to exercise even a vestige of authority outside
the State House, which, crowded with people,
lay in a state of siege, in spite of the fact that
small-pox had broken out there. Packard waited
for the active Federal support which had never
been refused to Kellogg, but he waited in vain;
and when, after months of hesitation, the President
withdrew the National troops, Packard and his
Government collapsed. Governor Nicholls, a
Democrat, then assumed full authority; and from
that day Louisiana has formed part of the “solid”
Democratic South.
And here let it not be forgotten that public
gambling and public lotteries owed their establishment
in Louisiana to Warmoth. The gambling
has since been abolished; the Louisiana lottery,
owing to its having been granted a twenty-five
63years’ charter, still exists to remind the world of
the evil methods of the period of reconstruction.
Warmoth himself said of the Legislature which
he had caused to be elected in 1870:—“There is
but one honest man in it,” and to a delegation he
cynically remarked, “Corruption is the fashion;
I do not pretend to be honest, but only as honest
as anybody in politics.”
I might also trace the history of reconstruction
in Tennessee, in West Virginia, in Missouri, and
in Arkansas; but I am chiefly confining my
attention to those Southern States which constitute
the “Black Belt”—the district, that is,
throughout which blacks and whites are nearly
evenly balanced, and in which there are particular
commonwealths containing more blacks than
whites. Moreover, on this branch of the subject
I have written enough, I believe, to show reason,
if not to show excuse, for the political feeling
which occupies the first place in the heart of
every Southern white man.
That feeling is, by itself, a political creed
stronger than the creed of Republican or of
Democrat; and it may be thus formulated. You
have freed our slaves, and, far from regretting,
we rejoice in what you have done. Without
properly consulting us, you have given those
64ex-slaves the suffrage and civil rights. There, we
think, you have greatly erred. While we will
admit that some negroes and coloured people are
fit to exercise the suffrage, we are of opinion that
the vast majority of them, owing as well to
natural lack of mental ballast as to ignorance, are
incapable of exercising the suffrage to their own
best welfare, to the benefit of the white people
among whom they live, and to the general advantage
of the nation. Apart from this opinion of
ours, and quite regardless of the question whether
that opinion be sound or not, we are steadfastly
determined never again to submit to any form,
direct or indirect, of negro government. We
have experienced a form of such government
during the Reconstruction Era. In those days
the chief sufferers were ourselves, and the chief
gainers were, not the negroes, who, like machines,
registered the desires of their patrons, but the
unscrupulous whites who exploited the negroes.
We intend, therefore, to risk no more of that
kind of thing. Here and there the negroes may
be more numerous than we whites. It must
make no difference. The white must rule, no
matter at what cost. You shall never again,
while we exist, compel us to relinquish that
determination. Our view does not, it may be,
accord with the principles of your Amendment
65XV., but it accords with our ideas of the minimum
of social comfort and security, and we intend
steadfastly to adhere to it, even if adherence
should cost us blood and treasure and much more
that we hold dear. You Northerners have never
known any form of negro domination, and have
never been in danger of it. Indeed, you know
little about the negro. We have to live with him,
and we are familiar with his failings as well as
with his virtues. Our knowledge tells us that it
would be suicidal folly to entrust ourselves, our
families, and our fortunes to his political discretion.
You think otherwise; but do not, we
pray you, ever attempt to make us practise in all
their fulness your very humane theories. We
would rather die at once. Congress, we know,
once passed a Civil Rights Bill, which directed
“that all persons within the jurisdiction of the
United States should be entitled to the full and
equal enjoyment of the accommodations, advantages,
facilities, and privileges of inns, public
conveyances on land or water, theatres, and other
places of amusement, subject only to the conditions
and limitations established by law, and
applicable alike to citizens of every race and
colour, regardless of any previous condition of
servitude.” That was very well in theory, but
the Act has been held by the United States
66Supreme Court to be unconstitutional, and, in
any case, you must never ask us to accept it.
There are occasions when we cannot admit that
whites and blacks are equal.
The above position is one upon which the
whites of the South are, as I convinced myself
during my stay and inquiries here, practically
unanimous. It is a position of danger, for it is a
position of covert, if not open, hostility to the
spirit of laws of the Union. A strict and rigid
enforcement of those laws, supposing that it could
be attempted, would, there is no doubt, create an
exceedingly grave crisis. On the other hand,
there is, or may be, danger in the fact that the
negro as a citizen does not get all that to which
he is legally entitled. How he is deprived of
very much that the law affects to give him will
be the subject of the next chapter.
CHAPTER III. THE EX-SLAVE AS HE IS.
67
The main outlines of the rights of the negro in
the United States are laid down in Amendments
XIII., XIV., and XV. to the American Constitution.
Says Amendment XIII., “Neither
slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a
punishment for crime whereof the party shall
have been duly convicted, shall exist within the
United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”
Says Amendment XIV., “All persons
born or naturalised in the United States, and
subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of
the United States and of the State wherein they
reside. No State shall make or enforce any law
which shall abridge the privileges or immunities
of citizens of the United States; nor shall any
State deprive any person of life, liberty, or
property without due process of law, nor deny to
any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection
of the laws.” And, says Amendment
XV., “The right of the citizens of the United
68States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by
the United States, or any State, on account of
race, colour, or previous condition of servitude.”
Such is roughly the American charter of the
black and coloured man’s liberties.
The Civil Rights Bill, passed by Congress in
1875, went further, and, as I have said, declared
that “All persons within the jurisdiction of the
United States shall be entitled to the full and
equal enjoyment of the accommodations, advantages,
facilities, and privilege of inns, public conveyances
on land or water, theatres, and other
places of amusement, subject only to the conditions
and limitations established by law, and
applicable alike to citizens of every race and
colour, regardless of any previous condition of
servitude.” But this measure was held by the
United States Supreme Court to be unconstitutional;
and I only again cite its first section here
in order to show, in all completeness, what the
negro in America wants and is struggling for,
and what his most enthusiastic friends in the
North would give him if they had it in their
power to give.
It is because he is not given these rights, and
because some of the rights which are given to
him in law are withheld from him in practice,
that the Race Question is to-day one of towering
69importance in America. If the American white
were able to frankly make up his mind to accept
the negro as in all respects his political and social
equal, the whole question would vanish, and the
two races might, in course of time, become one.
But the American white, it is absolutely certain,
will never adopt this solution of the difficulty.
He will not frankly accept the negro as his equal
at the polls, in society, in the court of law, or in
the school. He holds that the negro is physically
and intellectually inferior in the scale of
humanity; and he points, with a gesture that
forbids argument, to the differences that exist
between the Caucasian and the Caucasian’s
“brother in black.”
Am I, he asks, to admit my equality with a
being who more nearly approaches the quadrumana
than does any other member of the human
family; with a being whose arms are, on an
average, two inches longer than mine? Am I to
admit my equality with a being whose facial
angle is about 70 deg., while mine is about
82 deg.? Am I to admit my equality with a
being the average weight of whose brain is ten
ounces less than that of people of my own
family? Is it a matter of insignificance that he
is black while I am white; that his eyes have a
yellowish sclerotic coat; that his nose is short,
70depressed, and dilated; that he has high and
prominent cheek-bones; that his cranium is much
thicker than mine; that he has a low instep and
a “lark heel”; that his head is covered not with
hair but with wool of nearly flat section; that
his skin is thicker than mine, and that, it is
velvety and emits a characteristic odour; that
his frame, owing to structural peculiarities, is
not as erect as mine; or that the cranial sutures
of the negro close up much earlier than those
of the white man?
FACIAL ANGLES OF THE WHITE AND NEGRO RACES.
These points of difference, and many more,
are ever before the eye and in the mind of the
American white in the South. I am not concerned
to say whether or not the white man pays
71exaggerated attention to them. I can only
declare that, influenced, rightly or wrongly, by
his observations and his prejudices, the white
Southerner has impregnably determined that, in
spite of anything that Constitutional Amendments
and State legislation may hint to the
contrary, the negro on American soil occupies an
inferior position, and that he must never be
allowed to trespass beyond it.
I have already incidentally mentioned that
the illegal repression of the black is openly
defended by Americans who, in the ordinary
affairs of life, take rank as men of honour. Mr.
George William Curtis, writing in Harper’s
Weekly in June, 1887, said:—
“What is the Southern question? It is essentially one of
the gravest and most vital that can concern any community,
for it is substantially the question whether where the coloured
vote is largely in the majority, and is cast all together, the
community shall be placed under the government of its most
ignorant class, recently emancipated from a dehumanising
slavery, and led by unscrupulous chiefs. The pitiless cruelty
of slavery was not a good school for the exercise of political
supremacy in an otherwise highly civilised community, and the
situation in some parts of the Southern States is one which,
could it be reproduced in the Northern States, would not be
tolerated. Relief would be sought and found under law or
over law, and that is what is done in such communities in
the Southern States. There is plainly a deprivation of rights
conferred by law. But would any humane and intelligent
72Republican say that the power of the United States should be
employed to compel submission to an endless rule like that of
Moses in South Carolina?”
And the Boston Herald, one of the most
respectable of Northern newspapers, candidly
tells its New England readers that if they lived
in the South they would entertain the same views
about the negroes as the Southern whites do. It
explains very thoroughly the race prejudice,
which is prevalent with all white races, and
particularly with the Anglo-Saxon, and which has
kept the Anglo-Saxon race pure and has preserved
its institutions, civilisation, and free government.
Says the Herald on this subject:—
“The treatment accorded to coloured races by white men,
especially representatives of the Anglo-Saxon race, has never
been of a kind to call forth commendations, and yet it may be
said that this almost universal display of inhumanity indicates
that it is a necessary feature of race development. Our
Western countrymen believe that the only good Indian is a
dead Indian; our Southern countrymen believe that the negro
is a person who cannot be allowed political and social equality,
but must be kept in an inferior condition. We in the North,
who have nothing to fear from Indians and with whom the
negro is an exception, raise our voices in protest at such
barbarity. And yet our forefathers, who were, perhaps, quite
as conscientious persons as we are, did not hesitate to
undertake a war of extermination against the Indians, and
they even held views concerning the negro quite different from
those which we entertain.
73“In fact, human nature is such that the chances are
altogether in favour of the supposition that, if the people of
New England could be transported to the North-Western States
and Territories, and our fellow-citizens of those districts
brought back to New England, we should soon have those
who now entertain philanthropic views concerning the Indians
crying out for their speedy extermination, while those who now
regard them as obstacles to civilisation, to be brushed out of
the way as soon as possible, would come, looking at them from
a perspective of 2,000 miles, to regard them as men and
brothers, deserving of kind and equitable treatment. We
dare say that the removal of the white people of the North to
the Southern States and the transfer of the Southern people
to the north of Mason and Dixon’s line would be attended
with the same reversal of opinions respecting the negro
question—that is, the manner in which these race problems are
regarded is largely a matter of geographical location.”
The Atlanta Constitution thus excuses the
attitude of the whites. Is there, it asks, a State
in the North in which if, as in Mississippi, 181,000
negro voters, of whom 145,000 are unable to read
or write, were to-day settled, the white people
would be or could be divided under any pretence
or by any power? Is there a Northern State in
which, although, as in Mississippi, there were only
121,000 white voters to oppose them, this host of
black illiterates could capture and maintain the
control of affairs under any pretext or by any
power? Could this be done in Indiana, or in
Ohio, and especially could it be done if, as in
74Mississippi, the hideous and sickening pages of
the carpet-bag era, by showing what these people
did do when the whites were united against them,
gave appalling suggestions of what they would do
if the whites were divided? Iowa has about
the voting population of Georgia, say 320,000.
If 130,000 of these voters were negroes, of whom
100,000 were illiterate (to say no worse), is there
any sane man who believes, or any fair man who
will assert, that the white people of Iowa would
not so unite as to hold control of their affairs, and
remain so united, in all despite? Would any
political ambition, or could any external force, so
divide the whites as to make it possible for a considerable
minority of their number, by deluding
the ignorant and bribing the corrupt of the negroes,
to hold the reins of government?
Nor can it be denied that, in practice, many
of the most negrophil Northerners have as little as
possible to do with the black, and, indeed, systematically
treat him as an inferior. A Republican
Congress twenty years ago forced negro suffrage
upon the South, and at the same time established
it in the District of Columbia. Six years’ experience
of it in Columbia was sufficient, and to get
rid of it a Republican Congress obliterated suffrage
altogether there, amid the hearty amens of Republican
property holders in Washington. There
75are three Senators now in Congress—Messrs.
Edmunds and Morrill, of Vermont, and Mr. Sherman,
of Ohio—who twenty years ago assisted
might and main to burden the South with negro
suffrage. These three are among the foremost in
advocating Southern fairness towards the negro.
Indeed, Mr. Sherman is the author of a proposition
in this direction which for stringency goes
far ahead of anything previously suggested. Yet
all three of these Senators, who are large property
holders in Washington, voted to disestablish negro
suffrage in Washington fifteen years ago, and
not one of them would for one moment listen to
any suggestion to revive it.
The attitude of the Southern white towards the
negro is, nevertheless, not exactly an unkind one.
It is rather that of a magisterial guardian. Within
certain limits, the negro is no longer “kept
down.” Far from seeking to condemn him to
ignorance and stagnation, the white man contributes,
and contributes generously, to the
negro’s mental, physical, and moral advancement.
He freely provides his ex-slave with
facilities for education, with medical care in
seasons of sickness, and with opportunities for
religious instruction. Indeed, in these directions,
he does for the black man a great many good
deeds which the black man never dreams of
76trying to do for himself. But this is, I think,
mainly because the white systematically regards
the black as a child. And in this the white is
certainly justified. No one who has associated
much with the negro race can have failed to have
remarked that in the natural time of childhood
the negro is apparently as vivacious and as intelligent
as the white. With the approach of puberty,
however, the two races begin to betray marked
intellectual divergence. The white steadily progresses
in intelligence; the black stops short; so
that, a few years afterwards, the latter is by
comparison dull, stupid, and indolent, though
still frivolous, affectionate, good-natured, and
mischievous. I speak, of course, of the average
negro, and more especially of the full-blooded
one. There are exceptions, but they are few.
As a rule the grown negro, even if he have received
a better education than the majority of his
fellows, is in mind always a child. The uneducated
grown negro is invariably of this characteristic
nature; and he is often charmingly simple
and devoid of evil. But, on the other hand, he is
quite as often full of the worst vices and passions.
Into this, however, I will not go at present, my
immediate purpose being rather to show how the
negro is treated by his white fellow-citizens than
to indicate the effect that is being produced upon
77the South by the existence in it of an enormous,
and in many localities an overwhelming, negro
population.
According to law, the American negro has at
the polls exactly the same rights and privileges
as the American white man. But the concession
was made to the negro without the full and free
consent of the Southern white, and in consequence
the Southern white has always grudged
it, and has very rarely allowed it to be fully
exercised. There was a time, as I have endeavoured
to show, when the Southern white was
prevented by force majeure from greatly interfering
with the negro’s action at the ballot-boxes;
but since the days of Reconstruction the Southern
white man has been supreme in his own States,
and his will has ever been that the negro shall
not be a significant factor in politics. At first
the white enforced his will with the rifle and the
revolver. In many places the negro could not
approach the ballot-box without risking his life,
and so he stayed away. There were “rifle
clubs,” and, in Texas and Virginia, there was
the Ku-Klux Klan, an organisation of whites of
good position who were determined, no matter how
much blood it might cost, to make the coloured
people “behave themselves.” Then followed
the less violent but not less reprehensible
78recourse to “tissue-ballots.” “Let the negroes
vote if they will,” was the word; “we will
stultify their action by fraud, which is safer
than force.” And so it happened that, as in
South Carolina, although the negro majority
trooped to the polls and voted Republican to a
man, the returning officers found that, almost
without exception, the men who were elected
were Democrats.
The infamous trick was easily managed. In
America the voter is, in most places, required to
register, and to produce his registration certificate
upon recording his vote. He votes by depositing
in the ballot-box a printed ticket, or ballot. This
ticket simply bears the names of the favoured
candidates for vacant offices, and, although it
now has to be of certain prescribed dimensions and
colour, its form used to be very much dependent
upon the tastes and idiosyncrasies of the party
leaders who supplied it to the electors. In the
“tissue-ballot” days fraudulent party leaders
caused it to be printed upon the very thinnest of
tissue-paper, so that the thickness of, say, twenty-five
tissue-tickets did not much exceed that of an
ordinary piece of writing-paper. These tickets
were entrusted to unscrupulous voters of the right
political complexion. The ballots, before being
deposited, had to be folded, but only lightly
79folded; and thus, when an expert fraudulent voter
folded his twenty-five tissue-tickets together and
gave them a gentle flip as he dropped them into
the box, the papers flew open and apart, and at
once assumed a comparatively innocent appearance.
Upon the close of the poll the ballots were
counted and their number was compared with
that of the registered electors who had voted at
that booth. There was found to be a large
excess of ballots; whereupon all the papers were
returned to the box, and an election manager, in
accordance with precedent, undertook the duty of
withdrawing sufficient ballots to make the remainder
tally with the number of voters who had
polled. If, as was generally the case, the manager
was fraudulent, he took care to draw out
only thick tickets. If, as may have sometimes
happened, he was honest, he took the tickets as
they came, thick and thin indifferently. But in
either event the party that used “tissue-ballots”
naturally gained an immense advantage. If the
negroes—against whom almost exclusively this
device was employed—suspected and protested,
revolvers were exhibited by the other side.
Such a revelation as this may appear incredible
to British readers, but it by no means
exhausts the villainies of American politics as they
are displayed at the polls, even at this day; and
80Americans themselves seem to accept such things
as matters of course. Mr. John James Ingalls,
one of the United States Senators for Kansas,
excited no great surprise or repulsion when he
recently declared, “The purification of politics is
an iridescent dream; the Decalogue and the
Golden Rule have no place in a political campaign.”
Mr. Ingalls is a Republican. Republicans,
however, it is but fair to say, are not
monopolists of fraud. A normally respectable
Southern newspaper, the Charleston News and
Courier, during the last campaign, coolly gave to
its readers the following conspicuously printed
piece of advice:—“Go to the polls to-day. Vote
early, vote often, vote straight.” (November 4,
1890.) And I am bound to admit that the
counsel was acted upon. But of that anon.
Concurrently with the use of “tissue-ballots,”
the practices of “counting in” and “counting
out” were resorted to, or, in other words, false
returns were made. Again, the registration certificates
of the ignorant and often careless
coloured voters were frequently stolen or purchased
for ridiculous sums by whites. The
regular price used to be fifty cents, or a pint
of whisky.
Another favourite device was, and still is,
deception. The majority of coloured voters
81cannot read, and since, at most American elections,
there are several “tickets” to be voted for—as,
for example, a State ticket, a county or municipal
ticket, and a Federal ticket—there is generally
plenty of opportunity for Sambo to go wrong.
With the assistance of a learned friend, he selects
such tickets as he may, in his political wisdom,
desire to deposit. He also assures himself as to
the relative positions of the various ballot-boxes
in the booth. Then, with the State ticket
between his forefinger and thumb, the county
ticket between his forefinger and second finger,
and the Federal ticket between his second and
third fingers, and in the happy belief that the
State box is on the extreme right, the county box
in the middle, and the Federal box on the extreme
left, he enters the booth to do his civic duty. In
the meantime the managers inside have deliberately
changed the position of the boxes.
They are legally bound to indicate each box if
they be asked to do so; but, even if they comply
with the letter of the requirement, Sambo inevitably
gets his papers confused, and ends by
depositing them wrongly, and so spoils his vote.
In practice, the managers, as often as not, either
do not indicate the boxes or indicate them wrongly.
They are all labelled, but when Sambo is illiterate
the labels are meaningless to him.
82In a speech delivered on July 30th, 1888,
Governor John P. Richardson, of South Carolina,
openly and frankly defended this practice. Said
he:—
“The great problem which God has given us to solve is
not yet solved. We have now the rule of a minority of four
hundred thousand over a majority of six hundred thousand.
No army at Austerlitz, Waterloo, or Gettysburg could ever be
wielded like that mass of six hundred thousand people. The
only thing which stands to-day between us and their rule
is a flimsy statute—the eight-box law—which depends for its
effectiveness upon the unity of the white people.”
In a speech delivered a few days later Governor
Richardson again declared:—
“But there is one thing more which the Democracy has to
do, and that is to solve the problem of how a minority of four
hundred thousand people shall rule for the advancement of the
State and the people at large. There are to-day many people
who think that the eight-box law could be disposed of, but I
tell you that on it depends the salvation of the State. It
amounts to an educational qualification for suffrage. None of
us can forget the election trials which took place in this city,
when a native South Carolinian was the prosecutor against his
own people. But if he was the Cicero, we had yet the
Demosthenes to meet him, and the gifted Youmans arose, and
we saved our comrades by the skin of their teeth. Be careful,
my friends, of the eight-box law. Some have said that we
could control by simple Anglo-Saxon manhood, but this is
only a beautiful theory, and would be dangerous in practice.
I have an abiding faith in the onward progress of humanity,
83and I believe it is the eternal law of God that this land shall
be controlled by the Anglo-Saxon race.”
The eight-box law is the statute which provides
a separate box for each ticket, township, county,
State, Congressional, Electoral, &c. Every voter
must approach these boxes alone, and no one,
unless asked, is allowed to tell him where a particular
ticket belongs. If he cannot read he
cannot, without assistance, distribute his tickets,
and, by the law, all that are put into the wrong
box are void.
Senator Eustis, of Louisiana, at about the
same time publicly asserted that the whites of
Louisiana, in spite of the law, would rule by
might, and as for the rest of the country it was
none of Louisiana’s business.
The vulgar devices of making voters drunk
and of temporarily restraining their personal
liberty are not wholly neglected; but these are
troublesome methods, and the easier ones are
found by experience to have all the hoped-for
effect. Indeed, in many districts, the negro now
seems to recognise that his vote, should he deposit
it, will not be allowed to count, and he therefore
stays at home. In other districts he votes still;
but the whole business is a sad farce. And of
this I have some personal knowledge.
On November 4th, 1890, I was present at a
84voting place at Mount Pleasant in South Carolina.
The whites were voting for Tillman, the Farmers’
Alliance candidate, for Governor. A small dissentient
body of whites and the whole body of
negroes were voting for Haskell, the Democratic-Republican
Coalition candidate. The district is a
very black one, one of the blackest in the State,
and its vote was much counted upon by the
Haskell party. Overnight, therefore, the Tillmanites
tried, but in vain, to destroy the booth;
and on the day of the election they adopted a
modification of the old “tissue-ballot” trick,
using, however, ordinary instead of tissue-ballots.
Two hundred and forty-four persons voted at this
particular booth. When one of the boxes was
opened it was found to contain a largely excessive
number of ballots; the exact number was, if I
recollect rightly, 477. The surplus 233 papers
were cast out by the managers, some of whom
were shrewdly suspected of being parties to the
conspiracy, and the result of the poll in that
precinct was decided by the verdict of the
remainder. Nor was this the only villainy that
was perpetrated on that day in the neighbourhood.
In an adjoining precinct a Tillman champion
named Gaillard seized and destroyed the registration
books, thus rendering the polling impossible
in default of duplicate books. Ballot-boxes, too,
85are sometimes destroyed or made away with.
Indeed, there is no conceivable scoundrelism
that is not, or has not been, practised in the South
to neutralise the negro vote.
From what I have written it will be clear that
the extension of the suffrage to the coloured race
in the Southern States by no means ensures the
representation of the black man. The situation is
a very disgraceful one for the Southern whites;
but even the better class of Southern politicians
with whom I have conversed upon the subject
tacitly, if not expressly, defend, as with one voice,
the iniquitous system. “We cannot,” they say,
“be ruled by the negroes; we must protect ourselves.
It is very lamentable; but what is the
alternative?”
It is hard to suggest a practicable one, for the
fatal and irretrievable mistake of bestowing the
suffrage upon every male citizen of full age has
already been made. That mistake is recognised
as such not only by the Democrats, not only by
the whites. Senator Ingalls, whom I have already
spoken of as a Republican, wrote in the North
American Review, in April, 1886:—“Had the Republican
party been courageous or intelligent
enough to have attempted the reconstruction of
the South through its brains rather than through
its numbers, the most lamentable chapter in our
86history might have been unwritten.” And Mr.
A. M. E. Church, an intelligent coloured clergyman
of Vicksburg, wrote, in the same year:—“We
will say ... that the mass of negroes
would do themselves and their country more good
if the ballot were out of their reach.”
