Transcriber's Note:

Every effort has been made to replicate this text as faithfully as possible, including obsolete and variant spellings and other inconsistencies. Text that has been changed to correct an obvious error is noted at the [end] of this ebook. Also, the transcriber added the Table of Contents.

The Journal
of
Negro History

Volume IV

1919

Contents

Vol IV—January, 1919—No. 1

Vol IV—April, 1919—No. 2

Vol IV—July, 1919—No. 3

Vol IV—October, 1919—No. 4

The Journal
of
Negro History

Vol. IV—January, 1919—No. 1

PRIMITIVE LAW AND THE NEGRO

The psychology of large bodies of men is a surprisingly difficult topic and it is often true that we are inclined to seek the explanation of phenomena in too recent a period of human development. The truth seems to be that ideas prevail longer than customs, habits of dress or the ordinary economic processes of the community, and the ideas are the controlling factors. The attitude of the white man in this country toward the Negro is the fact perhaps of most consequence in the Negro problem. Why is it that still there lingers a certain unwillingness, one can hardly say more, in the minds of the best people to accept literally the platform of the Civil War? Why were the East St. Louis riots possible? I am afraid that a good many of the Negro race feel that there is a distinct personal prejudice or antipathy which can be reached or ought to be reached by logic, by reason, by an appeal to the principles of Christianity and of democracy. For myself I have always felt that if the premises of Christianity were valid at all, they placed the Negro upon precisely the same plane as the white man; that if the premises of democracy were true for the white man, they were true for the black. There should be no artificial distinction created by law, and what is much more to the purpose, by custom simply because the one man has a skin different in hue than the other. Nor should the law, once having been made equal, be nullified by a lack of observance on the part of the whites nor be abrogated by tacit agreements or by further legislation subtly worded so as to avoid constitutional requirements. Each man and woman should be tested by his qualities and achievements and valued for what he is. I am sure no Negro asks for more, and yet I am afraid it is true, as many have complained, that in considerable sections of this country he receives far less.

I have long believed that we are concerned in this case with no reasoned choice and with no explainable act, but with an unconscious impulse, a subconscious impulse possibly, with an illogical, unreasonable but powerful and in-explainable reaction of which the white man himself is scarcely conscious and yet which he feels to be stronger than all the impulses created in him by reason and logic. What is its origin? Is there such a force? I think most will agree there is such an instinctive aversion or dislike.

I am inclined to carry it back into the beginnings of the race, back to the period of pre-historic law and to that psychological origin which antedates the records of history, in the strict sense, to that part of racial history indeed where men commonly act rather than write. The idea of prehistoric law is that obligation exists only between people of the same blood. Originally, charitable and decent conduct was expected only of people of the same family. Even though the family was by fact or fiction extended to include some hundreds or even thousands of people, the fact was still true. The law which bound a man limited his good conduct to a relatively few people. Outside the blood kin he was not bound. He must not steal from his relatives, but if he stole from another clan, his relatives deemed it virtue. If he committed murder, he should be punished within his clan, but protected, if possible, by his clan, if he murdered someone outside it. The blood kin became the definite limitation of the ideas of right and responsibility. This was true between whites. All whites were not members of any one man's blood kin.

Palpably more true was this distinction between the Negro and the white man. The Negro could not by any fiction be represented as one of the blood kin. The Romans extended the legal citizenship to cover all white men in their dominions. It was the fictitious tie of the blood kin, but its plausibility was due to the fact that they were all white. I do not remember to have seen any proof that the Negro inhabitants of the Roman African colonies were considered Roman citizens. This is one of the oldest psychological lines in human history; the rights which a man must concede to another are limited by the relationship of blood. Prima facie there could be no blood relationship between the Negro and the white man. There could therefore be no obligation on the white man's part to the Negro in prehistoric law. This notion has, I think, endured in many ways down to the present day as a subconscious, unconscious factor behind many very vital notions and ideas. Is it not true that international law has been, more often than not, a law between white men?

The next point I hesitate somewhat to make because it is difficult to state without over-emphasis and without saying more than one means. I think it probable that in one way or another the idea of Christianity became connected with the notion of the blood kin and in that sense limited to the blood kin of those to whom Jesus came. Everyone is familiar with the Jewish notion that Jesus was their own particular Messiah, and that the Gentiles were foreclosed claims upon him. As Christianity grew, it grew still among the white nations, and the notion of it was not, I think, extended for a good many centuries to any except white people. The premises of Christianity unquestionably included the Negro, but the notion of the blood kin excluded him, and Christianity, like other religious ideas, was limited to the people who first created it and to those who were actually or by some plausible fiction their kin in blood. The idea of the expansion of the blood kin by adoption either of an individual or of a community of individuals was very old and thoroughly well established, but I think the idea never was applied to Negroes, Indians, or Chinamen except in unfrequent cases of individuals. A volume would be required to bring forward all the available evidence regarding this idea, and another perhaps to examine and develop it, to consider and weigh the pros and meet the cons. But it will perhaps suffice for present purposes to throw out the idea for consideration without an attempt at more considerable defense.

Another fact which has been most difficult to explain has been the continued lynchings of Negroes not merely for crimes against women, but for all sorts of other crimes, large and small. Here the traces of primitive law are very much clearer. Lynching is after all nothing more nor less than the old self-help. The original notion was that the individual should execute the law himself when he could, and that he was entitled in case of crime to assistance from the community in the execution of the law upon the offender. Murder, arson, rape and the theft of cattle were the particular crimes for which self-help by the individual and by the community in his assistance were authorized by primitive law. The preliminaries and formularies were very definite, but they do not look to us of the present day like procedure. It is true, however, that there are very few lynchings in which these formulas have not been unconsciously followed. There must be a hue and cry and pursuit along the trail. The murderer must be immediately pursued. The person against whom the crime is committed or his next of kin must raise an immediate outcry, and they and the neighbors must proceed at once in pursuit. If they caught the criminal within a reasonable distance or within a reasonable time, they then were endowed by primitive law with the right to execute justice upon him themselves. Commonly the criminal was hanged (even for theft) when caught in the act, but barbarous punishments were not uncommon. That was legal procedure, provided the cry was raised, the pursuit undertaken, and the criminal caught within a reasonable number of hours or days as the case might be. The mob had the right to execute the law, and it is not often that lynchings take place long periods after the commission of the crime. Such for many centuries was the law in Europe for whites. Self-help applied in particular to men of different tribes or communities who were not of the same blood kin.

If self-help applied under certain conditions within the blood kin as it unquestionably did, that is to say, within the law, it applied with greater force to all classes and offenders who were outside the blood kin and were outside the law. If a stranger or an alien came within the community bounds and did not sound his horn, community law sanctioned his instant killing by anyone who met him. Men could not peaceably enter the precincts of the German tribes as late as the year 500 or 600 A.D. without being liable to instant death unless they complied with certain definite formularies. Until within five hundred years, the stranger was practically without rights in any country but his own, and might be dealt with violently by individuals or bodies of citizens. One has but to remember the tortures visited upon the Jews in all European countries with impunity to realize the truth of the doctrine of self-help when applied to strangers. There was literally no law to govern the situation. The courts did not deal with it, no penalties were provided for the restraining of individuals or of the community at large, dealing with strangers until a relatively recent time.

Is it not true that the difference in blood between the Negro and the white man has caused a survival of this notion of self-help, today illogical, unreasonable, absurd, but powerful none the less despite its technical infraction of the law of the land? Is not the lynching of a Negro or of a white man simply the old primitive self-help with the hue and cry and the execution of the victim when caught by the mob or by the sheriff's posse? There is perhaps no field of speculation so fascinating as this of the survival of bygone customs, traditions, and notions, in present society. At the same time he will be a poor and uncritical student who will not recognize the ease of erecting vast structures upon slender foundations. My purpose in this article is not to allege the necessary truth of this proposition, but, if possible, to stimulate along different lines than has been common the researches of those who are interested in the psychological attitude of the white man toward the Negro.