Congress has it in its power to limit the suffrage;
but at this time of day it will not exercise
that power, which, by the way, ought never to
have been taken out of the hands of individual
States. The situation in Maine, where nearly all
the people are white and educated, is not like the
situation in Mississippi, where more than half the
people are black and ignorant. But Congress forgot
that fact, and Amendment XV. took from the
States, practically for ever, a wholesome power,
which, under sec. 2, Art. 1, of the original Constitution,
they had up to that moment been at
liberty to exercise. The repeal of Amendment
XV., however, would not settle, and would, in
my humble opinion, scarcely assist, the solution
of the race question. The cause of difficulty lies
far deeper; and this, I think, will appear when I
shall have considered the Southern negro in his
social and general, as well as in his political,
position, and when I shall have given some
examples of the force of race prejudice in
America.
87Throughout the South the social position of
the man in whose veins negro blood courses is
unalterably fixed at birth. The child may grow
to be wise, to be wealthy, to be entrusted even with
the responsibilities of office, but he always bears
with him the visible marks of his origin, and those
marks condemn him to remain for ever at the
bottom of the social ladder. To incur this condemnation
he need not be by any means black.
A quarter, an eighth, nay, a sixteenth of African
blood, is sufficient to deprive him of all chances of
social equality with the white man. For the
being with the hated taint there is positively no
social mercy. A white man may be ignorant,
vicious, and poor. For him, in spite of all, the
door is ever kept open. But the black, or
coloured man, no matter what his personal merits
may be, is ruthlessly shut out. The white absolutely
declines to associate with him on equal
terms. A line has been drawn; and he who,
from either side, crosses that line has to pay the
penalty. If it be the negro who dares to cross,
cruelty and violence chase him promptly back
again, or kill him for his temerity. If it be
the white, ostracism is the recognised penalty.
And it is not only the uneducated and the easily
prejudiced who have drawn the line thus sharply.
Speaking in 1858, Abraham Lincoln said:—
88“I am not, and never have been, in favour of bringing
about, in any form, the social and political equality of the
white and the black races. There is a physical difference
which forbids them from living together on terms of social
and political equality. And, inasmuch as they cannot so live,
while they do remain together there must be a position of
superior and inferior, and I, as much as any other man, am in
favour of having the superior position assigned to the whites.”
Mr. Froude, in “The English in the West
Indies,” writes:—
“One does not grudge the black man his property, his
freedom, his opportunity of advancing himself; one would
wish him as free and prosperous as the fates and his own
exertions can make him, with more and more means of raising
himself to the white man’s level. But left to himself, and
without the white man to lead him, he can never reach it....
We have a population to deal with the majority of
whom are an inferior race. Inferior, I am obliged to call
them, because as yet they have shown no capacity to rise
above the condition of their ancestors, except under European
laws, European education, and European authority to keep
them from war upon one another.... Give them
independence, and in a few generations they will peel off such
civilisation as they have as easily and as willingly as their
coats and trousers.”
And, says Professor E. W. Gilliam, to whose
writings on the subject I have already made some
allusion:—
“The blacks have been, and must continue to be, a
distinct and alien race; the fusion of races is the resultant
89from social equality and intermarriage, and the barrier to this
is here insurmountable. The human species presents three
grand varieties, marked off by colour—white, yellow, and
black. One at the first, in origin and colour, the race
multiplied and spread, and separate sections, settled in
different latitudes, took on—under climatic conditions acting
with abnormal force in that early and impressionable period of
the race’s age—took on, we say, different hues, which, as the
race grew and hardened, crystallised into permanent characteristics.
Social affinity exists among the families of these three
groups. The groups themselves stand rigidly apart. The
Irish, German, French, &c., who come to these shores readily
intermarry among themselves and with the native population.
Within a generation or two the sharpness of national feature
disappears, and the issue is the American, whose mixed blood
is the country’s foremost hope. It cannot be—a fusion like
this between blacks and whites. Account for it as we may,
the antipathy is a palpable fact which no one fails to recognise—an
antipathy not less strong among the Northern than
among the Southern whites. However the former may, on the
score of matters political, profess themselves special friends to
the blacks, the question of intermarriage and social equality,
when brought to practical test, they will not touch with the
end of the little finger. Whether it be that the blacks,
because of their former condition of servitude, are regarded as
a permanently degraded class; whether it be that the whites,
from their historic eminence, are possessed with a consciousness
of superiority which spurns alliance—the fact that fusion is
impossible no one in his senses can deny.”
Professor Gilliam wrote from a Southern
standpoint, but, says Judge Albion W. Tourgée:
“Looking at the subject from a standpoint
90diametrically opposed in every respect both to the
intellectual bias and to the political inclination
of Professor Gilliam, we are compelled to endorse
his views in this respect almost without the least
modification.” And in another page of his
admirable and informing volume, “An Appeal to
Cæsar,” Mr. Tourgée remarks, “When the freedman
began to establish his own home circle, to
build for himself a household about his own hearth,
however humble, the distance between the whites
and blacks, though in fact very greatly diminished,
seemed to have been as greatly increased.”
My own impression, as derived from somewhat
wide observation, is that, since the emancipation,
the distance has really as well as apparently
increased, and that it is still increasing. Whites
and blacks have less in common than of yore;
there is less chance than there ever was of their
working together peacefully for good; and racial
antagonism, nourished by both sides, grows daily.
There are many signs, too, of this growing antagonism.
On the side of the negro there is a
desire to be what the white man is, and to do
what the white man does—to elevate himself to
the same level of privileges, with or without the
pre-requisite education and fitness for the elevation.
He argues blindly that the legal right
confers the needful fitness. The law opens
91positions to him, and he is a voter. Why then
should he not vote himself and his friends into
the positions? And education by no means tends
to decrease the friction, seeing that the white
man is as prejudiced against an educated negro
as against an ignorant one. On the contrary, it
adds to it. When the uneducated black thinks
himself the equal of the white, the educated black
cannot be expected to submit resignedly to be
regarded as the white’s inferior. Yet he is obliged
to affect the resignation which he cannot feel. He
must suppress his real sentiments, or he must risk
physical maltreatment.
His social position cannot be properly understood
without the aid of illustrations. I will
therefore give a few, which are taken at hazard
from some hundreds of examples that I might cite.
But, as an introduction to this branch of the
subject, I must first quote a passage from Mr.
George W. Cable’s recent book, “The Silent
South,” a volume which is inspired from beginning
to end with love—perhaps unwise love—for
the negro, and with a desire to do all that lies in
the writer’s power to abate the prevalent race
friction. Mr. Cable asks:—
“Are the freedman’s liberties suffering any real abridgment?
The answer is easy. The letter of the laws, with a
few exceptions, recognises him as entitled to every right of an
92American citizen; and to some it may seem unimportant that
there is scarcely one public relation of life in the South
where he is not arbitrarily and unlawfully compelled to hold
toward the white man the attitude of an alien, a menial, and a
probable reprobate, by reason of his race and colour. One of
the marvels of future history will be that it was counted a
small matter by a majority of our nation for six millions of
people within it, made by its own decree a component part of
it, to be subjected to a system of oppression so rank that
nothing could make it seem small except the fact that they
had already been ground under it for a century and a half.
Examine it. It proffers to the freedman a certain security of
life and property, and then holds the respect of the community,
that dearest of earthly boons, beyond his attainment. It gives
him certain guarantees against thieves and robbers, and then
holds him under the unearned contumely of the mass of good
men and women. It acknowledges in constitutions and statutes
his title to an American’s freedom and aspirations, and then in
daily practice heaps upon him in every public place the most
odious distinctions, without giving ear to the humblest plea
concerning mental or moral character. It spurns his ambition,
tramples upon his languishing self-respect, and indignantly
refuses to let him either buy with money, or earn by any
excellence of inner life or outward behaviour, the most
momentary immunity from these public indignities even for
his wife and daughters.”
In America it is a matter of notoriety that
there is no exaggeration here, nor is the race
feeling confined solely to the South. To the
British reader the following cases in point
will, I believe, prove that there is no exaggeration:—
93“Supposing the Courts of our Southern States, while
changing no laws requiring the impanelling of jurymen
without distinction as to race, &c., should suddenly begin
to draw their thousands of jurymen all black, and well-nigh
everyone of them counting not only himself, but all his
race, better than any white man. Assuming that their
average of intelligence and morals should be not below
that of jurymen as now drawn, would a white man, for all
that, choose to be tried in one of those Courts? Would
he suspect nothing? Could one persuade him that his
chances of even justice were all they should be, or all they
would be, were the Court not evading the law in order to
sustain an outrageous distinction against him because of the
accident of his birth? Yet, only read white man for black
man, and black man for white man, and that—I speak as an
eye-witness—has been the practice for years, and is still so to-day;
an actual emasculation, in the case of six million people,
both as plaintiff and defendant, of the right of trial by jury.”—Mr.
G. W. Cable.
“The negro children of the city are usually the aggressors
when trouble occurs between them and white children. Both
colours are too ready for a row, but coloured parents are too
ready to teach their youngsters that white people are their
natural enemies. We daily see negro boys trying all their
ingenuity to get a fight out of the white boys when the latter
try to avoid a row, and this is peculiarly true when there are
two or three young negroes to one white. Negro girls are apt
to be extremely insolent, not only to whites of their own age,
but to ladies. In the matter of collisions between school-boys,
that may best be left to the police. The negro girls who push
white women and girls off the walks can be cured of that
practice by the use of a horsewhip; and we advise white
fathers and husbands to use the whip. It’s a great corrective.”—Chattanooga
Times.
94This advocacy of the summary horsewhipping
of girls is very significant of the brutal attitude
of the Southern white towards the negro.
“Between two and three o’clock an excursion train, composed
entirely of coloured people, arrived at Gouldsboro depôt
from Bâton Rouge. A large number of coloured men and
women were near the depôt waiting for the train, which was
due at eleven o’clock. As the train neared the depôt, one of
the excursionists attempted to get off and fell to the ground.
Some unknown person made a personal remark, when the
negro drew a pistol and fired four or five shots in rapid
succession, one of which struck a white man named William
Miller, brother of one of the Gretna police, in the nose and
lodged itself in the back of his neck. Then the shooting
became general, some four or five hundred shots being fired in
less than fifteen minutes. The stories of the blacks and
whites as to the origin of the trouble differ widely. The
negroes say that a large body of armed white men were
awaiting the train’s arrival, and that about ten minutes after it
stopped they opened fire on the negroes who were going to
the street car. The whites say that only half a dozen white
men were concerned in the affair, and that the negroes, before
the train came to a halt, fired two shots at a white boy named
Burmester. Billy Miller was then shot by one of the white
men, and then the fight became general.”—Associated Press
Telegram from New Orleans, September 1st, 1889.
“It is impossible for the negro to get any justice at the
hands of Southern magistrates or juries. A man who resides
in Augusta, Ga.—a Democrat and a hater of the negro—admits
that the whites’ maltreatment of the blacks must one day recoil
upon their own heads. ‘Why,’ said he to me to-day, ‘you
can’t convict a white man of the murder of a negro, nor even
95of a white friend of the negro. Just before I left home a
negro was found one morning in the street, with his body
riddled with bullets. I was pretty certain that his death was
due to a certain gang of roughs, whose leader is under obligation
to me for keeping him out of the penitentiary. Meeting
him I said, “Pat, who killed that nigger?” “Oh, some of the
boys,” said Pat, with a grin. “What did they do it for?” I
asked. “Oh, because he was a nigger,” said Pat. “And,” he
continued, “he was the best nigger in town. Why, he would
even take off his hat to me.”’ I thought he must be a good
negro, indeed, who would take off his hat to that creature, and
I walked away pondering upon what must be the outcome of it
all. It is my opinion that several of the Southern States will
have to be abandoned to the negroes if we would avoid terrible
consequences from the wrongs we are heaping on them.”—Washington
correspondence of the Pittsburg Dispatch,
January 11th, 1890.
“They had an election down in Jackson, Miss., yesterday,
and it was of the usual kind. The regular press reports, with
charming frankness, state that everything was progressing
quietly so long as the negroes stayed away from the polls; but
should the black men attempt to exercise the right of suffrage
there would be trouble.”—Philadelphia Evening Telegram,
January 7th, 1890.
A negro named William Black stole some trifling articles
from the house of a white man, one Jim Bennett, near Robins,
South Carolina. Bennett followed and caught the negro, and,
assisted by Dave Ready, Henry Sweat, and John Walker, tied
the prisoner to a tree. Ready then placed a gun to the negro’s
temple and blew out the man’s brains. Bennett, Walker, and
Sweat were arrested as accessories in the first degree, but were
discharged by Justice Dunbar. Ready apparently escaped.—Summarised
from a Barnwell letter of January 11th, 1890, in
the Charleston Budget.
96Two boys—Williams, a negro, and Robertson, a white—were
playing together near Waynesboro with a gun, which,
being accidentally discharged, killed Robertson. The negro boy
was arrested, but was taken from custody by a mob of white
men, who tied him up and shot him to death.—Summarised
from a despatch from Augusta, Georgia, dated October 24th,
1890, to the Charleston News and Courier.
“A Tennessee white man was hanged on Tuesday for the
brutal murder of his wife. The despatches tell us that he
objected to going on the gallows with three coloured men who
were to be hanged at the same time, and that the authorities so
far respected his prejudices as to swing off the negroes first.”—New
York Star, January 7th, 1890.
“Some years ago a great revival was going on in one of the
churches of my own city. The evangelist was fervidly inviting
all kinds of people to come to the ‘anxious seat.’ Crowds of
men, women, and children were accepting the invitation.
Tramps, drunkards, and beggars were among the number. At
last it was announced to the church officials that a negro upon
one of the back seats was ‘under conviction.’ Here was a
problem of serious import. The officials held a hurried and
anxious consultation, and it was finally decided that the negro
might receive the benefit of salvation in an inconspicuous pew.
This case might fairly be termed exceptional if it were not true
that one of the largest and most influential denominations in
the land, having been split in half by the question of slavery,
remains in that condition to-day solely on the question of
colour caste.”—Rev. John Snyder, in the Forum, October,
1889. (The denomination alluded to is the American Presbyterian
Church.)
“While the Republican whoopers at the North are bursting
with indignation at the fact that the negroes on Southern railroads
are provided with separate cars from those occupied by
the whites, they have not a word of protest against the fact
97that a daughter of a Southern negro ex-Governor was ‘frozen’
out of the ball-room of the Grand Union Hotel at Saratoga a
few nights ago. The gathering in the ball-room was not of
persons specially invited, but was made up, as such watering-place
balls usually are, of the guests stopping in the hotel.
The young lady in question is beautiful and accomplished, and
above all moral reproach, and so slightly tinted with negro
blood that she would have passed muster among whites almost
anywhere in the matter of colour. In spite, however, of all
the facts in her favour, the single circumstance of race created,
in a crowded assemblage in a Northern State, a sentiment that
immediately culminated in outward expressions which at once
convinced the unfortunate lady that she was an object of most
unfriendly observation on the part of the people gathered
there.”—New Orleans Picayune, August 30th, 1889.
“The report comes from South Carolina that a coloured
man, unarmed and defenceless, fell into an altercation with a
white man of that State named Gallman. Gallman slit the
coloured man’s throat from ear to ear, and drove to a
neighbour’s house, where he procured a shot-gun, and emptied
the contents of one barrel into the wounded man. At a late
hour that night Mr. Gallman’s friends, hearing that the victim
had not died, although he was at death’s door, rode to where
he lay, and carried him to the nearest churchyard, where they
riddled his body with bullets.”—Boston Advertiser, June 2nd,
1889.
“A reporter of the New York World on Saturday
disguised himself as a wealthy negro from Cuba, and went
around to the various first class hotels to secure accommodation
for himself. That must have been a busy day with
the hotel people, for the clerks smilingly told him that every
room was engaged. Seeing that it would be impossible to
secure a room, he then tried to get something to eat. At most
of the restaurants the waiters would pay no attention to his
98orders, and the cashiers with one accord assured him that the
proprietor was out and would not return until late. At the
Hoffman House Café he was given food, but was not served at
the bar. At Delmonico’s he was assured that they had
nothing to eat. So it seems that the prejudice against the
negro is not confined entirely to the South.”—New York
World, June, 1888.
Last year Mr. Douglass, a mulatto, was appointed United
States Minister to Hayti, and was taken thither on board an
American man-of-war, the Kearsage. Another ship, the
Ossipee, was first ordered to convey him. It is alleged that her
commander, being unwilling to carry and associate with a
coloured man, urged as an excuse that his vessel was not fit for
sea. The officers of the Kearsage refused to dine with the
Minister. “The army officers are in a state of glee over it,
and so are the Navy officers on duty here. All unite in
saying that if any of the Kearsage officers dine with Douglass
on the way to Hayti they will find themselves tabooed by
their brother officers thereafter.”—Summarised from the
Washington correspondence of the St. Louis Republic, October,
1889.
“We simply hate, as American citizens, to be told by our
equals de jure ‘Thus far shalt thou go, and no farther.’ The
blackest hands can cook the food for prejudiced throats; the
blackest, dirtiest arms can hold the whitest, cleanest baby;
the blackest, most illiterate man can sit on the same seat, even
with a lady, as a driver; but the angry passions rise when a
well-dressed, educated, refined negro pays his own fare and
seats himself quietly in a public conveyance.”—Orangeburg
Plain Speaker, a negro newspaper, December 4th, 1889.
“Two coloured men, respectable in appearance and well
educated, the one principal of, and the other a teacher in, a
public school of the city, entered a restaurant in Cincinnati
the other day. They seated themselves at a table, but no
99waiter went near them, and when they finally asked to be
served they were thrown out into the street. The sole trouble
was the fact that they were coloured.”—New York Evening
Post, December 31st, 1889.
“Social equality of whites and blacks is unheard of here,
even in ‘black’ Republican circles. The whites don’t want it
and the blacks won’t have it. Any white person who
advocates it here is quietly ignored as an irredeemable crank,
and the South can afford to keep cool and follow Northern
example regarding this deadest of dead issues.”—New York
Herald, November, 1889.
“Wednesday will be long remembered in Georgia as the
day on which an unparalleled number of violent crimes were
committed. At Jessop a bloody riot occurred; at Augusta
there was a conflict approaching the dimensions of a riot,
accompanied by bloodshed. At Dainesville a very worthy
coloured man was, it appears, cruelly murdered; at Toombsboro
another negro was killed; and at Greenville a shooting affair
occurred.... The quarrel was in every instance between
men of different colour.”—Macon Telegraph, December 28th,
1889.
“A few days ago a negro minister of this city boarded the
east-bound passenger train on the E.T.V. and G. Railway, and
took a seat in the coach occupied by white passengers. Some
of the passengers complained to the conductor and brakemen,
and expressed considerable dissatisfaction that they were
forced to ride alongside of a negro. The railway officials
informed the complainants that they were not authorised to
force the coloured passenger into the coach set apart for the
negroes, and they would lay themselves liable should they do
so. The white passengers then took the matter in their own
hands, and ordered the ebony-hued minister to take a seat in
the next coach. He positively refused to obey orders, whereupon
the white men gave him a sound flogging and forced him
100to a seat among his own colour and equals. We learned
yesterday that the vanquished preacher was unable to fill his
pulpit on account of the severe chastisement inflicted upon
him.”—Selma (Alabama) Times, quoted by Mr. G. W. Cable.
“There is terrible excitement here over the co-education of
the races. The Alton Board of Education has provided
separate schools for coloured children, but the negroes want
their children to attend the schools set apart for the whites.
They had threatened and threatened to force their way into
the schools and put their children alongside the whites, and
flatly refused to permit their children to attend the schoolhouses
set apart for the negro children. These threats, however,
until to-day, were looked upon as idle and meaningless.
This morning the negroes took action in the matter. Scores
of adult negroes, accompanied by half a hundred black children,
went to the high school and demanded admission. Superintendent
Powell is a mild-mannered man, and offered no
obstructions. The black children walked in and took possession
of all the desks they found unoccupied. The white
pupils protested, and began to pick up their books and make
preparations to leave. Some of the coloured boys grinned at
the white girls, and as soon as the negro men left the building
the white pupils assaulted the blacks. There was a hard fight
for fifteen minutes, during which books, inkstands, rulers,
slates and hair filled the air. The whites finally drove the
blacks out of the room and chased them out of the yard, and
continued to fight in the street. The white girls urged their
champions on with encouraging shouts, and brought them
munitions of war when possible.”—General Press Telegram
from Alton, Illinois, January 11th, 1890.
“At Decatur, Ill., Wood Bros., purveyors of candles and
ice-cream, had no ice-cream to sell to the Rev. Edward Wilson.
He was a negro. He now arrests the purveyors by virtue of
the Civil Rights Law, and ‘the case will be hotly contested.’
101Of course it will. And the jury will discharge the confectioners.
The black man will get no ice-cream. The people of
Decatur love the negro in the South, not in the North. The
Civil Rights Bill was prepared for the South, where a coloured
man can get all the ice-cream he may pay for. To apply Reconstruction
to the North—is not that oppressive? The same
Northerner who will endure arrest before he will sell ice-cream
to a black man will tell you confidently that the determination
of the Southerners to prevent black home rule is the vilest
conspiracy of modern times.”—Chicago Herald, September 6th,
1889.
“One hot night in September ... I was travelling
by rail in the State of Alabama. At rather late bedtime there
came aboard the train a young mother and her little daughter
of three or four years. They were neatly and tastefully
dressed in cool, fresh muslins, and as the train went on its way
they sat together very still and quiet. At the next station
there came aboard a most melancholy and revolting company.
In filthy rags, with vile odours, and the clanking of shackles
and chains, nine penitentiary convicts chained to one chain,
and ten more chained to another, dragged laboriously into
the compartment of the car where in one corner sat this
mother and child, and packed it full, and the train moved
on. The keeper of the convicts told me he should take
them in that car 200 miles that night. They were going to
the mines. My seat was not in that car, and I stayed in
it but a moment. It stank insufferably. I returned to my
own place in the coach behind, where there was, and had
all the time been, plenty of room. But the mother and
child sat on in silence in that foul hole, the conductor having
distinctly refused them admission elsewhere because they
were of African blood, and not because the mother was, but
because she was not, engaged at the moment in menial service.
Had the child been white, and the mother not its natural but
102its hired guardian, she could have sat anywhere in the train.”—Mr.
G. W. Cable.
“During a day’s stay in Atlanta lately, the present
writer saw many things greatly to admire.... He feels
constrained to ask whether it must be that in the principal
depôt of such a city the hopeless excommunication of every
person of African tincture from the civil rewards of gentility
must be advertised by three signs at the entrances of three
separate rooms, one for ‘Ladies,’ one for ‘Gentlemen,’ and
the third a ‘Coloured Waiting-room?’ Visiting the principal
library of the city, he was eagerly assured, in response to
inquiry, that no person of colour would be allowed to draw out
books.”—Mr. G. W. Cable.
“Postmaster Lewis and Colonel A. E. Buck were hung in
effigy in front of the Court-house to-night, in the presence of
probably 10,000 persons. This action was the result of Lewis
appointing a negro to a place in the Registry Department,
where he would come in contact with a white lady clerk.”—Letter
from Atlanta, Georgia, of August 8th, 1889, to Charleston
News and Courier.
“The Rev. J. Francis Robinson, a Baptist preacher of
good character, has been visiting in the City of Auburn, New
York. The day after his arrival he wished to get shaved, and
went to a barber-shop, but was refused attention. He went
in succession to several other barber-shops, but received the
same treatment at each. The Rev. F. D. Penny, pastor of
the Second Baptist Church in Auburn, accompanied the Rev.
Mr. Robinson to a number of shops, and offered the proprietors
a dollar to shave his friend, but his co-operation was of no use.
The trouble was that the Rev. Mr. Robinson had a black skin,
and, as one of the barbers said, ‘I refused to shave him
because it is against the rules of the trade to shave a coloured
man.’”—New York Evening Post, August 6th, 1889.
“Deacon J. H. Brown, of the First African Baptist
103Church, of this city, had quite an unpleasant experience at
Baxley yesterday. He is on his way, along with other
coloured deacons and clergymen, to a convention of the church
at Indianapolis. Six of them entered the white people’s
coach, filled largely with ladies, and, despite the repeated
protests of the passengers, would not vacate their seats. One
passenger wired to Baxley over the signature of ‘Passenger,’
asking for help to put the negroes out, and stating that he
would make himself known when the train arrived. When
Baxley was reached a crowd of men boarded the train and
requested the negroes to leave. They refused. This did not
change their purpose, and force was then used. In the fight
that ensued two men were cut, but not very seriously. The
train pulled out quickly to prevent further disturbance, and a
physician at Lumber City was telegraphed for to meet the
wounded men there. He refused, but subsequently one was
secured and the men cared for. Brown was hurt about the
head and face from blows inflicted by a club.”—Savannah
(Georgia) Times, September 10th, 1889.
“The colour line question has nearly caused a split in the
Independent Baptists’ Union. An organisation composed of
Baptist ministers of Virginia, West Virginia, and Maryland
is in session here. The Rev. H. A. Braxton, a coloured
member, objected to the use of the word ‘coloured’ in a
report referring to work among his race. This objection fired
the Southern sentiment of some of the white brethren, and a
sharp discussion ensued. Preacher Braxton declared that he
was opposed to ecclesiastical bossism, and wanted the colour
line buried. Dr. A. C. Dickinson, editor of the Religious
Herald, of Richmond, asked: ‘Do you want us to treat you
every way as if you were not coloured?’ The Rev. Mr. Braxton
replied: ‘Yes, we want to be treated as men, and we want
no special favours.’ The Rev. A. C. Dickinson said: ‘Do
you want us to bury the colour line? If so, where is it to be
104buried—on the white side or on the black? The colour is
there. God put it there. Leaving out the word “coloured”
won’t help it. Now, what are you going to do about it? Do
you intend to give up your convention and your churches and
join ours, or do you want us to give up ours and join yours?’
Rev. Dr. J. W. M. Williams, one of the most prominent
Baptists in the South, said: “If you (the coloured people)
don’t intend to stop talking on this question, then, in the name
of the Lord, go by yourselves and talk all day on the question
of colour. If the coloured people see they can do their work
better alone, let them go and work by themselves.’”—General
Press Telegram from Baltimore, Maryland, October 18th, 1889.
“A delegation of citizens waited on Governor Gordon
to-day, and asked him to take action concerning the whipping
of a number of negroes by unknown white men at East Point,
near Atlanta. The affair occurred late last night. It was
the outgrowth of the lynching of a negro boy on Wednesday
night for the usual crime. The negroes had a mass meeting,
and the citizens, becoming alarmed, sent for police from Atlanta.
The presence of the officers prevented further trouble, but
after they had gone a number of white men went to different
cabins and whipped the negroes, fourteen in all.”—Atlanta
despatch of September 6, 1889, to Charleston News and
Courier.
A man named L. P. Smith was employed as a detective.
He arrested one Jackson, a negro, mistaking him for a
murderer who was “wanted.” Finding out his error, but
desiring to secure the reward, he offered to release Jackson if
the latter would submit to have one of his ears cut off, that
ear bearing a mark similar to one on the ear of the sought for
murderer. Jackson agreed. Smith, uneasy as to what he
had done, then shot Jackson, who, however, lived long enough
to make a statement.—Summarised from a Birmingham
(Alabama) despatch of September, 1889.
105The mutilated bodies of Rosmond Cormier, coloured,
and his daughter Rosalie were found in a cabin on the
Abbeville Road, near Lafayette, Louisiana. Cormier, who
was sixty, had been previously whipped and ordered by a
band of “Regulators” to leave the district, but had not
complied. The “Regulators” returned, demanded admittance
to the cabin, were refused, and were fired at in self-defence by
Cormier. They then shot him and cut his daughter’s throat
from ear to ear. On the same night they very severely
whipped two other negroes.—Summarised from a New
Orleans despatch of September 11th, 1889, to the Charleston
News and Courier.
“In Fulton County, Georgia, a black boy of eighteen
years was taken from gaol and hanged for ‘assaulting’ a
white girl, the assault consisting of catching the child by the
arms and running away when she and her companion screamed.
Then a pack of white ruffians, heavily armed, went from one
cabin to another in an alleged search for a criminal, and
barbarously whipped and maltreated inoffensive negroes, who
were powerless to defend themselves against shot-guns and
revolvers presented at their heads.”—Greenville News, September
10th, 1889.
“There are symptoms of a race war in Missouri, at
Dexter.... The people in that section have for years
excluded all negroes from among them. A short time ago
a man named Williams settled on a farm there, and engaged
a dozen negroes to work for him. Fifty armed white men
waited upon him this week, and told him he must get rid of
the negroes. He said they might kill him first. The armed
men returned to town, where they are circulating a paper
pledging the signers to stand by the ‘Regulators.’”—Charleston
News and Courier, September 14th, 1889.
“Robert Battey, a negro juror, was refused admission to
the dining-room at the Augusta Hotel yesterday. He was
106the only coloured man on the jury, which was empanelled to
try a criminal case in the City Court, and when the hour of
dinner arrived the case was of such importance that Judge
Eve ordered the jury to be kept together.... Upon
arriving at the hotel Mr. B. S. Doolittle, the proprietor, who
is, by the way, a Northern man, refused Battey, the coloured
juror, admission to his dining-room, where a number of ladies
and gentlemen were seated at dinner. Mr. Doolittle offered
to furnish the coloured juror with his meal in another room,
but Battey would not consent to be isolated in that manner,
and before he would go into the private room he went home,
where he enjoyed his usual meal in custody of an officer.
This attempted intrusion of a negro into the dining-hall of an
hotel called forth considerable comment, and Mr. Doolittle
was upheld in his refusal to serve Battey with dinner at the
same table with white people.”—Augusta (Georgia) despatch
of October 4th, 1889, to Charleston News and Courier
I have, perhaps, cited sufficient examples of
white intolerance and tyranny. These characteristics
are, it will have been observed, not exclusively
confined to the South. I should add that, in
several States, what is known as miscegenation,
or, to be plain, marriage between a white and a
black or coloured person, is illegal.
After reading what I have written and quoted,
can any one fail to ask himself these questions?
Is there any doubt that there is a race problem of
infinite difficulty and danger awaiting, nay crying
for, solution in America? Is it not true that
there is practically one law for the black and
107another for the white in the South? Is it likely
that the negro’s civil rights will ever be respected
by the Southern whites? Can civilisation admit
the claim of the South to be permitted to settle
the race question in its own way? Is it not the
duty of the United States to deal with the question?
Is the position of the Southern black likely
to become more tolerable or less, under the existing
system? I might insist much more than I have
done upon the negro’s unfortunate situation. I
might picture him, in all detail, as he is in the
school, in the church, and even in the graveyard—a
being kept remorselessly apart from his white
fellows. But I am anxious not to be one-sided,
and not to allow my natural sympathy for the
black man’s wrongs to render me blind to the fact
that the white man, too, has wrongs great and intolerable.
What these wrongs are I shall attempt
to show when I deal with the position of the
Southern white. In the meanwhile I will conclude
my present division of the subject with a
few notes on the sanitary, moral, educational, and
material position of the Southern negro of to-day.
As to his sanitary position I have, I regret
to say, no very modern statistics at my disposal.
The latest that convey a fairly broad
view of the situation apply to the years 1883
and 1885; but there is no doubt that things
108have very little changed since then. The death-rate,
among children under five years old, per
1,000 of the whole population, for the year
1883 was—in Charleston, white 5·88, coloured
21·3; in Memphis, white 3·75, coloured 13·91;
in Nashville, white 5·65, coloured 12·44; and in
Savannah, white 7·59, coloured 18·01. The rate
in 1885 was—in Charleston, white 4·45, coloured
14·38; in Memphis, white 4·67, coloured 13·46;
in Nashville, white 4·37, coloured 10·78; and in
Savannah, white 4·23, coloured 13·70. Squalid
dwellings, in filthy neighbourhoods, impure air,
dirty water, neglect of personal cleanliness, immorality,
extensive meat consumption without
vegetable diet to match, and gregarious and
generally unsavoury habits, induce a black mortality
which, at least in the large centres, is enormous,
and is particularly noticeable under the
heads of consumption, pneumonia, and scrofula.
Bearing upon this point, a paragraph from the
New York Tribune, of August 20th, 1889, deserves
quotation:—
“As the result of extended observations, including
thousands of cases, thirty-six per cent. being negroes, and
mulattoes, Dr. L. McLane Tiffany, of Baltimore, finds some
marked differences in the diseases of whites and blacks. Thus,
spinal caries is more frequently located in the dorsal region
of the negro, and a cured case of Pott’s disease in the middleaged
109negro is very rare: dislocations are more frequent in the
white, as is also lateral curvature of the spine; keloid is
characteristically more frequent in the negro, likewise lipoma.
Although Dr. Tiffany has never seen an epithelioma of the lip or
any part of the face in a negro, osteo-sarcoma is often met
with in the race. In hospital cases, the negro bears operations
better, as a rule, than the white, but their reaction after
accidents is not so good as that of the latter. Dr. Tiffany
concludes that surgical affections pursue different courses in
the white and coloured races under identical hygienic
surroundings; that surgical diseases involving the lymphatic
system, especially tubercular, are more fatal in negroes than in
whites; that congenital deformities are more rare in negroes
than in whites; and that surgical differences observed between
negroes and whites are due to racial peculiarities.”
Yet the excess of mortality among the coloured
people, large though it be, is more than counterbalanced
by their superior fecundity. This is
very remarkable, seeing that in many cities where
the whites outnumber the blacks as two to one,
the death-rate among the latter positively exceeds
that among the former. In Charleston, for example,
the death-rate in 1884 was for the whites
1 in 42, and for the coloured 1 in 22; and in
1883, for the whites 1 in 46, and for the coloured 1
in 21. This is rendered the more striking by the
fact that the poorer coloured people in Charleston
are supplied with medicines and medical attention
at the expense of the city. In 1884 no fewer
than 17,950 coloured patients were treated in the
110city hospital and in the different health districts,
as against only about one-third of that number of
white patients. In 1886 the Charleston death-rate
was, per 1,000, for whites 20·65 and for
coloured 49·01. In 1887, out of 41,000 whites in
Atlanta, Georgia, 608 died, while out of 22,000
coloured people 707 died. Again, in the week
ending March 9, 1889, the estimated population
of New Orleans was—whites, 184,500; coloured,
69,500; and the death-rate per 1,000 was—whites,
14·13; coloured, 30·03. And the story is much
the same everywhere. The negroes die like flies,
and increase only because they also breed like
flies.
Their moral condition, as shown by criminal
statistics and by the testimony of competent observers,
is equally unsatisfactory. Says the Rev.
Dr. Tucker, formerly of Jackson, Mississippi:—
“In all the country districts the removal of the restraints of
slavery, such as they were, has resulted in an open abandonment
of every semblance of morality and the loss almost of the
idea of marriage. Why, in one county of Mississippi, there
were during twelve months 300 marriage licences taken out in
the county clerk’s office for white people. According to the
proportion of population, there should have been in the same
time 1,200 or more for negroes. There can be no legal
marriage of any sort in Mississippi without a licence. There
were actually taken out by coloured people just three!...
Soon after the war the Legislature passed an Act legalising the
111union of all who were then living together, marrying them
whether they wished or not; and for years afterwards the
courts were crowded with applications for divorce from
coloured people, which mostly had to be granted, since there
was ample cause for divorce under either the Divine or the
statute law. I know of whole neighbourhoods, including
hundreds of negro families, where there is not one single
legally married couple, or couple not married, who stay
faithful to each other beyond a few months, or a few years at
most; often but a few weeks. And if out of every 500 negro
families one excepts a few dozen who are legally married, this
statement will hold true for millions of coloured people. And
these things I tell you to-night are but hints. I cannot, I
dare not, tell the full truth before a mixed audience.”
These words were originally spoken before
the Episcopal Congress at Richmond, Virginia, in
1882; they were subsequently published in a
pamphlet, and I am generally assured, and implicitly
believe, that they were true then and are
true now. Even the negroes themselves dare not
deny them. One negro preacher published a
pamphlet, in which he admitted that—
“This speech reveals humiliating facts, so truthful, yet
hard to acknowledge. Not one of our social circles, if we can
be said to have any, is clean morally. They are full of base,
downright hypocrisy and falsehood, and full two-thirds of the
whole are members of the churches. Moral character is not
the standard. Crimes that should cause a blush on fair cheeks
assume a front of brass, and defy you to speak of or talk
about them.... A coloured man, only a few days ago,
112contended with me that the negroes were right in certain of
their practices, because the Lord Jesus himself said that
‘Seven women should lay hold of one man.’”
Such was the confession of the Rev. Isaac
Williams, with whom four other negro preachers
fully concurred, adding—
“Our acquaintance extends over seven to ten thousand
coloured people, concerning whose lives we know the truth,
and that truth is set forth in Dr. Tucker’s speech without
exaggeration. There are exceptions, but the general truth
is stated exactly as it is. We agree also that he has only
given hints as regards many things of such a nature that only
hints are possible.”
On this repulsive subject I also have said
enough. Nor will I say much concerning the
degrading superstitions and superstitious practices
of the great mass of ignorant blacks. Two years
ago the Herald, a respectable paper in Boston,
published an article five and a half columns long,
the object of which was to demonstrate that
Voodooism existed to an alarming extent among
the coloured people of Boston and New England
generally. Here are a couple of extracts:—
“No people are so prone by nature and force of circumstances
to superstition as the blacks. Devout and easily
excited, they are apt to accept, blindly and without reasoning,
the traditions of their fathers; and even among those of
reasonable education there are traces of the idolatrous creeds
and customs which have always characterised the West India
113Negroes. Voodooism, of which much has been hinted, a little
written, but almost nothing known—one of the blackest,
crudest, and most heathenish forms of idolatry the world has
ever seen—exists to-day to an alarming extent right here in
Puritan New England.”
“Perhaps the fact that the negroes have always regarded
themselves as a wronged people impels them to cultivate a
revengeful spirit; and the prevailing object of their so-called
spells is in the direction of working harm to their enemies.
They pay more attention to vengeance than to the cure of
diseases, although claiming wonderful power from their herbs
and decoctions. The prevailing sentiment, if it may be so
termed, of Voodooism, aside from idolatry, is revenge, and in
their hatreds these people are implacable. No punishment is
too horrible to be visited upon their enemies.”
Most white Bostonians believed that the article
was full of exaggerations, but, to the general
surprise, the negroes practically admitted the impeachment.
Here is part of a resolution which was passed
in July, 1889, by the Coloured National League
sitting at Boston:—
“Whereas the Boston Herald has lately shown that the
degrading superstition of Voodooism, as well as its practice,
exists here in Boston to some extent among a few illiterate and
ignorant persons of our race; and whereas the sentiment
among the better class of coloured people is that no one should
be swifter to condemn any kind of foolish race superstition or
disreputable practice than the coloured people themselves; and
whereas it should everywhere be the aim and desire of the
coloured people to welcome any information that may show the
114need of greater race enlightenment, or that shall stir us up to
more earnest efforts for the general elevation of our people;
be it resolved that the League places itself on record as being
both anxious and willing to strike hands with the Herald, or
any one else, in condemning, discountenancing, and stamping out
Voodooism or any other ‘ism’ hurtful to the physical, moral,
or spiritual elevation of the coloured people; and that the League
calls upon good coloured people everywhere to set their face like
a flint against every kind or evil superstition, habit, practice,
custom, or belief, whose tendency, if encouraged, might be to degrade,
belittle, or harm the coloured people in public estimation.”
I may add that, not perhaps at Boston, but
certainly in the South, and especially in Louisiana,
Voodooism exists to-day. I pass on to
criminal statistics as they concern the negro.
I will first take some suggestive statistics concerning
the State of Mississippi, one of the
“blackest” States in the Union, the population,
according to the Census of 1880, having been—white,
479,398; coloured, 650,291. In the
State Penitentiary on December 1, 1885, there
were 103 white and 676 coloured males. Of
the coloured people 113 were mulattoes, and
the total number of coloured criminals in
Mississippi in 1885 would be still further augmented
if the number of judicial and irregular
executions could be ascertained. As it is, it is
clear that an unduly large proportion of criminality
is furnished by the negro and negroid
115population. Mr. H. S. Fulkerson, who has written
an interesting pamphlet on “The Negro” (Vicksburg,
Mississippi, 1887), was induced by these
startling figures to go further into the subject, and
to examine the gaol register of Vicksburg, Mississippi,
from March 1st, 1886, to February 28th,
1887. He found the commitments for the year to
have been 446, as many as 426 of the prisoners
being coloured, and only 20 white. The population
of Vicksburg in 1880 was—whites 5,975; coloured,
5,836. He also examined, for the same period,
the register of Vicksburg Workhouse, an institution
in which violators of the city ordinances, &c.,
are confined. Of 1,416 persons committed 992
were coloured and 424 white. In 1889, in Charleston,
2,202 coloured persons were arrested, as
against only 1,250 whites. Most of the arrests during
the year were made for the following offences:
Whites.
Coloured.
Disorderly conduct
160
518
Drunk
248
165
Drunk and disorderly
242
291
Total
650
974
And here, to put the matter in a nutshell, are the
relative proportions, as gathered from the United
States Census of Prisoners, of black to white
criminality in half a dozen States:—Massachusetts,
1162¾ to 1; Indiana, 6¼; to 1; Illinois, 2·4 to
1; Tennessee, 5 to 1; South Carolina, 6¾ to 1;
and Georgia, 7·8 to 1. Thus in Tennessee the
coloured man is five times as prone to criminality
as the white, and in Georgia nearly eight
times. And it must be borne in mind that these
figures deal only with that portion of the total
criminality which finds its way into prison.
They do not, and no official figures can, take
into account the criminality which is summarily
punished by the operation of lynch law;
and every one who knows the South knows also
that, out of every fifty persons who are lynched
there, at least forty-nine are of coloured complexion.
Of lynching, however, I shall speak later, for it is
mainly reserved as a punishment for one particular
crime, the prevalence of which has a most important
bearing upon the position of the Southern white.
Educationally, the coloured man has undoubtedly
made great progress since his emancipation.
In the slavery days ignorance was imposed
by law upon the slave. Says the South
Carolinian statute of 1834:—“If any person shall
hereafter teach any slave to read or write, or
procure any slave to be taught to read or write,
such person, if a free white person, shall be fined
not exceeding one hundred dollars for each
offence and imprisonment not less than six
117months; or, if a free person of colour, shall be
whipped not exceeding fifty lashes and fined not
exceeding fifty dollars; and, if a slave, shall be
whipped at the discretion of the Court not exceeding
fifty lashes; the informer to be entitled to
one-half the fine and to be a competent witness.”
And up to the day of emancipation the slave was,
with scarcely an exception, kept in the densest
ignorance. From the close of the war to the
taking of the tenth census only fifteen years
elapsed. In that period the adult negro had not
greatly advanced, but the negro youth had made
an amount of progress which, though by no means
startling, was, I think, distinctly encouraging.
The following table shows (1) the illiteracy of the
male adult negro, and (2) the illiteracy of the whole
negro population of the Black Belt in 1880:—
Total Coloured Male Adults.
Illiterate Coloured Male Adults.
Total Coloured Population.
Total Coloured Illiterates.
Virginia
128,257
100,210
631,707
315,660
North Carolina
105,018
80,282
532,505
271,943
South Carolina
118,889
93,010
604,472
310,071
Georgia
143,471
116,516
725,274
391,482
Florida
27,489
19,110
126,838
60,420
Alabama
118,423
96,408
600,320
321,680
Mississippi
130,278
99,068
652,199
319,753
Louisiana
107,977
86,555
484,992
259,429
879,802
691,159
4,358,357
2,250,438
118Thus, while the proportion of male adults
who could read and write was, roughly speaking,
only one in four, the proportion of coloured
people of all ages was one in two. I have been
informed at Washington that the eleventh census
is likely to show that in these States seven coloured
people out of every ten have escaped the imputation
of illiteracy; but at the same time I have
been warned that “writing” necessarily implies
nothing more than ability to laboriously trace a
signature, and that “reading” does not involve
the ability to mark, learn, and inwardly digest
anything more abstruse than a sentence in monosyllables.
As Judge Tourgée has said:—
“One of the encouraging phases of the present situation is
the fact that a coloured man is proud of the distinction of
being able to read and write. It is to him a sort of patent of
nobility. It shows to the world that he has gone above the
level, that he has come up above the mass of his fellows, and
is worthy of distinction and consideration in this respect if in
no other. Because of these facts the statistics of illiteracy
among the coloured people are peculiarly unreliable.”
We may accept them as such, and yet regard
them as encouraging. The level of education is
rising. It has not risen high, and the number of
negroes who possess such an education as is the
property of a senior boy at a London Board
School may probably, even now, not mount to
119six figures. But there is promise in the fact that
the race supplies for its own improvement over
16,000 school teachers. An educated negro has
supplied some statistics on the subject of coloured
education in the South:—
“In 1887–88,” he writes, “there were 15,000 public schools,
having 1,118,556 pupils; 16 normal schools, 119 teachers and
3,924 pupils, with property valued at $992,350; 31 schools for
secondary instruction, 247 teachers, with 6,555 students, and
property valued at $843,100; 11 colleges of arts and sciences,
79 teachers, 922 students, and property valued at $1,443,000;
two schools of science, 29 teachers, 840 students, and property
valued at $50,000; 16 theological schools, 77 teachers, 833
students, and $489,500 in property; 4 law schools, 16 teachers,
81 students, and $40,000 in property; 3 schools of medicine,
48 teachers, 165 students, and $80,000 in property; while
there were 2,081 pupils in schools for the blind and dumb,
making a total of 16,430 teachers, 1,139,904 pupils, and
$3,934,950 in school property.”
Unfortunately there are no symptoms whatever
that the spread of education among the negroes
is causing, or ever will cause, the diminution of
white prejudice against the race.
Concerning the material position of the negroes
opinions vary greatly. There is no doubt, however,
that they are gradually acquiring property,
and, in a few cases, accumulating capital. It
was recently declared that coloured people owned
a million acres of land in Texas alone, paying
120taxes there on twenty million dollars’ worth of
property, and there were in the State twenty-five
coloured lawyers, one hundred coloured merchants,
five thousand coloured mechanics, and fifteen
newspapers conducted by coloured people. Somewhat
similar statements have been made, by
negro speakers and writers chiefly, concerning
the progress of the race elsewhere. Says one
journal:—
“Georgia’s coloured people are making a good record for
thrift and industry. In 1879 their property was valued at
$5,182,398; but in 1887 the valuation was $8,939,479,
showing a gain of 72½ per cent. during the nine years. In the
same time the valuation of white men’s property had risen
from $229,777,150 to $332,565,442, a gain of only 44·6 per
cent. approximately. These figures simply prove what the
intelligent representatives of the negro race have said about
the progress made, and go to illustrate anew that the negroes
are working out their own future. The richest coloured
woman in the South, Mrs. Amanda Ewas, who has a snug
fortune of $400,000, lives in Atlanta.”
On the other hand, the Charleston News and
Courier points out that in Charleston the negroes
stand just where they did in 1860; that the value
of the property held by them to-day is just about
the same as that held by the free negroes twenty-eight
years ago, and that, strange to say, the
coloured property holders are of the same class
121as in 1860, namely, the descendants of negroes
who were free before the war.
I have had an opportunity of examining the
assessment rolls of Chatham County, in which
the city of Savannah, Georgia, is situated.
These, as compiled in the summer of 1889, give
the following results:—
Population.
Property.
Property per Head.
Whites
17,494
$126,420,780
$1,510
Coloured
27,515
571,450
21
The negroes and coloured people, therefore, who
constitute 61 per cent. of the local population,
hold only 2 per cent. of the local wealth.
On the same subject the New Orleans Times-Democrat
says:—
“We doubt whether the value of property held by
coloured men in New Orleans is any greater to-day than that
held by the freedmen of colour in 1860, and yet both in New
Orleans and throughout Louisiana the negro has been
improving his condition steadily. It takes more than one
generation, however, to raise a race held in bonds of slavery to
the condition of property holders. When the hundreds of
millions of dollars that have been paid the negroes in wages
and the millions wasted by them in the veriest trash are
considered, it seems strange that so few dollars have been
invested in land, houses, or any permanent property. The
freedmen of colour who inherited land or houses have held on
122to them, or at least to a portion of them. The negroes
engaged in any very profitable trade or business may have laid
aside something and own some little property, but the great
majority of the race, who are simply farm hands, labourers, or
domestic servants, have acquired no permanent property of
any kind.”
As a further illustration of the relative status
of blacks and whites in what may be regarded
as a representative section of the Black Belt, I
append some interesting and detailed official
statistics of Richmond County, Georgia, a county
which had a total population in 1870 of 25,724,
and in 1880 of 34,665, and which is one of the
most populous and well-to-do counties in the
State. In it, moreover, the races are almost
equally divided.
Polls for 1889—White 5,069, coloured 4,029; total
9,098. Polls for 1888—White 4,923, coloured 3,844; total
8,767—an increase of 331.
Lawyers in 1889—White 50, coloured 1; total 51.
Lawyers in 1888—White 48, coloured 1; total 49—an increase
of 2.
Doctors in 1889—White 53, coloured 1. In 1888—White
46, coloured 2—an increase of 6.
Dentists in 1889—White 11, coloured 1; and the same
for 1888.
Acres of land owned in 1889—White 180,332, coloured
4,943; total 185,275. Acres in 1888—White 180,835¼,
coloured 4,661; total 185,496¼—a decrease of 221¼ acres.
Aggregate value of land in 1889—White $1,571,550, coloured
123$64,440; total $1,638,990. In 1888—White $1,619,720,
coloured $66,810; total $1,686,530—a decrease of $47,540.