There will be no doubt those who will exclaim that if I am right in this analysis of the problem—indeed, if there be any reasonable modicum of truth in what I say—then the solution of the problem will be difficult in the extreme. The whole method of attack upon it will be altered. A long educational campaign will become the main feature, intended to expose the true basis of the white man's denial of real equality to the Negro race. It will look like a battle too long to be waged with courage because the victory will be far in the future. I do not agree. The attack, if properly directed, and vigorously followed up, will, like the assault of the woman suffragists upon equally ancient instinctive promptings, be unexpectedly successful. The walls of the fortress are thin and the defenders the wraiths of a dim past.

Roland G. Usher.

LINCOLN'S PLAN FOR COLONIZING THE EMANCIPATED NEGROES[1]

The colonization of the emancipated slaves had been one of the remedies for the difficulties created by the presence of freedmen in the midst of slave conditions. The American Colonization Society was founded in 1816 with the object of promoting emancipation by sending the freedmen to Africa. Some of the slave States, moreover, had laws compelling the freedmen to leave the State in which they had formerly resided as slaves. With an increasingly large number securing legal manumission, the problem caused by their presence became to the slaveholding group a most serious one. The Colonization Society, therefore, sought to colonize the freedmen on the west coast of Africa, thus definitely removing the problem which was of such concern to the planters in slaveholding States.

The colony of Liberia, on the west coast of Africa, was chosen as a favorable one to receive the group of freed slaves. Branches of the Colonization Society were organized in many States and a large membership was secured throughout the country. James Madison and Henry Clay were among its Presidents. Many States made grants of money and the United States Government encouraged the plan by sending to the colony slaves illegally imported. But to the year 1830 only 1,162 Negroes had been sent to Liberia. The full development of the cotton gin, the expansion of the cotton plantation and the consequent rise in the price of slaves forced many supporters of both emancipation and colonization to lose their former ardor.

As the antebellum period of the fifties came on these questions loomed larger in the public view. The proposition for colonizing free Negroes grew in favor as the slavery question grew more acute between the sections. Reformers favored it, public men of note urged its adoption and finally, as the forensic strife between the representatives of the two sections of the country developed in intensity, even distinguished statesmen began to propose and consider the adoption of colonization schemes.[2]

Abraham Lincoln, as early as 1852, gave a clear demonstration of his interest in colonization by quoting favorably in one of his public utterances an oft-repeated statement of Henry Clay,—"There is a moral fitness in the idea of returning to Africa her children, whose ancestors have been torn from her by the ruthless hand of fraud and violence."[3] In popular parlance, however, Lincoln is not a colonizationist. He has become not only the Great Emancipator but the Great Lover of the Negro and promoter of his welfare. He is thought of, popularly always, as the champion of the race's equality. A visit to some of our emancipation celebrations or Lincoln's birthday observances is sufficient to convince one of the prevalence of this sentiment. Yet, although Lincoln believed in the destruction of slavery, he desired the complete separation of the whites and blacks.

Throughout his political career Lincoln persisted in believing in the colonization of the Negro.[4] In the Lincoln-Douglas debates the beginning of this idea may be seen. Lincoln said: "If all earthly power were given me, I should not know what to do as to the existing institution. My first impulse would be to free all the slaves and send them to Liberia—to their own native land. But a moment's reflection would convince me that, whatever of high hope (as I think there is) there may be in this, in the long run its sudden execution is impossible. If they were all landed there in a day, they would all perish in the next ten days; and there are not surplus shipping and surplus money enough in the world to carry them there in many times ten days. What then? Free them all and keep them among us as underlings? Is it quite certain that this betters their condition? I think that I would not hold one in slavery at any rate, yet the point is not clear enough for me to denounce people upon. What next? Free them and make them politically and socially our equals? My own feelings will not admit of this, and if mine would, we well know that those of the great mass of whites will not. Whether this feeling accords with sound judgment is not the sole judgment, if indeed it is any part of it."[5]

A few years later in a speech in Springfield, Lincoln said:[6] "The enterprise is a difficult one, but where there is a will there is a way, and what colonization needs most is a hearty will. Will springs from the two elements of moral sense and self-interest. Let us be brought to believe it is morally right, and at the same time favorable to, or at least not against our interests to transfer the African to his native clime, and we shall find a way to do it, however great the task may be."[7] It is apparent, therefore, that before coming to the presidency, Lincoln had quite definite views on the matter of colonization. His interest arose not only with the good of the freedmen in view, but with the welfare of the white race in mind, as he is frank enough to state.