Aggregate value of city or town property in 1889—White
$9,713,140, coloured $438,940; total $10,152,080. In 1888—white
$9,364,150, coloured $416,620; total $9,980,770—an
increase of $371,310.
The number of shares in State or national banks is the
same for 1888 and 1889, and is 20,300, and they are all owned
by the whites.
The value of shares of such bank stock for 1889 is returned
at $887,000, and for 1888 was returned at $1,002,000, showing
a decrease of $115,000.
Property owned by gas or electric light companies is all
owned by whites, and is valued in 1889 at $203,840, and for
1888 was returned at $215,250, showing a decrease of
$11,410.
Amount of money and solvent debts, notes, accounts, etc.,
for 1889—whites $1,358,890, coloured $150; total $1,359,040.
In 1888—whites $1,491,630, coloured $150; total $1,491,780—a
decrease of $132,740.
Merchandise of every sort for 1889—whites $1,260,550,
coloured $5,730; total $1,266,280. In 1888—whites
$1,278,290, coloured $5,680; total $1,283,970—a decrease of
$17,690.
The capital invested in shipping and tonnage is all white,
and for 1889 is $16,200. In 1888 it was $27,620—a decrease
of $11,420.
Stocks and bonds are all white, and for 1889 are returned
at $1,209,120, and for 1888 at $1,400,630, showing a decrease
of $191,510.
Cotton manufactories are all white, and are returned for
1889 at $4,023,300, against $3,946,000 for 1888—an increase
of $77,300.
Iron works, foundries, etc., are all white, and are returned
124for 1889 at $33,500, against $35,500, showing a decrease of
$2,000.
Value of household and kitchen furniture, pianos, organs,
etc., for 1889—White $570,690, coloured $17,990; total
$588,680. In 1888—White $550,300, coloured $14,490;
total $564,790—an increase of $23,890.
Watches, silver plate, and jewellery for 1880—White
$74,020, coloured $50; total $74,070. In 1888—White
$77,950, coloured $50; total $78,000—a decrease of $3,930.
Horses, mules, hogs, sheep, cattle, etc., for 1889—White
$200,140, coloured $12,820; total $212,960. In 1888—White
$199,430, coloured $13,580; total $213,016—a decrease
of $50.
Plantation and mechanical tools, law or other library
books, pictures, etc., are all returned by whites, and for 1889
are $63,100, against $71,650 for 1888, showing a decrease of
$8,550.
Cotton, corn, crops, and provisions held for sale on April
1st are all white, and are returned for $350 in 1889 and
$2,000 in 1888, showing a decrease of $1,650.
Value of all other property not before enumerated for
1889—White $405,170, coloured $4,440; total $409,610. In
1888—White $343,430, coloured $3,960; total $357,390—an
increase of $52,220.
Aggregate value of whole property in 1889—White
$21,590,560, coloured $547,560; total $22,138,120. In 1888—White
$21,635,550, coloured $521,340; total $22,156,890—an
aggregated decrease of $18,770.
In view of facts like these, it is hard to know
what to make of the favourite negro declaration
that the coloured people will, in the not distant
future, be as powerful in the South in the matter
125of wealth as they already are in the matter of
numbers. I believe, nevertheless, that it may
be accepted that the material improvement in
the coloured man’s condition is more noticeable
than his improvement in any other direction.
He lives more comfortably and dresses better
than he did eight or ten years ago; and, as his
main ambitions are physical and material rather
than intellectual and æsthetic, he is entitled to
congratulate himself.
The general progress of the negro does not,
however, satisfy those who once cherished the
highest hopes on his behalf. Here is a suggestive,
and, as I happen to know, a true paragraph,
dated Atlanta, Georgia, June 1, 1889, which I
clip from a Southern newspaper:—
“A celebrated English philanthropist was buried here
yesterday, having died at the residence of his daughter, Mrs.
Booth. John Glazebrook was his name, and he was a citizen
of Manchester, England. He was a man of great wealth, and
becoming interested in the abolition of slavery in the United
States, spent thousands of pounds in aiding the agitation. He
paid the expenses of lecturers, had runaway slaves exhibited
before English audiences, and placed his fortune in the scales
to accomplish the abolition of human servitude. A few
months ago he decided to visit this country for the purpose
of seeing whether the negro had improved. He died with the
declaration that he had wasted his money, and that freedom
had brought no benefit to the negro.”
CHAPTER IV. THE POSITION OF THE SOUTHERN WHITE.
127
In the Southern States, and especially in the
States which constitute the Black Belt, the Race
Question has in recent years assumed far more
serious proportions than is generally supposed.
It has, in fact, assumed the proportions of a
species of guerilla race war. Few people, even
in America, thoroughly realise this. The leading
newspapers of the country pay surprisingly little
attention to occurrences outside the district in
which they find the majority of their readers.
There is, so far as I am aware, no neutral journal
which busies itself exclusively with the problem,
and, consequently, Americans and foreigners alike
are without any mirror in which they may
periodically see reflected all the aspects and all
the incidents of the situation. To keep up with
the history of the Race Question the student
must read, not the great newspapers of New
York, Philadelphia, Boston, Chicago, or New
128Orleans, but rather the little county newspapers
of the South—newspapers the very names of
which are scarcely known in the North and
wholly unknown in Europe. And even these
rural newspapers must be read with discretion
and discrimination, for all of them are partisans.
Some make a point of dwelling at length upon
accounts of outrages committed by negroes, and
of almost ignoring accounts of outrages committed
by whites; others—they are, it is true, in
the minority—follow the opposite plan. A few
only are fair; a few only would care to print so
free a confession as the following, which I take
from the Augusta (Georgia) Chronicle, of Jan.
5th, 1890:—
“Laws are powerless either to prevent the commission of
crime or to punish criminals, unless public sentiment forbids the
one and commands the other. Where there is little regard for
human life, and we fear this is the case in many portions of our
country, the courts are often to blame for not hanging those
who slay their fellow-men. Is it not a fact that it is almost
impossible to convict a man of the crime of murder who has
any social position or means to defend himself? Fortunately,
crimes of this sort do not often occur; but, if they did, public
sentiment is so demoralised that the courts would fail of conviction.
This is true as to white men who kill their equals.
If a negro kills a white man, he is pretty sure either to be
lynched or hung. But if a white man slays a negro, he is in
no danger of being lynched, and as to his being hung for the
crime there is not much probability.”
129To understand, therefore, both sides of the
question, and to fully appreciate the seriousness
of the situation, one must be a far more
omnivorous devourer of newspapers than the
ordinary citizen of Great Britain or of America
has time to be. I have had exceptional opportunities.
While I was in the country I met the
leading men of both sides, and had thrust upon
me the newspapers, big and little, of both parties.
Nay, many people who for years have made a
study of the subject were so good as to place
their notes and their volumes of illustrative newspaper
clippings at my disposal. Thus I may
pretend to have secured the broadest and most
far-reaching view of the difficulties amid which
the South stands; and I cannot hide from myself
the conclusion that, as between the races, the
situation throughout the Black Belt is veritably,
as I have said, one of active though unprofessed
guerilla warfare. In the last chapter I gave a
number of examples, selected almost at hazard
from a far larger number which I might have
cited, of the manner in which this warfare is
being waged by the whites against the blacks.
In this I shall give examples, similarly selected to
a great extent, of the manner in which this warfare
is being waged by the blacks against the whites.
I have, I think, amply demonstrated the existence
130of hostility on the white side. What I shall
quote now may, in the opinion of many, provide
good excuse for the existence of that hostility;
but I would submit that it also proves the
inherent and unconquerable mutual antipathy of
the races and their hopeless unsuitability for life
side by side and upon a level of approximate
equality. The antipathy is not between individual
blacks and whites. It is rather such an
antipathy as used to exist between Turks and
Slavs in the Balkan provinces in the days of the
Bulgarian atrocities, although that antipathy was
religious as well as racial and political.
And here let me say at once, deliberately and
without hesitation, that if the racial crimes and
outrages which are of daily occurrence in the
Southern States were taking place in a semi-civilised
part of Europe, and were only half as
well advertised as the events in Bulgaria were,
the public sentiment of Europe would at once
insist upon, and would within six months secure,
reform, even at the cost of war. Such a situation
as sullies the South is a disgrace to the fair name
of Anglo-Saxon civilisation. It is not for me to
attempt to apportion the blame. Doubtless there
are grave faults on both sides. As an unprejudiced
observer, I can merely declare generally
that the condition of affairs is not only a
131scandal so far as the United States are concerned,
but also a matter of which all civilised humanity
has cause to be ashamed.
It was my good fortune in the course of my
tour to meet, and to confer very intimately with,
the anonymous author of the most remarkable
book that has yet appeared upon the Race Question.
I mean “An Appeal to Pharaoh,” a
volume published in the winter of 1889 in New
York by Messrs. Fords, Howard, and Hulbert.
To this volume I must make further allusion
when I come to consider the difficult, but inevitable,
problem—what is to be done? At
present I mention it incidentally for the reason
that I am anxious to repeat here something that
its writer said to me, and for the reason that all
who have read the work will, I am sure, extend
due deference to any opinion expressed by so
competent and unbiased an authority. My friend
knows the South as few know it, and he has for
the negro a genuine and kindly regard; yet, said
he, “if the option were offered me of taking my
wife and family into one of the black country
districts of the South, or into a jungle full of
wild beasts, and if I were obliged to leave
them without proper protection, I would unhesitatingly
choose the jungle.” I did not ask
why. I knew that it was because no white woman
132is safe, from hour to hour, in those black country
districts. It was because the race war on the
black man’s side is waged largely, though not exclusively,
against the whites who are least
capable of self-protection, and whose safety is
held most precious by those to whom they are
near and dear. I am bound to produce evidence
concerning this awful phase of the struggle; and,
unfortunately, there is evidence in plenty ready
to my hand. “Lynched for the usual crime” is
a stereotyped heading in many scores of Southern
newspapers. Nor, as a rule, is the brutality of
the negro’s act much less conspicuous than the
speed and cruelty with which the victim is
avenged. On both sides it is a terrible and
almost unparalleled state of affairs. I will restrict
myself to the recital at length of one case
only:—
“Louisville, Kentucky, September 2nd, 1889.—The Courier
Journal has a special from Somerset, Kentucky, which states
that news has reached there of a brutal outrage committed
upon the twelve-year-old daughter of William Oates, a prominent
and wealthy farmer residing a few miles from Montecello.
Mr. Oates has two daughters, aged respectively twelve and
fourteen years. Mr. and Mrs. Oates left home on business,
and left the two young girls in charge of the house. Mr.
Oates had in his employ a negro boy about grown. Knowing
that the old folks were away, he entered the house, and, after
locking the door upon the two girls, assaulted the younger.
133The elder girl escaped from the room, and, going to a neighbour’s
house, gave the alarm. A posse was organised and
started in pursuit. The negro was caught in the woods and
tied to a stake. A rail pen was then built around him, coal
oil was poured over him and upon the rails, matches were
applied, and the negro was burnt to death.”
Similar outrages are, practically, of every-day
occurrence. All of them do not get into the newspapers.
Many families, unwilling to publish their
disgrace and misfortune, bear their trouble in
silence. Many of the criminals, too, are never
caught: but here is proof of the commonness of
such crimes as the above. All the cases alluded
to took place during 1890, and, as will be seen,
within a very short period, and all were chronicled
in the newspapers.
On October 30th, near Valdosta, Lowndes
County, Georgia, a negro, named Lowe, assaulted
a Miss Hardee. He was arrested, but taken from
the officers the same night by a mob of whites,
tied to a tree, and shot to death.
On November 1st, eight miles from Columbia,
South Carolina, and a mile and a half from the
Winnsboro Road, a negro attempted to assault
and then murdered Miss Florence Hornsby, aged
sixteen. A youth named Hagood was arrested
for the crime. Six years before, this youth’s
father had been lynched near Woodward’s store,
134at Rockton, for assaulting a lady of Fairfield
County.
On November 3rd, in Twigg’s County, Georgia,
a Miss Howell, aged seventeen, was assaulted by
a negro named Owen Jones, who, having been
caught and having confessed, was hung by citizens
on a tree on the road from Hawkinsville to Allentown,
fifty shots being then fired into his body.
On November 6th, Mrs. J. G. Bailey, of Arlington,
Tennessee, was killed by a negro, who
escaped, pursued by a posse of citizens intent
upon lynching him.
On the night of November 8th, at Annapolis,
Maryland, threats were made to lynch a coloured
man named Forbes, who was in custody there for
having assaulted a white girl. Revolvers were
freely drawn, and a serious riot between whites
and blacks was only prevented by the calling out
of the Governor’s Guards.
On November 17th, a negro named Henry
Smith, who a few days before had assaulted one
Mrs. Calhoun, was lynched near Chin’s Trestle,
Alabama. Another negro was lynched near Hillman,
Alabama, on the same day.
Early in the morning of November 18th, a
negro named William Singleton was lynched at
Macon, Georgia, for an attempted assault upon
the daughter of the late Chief Justice Lumpkin.
135Singleton was hanged, and two volleys of pistol-shots
were fired into the body.
I might, if the topic were not so repulsive,
cite hundreds of other examples. What I have
written is, I imagine, quite sufficient to show that
the situation of white women in many parts of the
South is a very perilous one. Nor is this all.
Throughout the South, and even elsewhere, the
negro is as ready to kill the white man as the
white man is to kill him. I have mentioned in
the last chapter a number of cases in which, speaking
generally, the whites were to blame. Here
are some cases, all of recent occurrence, in most of
which the initiative seems to have come, directly
or indirectly, from the blacks, although the
savagery displayed was often about equal on both
sides:—
On October 18th, 1890, at Winston, North
Carolina, a white gentleman named Silas Riggs
was attacked in the street by a mob of negroes.
He took refuge in a bar-room. The negroes followed
and “dared” him to come out. A few
whites who were in the room sallied forth, a fight
ensued, Mr. Riggs was killed, and several other
people were badly wounded.
On October 21st–22nd, 1890, in Ware County,
Georgia, a dispute concerning land arose. Thomas
Seers, one of the disputants, shot a negro. The
136negroes retaliated, killing B. E. M‘Lendon,
F. Seers, and T. Seers, and wounding another
white. The despatch announcing this to the
Charleston World says:—“Much of the territory
is covered with dense pine forests, the working of
which for turpentine employs large numbers of
both white and black. These are very illiterate,
and there is much race prejudice, which frequently
leads to conflicts.”
“Opelika, Alabama, October 26th, 1890.—Bob
Redding, the notorious negro desperado, who
has been sought for ten years, was shot and killed
at three o’clock this morning by Policeman
Gibson.”
On October 27th, 1890, at the Jing-a-Ling
Saloon, North College Street, Nashville, Tennessee,
a coloured man named Lee asked the bartender
for a tin of oysters, and was refused. He
left, but returned with a stone, which he attempted
to throw. Before he could do so the
white, whose name was William Young, shot him
dead.
On November 1st, 1890, at Greenville, South
Carolina, a negro named Sam Swinger struck
with an axe a white man named P. M. Connelly,
who died a few days afterwards from his injuries.
On November 4th, 1890, near Lexington,
Georgia, at a negro “hot supper,” a negro,
137named Willis Collins, quarrelled with a white,
named Wheless, who shot him with a pistol.
On November 4th, 1890, election day, at
Irwine, Estill County, Kentucky, a white, named
Dr. P. A. Lilly, brought up to the polls a negro,
named Charles White. John Wilson, Commissioner
of Schools for the county, challenged
White’s right to vote. Upon this Lilly and
Wilson quarrelled and drew their pistols. Wilson
was hit twice, but was still able to fire twice, one
of his bullets striking Lilly near the heart. Then
William, a brother of John Wilson, intervened,
and took away Lilly’s pistol. Lilly, however,
drew a large knife and thrice stabbed John. A
brother of Dr. Lilly also intervened, but John
Wilson, lying in his blood, fired at and fatally
wounded him, and, dragging himself across to
where Dr. Lilly lay, dashed out Lilly’s brains
with his pistol. Several bystanders were slightly
wounded; the two Lillys and John Wilson died.
On November 8th, 1890, at Fairmount, near
Marion, Indiana, on the occasion of a Democratic
fête, a negro named Tom Uttley interfered
in the proceedings. A white named W. H.
Campbell defied him, and both drew their pistols
and fired simultaneously. Each had fired two
harmless shots, when a white named Con Paul
flung a brick at the negro, who turned and shot
138him dead. Another negro, named Rayser, came
to the assistance of Uttley, and was shot through
the left leg and right arm. Uttley fled, but was
captured. In the mêlée, besides Paul and Rayser,
four men were seriously wounded.
It cannot, I think, be necessary to say much
more in order to prove the existence in the United
States of race prejudice of a very dangerous and
inflammable sort. The Southern white may be
as well off, as regards the negro, as he deserves
to be; but, nevertheless, his position and the
position of his womankind are not enviable; and
it tends to—nay, a large body of the negroes
intend that it shall—become worse. Here is
what appeared in August, 1889, in a newspaper
called the Independent, which was published in
Selma, Alabama, under the editorship of a negro
preacher, named Bryan:—
“Were you (the whites) to leave this Southland, in twenty
years it would be one of the grandest sections of the globe.
We would show you mossback-crackers how to run a country.
You would never see convicts, half-starved, depriving honest
working-men of an honest living. It is only a matter of time
when throughout this whole State affairs will be changed, and,
I hope, to your sorrow. We were never destined to be always
servants, but, like all other races, will and must have our day.
You now have yours. You have had your revolutionary and
civil wars, and we here predict that at no very distant day we
will have our war, and we hope, as God intends, that we will
139be strong enough to wipe you out of existence, or hardly leave
enough of you to tell the story.”
And yet the armchair theorists of the North
say:—“All is well; the race question in the
South may now safely be left to settle itself.”
It will never settle itself, unless by wholesale
bloodshed.
One must have lived in the South to appreciate
the ever-widening gap that exists between the
races. One must have lived in the South to
appreciate the strength of the passions that lie
half slumbering there, but are always ready to
awake. Here, by way of partial illustration, is a
summary of a speech which was made in September,
1889, in the Georgia Senate by Senator
Gibbs, in favour of the repeal of the law prohibiting
emigration agents from working in the State,
his idea being to facilitate coloured emigration.
Senator Gibbs claimed that the State would not
be ruined by the loss of a race of people who,
in their emancipated condition, were unfit for
labourers. The free negro, he said, was worthless
as a labourer. Emancipated, he became
useless and lapsed into barbarous Voodooism.
He quoted figures to sustain the position that
freedom had destroyed the negroes’ usefulness.
Notwithstanding the great increase of blacks since
the war, production had in Georgia suffered a
140loss of nearly one-half. This, to him, denoted
the great demoralisation which had overtaken
negro labour, and accounted for the enormous
class of vagabond negroes whose presence in the
State was a “continual menace to property, to
peace, and to virtue.” It was highly necessary,
he maintained, to get rid of this dangerous
criminal element. The lives of Southern women
were actually circumscribed and bound in, for
fear of assault at the hands of these scoundrels.
Unless something should be done to relieve the
strain which owed its existence to the presence of
these wretches, the time would come, before long,
when the white people would rise as one man
and demand emigration or extermination. “It
has only been a short time since,” said he, “that
one of the villains having suffered as he deserved
at East Point, the negroes formed a plot to burn
that town and kill the citizens. Nothing was
said about that; but as soon as the whites rose to
defend themselves, and castigated some of the
plotters, the cry of ‘Outrage!’ was heard from
one end of the land to the other. ‘Outrage on
innocent negroes,’ to discourage them in their
lawlessness! I care not what course the courts
may take; when the white men strike for home
and fireside I am with them. There is not room
in this country for both the negro and the
141Yankee. Vast sums have been expended to educate
negroes, who have never done and will never
do the State the least good. On the contrary,
they are always ready, at the call of the carpetbagger
and his base Southern ally, to do her all
the harm in their power.”
These extracts give no notion of the violence
of the speaker’s language, but only of the tone
of his speech, which admirably represented the
blind intolerance of that section of Southern
whites that refuses to see any good whatever in
the negro, and that seems not even to recognise
his humanity.
The very carelessness of the negroes on the
subject of the white man’s most cherished creeds
and principles has more than once gone near to
provoke a dreadful outbreak. The article already
cited from the Selma Independent narrowly
escaped doing so, although it contained only
vulgar threats. More dangerous was an article
that was printed in August, 1887, in another
negro paper, the Montgomery Herald. “Every
day or so,” it said brutally, “we read of the
lynching of some negro for outraging some white
woman. Why is it that white women attract
negro men more than in former days? There
was a time when such a thing was unheard of.
There is a secret to this thing, and we greatly
142suspect it is the growing appreciation of the
white Juliet for the coloured Romeo as he
becomes more and more intelligent and refined.
If something is not done to break up these lynchings
it will be so that after a while they will
lynch every coloured man that looks at a white
woman with a twinkle in his eye.”
The writer of that article, like many of his
race, did not, one may charitably hope, realise
the attitude of the Southern white women towards
the negroes. If he did realise it, and if he knew
that no Southern white for an instant admits the
social equality of the races, he was guilty of
something very much like playing with gunpowder.
Surely the prevailing sentiment of the
whites on the subject of social equality is sufficiently
indicated by the existence in many States
of laws forbidding mixed marriages, and by the
existence in all of unwritten laws which oust the
white makers of mixed unions from society, even
of the humblest and least conventional character.
The white man is blamable enough, but not the
white woman. There was much truth in a speech
of Dr. Fulton’s on the subject of “The Negro’s
Redemption,” which I once listened to, although,
I think, he ought not to have mentioned black
women in his remarks. The chief sinners—if
sinners they can be called in such connection—are
143the coloured, as distinct from the pure negro,
women of the South. Dr. Fulton declared that
the social relations of the whites and blacks in
the South were on the same level to-day as when
slavery existed; even men high in religious
circles ran no risk of ostracisation when it became
known they were the fathers of children by
coloured concubines.
And while the armchair theorist of the North
is easy in his mind with regard to the race
question, concerning which he knows practically
nothing, the Southern white man, who ought to
know all the dangers of the situation, is, I am
obliged to admit, strangely indifferent to them.
His idea seems to be, “There are dangers in the
future; but the present situation will probably
last as long as I live, and so I have no need to
greatly worry myself about it. I do not fear the
negro; I do not believe in his power of organisation;
and if he were to rise we could crush him
into resignation.” He seems to be unmindful of
the fact that the existence of the Black Belt in
the South paralyses his material progress and
fetters his whole action as a citizen. Capital
does not go Southward in search of an investment,
or, if it go, it goes seldom, and it goes
with hesitation. It has no confidence in a country
which may any day fall again under the rule of
144a black majority, and may then drift back into
the anarchy of the Reconstruction period. And,
although the white man does not personally fear
the negro, he so much fears him corporately that
all his political principles and leanings have
vanished in face of the one great question, Shall
the white rule or the black?
The Southern whites form to-day one political
party. Their point of union is not the tariff, not
civil service reform, not the pension system, but
simply and solely the one question. The penalty
is that now for years past one party has been
continuously in power throughout the Solid South,
and that it has had practically no opposition.
This is an unwholesome state of public affairs;
it would be undesirable anywhere. In America
it is particularly dangerous, for it tends to corrupt.
The Southern State Governments are, it
must be admitted, better and purer than, in the
circumstances, might be reasonably expected;
but every intelligent Southerner sees and feels
the bad influence.
The South, however, has a choice of two evils,
and she has chosen the least. She is not responsible
for the situation. She can only make the
best of it. An illustration of what I mean was
afforded during the 1890 elections in South Carolina.
The two candidates for Governor were
145Haskell and Tillman. Haskell is an honoured
veteran of the war, a tried statesman, a general
favourite, and an upright and courteous gentleman.
Tillman’s experience of arms is confined
to participation in a race riot; he is new to politics;
he is the favourite only of the lower and
least reputable class of whites; and his election
utterances betray him as glaringly deficient in
tact and gravely lacking in conventional politeness.
Both are Democrats. It was Tillman’s
fortune, thanks to the influence of the Farmers’
Alliance, to be the nominee of the Democratic
Convention; and on that point the whole contest
turned. All the best men in the State wanted
Haskell, and did not want Tillman; but Haskell
had been offered Republican support, and so,
rather than vote for Haskell, the best men either
abstained or voted for Tillman. It would never
do, they felt, to allow Haskell to come into power
on a wave which was partially composed of negro
and Republican votes. Party discipline, therefore,
prevailed over personal preference, and the
worse man won. But for the presence of a negro
majority in South Carolina, Haskell would no
doubt have been elected. How true it is, as
Jefferson said, that American institutions are
founded on jealousy and distrust, and not on
confidence!
146Yet, although the white resents the presence
of the black, and forbids the black to fully exercise
such rights as the Federal Government has
conferred upon him, the white is, withal, more
dependent to-day upon the negro than the negro
is upon the white. There can be no question
that the sudden removal to-morrow of every
white man from the Black Belt would cause far
less inconvenience to the negroes than the sudden
removal of every black and coloured man would
cause to the whites. The needs of the negro are
small, and he can supply most of them by his
own exertion. The needs of the white man are
relatively large, and he has been for generations
accustomed to have most of them supplied to him
by the exertion of the negro—first as slave, and,
for the last quarter of a century, as very lightly
paid freedman. The result is that in certain
spheres of labour the negro is supreme throughout
the South. He has no white rivals, for
the reason that the wages which content him
would be scorned by the lowest and poorest
white in the country. His disappearance, therefore,
would leave those particular spheres—the
cottonfield, the plantations, the domestic servants’
department, and many more—absolutely
empty. In a word, without the negro, or without,
at least, some substitute for the negro, the
147Southern white would for a time be in danger
of starving.
Let me not be here understood to mean that
upon the whole the South is unsuitable as the
white man’s home. It is, on the contrary, a fit
home and, in most parts, a healthy one for him.
The death-rate per thousand inhabitants in the
eight most distinctively Southern States is given
in the 1880 census report as follows: Alabama,
14·20; Arkansas, 18·46; Florida, 11·72; Georgia,
13·97; Louisiana, 15·44; Mississippi, 12·89; North
Carolina, 15·39; and South Carolina, 15·80. These
are the swampy, malarial States, commonly accounted
most pestilential in climate. Compare
their death-rates with those of eight other
States commonly accounted salubrious in climate:
Indiana, 15·78; Kansas, 15·22; Massachusetts,
18·59; New Hampshire, 16·09; New Jersey, 16·33;
New York, 17·38; Rhode Island, 17; and Illinois,
14·63. The comparison is not unfavourable to the
South; and it must be borne in mind that the
death-rates given for the Southern States named
include negroes as well as whites, a fact which
enormously swells the average, for the reason
that the negro death-rate is much higher than the
white, and in many cases more than doubles it.
The fact that the menial work of the South
is done by the negro, combined with the fact
148that the black race is despised by the white, is
responsible for the existence in the South of a
class of whites such as is met with nowhere else
in the United States; I mean the poor and idle
and unashamed class. These people will not
undertake menial work as we understand it.
They believe that, if they did so, they would
ipso facto place themselves on a level with the
negroes.
The upshot is that the Southern white man is,
as a rule, either a “boss,” (that is, an employer of
labour) or a “loafer.” The “boss” is generally
a good citizen; the “loafer” is uniformly a bad
one, but he seems to be a necessary product of
the situation. The presence of the negro has
created him, and he is a very dangerous factor
in the race problem. He is the man who preys
upon the community, white as well as black. He
deems it more worthy of his white manhood to
be a gambler, a corrupt political adventurer, a
haunter of low saloons, a braggart and a swaggerer,
than to work for a poor but honest living.
And even the white man who is not a “loafer,”
but a “boss,” is often enough a very small “boss”
indeed—the farmer of a few thin and infertile
acres—a citizen who is only a “boss” because, for
race reasons, he is too proud to accept employment.
In one of the North-Western States he
149would naturally be a “farm-hand,” and would be
much better off than he is, as his own master, in
Georgia or Mississippi.
The result of this condition of affairs is that
in the Black Belt wealth is less equally divided
than it is elsewhere. There is the small class of
white capitalists, there is the larger class of poor
whites, and there is the still larger class of negroes,
most of whom live literally from hand to mouth.
The war is, of course, partially responsible for a
certain amount of white poverty; but the main
cause is, as I have said, the presence of the
negro; and upon poverty and false pride follows
ignorance. There is more white ignorance in the
South than in any other part of the States. The
average percentage of white illiteracy among
people of ten years old and upwards in the
Northern States in 1880 was 5·2; and it varied
from 3·5 in Nebraska, 3·6 in Oregon, 3·7 in
Kansas, and 3·8 in Iowa, to 7·0 in Indiana and
10·9—a wholly exceptional figure—in Rhode
Island. But the average percentage of white
illiteracy among people of ten years old and upwards
in the States of the Black Belt in 1880 was
22·2, the percentage in the individual States
being—Mississippi, 16·3; Virginia, 18·2; Louisiana,
18·4; Florida, 19·9; South Carolina, 21·9;
Georgia, 22·9; Alabama, 24·7; and North
150Carolina, 31·5. And this comparison, significant
as it is, does not show the whole extent of
Southern white illiteracy, for the figures above
given refer not merely to the native, but also to
the foreign-born population. Putting aside the
latter, one finds that while the average native
white illiteracy in the North was but 3·2 per cent.,
that in the South was 24·7 per cent. Thus, of
every four native-born whites in the Black Belt,
three only even pretended to be able to read and
write. The proportion of native white illiterates
in the whole North was no more than one in thirty-one.
In Massachusetts it was considerably less
than one in a hundred. So much for the
demoralising influence of the situation upon the
white man. I have now to review some of the
suggested solutions to the race problem.
CHAPTER V. SOME SUGGESTED SOLUTIONS.
151
When freedom was first given to the Slaves in
the South, no one suspected that the measure was
destined to create a new and more difficult phase
of a problem which had already brought the
Union to the verge of ruin. Nearly every one
believed that manumission would, in course of
time, solve the race question; and those who did
not believe that manumission alone would produce
this result, were apparently convinced that manumission
combined with extension of the suffrage,
and with the concession of full rights of citizenship
to the freedmen, could not possibly fail to be
efficacious; and so Amendment XV. was passed
as a final panacea.
But, in fairness to the foresight of a discerning
minority, it should be remembered that the
amendment was not passed unanimously. It was
rejected by California, Delaware, Kentucky,
Indiana, Oregon, and Tennessee, and later, on
reflection, by New York. It is true that it was
152ultimately ratified by 29 out of 37 States.
Several of these were, however, at the time under
“Reconstruction,” and the ratification from Virginia,
South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia,
Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas,
and Texas, may be supposed to have been
to some extent exacted under duress. Still, the
question of giving suffrage to the negro was not
then anywhere regarded from the point of view
from which it is now seen by the best men of all
parties. As Judge Tourgée has pointed out, it
was confidently predicted by every theorist who
speculated upon the subject, that the negro would
wither away under the influences of freedom and
civilisation. It was unhesitatingly asserted, and
almost universally believed, that the first decade
of liberty would show the race to have been decimated
by disease, debauchery, and the lack of the
master’s paternal care. It was not an unnatural
conclusion for men to arrive at who devoutly
believed in the negro’s incapacity for self-support.
Mr. Tourgée adds:—
“That the people of the North should believe it also is
hardly to be wondered at. They have always reflected the
Southern idea of the negro in everything, except as to his natural
right to be free and to exercise the rights of the freeman.
The North, however, has never desired the numerical
preponderance of the coloured man, and has especially desired
153to avoid responsibility in regard thereto. From the first it
seems to have been animated by a sneaking notion that after
having used the negro to fight its battles, freed him as the
natural result of the overthrow of a rebellion based on slavery,
and enfranchised him to constitute a political foil to the
ambition and disloyalty of his former master, it could at any
time unload him upon the States where he chanced to dwell,
wash its hands of all further responsibility in the matter, and
leave him to live or die as chance might determine. It seems
a hard saying, but there is very little doubt that, side by side
with the belief in the Northern mind that the negro would
disappear beneath the glare of civilisation, was a half-conscious
feeling that such disappearance would be a very
simple and easy solution of a troublesome question.
It being, then, the prevalent and all but
general impression that the negro would soon die
out, it scarcely occurred to legislators to question
whether or nor it might complicate matters to make
him, for his short season on earth, a full voting
citizen. Had it been foreseen that, far from
dying out, the negro would increase and multiply
to an almost unheard-of extent, there would, we
may be sure, have been much more hesitation
than there was over the passing of Amendment
XV. That amendment may be repealed at any
time by the action of two-thirds of both Houses
of Congress, and by subsequent ratification by
three-fourths of the States of the Union; but to
look for its repeal now is hopeless.
Colonel T. B. Edgington, a Northerner, recognising
154the menace of negro suffrage to Southern
civilisation, proposed, in a speech delivered at
Memphis in June, 1889, to get over this phase of
the difficulty by limiting the right to vote among
the negroes, and by making the office of voter, or
suffragist among them, an elective office—an
office that a man shall hold, say for four years,
by election of the whole body of the people, or
by election of the coloured people alone, if this
course seem preferable. Thus no property or
educational qualification would be required. The
end desired could be attained by so adjusting
and limiting the negro vote that it should not exceed
say 5 or 10 per cent. of the white vote on
any given question or issue.
There have been many other advocates in
favour of limitation or suspension of negro suffrage;
and a movement towards this end has
lately made much progress in Mississippi; but,
upon the whole, it seems to me that, as I have
said, to look for the repeal of Amendment XV. is
hopeless.
Nor would its repeal at the present date solve
the difficulty. It would rather accentuate it; for
the negro would not submit to be thus set back
upon his upward path. Indeed, repeal of the
Amendment is even more ridiculous as a remedy
than is another measure which, nevertheless, has
155more than once been advocated by speakers and
writers who ought to have known better—I mean
the extermination of the inconvenient race: for,
whereas extermination would be undoubtedly
effective, repeal would only reopen the difficulty
in a new and inflamed phase.
Neither policy is to be seriously considered.
The United States have, both as individual
States and as a Union, incurred towards the
negro liabilities which cannot be repudiated or
shirked. The country kidnapped and imported
the negro, enslaved him or connived at his enslavement,
used him for national purposes, freed
him and put power into his hands; and it cannot
now or ever shake off all responsibility concerning
him. As he is, he is, for many reasons, an
undesirable fellow-citizen; but he was created a
fellow-citizen to suit the temporary political
interests of the North; and, having served those
interests, he is not now to be disowned and cast
out a beggar. Equality between the races is
a hopeless dream; yet the whole fabric of
American institutions rests upon the assumed
equality of the citizens. If American institutions
honestly and freely tolerated the existence of
“classes,” the race question would never have
attained its present importance. The negro,
while “keeping his place,” might still have
156enjoyed his vote. As things stand, he is
practically, in spite of his nominal rights, an
alien. When, as in the Reconstruction Period,
he exercised his rights most fully, he did so to
the prejudice of the rights of the Southern white,
who was then, as it were, the alien. Now, when
the white Southerner has fully resumed the
exercise of his rights, the black man suffers
proportionately. And every day’s experience
shows more and more clearly that real equality
in the South, as between whites and blacks, is
impossible of attainment. Says the New York
Tribune, with bitterness but with truth:—
“There may be one faith, one baptism, and one name under
Heaven whereby men may be saved, but in South Carolina
there must be a white man’s church, high-toned and very
respectable, and a place somewhere outside where the negroes
may herd together without disturbing the pious meditations of
their superiors. Simon of Cyrene, who carried the cross, was
a negro, but that passage in the Gospels can be bracketed if
need be, and not read in the white churches of Charleston
during Holy Week. The Ethiopian eunuch baptised by Philip
could not have had a white skin, but that chapter can be
omitted in the liturgical order of second lessons. The white
saints will kindly consent to pray every Sunday for all sorts
and conditions of men, provided ‘the niggers’ are taught to remain
in their own place and not to intrude where they are not
wanted. They will live and die in the faith and communion of
their white fathers and white grandfathers, with no negroes on
the sacred premises, except possibly the coloured sexton, who
157must not under any circumstances be a communicant, but
merely a sweep. What arrangements will be made for their
benefit in the next world they cannot tell, but they may at
least indulge the pious hope that there will be a separate
‘nigger heaven’—an adjunct, like their own coloured convention,
to the white man’s paradise—a separate missionary
jurisdiction with swarthy angels and combination negro
melodies.”
I would merely add, by way of comment,
that Charleston and South Carolina are by no
means the most intolerant and intolerable places
in which the Southern negro is at present
dwelling.
I have alluded to two suggested, but ineffective
or impracticable, ways out of the difficulty.
Another scheme, from which in the early
days of the negro’s freedom much was expected,
was the gradual fusion of the races. Miscegenation,
or intermarriage between whites and blacks,
was, for a season, the favourite prescription of
theorists, especially in the North, whence to this
moment comes plenty of theory, with little or no
practical help. Another suggested remedy was
education. If, said the counsellors, you educate
the negro thoroughly well, you will render him
as good a citizen as the white man. Let me deal
separately with each of these plans, as well as
with yet another—namely, the surrender of the
Black Belt to the black, and the constitution of
158recognised Black States as members of the
Union. I will deal with them in the order in
which they appear to have found favour, and first
with the least promising.
Surrender, no matter in what form it may be
advocated and brought about, involves the unjustifiable
premise that the negro is fit for self-government.
It has never been proposed that the
States of the Black Belt, or any portion of them,
shall be allowed independence. No one has gone
further than to suggest that the whites, or the
great body of whites, shall retire from them with
indemnity. The relationship of the States to the
Union would remain as at present. The State
government and representation would simply be
left to the negroes and the coloured people, the
rights of such whites as might elect to stay being,
of course, as much as possible secured. The
lessons of history and experience are, in the
highest degree, discouraging for the success of
such a scheme, could it, which I very much
doubt, be carried out in its initial stages. Says
Mr. J. A. Froude, in “The English in the West
Indies”:—
“There is a saying in Hayti that the white man has no
rights which the blacks are bound to recognise.... They
can own no freehold property, and exist only on tolerance.
They are called ‘white trash.’ Black dukes and marquises
159drive over them in the street and swear at them....
Englishmen move about Jacmel as if they were ashamed of
themselves among their dusky lords and masters. The presence
of Europeans in any form is barely tolerated.”
And here is the same writer’s summary of the
history of San Domingo:—
“St. Domingo, of which Hayti is the largest division, was
the earliest island discovered by Columbus, and the finest in
the Caribbean Ocean. The Spaniards found there a million or
two of mild and innocent Indians, whom ... they converted
off the face of the earth, working them to death in their
mines and plantations. They filled their places with blacks
from Africa. They colonised, they built cities; they throve
and prospered for nearly two hundred years, when Hayti was
taken from them and made a French province. The French
kept it till the Revolution. They built towns, they laid out
farms and sugar fields, they planted coffee all over the island,
where it now grows wild. Vast herds of cattle roamed over
the mountains, splendid houses rose over the rich savannahs.
The French Church put out its strength; there were churches
and priests in every parish. So firm was the hold that they
had gained that Hayti, like Cuba, seemed to have been made a
part of the old world, and as civilised as France itself. The
Revolution came, and the reign of Liberty. The blacks took
arms; they surprised the plantations; they made a clean sweep
of the whole French population.... The island being
thus derelict, Spain and England both tried their hands to
recover it, but failed; ... and a black nation, with a
Republican Constitution, and a population, perhaps, of about a
million and a half of pure-blood negroes, has since been in unchallenged
possession, and has arrived at the condition which
has been described to us by Sir Spenser St. John.”
160What that condition is has been painted in
lurid, but not exaggerated, colours by Sir
Spenser, to whose book reference should be
made. Mr. Froude sufficiently sketches it in the
following passages:—
“Morals in the technical sense they have none.”
“A religion which will keep the West Indian blacks from
falling back into devil-worship is still to seek,”
“In spite of schools and missionaries, 70 per cent. of the
children now born among them are illegitimate.”
“Behind the religiosity, there lies active and alive the
horrible revival of the Western African superstitions; the
serpent-worship, and the child sacrifice, and the cannibalism.
The facts are notorious.”
“There is no sign, not the slightest, that the generality of
the race are improving either in intelligence or moral habits;
all the evidence is the other way.”
“Ninety years of negro self-government have had their use
in showing what it really means.... The movement is
backward, not forward.”
Not only in St. Domingo has the experiment
of negro self-government been tried under
pseudo-civilised conditions. It has been tried
also in Liberia, and with almost equally bad
results. To-day in Liberia whites are treated
by the blacks much as blacks are treated by
whites in the South. A negro State has never
yet shown itself worthy to rank on terms of
equality with a white one, and there are no
161symptoms that it will ever reach that level.
Diplomatic intercourse with such States cannot
be carried on under ordinary conditions; neither
can commercial transactions. Black rule means
anarchy, and it invariably brings to the front the
fact that the negro hates the white as much as
the white hates him, and is even more ready than
the white is to play the tyrant and the oppressor.
Life for a white in every existing negro State is
well-nigh unendurable. A fringe of negro States
on the southern and south-eastern borders of the
Union would, therefore, be a perpetual danger to
the whole Federation.
Education is a supposed panacea that has been
more widely advocated; and amongst its ablest
champions is Judge Tourgée. But education,
although it may in time civilise and soften the
more naturally intelligent of the coloured people,
will, I am convinced, do very little for the pure-blooded
negro, the man with the facial angle of
about 70 deg. You cannot make a silk purse out
of a sow’s ear, and you cannot make a Solon out
of a person with an unsuitably constructed head.
Coloured people and blacks in the South have now
for quite twenty years been more or less subjected
to the influences of education. Almost anyone
who may have so desired has been able during
that period, and, indeed, for a longer time, to
162obtain instruction of all kinds—technical, linguistic,
mathematical, scientific, and philosophical,
as well as elementary. In fact, there is in
the South even less practical difficulty in the way
of the poor negro of genius, if such a being exist,
than in the way of the poor white of genius; for
philanthropic people have established free colleges
and schools for him, and stand ready to give him
all possible encouragement to persevere and make
a name and a fortune. Yet, in spite of this, the
pure-blooded negroes who have come to the front
in any way may be counted on one’s fingers—perhaps
on the fingers of one hand. A greater
number of coloured people—mulattoes and cross-breeds
of various tinctures—have profited by the
opportunities given. Among these, one of the
most noteworthy is Mr. B. K. Bruce, of Mississippi.
He was born of slave parents in Virginia,
in 1841, and went to Mississippi in his boyhood,
subsequently removing to Missouri, but returning
in 1869. His education was limited, and while
following the occupation of a planter, he held the
position of Sergeant-at-Arms of the State Senate
for two years, Sheriff and Tax Collector of
Bolivar County for four years, a Levée Commissioner
for three years, and was elected to the
U.S. Senate in 1875. He now holds a responsible
Government post at Washington. Another
163notable coloured man is Mr. F. Douglass, who is
many times mentioned in these pages, and who
is now United States Minister to Hayti. He
had previously been one of the San Domingo
Commissioners; was a trustee of the Howard
University and of the Freedman’s Bank, and was
appointed United States Marshal for the District
of Columbia by President Hayes, and Recorder
of Deeds for the District by President Garfield.
He is the fourth coloured Minister to Hayti, his
predecessors having been Messrs. E. D. Bassett,
J. U. Langston, and J. E. W. Thompson. Mr.
R. B. Elliott, a coloured man who was born at
Boston and educated in England, has held several
high positions in South Carolina, including a seat
in the Forty-second and Forty-third Congress,
from which he resigned. Mr. Pinchback, Lieutenant
Governor of Louisiana, who afterwards
contested a seat in the Senate, is another of the
leading coloured men.
But these are not the individuals with the
negro facial angle and the full negro characteristics,
neither do they form the majority
of the negro and negroid population. Moreover,
they are, I am assured, decreasing in
numbers, and, although more intelligent than the
pure blacks, are, as a general rule, even less
desirable as citizens. But of this later. Suffice
164it to say that education has not produced such
results as might fairly be expected from it; and
that the educated man of colour, if severed from
white influence and stimulus, seems to evince an
ineradicable tendency to “hark back” to the
vices, the superstitions, and the weaknesses of his
ancestors; while, as I have already said, education
does not abolish race prejudice, and scarcely
ameliorates it. The educated black becomes
doubly conscious of the contempt in which the
whites hold him and his race; while the white
looks upon the educated black as a doubly
dangerous rival and possible enemy. In the
meantime, with every scrap of education that he
assimilates, the black imbibes increased anxiety
to assume that position as a citizen which the
white is, above all things, determined that the
coloured man shall never hold in the South.
Even the Boston Transcript, a Northern paper,
recognises this fact. “We have always said,” it
declares, “that the very improvement of the
negroes’ condition socially makes worse the prospect
of quieting down that burning question.
Naturally, the more they get the more they want,
and the more they will have, too. The only
logical position was to keep them slaves. Once
citizens, they have as good right as anybody to
ride in your Pullman, or sit in your theatre or
165restaurant, sleep in your hotel or church, or live
in your street or block. Lack of money is all
that intervenes at present, and that will not
always.”
And Dr. S. M. Smith, D.D., of Columbia,
South Carolina, writing in the Presbyterian
Quarterly for October, 1889, takes the same
view. His conclusions are thus summed up by
the Raleigh State Chronicle:—
“The patent panacea for all negro defects, education, does
not mend matters in the least; an ‘educated’ negro is just as
much negro as before, just the same raw hide volume with
the incongruous addition of a gilt edge; he is only a little
more aggressively offensive than his less ornate brother. Social
complications are not at all lessened by education, nor mitigated
by ‘light complexions’ either.”
Miscegenation is the most widely favoured
and venerable of what I may call the quack
nostrums for the cure of existing evils. The
late Mr. Henry Woodfin Grady, one of the
truest friends that the negro ever had, laid it
down as an axiomatic condition of harmony
between races “that each race should earnestly
desire a fusion of blood, in which all differences
would be lost.” The action of the natural law
thus stated has made white North America what
it is to-day. But, as the author of “An Appeal
to Pharaoh” points out, the law that governs the
166distribution, association, and conduct of all other
living creatures rules the action of men also.
Birds and beasts, fishes, reptiles, and insects—nay,
trees, and flowers, and weeds—group themselves
together after their kind: and man is no
exception to the universal rule. In every land
and clime, under whatever circumstances and conditions
he may be placed, he recognises and
obeys nature by seeking his own kind, avoiding
every other, and warring with his dissimilar
neighbour. Families, classes, societies, tribes,
nations form around some common centre of
agreement or likeness that unites the like and
excludes the unlike from the invisible but impassable
circle. The map of the world is a map of
the larger groups. The history of the world is
chiefly the history of the formation, organisation,
and contentions of these groups. The history of
North America is a particular demonstration of the
action of the law under consideration. Four centuries
have not elapsed since the white man first set
his foot on the eastern shore of the New World.
Every step of his progress westward has been
marked by the blood of the dissimilar race, which
he found there and drove before him. He sits on
the grave of the red man; he has shut the door
in the face of the yellow man from China; what
shall he do with the black man from Africa?
167Intermarry with him, say the quacks. But, to
again quote Mr. Grady, “not only do the two
races not earnestly desire fusion, but both races
are pledged against it as the one impossible
thing.” This is quite notorious throughout the
South, where it has even inspired legislation
against miscegenation; yet many humanitarian
theorists in the North still put forward intermarriage
as the panacea.
I summarise here an interesting article which
was contributed to Belford’s Magazine for September,
1889, by Mr. Cone on the significance of
racial colour. The writer attempts to prove that
colour of the skin is inseparably connected with
the brain and higher faculties of the individual,
and that according to a fundamental law of
Nature the negro, being black, always has been,
and for ever must remain, an inferior grade of
humanity. The alleged law, as stated by Mr.
Cone, is as follows:—“Whatever race or species is
changeless from generation to generation as to
the colour of its skin, hair, and eyes—if it be man
or animal—or eyes and plumage, if it be bird,
evinces low brain-power, is ‘inferior’; while that
which is changeful from generation to generation
as to the colour of its skin, hair and eyes, or
plumage, shows high brain-power, is ‘superior.’
Or, more briefly: The invariable as to racial
168colour is the ‘inferior’; the variable is the
‘superior’ race.” After an elaborate investigation
of attempts to domesticate wild birds and wild
animals, and of efforts to raise black men and red
men to a higher plane of civilisation, the conclusion
is reached that all such attempts have
been absolute failures. The cases of Hayti and
Jamaica are cited to prove that the black man,
when raised by a higher race to a level of life
which he was unable to himself attain, has never
shown any ability to maintain himself there; he
“lacks the brain-fibre, the brain-power, which
is necessary to do so, and, left to himself, he
retrogrades, reverts.” The red Egyptian and
the yellow Chinaman, though more variable, and,
therefore, of a higher type than the negro, are
forcible illustrations of arrested development.
“Hybridism in animals, and the sterility of miscegenation
when pressed beyond certain well-known
limitations, are proof that Nature punishes
in her own effective way the violation of her
laws, whether men have understood those laws or
not.” This fundamental law of Mr. Cone declares
that racial intellect, racial superiority and inferiority,
are written in racial colour; and the
writer concludes by saying:—“If this be true,
then other conclusions inevitably follow, which a
wise statesmanship, sincere in purpose, lofty in
169motive, scholarly in grasp, and philosophic in
breadth of view, will not disregard.”