After being made President, the question of colonization arose again. Large numbers of slaves in the Confederate States not only became actually free by escape and capture but also legally free through the operation of the confiscation acts. In this new condition, their protection and care was to a considerable extent thrown upon the government. To solve this problem Lincoln decided upon a plan of compensated emancipation which would affect the liberation of slaves in the border States, and he further considered the future of the recently emancipated slaves and those to be freed.[8]

Taking up this question in his first annual message, he said: "It might be well to consider, too, whether the free colored people already in the United States could not so far as individuals may desire be included in such colonization," (meaning the colonization of certain persons who were held by legal claims to the labor and service of certain other persons, and by the act of confiscating property used for insurrectory purposes had become free, their claims being forfeited). "To carry out the plan of colonization may involve the acquiring of territory, and also the appropriation of money beyond that to be expended in the territorial acquisition. Having practiced the acquisition of territory for nearly sixty years, the question of constitutional power to do so is no longer an open one to us.... On this whole proposition, including the appropriation of money with the acquisition of territory, does not the expediency amount to absolute necessity—that without which the government itself cannot be perpetuated?"[9]

Congress responded to this recommendation in separate acts, providing in an act, April 16, 1862, for the release of certain persons held to service or labor in the District of Columbia, including those to be liberated by this act, as may desire to emigrate to the Republic of Hayti or Liberia, or such other country beyond the limits of the United States, as the President may determine, provided the expenditure does not exceed one hundred dollars for each immigrant.[10] The act provided that the sum of $100,000 out of any money in the Treasury should be expended under the direction of the President to aid the colonization and settlement of such persons of African descent now residing in the District of Columbia.[11] It further provided that later, on July 16, an additional appropriation of $500,000 should be used in securing the colonization of free persons.[12] A resolution directly authorizing the President's participation provided "that the President is hereby authorized to make provision for the transportation, colonization and settlement in some tropical country beyond the limits of the United States, of such persons of the African race, made free by the provisions of this act, as may be willing to emigrate, having first obtained the consent of the government of said country to their protection and settlement within the same, with all the rights and privileges of freemen."[13] The consent of Congress was given under protest and opposition from some individual members. Charles Sumner in and out of Congress attacked the plan with vigor,[14] but in spite of this opposition the recommendation was carried.

On several occasions Lincoln seized the opportunity to present his views and plans to visiting groups and committees. On July 16, 1862, when the President was desirous of securing the interest of the border State representatives in favor of compensated emancipation the plan for colonization came to light. His appeal to these representatives was: "I do not speak of emancipation at once but of a decision to emancipate gradually. Room in South America for colonization can be obtained cheaply and in abundance, and when numbers shall be large enough to be company and encouragement to one another the freed people will not be so reluctant to go."[15]

Again on the afternoon of August 14, 1862, the President gave an audience to a committee of men of color at the White House. They were introduced by Rev. J. Mitchell, Commissioner of Emigration. E. M. Thomas, the chairman, remarked that they were there by invitation to hear what the executive had to say to them. Having all been seated the President informed them that a sum of money had been appropriated by Congress and placed at his disposal for the purpose of aiding colonization in some country, of the people, or a portion of those of African descent, thereby making it his duty as it had been for a long time his inclination to favor that cause. "And why," he asked, "should the people of your race be colonized and where? Why should they leave this country? You and we are different races. We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races. Whether it is right or wrong I need not discuss, but this physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both, as I think. Your race suffer very greatly, many of them, by living among us, while ours suffer from your presence. In a word we suffer on each side. If this is admitted it affords a reason why we should be separated. If we deal with those who are not free at the beginning and whose intellects are clouded by slavery we have very poor material to start with. If intelligent colored men, such as are before me, would move in this matter much might be accomplished. It is exceedingly important that we have men at the beginning capable of thinking as white men and not those who have been systematically opposed."

The place the President proposed at this time was a colony in Central America, seven days' run from one of the important Atlantic ports by steamer. He stated that there was great evidence of rich coal mines, excellent harbors, and that the new colony was situated on the highways from the Atlantic or Caribbean to the Pacific Oceans. He told this delegation of men to take their full time in making a reply to him. The delegation withdrew, and we are unable to discover any information regarding the reply. Evidently the group of men never returned to make reply to the appeal of the President.[16]

In the Second Annual Message December 1, 1862, more practical suggestions were made to Congress by the President. Says he: "Applications have been made to me by many free Americans of African descent to favor their emigration, with a view to such colonization as was contemplated in recent acts of Congress. Other parties at home and abroad—some upon interested motives, others upon patriotic considerations, and still others influenced by philanthropic sentiments have suggested similar measures; while on the other hand several of the Spanish American Republics have protested against the sending of such colonies to their respective territories. Under these circumstances I have declined to move any such colony to any State without first obtaining the consent of the government, with an agreement on its part to receive and protect such emigrants in all the rights of freemen. I have at the same time offered to several States situated within the tropics, or having colonies there to negotiate with them, subject to the advice and consent of the Senate, to favor the voluntary emigration of persons of that class to their respective territories upon conditions which shall be equal, just and humane. Liberia and Hayti are as yet the only countries to which colonies of African descent from here could go with certainty of being received and adopted as citizens; and I regret to say such persons contemplating colonization do not seem so willing to go to those countries as to some others, nor so willing as I think their interest demands. I believe, however, opinion among them in this respect is improving; and that ere long there will be an augmented and considerable migration to both countries from the United States."

Later in the same message Congress is requested to appropriate money and prepare otherwise for colonizing free colored persons with their own consent at some place without the United States. The President continues: "I cannot make it better known than it already is, that I strongly favor colonization and yet I wish to say there is an objection urged against free colored persons remaining in the country, which is largely imaginary, if not sometimes malicious. It is insisted that their presence would injure and displace white labor and white laborers. Is it true then that colored people can displace any more white labor by being free than by remaining slaves? If they stay in their old places they jostle no white laborers; if they leave their old places they leave them open to white laborers. Logically then there is neither more nor less of it. Emancipation even without deportation would probably enhance the wages of white labor and very surely would not reduce them. Reduce the supply of black labor by colonizing the black laborer out of the country and by precisely so much you increase the demand for and wages of white labor."[17]

Pursuant to the power given the President, negotiations were begun with the foreign powers having territory or colonies within the tropics, through the Secretary of State, W. H. Seward, mainly to ascertain if there was any desire on the part of these governments for entering into negotiation on the subject of colonization. Negotiations were to be begun only with those powers which might desire the benefit of such emigration. It was suggested that a ten years' treaty should be signed between the United States and the countries desiring immigration. The latter were required to give specific guarantees for "the perpetual freedom, protection and equal rights of the colonies and their descendants." Before and after the transmission of the proposals to foreign countries, propositions came from the Danish Island of St. Croix in the West Indies, the Netherland Colony of St. Swinam, the British Colony of Guiana, the British Colony of Honduras, the Republic of Hayti, the Republic of Liberia, New Granada and Ecuador. The Republics of Central America, Guatemala, Salvador, Costa Rica, and Nicaragua, objected to such emigration as undesirable.[20]

Great Britain rejected the proposal as a governmental proposition on the ground that it might involve the government in some difficulty with the United States government because of fugitives, and therefore expressed her disagreement with such a convention. Seward had asserted that there was no objection to voluntary emigration; the government of British Honduras and Guiana then appointed immigration agents who were to promote the immigration of laborers by using Boston, New York and Philadelphia as emigration ports.