It is true that America has become a mighty
nation from the intermingling of races, but
almost entirely from the intermingling of races
that belong to the Indo-Germanic stock. The
more nearly allied the races, the more successful
has been the intermingling. English, Scotch,
Irish, Dutch, Germans, and Scandinavians have
harmoniously united to produce the American;
but the Latins, as we see in Canada and Louisiana,
blend much less readily with the Anglo-Saxons
and Celts, and continue to hold aloof long after
races more nearly akin have inextricably merged
in one composite but individual people. The
French, the Italians, and the Spaniards are those
that thus hold aloof. Some of them seem to
intermarry—and this is peculiarly noticeable in
Central and South America—more readily with
the native Indian, or even with the negro, than
with the Anglo-Saxon. In Paraguay, Guatemala,
Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Salvador, Honduras, and
Southern Mexico, for example, the mass of the
population is Indo-Spanish. It would seem as if
the Southern European does not possess the
colour-antipathy as the pure white possesses it;
and, surely, his own dark colour lends plausibility
to the theory that he is one step nearer than the
170pure white is to the Indian and negro stocks.
But nowhere does the pure white, as represented
by the Anglo-Teutonic races, generally admit
coloured races to social and family equality.
There are mulattoes in the United States, but
nearly every mulatto is the offspring not of
marriage but of an irregular, temporary, and disgraceful
union. There are Eurasians in India,
where, after all, whites and coloured people are
racially related; yet even there most of the half-breeds
are illegitimate. In Africa, in the meanwhile,
the Hottentot and the Bushman, instead of
blending with the whites, are vanishing. In
Australia, too, and New Zealand, the aboriginal
inhabitant is disappearing fast. Race, more than
anything else, has to this day kept Central Africa
a secret from the white world. And the
numerical superiority of the negroes in the Black
Belt is, more than anything else, responsible for
the fact that the Black Belt is almost a terra
incognita to the mass of Northerners, and for the
equally important fact that European and Northern
brains and capital do not go there as they go
to the whiter but not richer West. In the South,
in the past five-and-twenty years, the negro has
improved in very many respects; but that makes
no radical difference. He is still the negro, and
he always will be the negro.
171Yet, in spite of these and other considerations
that must be ever present to the minds of all who
know the South and are unprejudiced observers
of what is there for them to see, we find people
persistently advocating miscegenation as the
certain cure for the evils of the situation. Mr.
Frederick Douglass, a mulatto, and, perhaps, the
most distinguished coloured American now living,
takes a somewhat neutral position. Writing in
the North American Review for May, 1886, on
miscegenation, he says:—“I am not a propagandist,
but a prophet. While I would not be understood
as advocating the desirability of such a
result, I would not be understood as deprecating
it.” But many whites have been bolder. The
opinion of the Rev. Dr. B. T. Tanner is that
“whether the whites and the blacks of the country
shall mix is no longer an open question, being
settled by the fact that the mixing has already,
and to a large extent, taken place.... As
we gaze,” he continues, “upon the millions of
whites and millions of blacks confronting each
other, and as we remember that where there is no
association there can be no certain amity, and
that where there is no amity there can be no lasting
peace, we are made to ask, What will the
harvest be? As there cannot be other than one
Government, so there must not be ultimately
172more than one people. The union of which we
so justly boast must comprehend both.” The
Rev. J. W. Hamilton, of Boston, is another prophet
and advocate of miscegenation. And the
language of Prof. S. B. Darnell, of the Cookman
Institute, Jacksonville, is:—“However we may
feel on the subject, the stern logic of sequences
will make, in the coming years, ‘our brother in
black’ a misnomer; and the diverse streams of
blood will so mingle that our posterity shall quote
again, ‘God hath made of one blood all nations of
men.’” On the other hand, Abraham Lincoln, in
his reply to Senator Douglas in 1857, said, “There
is a natural disgust in the minds of nearly all white
people at the idea of an indiscriminate amalgamation
of the white and black races.” And again:—“There
is a physical difference between the two,
which, in my judgment, will probably for ever
forbid their living together upon the footing of
perfect equality; and, inasmuch as it becomes a
necessity that there must be a difference, I, as
well as Judge Douglas, am in favour of the race
to which I belong having the superior position.”
And these prejudices belong not only to the pure
white branches of the great Indo-Germanic stock.
In our West Indian colonies there are about
10,000 coolies, of whom Mr. Froude says:—“They
are proud, and will not intermarry with the
173Africans. If there is no jealousy, there is no friendship.
The two races are more absolutely apart than
the white and the black.” Between the races in
America, as Judge Tourgée expresses it, “there
is no equalisation, no fraternity, no assimilation
of rights, no reciprocity of affection. Children
may caress each other, because they are children.
Betwixt adults fewer demonstrations of affection
are allowed than the master bestows upon his dog.
Ordinary politeness becomes a mark of shame.
A caress implies degradation. In all that region
no man would stand in a lady’s presence unless
uncovered. Yet not a white man in its borders
dares lift his hat to a coloured woman in the
street, no matter how pure her life, how noble
her attributes, or how deep his obligations to
her might be.”
If such be the prevailing sentiments among
Southern white people, the questioner may say,
How then do you account for the mulattoes,
thousands of whom are found in and far beyond
the limits of the Black Belt? The point is one
concerning which I am anxious to convey a very
clear understanding, for it is a most important
point. There is, undoubtedly, a large mixed
population; and, as the Rev. Dr. T. B. Tanner
has said, “the mixing has already taken place.”
It has taken place; it took place amid conditions
174which have ceased to exist; and practically it
takes place no longer. It is in his assumption
that the mixing process continues, and in his implied
assumption that the causative unions were
at any period and to any considerable extent
legitimate ones, that Dr. Tanner creates a false
impression. Here are the facts, so far as I have
been able to ascertain them; and I have spared
no pains in my efforts to get at the bottom of
them.
The mulatto, strictly classified, is the offspring
of a pure white and a pure black parent, and he
is much less common than is generally supposed.
In nine hundred and ninety-nine cases out of a
thousand he is of illegitimate birth, and in ninety-nine
cases out of a hundred, except, perhaps, in
Louisiana, where there is a large population of
French descent and of modified anti-negro prejudices,
he is a person no longer a minor. I
made inquiries in Charleston with the object of
discovering there a mulatto child of tender years,
but in vain. I found mulattoes of five-and-twenty
or thirty, but I could find no children. More
than once in the street I thought that I had come
upon what I was looking for; but in every case
the child proved to be not a genuine mulatto, but
simply a coloured child, the offspring, that is, of
a parent or parents with some white blood, but
175not the direct offspring of black and white. The
coloured people, as distinct from the pure-blooded
negroes, are everywhere common enough, and
may be casually mistaken by the unfamiliar
observer for mulattoes. But the real mulatto is
comparatively rare, and is daily becoming rarer.
Most of the coloured people have less than one-half
white blood; an overwhelming majority,
indeed, have less than one-quarter. A coloured
person with but one-eighth or one-sixteenth of
negro blood is very rare indeed. The kind of
proportion that is common is ten-twelfths or
fourteen-sixteenths, or even more. All this
points to the fact that miscegenation, although
at one time prevalent, has, as I have said, practically
ceased. It also points to the fact that,
as the author of “An Appeal to Pharaoh”
puts it:—
“The process is never continued beyond a few steps further,
and halts abruptly at the point where it promises to prove
effective by the obliteration of the negro type in an individual
who shall still represent the union of the two diverse strains
of blood. Such an individual may, indeed, exist in America;
but, if so, he wisely holds his peace as to his pedigree. The
octoroon is nearly white, and is usually attractive in person.
He is free to marry in his own class, or below it; but
he is as far from marrying a white woman as was his blackest
ancestor. And so of the mythical individual, whose case we
have just considered.”
176The truth is that the mulatto, the quadroon, and
the octoroon are chiefly products of the slavery
period. Since the war, the birth of a mulatto,
quadroon, or octoroon out of wedlock has been
of the rarest occurrence; and legislation and
prejudice have limited, and well-nigh put a stop
to, the birth of these people in wedlock.
Mulattoes intermarry, and, in some cases, have
intermarried for generations. In more than one
place in the South they, with occasional admixture
of quadroons, constitute a small, distinct
community of highly respectable people, living to
themselves for the most part, and having as little
in common with their black as with their white
neighbours; for white blood, even in small
quantities, “tells,” and the pride of the mulatto
or quadroon, as a rule, rebels as much at the idea
of alliance with the negro as does the pride of
the white at the idea of alliance with coloured or
black. The mulatto originated in the desire of
the slave woman to enjoy the favour of her white
master, and in the desire of the master to add to
his possessions—as well as, to some extent, in
white brutality and youthful dissoluteness, at a
period when these could be very freely indulged.
The black slave woman and the white master
have disappeared, and all the conditions have
changed. With the changed conditions the birth
177of mulattoes, of quadroons, and of octoroons has
steadily grown rarer and rarer, until it threatens
to cease altogether. If miscegenation ever
promised to solve the negro problem—and this I
doubt—emancipation hopelessly destroyed the
prospect. Whatever miscegenation there was,
was entirely confined to white men and negro or
coloured women. The Southern white woman
has had no part in it. In her opinion it is, in
all circumstances and conditions, loathsome and
abominable. Miscegenation, upon the only principles
in accordance with which it has ever been
practised between the races in the United States,
is, after all, no real miscegenation at all. It was
one-sided, it was criminal, it involved the disowning
of the child by the stronger of its
parents. Could any satisfactory admixture have
been effected on such terms? And there has
never been the slightest sign of assimilation on
any other terms.
There is yet another aspect of the question,
and that is, Is the mulatto, the quadroon, the
octoroon, a desirable product? It cannot be
denied that the intelligence, the general aptitude
for affairs, the business and political capacity, the
æsthetic faculty, and the finer qualities of the
coloured man, are always closely proportionate
to the degree of whiteness of his skin. In the
178coloured man we continually find a perception
of artistic beauty in form, colour, and effect, and
what may be called a natural sense of decency
and shame. These are foreign to the negro
nature; and their peculiar absence seems to widen
the already sufficiently broad gulf between pure
black and pure white. In the coloured man,
again, we find the natural leader of the negro in
all movements, political, religious, and social.
The only representative of the coloured population
who ever sat in the United States Senate was
nearly white; and in the Reconstruction period
the masters of the situation in the South were,
not Northern whites and Southern negroes, but
Northern whites and Southern coloured men.
The hybrid of the white man’s begetting was
then the white man’s scourge. Beyond a doubt,
he is intellectually a great improvement upon the
black. But he is no nearer the white than was
his black mother. “If,” says the author of “An
Appeal to Pharaoh,” “the negro race were wholly
supplanted on American soil by a race of mulattoes,
or even of octoroons, the race problem would
be so far from approaching a solution, that it
would be at least as perplexing and as fraught
with present difficulty and promise of future
trouble as is the negro problem of to-day.” And,
apart from this, the mulatto is physically and
179constitutionally, and also to, I fear, a very large
extent, morally, a failure. Although both white
and negro are long-lived races, the mulatto, born
of Anglo-Saxon and negro, very rarely attains
the age of fifty; and he is particularly and abnormally
subject to certain forms of disease. Moreover,
there is a general and, I believe, a not
unfounded impression that nature refuses to
perpetuate beyond two or three generations this
race of human hybrids. Dr. J. C. Knott, after
nearly fifty years of residence among the black
and white races of the South, declared mulattoes
to be “the shortest-lived of any class of the
human family,” and that the product of the cross
between the Anglo-Saxon and the negro dies off
before the dark stain can be washed out by amalgamation;
while Professor Drummond says,
“Inappropriate hybridism is checked by the law
of sterility.” This last doctrine may, it is just
possible, not apply, or may only apply to a
limited extent, to the mulatto. There is, unfortunately,
less room for doubt that, in the South,
people of mixed blood furnish a surprisingly
and disproportionately large quota to the criminal
population. It was estimated that in the Mississippi
Penitentiary, on the 1st of December, 1885,
there was one white for every 4,480 white inhabitants
of the State, one black for every 918 black
180inhabitants, and one “coloured” for every 314
“coloured” inhabitants. I am not desirous of
asking too much attention to this particular
estimate, which is open to error, for the reason
that, in the census reports, black and “coloured”
people are classed together; but I feel bound to
say that, upon showing this estimate to the
superintendents of several convict establishments
in the South, I have been invariably told that,
whether exact or inexact, it might be accepted as
expressive of the general truth. If, therefore,
the products of miscegenation be short life and
excessive tendency to disease and crime, is miscegenation,
even supposing honourable and legal
miscegenation to be possible, a desirable way
out of the difficulty? I venture to think not.
Honourable miscegenation, besides, is out of the
question.
One other solution has been proposed. It is,
however, too important and many-sided a scheme
for me to deal with at the close of this already
too lengthy chapter.
CHAPTER VI. THE IDEAL SOLUTION.
181
I have attempted to show that the negro problem
in the Southern States cannot be satisfactorily
solved by the limitation of the suffrage, by the
surrender of any portion of the country to the
control of the black majority, by education of the
coloured citizen, or by miscegenation of the races.
The central point of the situation is the presence
of the negro in the South. If he were not there,
there would be no negro difficulty. The solution,
therefore, that alone promises to be thoroughly
effective is his removal. His mere dissemination
throughout the Union would not be sufficient.
No scheme of emigration from the South to the
North and West can permanently benefit the
negro or settle the race question. The “colour
line” is, as has been repeatedly shown, even more
clearly defined in the North than in the South.
Everywhere in the South, for example, one
may see black and white cab-drivers, though
they do not love one another, plying indiscriminately
182for hire, black and white bricklayers
working on the same buildings, black and white
compositors setting up type at adjoining cases;
but in most parts of the North things are different.
There, with very few exceptions, the negro is
not admitted to ordinary trade-union organisations;
he is remorselessly “crowded out” from
every occupation and employment; and his position
is, upon the whole, worse than in Georgia
or Louisiana. If the seven or eight millions of
coloured people were to-morrow scattered equally
over the States, the South, no doubt, would be
relieved, but neither the North and West nor the
negro would be better off. A more radical programme
of removal must be adopted by any
party that earnestly desires alike the welfare
of the inferior stock and the final solution of
the problem. There must be another exodus
from Egypt, another restoration of the captive
tribes.
In its bare outline the policy with which I am
about to deal is not new. One of Thomas Jefferson’s
most prophetic utterances was:—“Nothing
is more clearly written in the Book of Destiny
than the emancipation of the blacks; and it is
equally certain that the two races will never live
in a state of equal freedom under the same
Government, so insurmountable are the barriers
183which nature, habit, and opinion have established
between them.”
Jefferson, who died nearly forty years before
emancipation became an accomplished fact, did
not omit to prepare, so far as lay in his power,
for the evil which he saw approaching. With
Henry Clay and others, he founded the African
Colonisation Society, which established on the
west coast of Africa the Negro Republic of
Liberia, and, between 1820 and 1860, sent thither
about 10,000 free coloured people. It may at
once be admitted that the colony has not been a
conspicuous success, for the American immigrants
and their descendants now hardly number 5,000
souls, and, according to Mr. Charles H. J. Taylor,
a late American Minister to the Republic, the
place is to-day “a land of snakes, centipedes,
fever, miasma, poverty, superstition, and death.”
But the comparative failure of the Liberia scheme
is due, in my humble opinion, rather to the
principles in accordance with which it was carried
out than to any inherent and necessary unfitness
of the negro for colonisation. I shall later point
out what appears to me to be the weak points in
the Constitution of Liberia, as well as in that of
Hayti. If they lie where I suspect they do, it is
only natural that Jefferson and his associates and
successors should have overlooked them.
184Nor were Jefferson and his friends the only
ones who, early in the century, sought to fend off
the looming negro difficulty. In 1825 Senator
Rufus King, of New York, was so far-seeing as
to introduce to the United States Senate a resolution
declaring that “the whole public land of the
United States, with the net proceeds of all future
sales thereof, shall constitute and form a fund
which is hereby appropriated; and the faith of
the United States is hereby pledged that the said
fund shall be inviolably applied to aid the emancipation
of such slaves within any of the United
States, and to aid the removal of such slaves and
the removal of such free persons of colour in any
of the United States, as by the laws of the States
respectively shall be allowed to be emancipated,
to any territory or country without the limits of
the United States.”
Senator King was far in advance of his day
and generation, and, not unnaturally, his motion
came to nothing; but it is very likely indeed
that, had it been carried, there would at the
present moment be no considerable number of
negroes in North America. The sum of money
which under his scheme would already have
become available for the removal of the coloured
people exceeds £50,000,000 sterling, exclusive of
interest, and the lands still undisposed of are
185worth, at a moderate computation, a hundred
millions more.
Nothing practical, however, save the Liberia
experiment, was attempted in Mr. King’s day,
or has been attempted since, towards the final
solution of a problem which for a generation has
been yearly growing graver and more dangerous.
It looks now as if the moment were about to
arrive when either the question must be peaceably
settled or it will settle itself by violence;
and it is, therefore, worth while to consider
whether the most radical and permanent solution
of the difficulty is practicable, and, supposing it
to be so, how it may, even at this late hour, be
accomplished without force and injustice.
First, let me premise that the United States,
as a whole, and not merely the South, owes an
enormous debt to the negro race. Everyone
admits that the institution of slavery was a crime
against humanity; but everyone does not remember
that for a century and more the North
was particeps criminis. Some aspects of her
responsibility will be found dealt with in the
Appendix on Slavery in the North. It is too
often forgotten that Southern slavery, up to the
time of emancipation, existed under and was protected
by the laws of the Union.
The debt owing to the blacks is manifold.
186Something is due to those who, against their will,
were dragged from their homes, subjected to the
untold horrors of the middle passage, and forced
to labour, unrequited, for strangers. What the
horrors of the middle passage were is hinted at
rather than told in the log-book of Her Majesty’s
ship Skipjack, which, in 1835, captured the
Portuguese slaver Martha, with 447 slaves on
board. The Martha had left Loango forty-three
days before for Brazil with a freight of 790 slaves,
of whom 353, or nearly 45 per cent., had perished
from the tortures and miseries of the voyage.
These tortures and miseries were not less, we
may be sure, fifty or one hundred years earlier.
Something, again, is due to those who, in the
land of their captivity, were deprived by law of
education, of the privilege of marriage, and of
the guardianship of their children. More, perhaps,
is due to those who, in support of the
triumphant principles of the land of their captivity,
shed their blood. As many as 300,000 people of
colour took arms during the Civil War. And
thankful recognition, if nothing beyond, is owing
by the South to the subject race which, in the
hour of national adversity, instead of rising to
complicate the troubles of the Confederacy, was
loyal, and even helpful, to the dominant class.
There are other grounds of indebtedness, but they
187have been so fully indicated in the course of this
work that I need not again specify them. My
only objects here are to insist upon the fact that
a heavy debt has been incurred, and to point
out that the time has not yet come when the
United States can say, “We are doing something
tangible towards paying it off.”
In considering the practicability of the removal
from the United States of the blacks and coloured
people, one must bear in mind the following
questions:—
Is the negro willing to go?
Can the negro be dispensed with?
How can he be removed?
Whither can he be sent?
First let me attempt to offer a reply to the
question, “Is the negro willing to go?” I believe
that he is, but he can best answer for himself.
The Rev. T. S. Lee, a coloured clergyman of
Charleston, speaking on Emancipation Day, 1890,
said:—
“I believe that the ultimate solution of the so-called race
problem will be emigration, from necessity, if not from choice....
For two people so distinct from each other in their
physical structure, and between whom there are naturally
such insurmountable barriers, to develop on separate and
distinct lines, dwelling together here, is about as reasonable as
for two kings to reign on the same throne at one and the same
time.... We make a great mistake when we suppose
188that the Anglo-Saxon gave us our enfranchisement for the love
he had for us ... He did it because he thought he could
use us.... It is a mistaken idea for us to kneel down to
the whites. The Anglo-Saxon and the black man cannot work
together; one or the other will have to leave, and I am somewhat
of a believer in the tale about the Lord’s fire. The fire
will not burn the people, but it will be so warm that our
people will have to move on or get burnt; and I rather
believe that they will move on.... We must show our
independence, and the sooner we do this the better. Let some
of us leave—go to Africa if necessary—and show that we can
get along without the Anglo-Saxon, and, by this spirit of
independence, make him learn and appreciate our value.
Independence and emigration are, in my opinion, the only
solutions to this great question.”
And Mr. Lee does not stand alone. Bishop
H. M. Turner, of Atlanta, Georgia, a leader
among the negro Methodists, said, in the course
of a public speech in 1889, that nothing but
poverty had kept his people where they were,
and that nothing but actual departure from the
country could cure existing evils.
And a few days later, he said, with reference
to the Morgan Bill which was then before Congress:—
“May God grant that the Bill may pass. The white people
brought us here against our will. Now they ought to provide
for us to leave if we desire. Besides, we must work out our
destiny anyhow, and if a portion of us think we can do it
better elsewhere, let the nation help us to try it. If the Bill
189meant compulsory expatriation, we would fight it to the death;
but, as it is voluntary upon the part of the negro, let it pass as
soon as possible. The negro at best is but a scullion here, and
he can be no less in Africa. I am tired of negro problems,
lynch law, mob rule, and continual fuss, and millions of other
negroes are tired of it. We want peace at some period in our
existence, and if we cannot have it here, where we were born
and reared, let that portion of us who choose to try another
section of the world have a little help. This nation owes the
negro forty billion of dollars any way; so give us a little to
emigrate upon.”
Dr. Edward Wilmot Blyden, formerly of the
West Indies and more recently of Sierra Leone,
is another distinguished negro who advocates
negro emigration from the States. More than
this, in November, 1889, a negro colonisation
society was established in Augusta, Georgia, to
promote emigration to Africa. At about the
same time a wholesale emigration of negroes to
Mexico was projected, and a negro delegation
visited the city of Mexico to make arrangements
for it; while, a little earlier, a large scheme of
negro migration from the States to the Argentine
Republic was extensively advocated by most of
the negro journals of the South. Unfortunately,
neither Mexico nor the Argentine Republic wants
the negro. The Mexican newspapers, as with
one voice, bitterly attacked the scheme, and
called upon their Government to be patriotic,
190and not to countenance a plan which would bring
into the Republic a race alien in blood and
language. And the Buenos Ayres Standard
said:—“The darkey is destined to give the
United States far more trouble some day
than the detested heathen Chinee; and it would
be really too cool of Jonathan to ask us here
to help him out of the unsavoury mess.” The
Prensa, a Spanish newspaper of the same city,
declared upon the same occasion:—
“It cannot be comprehended that a country proud, as ours
is, of its wonderful and rapid advancement should commit the
folly of introducing an element of obstruction, offensive both
to sight and smell, and with marked tendencies to laziness.
The United States would ridicule South America if the latter
were to accept this Greek gift.”
But these remarks do not touch the question of
the negro’s readiness to migrate. There is really
no doubt that he is quite ready, provided always
that migration will better him, and provided also
that he can accomplish it without serious immediate
loss to himself.
Can he, then, be spared? The answer, I
think, is “Yes.” The Birmingham, Alabama,
Age-Herald took up the question in June, 1889,
and thus expressed itself:—
“In the lowlands of the Mississippi delta, the river bottoms
of Arkansas and Louisiana, the Alabama black belt, and the
191South Carolina coast, negro labour may seem indispensable;
but this is simply because the big plantation system exists in
those sections. It would be a blessing to the South if the big
plantation system could everywhere be broken up, and small
farms, occupied and cultivated by thrifty white owners,
substituted. In Texas, in Georgia—in all parts of the South,
in fact, except those enumerated above—the white farmers
work their own fields, and work them to much better
advantage than those tenanted out to negroes.... The
negro can be easily dispensed with, and if he stays in the
South it is painful to conceive what must be the inevitable
consequence.... The negro must go, or those Southern
communities where he is found in such large numbers will go
to something worse than perdition.”
Upon this the Memphis Avalanche of June
8th, 1889, remarked:—
“We have no hesitation in endorsing as true everything
the Age-Herald has said. There are hundreds and thousands
of white labourers in the cotton fields of the South to-day. In
Texas, where an immense amount of cotton is grown, a negro
is frequently not seen in a day’s ride.”
The New Orleans Times-Democrat, one of the
most respectable and influential of Southern
journals, on June 17th, 1889, took the same view
in very decided terms, and added:—
“There is no portion of the South where the whites cannot
live, where they do not work more intelligently and better than the
negroes, and where they do not produce larger crops per capita.
The South would be more productive, richer, and more prosperous
in every way if it were peopled altogether by white men.”
192The Galveston, Texas, News held similar
language; so did the Charleston News and Courier;
so did the Atlanta Constitution, the Nashville
American, the Richmond Dispatch, the Arkansas
Democrat, the New Orleans Picayune, and, in
brief, all the leading newspapers of the South.
Indeed, I know of no important exception. Concerning
the filling of the gap which would be
created by the removal of the negro, the Greenville,
South Carolina, News of March 17th, 1889,
had already said:—
“If we can keep the white people there will be no lack of
labour and population. The natural increase may be trusted
to occupy every acre of available ground without the coming
of new citizens; but we might reasonably hope for a great
inflow of white immigration to follow the tide of coloured
emigration.”
Colonel Stokes, a representative Southern,
writing on the same subject, argues forcibly and
convincingly against the assumption that the
negro is an essential element in cotton raising.
“It is generally admitted by all who are acquainted
with the matter that the negroes are the most
inefficient of all labourers in nearly all the fields
of labour. The Southern negroes cultivate an
average of not more than six or eight acres to
the hand; the Northern farmer cultivates forty
to sixty acres. The latter uses a great variety
193of improved farming implements. The negro
cannot be taught to use any other than the primitive
types he has been long accustomed to.
Still, the planter is dependent upon the negro to
till his fields simply because the negro is here
and cannot be got rid of, and white labour is not
available in any sufficient numbers while the
field is so occupied. But it is certain that if the
negro cotton-raiser could everywhere be replaced
by white men, the cotton region would wear a
very different aspect.”
There are even signs that the negro is being
dispensed with already, and that, if he remain,
his position as a labourer will deteriorate rather
than improve. The Forum for December, 1889,
contained a powerful article on “The Race
Problem,” by Professor Scomp, of Emory College,
Georgia. The writer, in summing up, says:—
“Sadly, yet with perfect conviction, we are driven to the
inevitable conclusion that if the negro’s citizenship and his
social and business privileges are to have play and development,
it must be upon another soil than that of the whites.
As equals, the races cannot and will not exist together.”
And, writing privately to Dr. E. W. Blyden,
Professor Scomp thus explains his views as to
one aspect of the negro’s future in the States:—
“One feature which I regard as ominous to the future of
most of the Southern negroes is the steady and rapid improvement
194in machinery in all departments of the cotton-plantation
industry; e.g., less than two months ago there was exhibited at
the Georgia State Fair, at Macon, a machine for chopping
cotton, by which one man, upon a kind of buggy plough, could
in one day do the work, by horse-power, of more than a dozen
ordinary choppers. Such machinery, generally introduced,
must, for the most part, put an end to the plantation negro’s
summer work and his means of subsistence. Many efforts, too,
are making at the invention of a proper cotton-picking machine,
and, though this has not yet succeeded to any great degree,
American industry will undoubtedly prove equal to the task
of invention. When that day comes the mass of Southern
negroes will be practically out of an occupation and without a
livelihood.”
Apart from this, the negro is now doing much
less in the South than he used to do. The
Charleston News and Courier, which made a careful
investigation of this matter in South Carolina,
county by county, a few years ago, found that
30 per cent. of the cotton was raised by white
and 70 per cent. by coloured labour. In Mississippi
the State census of 1880, taken coincidentally
with the United States census, showed
that 328,568 bales were produced by white and
627,240 bales by negro labour. In these States,
with large negro majorities, nearly a third of the
cotton crop was raised by the whites. Judging
by these figures, it is safe to say that, including
the comparatively white States of Texas and
Arkansas, very nearly half the cotton is raised
195by the whites, whereas thirty years ago not over
400,000 bales, or one-tenth the crop, was grown
by them.
If, as would appear to be the case, the negro
be willing to migrate and can be dispensed with,
the next questions for consideration are—How
can he be removed? And whither can he be
sent? The two questions are intimately allied,
and may best be examined together. I think
that a rough key to one of them has been furnished
by Mr. J. A. D. Mitchell, who, writing on
January 11th, 1890, to the Cleveland, Ohio,
Gazette, a newspaper conducted by and in the
interests of coloured people, says:—
“Let the United States Government assume a protectorate
over such portions of the African Continent as are not already
provided for, and, to enforce the claim, call for 100,000 or
more American negro volunteers to assist, not only in the
abolition of the slave traffic, but also in Christianising and
reclaiming the African negro from heathenism and idolatry.
I claim that climatic and other influences preclude the possibility
of the white man accomplishing much without the aid
and influence of the negro.... The necessity for forced
emigration or colonisation would (either being distasteful as
well as impracticable) be supplanted by a voluntary uprising
of the negro to participate in reclaiming the land of his
forefathers.”
There is here, I really believe, the germ,
though only the germ, of a sound and useful
196scheme. It is not likely that the United States
Government will, in our day, assume onerous
protectorates in other continents; and it is not, I
am convinced, desirable that, in the future home
of the negro, the emigrant shall live under institutions
similar to those which at present contribute
so much to his discomfort. If the black
were to move to what would practically be an
American foreign possession, he would scarcely
improve his position. He would still find himself
on nominal equality with, but in actual inferiority
to, the white governing powers. If not, he would
have to govern himself; and for this task the
negro is peculiarly unfitted. It is for this reason
that Hayti and Liberia have proved failures.
Where I detect the true ring in Mr. Mitchell’s
crude suggestion is in his proposal that the negro
shall be given not only a country, but also a
stimulus to make himself worthy of the boon.
In one or other of these, to my mind, absolutely
essential features, all the remaining projects of
negro migration that have come under my notice
are lacking.
Several Bills, aspiring to deal in an adequate
manner with the race problem, have lately been
brought before the notice of the United States
Senate. Senator Butler, of South Carolina, asked
for the appropriation of five millions of dollars
197in aid of negro emigration generally. Senator
Gibson, of Louisiana, advocated the acquirement,
as the negro’s future home, of extra-Union territory.
Senator Morgan, of Alabama, brought
forward a scheme of African colonisation; and
Senator Call, of Florida, revived the old project
of opening negotiations with Spain to secure
the establishment in Cuba of a negro
republic.
But all these legislators have missed the one
important point. You cannot, without the use of
force, ensure anything approaching to a general
exodus of a whole race, unless you first provide
the people with high aims, and also hold out to
them a reasonable hope of improved political,
social, and financial conditions. Had the Israelites
seen nothing better than Egypt before them,
they would never have quitted the land of
Goshen; had the Babylonian captives not looked
to the rebuilding of the Temple, it is doubtful
whether many of them would have availed themselves
of Cyrus’s permission to return to
Palestine.
Speaking in the Senate on the subject of the
Butler Bill, Senator Wade Hampton, who has
been one of the most honoured and successful
Governors of South Carolina, the blackest State
in the Union, said, on January 30th, 1890:—
198“I have expressed the opinion that the separation of the
white and coloured races in the United States would be of
permanent benefit to both.... I recognise as fully as
anyone the political rights of the coloured people, and
amongst these rights is that paramount one of every citizen of
the Republic to choose his own home. The forcible expulsion
of the negroes would not only be unlawful, but would be
impolitic, unjust and cruel.... No thoughtful patriotic
man would contemplate any such action. But whilst
patriotism, wisdom, and an enlarged philanthropy dictate
these views, it may still be a question whether some feasible
plan cannot be adopted by which such coloured people as
desire to seek a new home, where, under their own laws and
their own government, they could work out their own destiny
free from contact with the white race, could not receive the
generous and fostering assistance of this great and rich
Government.”
Like his brother legislators, Senator Hampton
fails to grasp the necessity of giving to the
negroes a motive to induce them to leave the
States; like them, too, he appears to be of
opinion that, no matter whither the negro may
remove, he must be, if not an American subject,
at least a self-governing individual. On both
these points, I venture to think, his attitude is a
wrong one; but on the other point which is dealt
with in this extract from his speech he is right.
The American Government ought, in recognition
of its indebtedness, as well as from politic consideration
of its own best interests, to be prepared
199to assist the proposed negro emigration; and on
that point Senators Butler, Gibson, Morgan, and
Call are in practical agreement with Senator
Hampton.
One of the most conspicuous characteristics of
the negro is, as I have already had occasion to
point out, his childishness. Referring to the
negroes of Africa, Mr. H. M. Stanley, writing in
December last to The Times, said:—
“If one regards these natives as mere brutes, then the
annoyances that their follies and vices inflict are, indeed,
intolerable. In order to rule them and to keep one’s life
amongst them, it is needful resolutely to regard them as
children, who require, indeed, different methods of rule from
English or American citizens, but who must be ruled in
precisely the same spirit, with the same absence of caprice and
anger, the same essential respect to our fellow-men.”
Another recent writer has said of them:—
“They are children; children naughty or children
good; pleased or angry; children to be ruled
firmly, treated kindly; but always, at bottom,
children.” And everyone who knows thoroughly
the African negro, either in Africa or in America,
can have no other estimate of his character.
This being so, is it reasonable, on the one
hand, to elevate the negro, as he has been
elevated in America, to a level of political and
legal equality with the Caucasian; or, on the
200other hand, to expect this child of nature to
properly govern himself? The experiment of
equality has failed in America; the experiment
of self-government has failed in Hayti, in Liberia,
and wherever else it has been tried. Surely,
then, it is as necessary, in the experiment of the
future, to avoid placing the negro on a pedestal
which he has proved himself incapable of occupying
as it is to avoid enslaving him, oppressing
him, or in any way unfairly treating him. If
my contentions be sound, it results that the experiment
of the future must be conducted with
due regard to the following conditions:—
1. The emigrating negro must be offered a
country in which he may pursue high aims, enjoy
a prospect of improved political, social, and
financial status, and find climate and employment
suited to his needs.
2. He must not govern, but be governed. At
the same time he must not be oppressed, either
physically or morally; and there must be no
restraint upon his improvement and advancement.
3. His emigration must be assisted, either by
those who owe him a debt or by those who will
benefit by his migration, or by both.
Accepting the above conditions as postulates,
I may now definitely indicate what, after a long
and careful study of the problem in its various
201aspects, seems to be the only solution that will be
alike just and permanent.
The country that is most suitable for the
negro is, beyond all cavil, that central belt of
Africa which lies between the Sahara and the
Tropic of Capricorn, and which includes the
Congo Free State, Senegambia, Liberia, the
British and German possessions on the Gulf of
Guinea, Sierra Leone, Gaboon, Angola, Damaraland,
Mozambique, Zanzibar, and the territories
of the various British and German African
companies. The greater part of this belt is the
negro’s own country, the place whence his
ancestors were kidnapped, or in which his race
still dwells; and, so far as civilisation is concerned,
nearly all of it is, to this day, virgin soil.
The past fifty years have witnessed the first
serious attempts on the part of civilisation to
open up this immense district, the riches and
fertility of which no one, even now, is in a
position to estimate. Very little progress has
been made. The climate and general conditions
are, over much of the tract, unsuitable for the
majority of Europeans. European influences,
nevertheless, are almost everywhere dominant;
and almost everywhere there exists the framework,
though not all the machinery, of just
government. The crying need of the situation is
202more civilisation—civilisation not of a very advanced
or cultured variety, but rather civilisation
of a kind which, not being too much superior
to native habits and modes of thought, and
being, nevertheless, of a moderately progressive
type, may first, if properly encouraged and led
by white influence, capture the Africans and then
gradually raise them with itself to higher planes.
Who are more suited to apply such modest
civilisation to the blacks of Africa than the blacks
of America? Africa, as a whole, will never be a
white man’s country. It will not, therefore, be
the scene of such race jealousies as torment the
Southern States of the American Union.
At the same time, Africa, it is tolerably
certain, will always have the advantage of white
rule, and of a kind of white rule, moreover, that
will not possess the irksome defects of white rule
as it now exists in America. In no British
colony, for example, is there any reason why
a capable negro should not raise himself to high
position and honour. In no British colony, on
the other hand, does the negro govern. And I
think it may also be said that in every British
colony in which he is to be found the negro is a
fairly happy and contented person. It is a great
mistake to suppose, as many people do, that the
negro objects to be governed, and to be governed
203firmly. On the contrary, he likes it, provided
always that the government be fair as well as
firm. Colonel Shepard, an acknowledged advocate
of the negro, admits, with regard to the
present condition of Hayti, that the whole business
is a fine illustration of the futility of introducing
republican institutions to a country whose
people are uneducated, untrained in affairs, and
incapable of self-government.
Nor is the negro hopelessly enamoured of the
suffrage. He clings to it in the United States,
because there it constitutes almost his only badge
of humanity; but to those who will freely concede
his humanity he will as freely surrender the
suffrage.
By a wholesale migration, and properly conducted,
of Southern negroes to Africa, America
would be relieved, and Africa would be benefited.
Already this fact has, to a limited extent,
been recognised and acted upon. In 1884 a plan
for the introduction of Southern negro labour to
the Congo district was submitted to the King of
the Belgians by an American, Colonel George W.
Williams; and I believe I am correct in saying
that Colonel Williams was in consequence empowered
to engage twelve clerks, accountants,
and storekeepers at 125f. a month, and twelve
mechanics and engineers at from 200f. to 300f. a
204month, transportation, board, lodging, and medical
attendance to be provided by the Congo Free
State. Five years later, in 1889, the King of
the Belgians made application to the United
States for twenty-four professional men and
artisans to go to the Congo as representatives of
the trained and educated American negro. His
Majesty’s agent visited, among other places,
Shaw University, at Raleigh, North Carolina, a
remarkably well-conducted college for coloured
students. The principal, Dr. H. M. Tupper,
declared his firm belief that thousands of American
negroes would, within a few years, go to the
Congo country; and he said that he recognised
in the opportunity a grand means of permanently
improving the condition of many coloured people.
If the American negro were shown, as he
easily might be shown, first, that his exodus to
Africa would result in vast good to his race, and
would open to him an honourable mission as a
civiliser; next, that the proceeding would result in
a general amelioration of his own condition; and
finally, that in Africa he would escape from the
discomforts and persecutions that hem in his
career in America; and if, at the same time, he
were offered aid to enable him to migrate to and
establish himself on the soil of his fathers, I do
not doubt that he would leave America, not
205merely in his thousands, but in his millions. He
desires, above all things, a country and an aim in
life. Give him those, and he will seize them
gladly. But it is useless to counsel him to go to
Africa, or elsewhere, unless you also hold out to
him an object to be attained. And even a grand
object will not alone induce him to move. He is,
as a rule, poor. His investments, such as they
are, are all in America. It is necessary not only
to assist him to move and settle, but also to pay
him generously for the little that he must surrender.
It is impossible, while considering this scheme,
to avoid thinking, again and again, of the parallelism
of the exodus of the Israelites, and of the
Biblical conclusion, “And they spoiled the
Egyptians.” The Egyptians, like the Americans,
had incurred a great debt to their bondsmen, and,
like the Americans, they sought to evade it, and
suffered bitterly in consequence. But the payment
was inevitable in Goshen, and it is inevitable
in the United States. In Goshen it was paid in
the form of spoils, surrendered in panic by a
people who, at the last, were glad to be rid of
their captives at any cost. How will it be paid
in America?
One cannot foresee, but it is quite certain that
it is not yet too late for it to be voluntarily
206tendered in cold blood, and to be gratefully
accepted; and it is reasonable to suppose that
delay in payment will not lessen but rather
increase the amount—be it of treasure, blood,
misery, or unrest—to be ultimately paid.
It would seem, therefore, that principles of
ordinary economy, as well as of common justice,
indicate that an effort should be made to pay off
the negro as soon as possible.
It cannot be said that the Union has any lack
of means. Her actual indebtedness at the conclusion
of the Civil War was, roughly speaking,
£551,286,000; it is now only £187,115,000, and
between June 30th and October 1st, 1890, it was
reduced by £14,537,000. In twenty-five years the
Federal Debt has been lessened by £364,171,000,
or at the average rate of over fourteen and a half
millions sterling per annum; and the annual
surplus available for reduction is now, as a rule,
so much larger than it was a few years ago, while
the debt remaining is of such very manageable
proportions, that very little hardship to the United
States would result from a temporary diversion—say,
for thirty years—of a portion of the surplus
from the purposes of the reduction of the Federal
Debt to the payment of interest and gradual payment
of principal of a special series of negro
emigration and settlement loans.
207It is calculated that an annual sum of twelve
or fourteen millions sterling might thus, without
undue pinching, be diverted; and this represents
a very large capital amount—an amount which
would probably be quite sufficient, with a certain
quota of aid from outside, not only to decently
transport, but to comfortably establish in Africa,
every pure-blooded negro now on United States
territory.
It might not be also sufficient to buy out the
negro; but that might justly be assigned as a
duty, in whole or in part, to the individual States
concerned, seeing that they are more immediately
interested than is the nation at large in getting
rid of him, and that the expenditure to be incurred
would sooner or later be returned to the States in
the shape of payments on the re-sale of lands and
buildings now belonging to the negroes.
That the United States have not already
entered upon some such course is rather remarkable;
for they have spent scores of millions in
the payment of debts which are less pressing, and
they have, indeed, been so generous in certain
directions as to have incurred the reproach of
unwarrantable extravagance. They have over
half a million names on their pension-roll, and
they pay the pensioners more than twenty millions
a year, in spite of the fact that most of the
208persons who benefit had no legal claim upon the
country at the time when the services in respect
of which pensions are now paid were rendered.
The pensions are not, as pensions are in England,
deferred pay; they are compensations and
gratuities. The Union has been lavish with
them; but the Governments which have granted
them have always looked forward to a return in
the shape of political support, and so the sums
disbursed have been regarded as profitable investments.
Hitherto, there is no doubt, American politicians
as a body have not discovered that any
profit can result from the payment of the nation’s
indebtedness to the negro; and that is the reason
why they have not dealt with the negro as they
have dealt with the soldier.
But will there be no profit? The South is
now stagnant under the incubus of the negro.
According to Governor Lee, of Virginia, the
negro does not “pay” as a citizen. The Greenville
News goes so far as to make the following
estimate of the results which would follow upon
the removal of two-thirds of the present coloured
population from South Carolina:—
“We should lose,” it says, “$50,000 to $75,000, which is
probably a full estimate of the total amount of taxes paid by
coloured people; the cultivation of some land, the production
209of some cotton, for a time. We should have about $175,000
of the amount now used for coloured public schools for the use
of white schools, nearly doubling the present terms and adding
much to the facilities and comforts of teachers and scholars.
We should have in the penitentiary about 100 convicts instead
of 800. Our criminal courts would sit on an average from a
day to a day and a half a week, nine-tenths of their time
being now occupied by trying coloured persons. Our gaols
would have about one-fifth of the inmates they now have,
nineteen-twentieths of the prisoners now fed and kept at the
cost of the taxpayers being coloured. The lunatic asylum
would have one-half its present population and would cost one-half
of what it now costs. The county poor-houses would
contain one-half, or less, of their present population. The trial
justices would have, on an average, about a case a month.
These calculations are from the actual figures. What we
should gain in the way of keeping white people who are
now crowded out by coloured competition, the improvement
of lands by intelligent and careful cultivation, and the
incoming of white mechanics and farmers, are matters of
further estimation.”
The Union is divided, and it is the presence
of the negro that causes the division. Nearly
one-eighth of the population of the Union is of
alien race, and, besides being hopelessly alien, is
oppressed, discontented, and dangerous. These
are evils which might be abolished to the general
profit. And worse evils lurk in the future. The
prosecution of a race war would not be cheaper
than the promotion of a negro exodus. The
severance from the Union of six or eight States
210would be vastly more weakening to the nation as
a whole. In some form the debt must be paid.
Nature has never yet admitted the plea of any
Statute of Limitations in cases like the one under
discussion. It were well, then, to make a settlement
while it can still be made peacefully and,
comparatively speaking, cheaply.
If America would do its duty by the negro,
those civilised nations which have established
themselves in Africa would, in pursuance of their
own interests, aid her. Great Britain, Germany,
and France would each and all welcome the
immigration to their African possessions of large
and leavening bodies of American blacks. Not
long ago Sir Alfred Moloney, Governor of Lagos,
received a deputation from “the Brazilian and
Havannah repatriates in the colony of Lagos,”
and was assured that all the negroes of Brazil
wished to return to the country of their ancestors.
In reply, Sir Alfred Moloney said that he had
induced the commercial world to take an interest
in the project, and that the African Steamship
Company had engaged to provide improved and
cheaper facilities for negro immigrants from
Brazil. He welcomed the idea of “repatriation,”
and would encourage it. Much more, no doubt,
would he welcome the idea of the “repatriation”
of the immeasurably more civilised and less debauched
211American negro. The black, it is true,
will not do much good for himself anywhere
without white superintendence, but there is no
reason why such superintendence as is necessary
should not be forthcoming, and, if it be once
understood that the salvation of Africa lies with
the negro even more than with the white, there
is every ground for believing that the American
negro will rise bravely to the occasion.
Even in a greater degree than in the African
possessions of Great Britain, Germany, and France
does there appear to be a career for the American
negro in the Congo Free State. The author of
“An Appeal to Pharaoh” has indicated that State
as the American negro’s promised land. A copy
of the book was recently given to Mr. H. M.
Stanley, a man who, having spent parts of his
life not only in the Dark Continent but also in
Louisiana, knows the negro both in America and
in Africa. The volume drew from the traveller
a very interesting letter, from which I extract
the following:—
“There is space enough in one section of the Upper Congo
basin to locate double the number of the negroes of the
United States without disturbing a single tribe of the aborigines
now inhabiting it. I refer to the immense Upper Congo
forest country, 350,000 square miles in extent, which is three
times larger than the Argentine Republic, and one and a half
times larger than the entire German Empire, embracing
212224,000,000 acres of umbrageous forest land, wherein every
unit of the 7,000,000 negroes might become the owner of
nearly a quarter square mile of land. Five acres of this,
planted with bananas and plantains, would furnish every soul
with sufficient subsistence—food and wine. The remaining
twenty-seven acres of his estate would furnish him with timber,
rubber, gums, dye-stuffs, for sale. There are 150 days of rain
throughout the year. There is a clear stream every few
hundred yards. In a day’s journey we have crossed as many
as thirty-two streams. The climate is healthy and equable,
owing to the impervious forest which protects the land from
chilly winds and draughts. All my white officers passed
through the wide area safely. Eight navigable rivers course
through it. Hills and ridges diversify the scenery and give
magnificent prospects. To those negroes in the South accustomed
to Arkansas, Mississippi, and Louisiana, it would be a
reminder of their own plantations without the swamps and the
depressing influence of cypress forests. Anything and everything
might be grown in it, from the oranges, guavas, sugarcane,
and cotton of sub-tropical lands to the wheat of California
and the rice of South Carolina. If the emigration were
prudently conceived and carried out, the glowing accounts sent
home by the first settlers would soon dissipate all fear and
reluctance on the part of the others. But it is all a dream.
The American capitalists, like other leaders of men, are more
engaged in decorating their wives with diamonds than in
busying themselves with national questions of such import as
removing the barrier between the North and the South. The
‘open sore’ of America—the race question—will ever remain
an incurable fester. While we are all convinced that the
Nessus shirt which clings to the Republic has maddened her,
and may madden her again, it is quite certain that the
small effort needed to free themselves for ever from it will
never be made.”
213I am inclined to be more sanguine than Mr.
Stanley was when he wrote that letter. Some
solution of the race question cannot be long deferred,
and surely there is enough latent justice
and prudence in the American people to induce
them to render the inevitable solution a peaceable
and equitable one.
In a still later utterance on the subject
Mr. Stanley has taken a cheerier view. The
Congo Government, he declares, is favourable,
and the laws are calculated to promote happiness
and content. Whites cannot colonise the State,
since a white man living in the Congo Valley for
three years expends ten years of vitality, while
women cannot retain health.
“With negroes forming the majority of its citizenship, the
State would, with proper encouragement, make remarkable
development, and, in time, become a great nation.... At
present the Congo Free State’s government is entirely in the
hands of whites, but, in my opinion, any man who can prove
his capacity would receive all that any could expect.”
For the half-breed of the South another haven
must be sought. He is no more the friend of the
black than he is of the white. Neither desires
his company. But in the West Indies, or in
some parts of South and Central America, he
might, no doubt, discover a land in which his
existence would be a not unpleasant one.
214I have discussed this great subject copiously,
but very inadequately. No question at present
before the world has so many aspects; and to
America no question is equally important. The
solution which I have advocated is costly; but it
is, I believe, the only one that promises a permanent
and honourable settlement of the difficulty.
Any other must be imperfect, or must involve
wholesale bloodshed. Until something of the
kind is put into practice, the dearly bought union
must remain a nominal one, and North and South
must continue to cherish different aims, and to
be, in effect, separate nations. Only when the
negro shall have departed will the name of the
United States truly represent anything more than
a magnificent aspiration.
It would be ungenerous to conclude this
work without some acknowledgment of the great
assistance that has been rendered to me in my
study of the subject by, among others, Mr. Eustace
Ballard Smith, Mr. John Bigelow, Mr. P. Bigelow,
Major Post, U.S.A., Mr. Chauncey M. Depew, Mr.
J. W. Barnwell, Mr. G. W. Cable, Mr. Theodore
Roosevelt, Mr. C. M‘Kinley, Mr. S. J. E. Rawling,
Mr. R. W. Gilder, and the Governors of most of
the Southern States. To them, and to many
others, including a number of negro gentlemen,
215whose names, if I have not already mentioned
them incidentally, are, at their own wish, withheld,
I desire to express my most grateful thanks,
coupled with the sincere hope that the difficulty
which interests all of them, and which is only
fortunate in that it has enabled me to make their
acquaintance, may, before long, cease to exist.
APPENDIX. — A.—THE POPULATION OF THE SOUTH IN 1890. — B.—COLOUR CASTE. — C.—SLAVERY IN THE NORTH. — D.—THE GROWTH OF THE COLOURED RACE.
216
Up to the time of sending this book to the press, no official
statistics of the relative proportions of the races in the
Southern States of the Black Belt in 1890 have reached me
from Washington. Bulletin No. 16 of the Census Office contains,
however, a final statement as to the total population of
each State in question. I give the figures in tabular form,
leaving vacant columns for the insertion hereafter of the
missing information:—
Total Population, 1890.
White.
Coloured.
North Carolina
1,617,947
Virginia
1,655,980
Georgia
1,837,353
Florida
391,422
Alabama
1,513,017
Louisiana
1,118,587
Mississippi
1,289,600
South Carolina
1,151,149
10,575,055
217
To the Forum for October, 1889 (Forum Publishing
Company, 253, Fifth Avenue, New York), the Rev. John
Snyder contributed an article with the above title. As it
illustrates many points that are briefly touched upon in the
present volume, I venture to append some further portions
of it beyond those already quoted.
“A gifted American actor,” says Mr. Snyder, “has
conceived a professional scheme which promises an affluent
return of profit and reputation. He is convinced that, under
certain clearly recognised conditions, the drama of Othello
may be made popular in the Southern States. He sees
clearly, of course, why this great product of the master’s
genius has been ‘under a cloud,’ so to speak, south of Mason
and Dixon’s line, and he purposes revealing to the art-loving
people of that section the beauties of a work which the
interpretative power of the greatest actors of the past has
never made tolerable on the Southern stage.
“He is conscious of the natural difficulties to be overcome;
of the state of social feeling which will always resent
the intrusion of the African on the histrionic stage, except
within the limited range of the minstrel show. But his
system contemplates an easy solution of these apparently
insuperable difficulties. He does not design to impart a less
pronounced colour to the face of Othello, because experience
has taught him that the slightest tinge of creaminess in the
complexion and the faintest crinkle in the hair would leave the
prejudice against his hero’s race practically unaffected. He
simply intends to ‘improve’ Shakspeare so that the great
bard’s creations may be made generally acceptable to all
sections of our free and enlightened land.
“There is no intention wilfully to misrepresent Shakspeare,
218or to distort his plain meanings. But this artist has reasoned
himself into the conviction that the great author’s hero could
not have been a negro. Therefore, all the prejudice against
him on that ground is manifestly unreasonable. In the very
nature of things, he must have been the representative of
another race, or else Brabantio’s friendship, Desdemona’s love,
Cassio’s esteem, and the unstinted admiration of Venice would
all be impossible and inconceivable. Accordingly, our actor
holds, Othello must have resembled one of those stately Arab
chiefs whose portraits gleam from the pages of ‘Picturesque
Palestine.’
“Our Southern brethren are at last to have an Othello who
cannot, as the moral circus advertisements say, ‘offend the
most fastidious.’ Shakspeare, carefully modernised, will become
popular once more in the sunny South. All references
to the blackness of Othello’s face and the thickness of his lips
are to be conscientiously softened down into less objectionable
phrases, and those audiences which may be ethnologically
unenlightened are to have their sensitive natures soothed by
some such prologue as Bottom proposed for the sapient actors
of Athens: ‘Ladies, or fair ladies, I would wish you, or I
entreat you, not to fear, not to tremble; my life for yours. If
you think I come hither as a “nigger,” it were a pity of my
life. I am no such thing. I am an Arab.’ That would put
all doubt at rest.
“The only thing likely to interfere with the success of this
scheme of mingled philanthropy and profit is the presence of
that vast amount of astute Shakspearean philosophy which is
based upon the assumption of Othello’s objectionable ethnic
relationship. What becomes of Professor D. J. Snider’s
‘System of Shakspeare’s Dramas.’? It is quite probable that
Shakspeare, could he be consulted, would offer no strenuous
objection to the proposed change. Having been an actor himself,
he would doubtless sympathise with the despair to which
219the modern representative of his profession is reduced in the
task of catering to the present unreasonable demand for
dramatic novelties. As there is not the slightest appreciable
trace of a ‘system’ in any of his dramas, and as the social
prejudice against the African race as such is something which
in his day and generation was still unborn, it is reasonable to
suppose that Othello might be re-made into a Chinaman or a
Choctaw without seriously affecting the motive of the tragedy.
“Still, when a man has constructed a ‘System of Shakspeare,’
and has announced that ‘Shakspeare makes race an
ethical element of marriage, as important as chastity,’ and that
‘in Europe to-day the marriage of a lord and a servant-girl
collides with the moral consciousness of the whole public,’ he
naturally has the same kind of affection for that system which
Dr. Sangrado had for his, and any attempt to upset its ‘ethical’
conclusions by substituting an Arabian Othello for an Ethiopian,
will be apt to be resented. It is as fundamentally
unethical to marry an Arab as a negro. It will be much
wiser for our actor frankly to retain the African characteristics
of his hero, letting it be understood that a true Shakspearean
system employs this tragedy as an ‘awful example’ to warn
those who are tempted to leap over the ethical fence of racial
distinctions.
“Once outside of the atmosphere of American social life, it
is difficult to treat the spirit of colour caste with seriousness or
decent respect. Of course, that man would be but a shallow
ethnologist who should maintain that the terms ‘superior’ and
‘inferior’ do not justly mark the distinctions between races,
or who should refuse to acknowledge that certain choice
characteristics of civilisation are confined within fairly well-ascertained
racial limitations. And the man who looks with
disapproval upon marriage unions between the members of a
progressive race like the Caucasian, and the members of a
conditionally unimprovable race, is governed by principles of
220the simplest prudence, to say no more. The difficulty is always
in determining this question of improvability. The Spanish
race in its various colonies has seemed to stand still for three
centuries, yet to attribute racial inferiority to the countrymen
of Cervantes and Loyola would be manifestly unjust. The
negro race in this country may be mentally and morally both
inferior and unimprovable, and hence it would be both wise
and ethical for our stock to refuse to make with it a mixture
of blood. But the average American knows nothing and
cares nothing about any physiological reasons for declining
such marriages. In truth, the race question does not, with
us, involve this marriage element at all. Generally speaking,
nobody wants his daughter to marry a negro, and the negro is
not anxious to seek such marriages. As a matter of fact, in
the matter of marriage the negro is ridiculously fastidious,
accepting without complaint the white man’s classification of
every shade of colour, even the slightest, under the head of
negro, and rigorously claiming for his own race every possible
modification of the original type. There are plenty of octoroons
and quadroons who might easily pass for members of the white
race, but who never think of seeking marriage associations
outside their mother’s stock. And they would be subjected to
the severe censure of the black race if they did so. The
bugbear of ‘miscegenation’ is the least substantial phantom
that haunts the imagination of ignorant people.
“The cruel wall of caste which has been relentlessly built
around the negro in this country was not created by the fear
of racial deterioration on the part of the Caucasian. The feeling
from which it sprang is so inexplicable as almost to defy any
philosophical analysis. That in the Southern States slavery
should have created a clearly defined colour caste was reasonable
and natural. That among a people generous in disposition
and generally religious in their habits of mind this caste
feeling should have been strengthened by every argument
221tending to show the negro’s natural inferiority and fitness for
his servile position was equally natural. That within the
limits of slave territory every Southern gentleman should consider
the presence of mental ability in an individual negro a
reflection upon the system and a menace to its continuance,
was the most reasonable thing in the world. But it is only
justice to say that not in the South but in the North did this
curious feeling of colour caste first have its rise. The Southern
man apparently denied to the negro social recognition not
primarily because he was a negro, but because he was a slave.
The Northern man seems to hate the negro primarily on
account of his colour. In domestic service, the filthiest and
most ignorant Irish or German servant refuses to eat at the
same table with the cleanest and most respectable negro. In
some of our hotels the wealthiest negro in the land could not
purchase, at any price, the privilege of sitting in the common
dining-room, or of occupying one of the sleeping apartments.
Industrially, he is practically restricted to a “beggarly account,”
of the least profitable and most menial trades. Those labour
unions which complain so bitterly of the oppression of capital,
and announce Utopian principles of universal brotherhood, do
not dare to cast their mantle of protection over the despised
and neglected labourer with a black skin. But saddest of all
is the attitude which the Church has held towards this spirit
of colour caste. Ideally, at least, the Church is the home
of human equality. All classes and conditions of men are
supposed to meet there on a common ground. And while we
constantly depart from this principle in practice, we usually
try to cover and disguise our shortcomings by a thin veil of
self-exculpation. We may not want the poor and poorly
dressed man sitting in our pews, but we rarely make a frank
confession of the fact. Only the negro is openly, and by
common consent, excluded from the broad definition of
Christian equality. We have not yet accepted Mr. Nasby’s
222advice, and altered our version of the New Testament so that
it shall read ‘Suffer the little (white) children to come unto
Me,’ but it would be quite consistent for us to do so.
“This condition of things would cease to be mysterious if
it were based upon recognised physiological reasons. We can
easily understand Brabantio’s surprise when his daughter
became enamoured of a thick-lipped African, or Aunt
Ophelia’s disgust at seeing Eva hanging about the neck of
Uncle Tom. We are not disposed to question the good
Puritan’s conviction that the pure negro is ‘an acquired taste.’
But we entertain the same personal and social repugnance for
every possible modification of the negro. Even when the
bleaching process has been so thorough that no external
indication of African blood remains; even when the individual
has assumed all the characteristics of Caucasian beauty and
intelligence, we still treat him as a social pariah. Several
years ago there was, at a certain school in Pittsburg, a very
beautiful and intelligent young lady. In scholarship and
deportment she stood for a year at the head of the school. At
the end of that time somebody told the principal that his
favourite pupil had lurking in her veins a few unsuspected
and undiscoverable drops of African blood. She was turned
out of the doors as ignominiously as if she had been guilty of
unchastity or was afflicted with some infectious disease.
“Tell the average American that he is descended from
Pocahontas, that his blood may be traced to Confucius, or that
his daughter has secretly married one of Madame Blavatsky’s
mythical Indian Mahatmas, and the chances are that he will
be flattered and gratified. You stumble over no ‘ethical
principle’; you encounter no fatal racial prejudice. Tell him
that his great-great-grandfather was probably a powerful
potentate from the Congo or the Niger, and you touch the
acme of insult. It would be safer to accuse him of highway
robbery.
223“But the most astonishing feature of this colour caste is
found in the complacent assumption of the average American
that it is something inherent and natural in the human mind,
and is therefore universal. Tell such a person that it is the
result of social and political education, and he will smile at
your ignorance. Yet when such an American steps over the
borders of his own country he does not find this prejudice
shared by any other nation. The Frenchman, Englishman, or
German may not want his daughter to marry a negro, but in no
part of Europe do you detect the presence of that galling
system of social discrimination which so exasperates the black
man in this country. All over the continent of Europe you
find the negro living in the best hotels, travelling in first class
coaches, and sitting as an equal on the benches of the great
scientific and art schools. You find no trace of this prejudice
in the press or literature of Europe; you find no taint of it in
its social life. London is the great meeting-place of all the
varied races of the world. A new Peter would find there the
representatives of more peoples than listened to the many-tongued
sermon on the Day of Pentecost. All colours and
conditions of men make up the varied web and woof of its
marvellous life. Each man’s condition is determined by his
rank, his wealth, his social position. Social caste indeed exists
of the most rigid type; but it is never based on colour, hardly
ever upon racial distinctions. It may be, as the author of the
‘System of Shakspeare’s Dramas’ affirms, that the marriage
of a lord and a servant-girl ‘collides with the moral consciousness
of the whole public,’ but a man’s treatment is conditioned
upon his wealth, his intelligence, his knowledge, his rank, or
his personal character, never upon the colour of his skin. In
the light of this fact our colour caste seems as provincial as it
is undeniably absurd, cruel, and indefensible.”
224
The following letter was addressed in 1888 to the Editor
of, and was printed in, the Charleston News and Courier. As
it deals very ably, though from a pronouncedly Southern
standpoint, with the responsibility of the North towards the
negro, I reprint it with a few insignificant corrections:—
“Sir,—I was glad to see your editorial on March 9th last
on the Emancipation Proclamation. It is surprising how
much ignorance exists upon the subject of emancipation in
some of the usually best-informed circles. I desire to call
your attention to two instances of this in that usually accurate
journal, the Nation (of New York). In a recent number
there appeared the review of a letter written from Washington
to a paper in Frankfort:—
“‘The condition of our negro population is the subject of
a Washington letter in the Frankfurter Zeitung of December
24th, 1887. The writer’s view of their social status is correct
enough, but he is rather at sea in his historical retrospect,
as when he says that the South was at one time more opposed
to slavery than was the North, and that the Civil War was a
struggle between “the sons of the slave-owners and the
planters to whom their fathers had sold their dark commodities.”
This is a corollary to the misleading statement
that “in 1790 the negroes were distributed throughout this
country, and were almost exclusively slaves,” but that, “during
the first quarter of a century the inhabitants of the Northern
States gradually sold their slaves to the South, where climate
and the nature of the agricultural products increase the value
of negro labour,” all of which sounds as if the countryman of
Von Holst had drawn his inspiration from the pro-slavery
pamphlets of Buchanan’s Administration.’
“I have not seen this letter, nor do I know who is the
225writer, but if you will allow me space I think I can convince
even the Nation, and its readers who shall happen to see this
communication, that the statements quoted are not so wide of
the mark as the Nation seems to think.
“If such, as the Nation suggests, was indeed the source of
the writer’s information, can the following facts and figures,
which are taken mostly from a work of that time, be disputed?
The author from whom I take the figures, as I cannot at this
moment put my hand upon the census of 1790, was, it is true,
a Rebel brigadier, the heroic defender of Marye’s Heights at
Fredericksburg, where he was killed; but, all the same, can the
statements be denied?—(‘Cobb on Slavery,’ Philadelphia, T.
and I. W. Johnson and Co., 1858):—
“By the census of 1790 there were 40,370 slaves in the
States north of Virginia. Now how were those 40,000 slaves
emancipated? Can any one point to a single Act by any
Northern State by which any negro was actually and immediately
emancipated? We ask this because it is clear that all
the gradual emancipation schemes had just the effect which the
Frankfort writer states: to wit, they caused the inhabitants of
the Northern States generally to sell their slaves to the South.
Laws prohibiting slavery after some future date were but
warnings to the owners of slaves to send them out of the
State before the Act should go into effect. The inevitable
working of such Acts was to send the slaves South for sale.
“Vermont, we know, claims the honour of having been the
first to exclude slavery. She claims that this was done by
her Bill of Rights in 1777. But the census of 1790 shows
seventeen slaves. Her Bill of Rights could not have done a
very perfect work since it allowed seventeen slaves to remain
in bonds thirteen years after its adoption. Slavery, which had
been introduced into Massachusetts soon after its first settlement,
was ‘tolerated,’ as Chief Justice Parsons gently expresses
it, certainly until the adoption of the Constitution of 1780.
226Nor, indeed, did the Constitution of 1780, by any express provision
or declaration, prohibit slavery. But a very few days
ago a letter of Mr. Thomas Silloway, of Boston, appeared in
the Charleston Sun, giving instances of bills of sale and disposition
by will of Indian and negro slaves in Massachusetts as
late as 1771. Dr. Oliver Wendell Holmes makes Old Sophy,
the nurse of Elsie Venner, the daughter of a slave mother. So
gradual was the decadence of slavery in Massachusetts that as
late as 1833 her Supreme Court could not say by what specific
Act the institution had been abolished. (Winchendon v.
Hatfield, 4 Mass. 123; Commonwealth v. Aves, 18 Pick, 209.)
“In Belknap’s ‘New Hampshire,’ Vol. III., 280, published
in 1792, the matter is thus explained:—
“‘Slavery is not prohibited by any express law. Negroes
were never very numerous in New Hampshire. Some of
them purchased their freedom during the late war by serving
three years in the army. Others have been made free by the
justice and humanity of their masters. In Massachusetts they
are all accounted free by the first article in the Declaration of
Rights, “All men are born free and equal.” In the Bill of
Rights of New Hampshire the first article is expressed in these
words: “All men are born equally free and independent;”
which, in the opinion of most persons, will bear the same
construction. But others have deduced from it this inference,
that all who are born since the Constitution was made are
free; and that those who were in slavery before remain there
still. For this reason, in the late census, the blacks in New
Hampshire are distinguished into free and slaves. It is not in
my power to apologise for this inconsistency.’
“The author then goes on to explain, as we Southerners
afterwards continued to do, how much better off those who
were slaves were than those who were free in other States.
By the census of 1790 there were 158 slaves in New
Hampshire, and in 1840 there was still one remaining.
227“In the plantations of Rhode Island slaves were more
numerous than in the other New England States, as, indeed,
they necessarily were, considering that the merchants and
sailors of that little State were the greatest slave traders of
this country. But as the negroes could not thrive in that
latitude, her Legislature provided a gradual scheme of
emancipation, which took a lifetime to work out, leaving as
late as 1840 five slaves in that State. Connecticut was too
much interested to indulge her philanthropy at the expense of
an immediate emancipation. In 1790 she had 2,750 slaves.
So she too adopted a plan of gradual emancipation, by the
slow and prudent workings of which seventeen of her slaves
remained as such in 1840.
“As Mr. Bancroft observes: ‘that New York is not a slave
State like Carolina, is due to her climate and not to the
superior humanity of her founders.’ (Vol. II., 303). When
South Carolina prohibited the importation of slaves from
Africa in 1789, New York imported them and shipped the
savages to this State as American slaves. As late as 1858 the
London Times charged that New York had become the
greatest slave-trading mart in the world, a charge which
Wilson, in the ‘Rise and Fall of the Slave Power,’ fully
corroborates. In 1790 New York had 21,324 slaves. She,
too, adopted an Act of gradual emancipation, by the operation
of which in 1840 all but four slaves had been gotten rid of.
New Jersey, though adopting the same scheme, was slower in
getting rid of her slaves, 674 still remaining in 1840.
“Adam Smith observed:—‘The late resolution of the
Quakers in Pennsylvania to set at liberty all their negro slaves
may satisfy us that their number cannot be very great. Had
they made any considerable part of their property such a
resolution could never have been taken.’ (‘Wealth of Nations.’)
There were 3,737 slaves in Pennsylvania in 1790, and, as Adam
Smith predicted, she would not sacrifice so much property. So
228she, too, provided for gradual emancipation. The census of
1840 showed sixty-five negroes still in slavery. In 1823 a
negro woman was put up on the auction block along with some
machinery, smith’s tools, and one cow, and sold for debt by the
sheriff of Fayette County, in the State of Brotherly Love. They
were still discussing this case in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
as late as 1837, but it was the inadequacy of the price
the poor wretch brought, and not the iniquity of the transaction,
about which they were contending. (Lynch v. Commonwealth,
6 Watts 495.) It was the frosts and snows which put an end
to slavery at the North, not philanthropy.
“It is familiar history that the slave trade by which slavery
was established in this country was carried on by Old England
and New England, and not by the South. As Mr. Lecky
points out, the New England trade, just prior to the Revolution,
consisted in sending her lumber out and bringing
slaves in.
“Some time since in his notes, in this same paper, while
reviewing a work on ‘Brazil and Slavery,’ the editor of the
Nation wrote as follows:—
“‘We can recommend it for its own sake, but we have read
it with the deepest interest for its reflected light on that
irrepressible conflict which ended, some would say, in April,
1865, and others in March, 1876. First, and above all, it inspires
a sense of profound thankfulness that there never existed in this
country a party, or a policy, or a measure of gradual emancipation.
We mean, of course, against that purely Southern slave
power which dictated the compromises of the Federal Constitution.’
“In this the editor of the Nation could not have meant
that there never existed in this country a policy or a measure
of gradual emancipation, for, as we have seen, just such a
policy was adopted throughout the Northern States. It was
by just such measures that the Northern people rid themselves
229of the institutions which they had so large a hand in imposing
upon the South. But was this statement correct even if
limited by his last sentence, ‘We mean, of course, against the
Southern slave power,’ &c.?
“Mr. Lincoln declared, in his inaugural address, that the
Republican party had no intention to interfere with the institution
of slavery; and Congress, by a joint resolution,
approved July 22nd, 1861, repeated Mr. Lincoln’s declaration,
and announced to the South that the war was only for the
preservation of the Union, and not for the abolition of
slavery; and Congress actually passed in March, 1861, by a
two-thirds vote, a proposed amendment to the Constitution
that:—
“‘No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which
will authorise or give Congress the power to abolish or
interfere within any State with the domestic institutions
thereof, including that of persons held to labour or service by
the laws of the said State.’
“Upon the recommendation, however, of Mr. Lincoln,
made in a special message in April, 1862, Congress passed
another joint resolution offering pecuniary aid from the
General Government to induce the States to adopt ‘general
abolishment of slavery.’
“Mr. Lincoln expressed the sentiment of the North, which
enabled him to carry on the war successfully, when, on the
22nd August, 1862, he said:
“‘My paramount object is to save the Union, and not
to save or destroy slavery. If I could save the Union
without freeing any slave I would do it. If I could save
it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could
do it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also
do that.’
“The slaves in the States at war with the Federal Government
were freed as a military and not as a political measure.
230The Federal Government did not free the slaves in Delaware,
Maryland, and Kentucky. The results of the war rendered
slavery impracticable, but that was all.
“The truth is that the South could at any time during
the war have secured the institution of slavery at the sacrifice
of the right of secession. That sacrifice she would not
voluntarily make, and she lost both her sovereignty and her
slaves. She was the unfortunate, innocent, last holder of a
dishonoured bill, and the emitters of it turned upon her and
called to the world to see how they would punish her for
holding it.
“Edward McCrady, Jr.”
To this it may be added that, under the old territorial
laws of Illinois, persons were allowed to bring slaves into the
Territory under the name of indentured servants. As such
they might be held in bondage for a term of ninety-nine years
or less. This was in direct violation of the spirit of the
ordinance of 1787, which interdicted slavery or involuntary
servitude in all the territory north of the Ohio River. The
first Illinois State Constitution, adopted in 1818, prohibited the
further introduction of slaves, but did not abolish this species
of slavery by liberating the victims of the old Territorial
enactments. Thus slavery existed in Illinois in defiance of
the ordinance of 1787 until the adoption of the Constitution
of 1848, which contained the following provision:—“There
shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in this State,
except as a punishment for crime.” After the adoption of
the Constitution of 1818, the first Legislature re-enacted the
law “respecting free negroes, mulattoes, servants, and slaves”
of Territorial times. No severer law was to be found in any
slave State. It forbade negroes or mulattoes to settle in the
State without certificates of freedom. No person was to
employ any negro or mulatto without such certificate, under a
231penalty of $1.50 for each day. To harbour any slave or servant,
or hinder the owner in retaking a slave, was made a felony,
punishable by restitution or a fine of two-fold value, and
by a whipping not to exceed thirty stripes. Every black or
mulatto without a proper certificate was subject to arrest as a
runaway slave, to be advertised for six weeks by the sheriff,
when, if not reclaimed or his freedom established, he was sold
for one year, after which he was entitled to a freedom certificate.
Any slave or servant found ten miles from home without
permit was liable to arrest and thirty-five stripes, on the order
of a justice. For misbehaving to his master or family he was
punishable with the lash. Indeed, punishment with the lash
to the number of thirty-nine and forty stripes was prescribed
for each of a long list of offences, real or of legal construction.
Even after the adoption of the Constitution of 1848, which
required the General Assembly at its first session to pass such
laws as should effectually prohibit free persons of colour from
immigrating to, or settling in this State, and should prohibit
the owners of slaves from bringing them there for the purpose
of setting them free, the Legislature passed an Act, February
12th, 1853, which imposed on every such coloured person a
fine of $50. If the fine was not paid forthwith he was to be
advertised and sold to any one who would pay the fine and
costs for the shortest period of such person’s service. A case
under this law was carried up to the Supreme Court, and
decided, so late as 1864, to be valid. Other provisions of these
enactments, which were known as the Black Laws, were
almost equally detestable. On February 7th, 1865, they were
repealed. Had it not been for these Black Laws the census of
Illinois would not be blotted with an enrolment of “168 slaves”
in 1810; 917 in 1820; 747 in 1830; and 331 in 1840—the
last census that carries such a stain. Fortunately, the masters
and people at large were better than their laws.
232
The following table shows the white and coloured populations
of the whole of the United States at the various
decennial periods from 1790 to the present time:—