The President came to be of the firm opinion that emigration must be voluntary and without expense to those who went. This was repeatedly asserted according to reports of the Cabinet meeting by Gideon Wells.[21] The Netherlands sought to secure a labor supply for the colony of Swinan for a term of years, using the freedmen as hired laborers. Seward objected to the acceptance of such a proposal.

Of all the propositions offered President Lincoln seemed satisfied with two—one was for the establishment of a colony in the harbor of Chiriqui in the northeastern section of the State of Panama,[22] near the republics of New Granada and Costa Rica. The situation seemed favorable not only because of the ordinary advantages of soil and climate but also because of its proximity to a proposed canal across the Isthmus of Darien and because of its reputedly rich coal fields. There were two objections to this plan. One was the existence of a dispute over territory between the republics of Costa Rica and Granada. The other grew out of a specific examination of the coal fields by Professor Henry of the Smithsonian Institute.[23] His report doubted the value of the coal bed and advised a more thorough examination before closing the purchase. Before the project could be examined a more acceptable proposition appeared. In addition it also developed that there was opposition to Negro emigration from several of the States of Central America.[24]

An effort was then made to establish a colony on the island of A'Vache in the West Indies. This colony was described in a letter to the President by Bernard Kock, represented to be a business man. This site was described as the most beautiful, healthy and fertile of all the islands belonging to the Republic of Hayti, and in size of about one hundred square miles. "As would be expected," writes Kock, "in a country like this, soil and climate are adapted for all tropical production, particularly sugar, coffee, indigo, and more especially cotton which is indigenous. Attracted by its beauty, the value of its timber, its extreme fertility and its adaptation for cultivation, I prevailed on President Geffrard of Hayti to concede to me the island, the documentary evidence of which has been lodged with the Secretary of the Interior."[25]

On December 31, 1862, there was signed a contract by which, for a compensation of $50 per head, Kock agreed to colonize 5,000 Negroes, binding himself to furnish the colonies with comfortable homes, garden lots, churches, schools and employ them four years at varying rates. He further agreed to obtain from the Haytian government a guarantee that all such emigrants and their posterity should forever remain free, and in no case be reduced to bondage, slavery or involuntary servitude except for crimes; and they should specially acquire, hold and transmit property and all other privileges of persons common to inhabitants of a country in which they reside. It would be further stipulated that in case of indigence resulting from injury, sickness or age, any such emigrants who should become pauperous should not thereupon be suffered to perish or come to want, but should be supported and cared for as is customary with similar inhabitants of the country in which they should be residents.[26]

Kock also proposed a scheme to certain capitalists in New York and Boston. This had nothing to do with the contract with the President. He proposed to transport 500 of these emigrants at once, begin work on the plantations, and by the end of the following September—a period of eight or nine months—he estimated that this group could raise a crop of 1,000 bales of cotton. It was planned that the colonists should secure from the island a profit of more than 600 per cent in nine months. Kock estimated his necessary expenses as $70,000, and all expense incurred by freighting ships and collecting immigrants was to be borne by the government. It soon became known to the government that Kock had sought the aid of capitalists and money makers. Suspicion as to the honesty of his purposes was then aroused. It was finally discovered also that he was in league with certain confederates to hand over slaves to him as captured runaways on the condition of receiving a price for their return. Lincoln investigated the matter and discovered that Kock was a mere adventurer and the agreement with him was cancelled.[27]

A certain group of capitalists, whose names are not mentioned, then secured the lease from Kock and entered into contract with the government through the Secretary of the Interior, April 6, 1863.[28] Under this agreement a shipload of colonists from the contrabands at Fortress Monroe, said to number 411-435, were embarked.[29] An infectious disease broke out through the presence on board of patients from the military hospital on Craney Island and from twenty to thirty died. On the arrival in the colony no hospitals were ready, no houses were provided, and the resulting conditions were appalling. Kock was sent along as Governor, and he is said to have put on the air of a despot and by his neglect of the sick and needy to have made himself obnoxious.

Rumors of the situation came to the President and he sent a special agent, D. C. Donnohue, who investigated the matter and made a report. Donnohue elaborately described the deplorable situation of the inhabitants, the wretched condition of the small houses and the prevalence of sickness. He further reported that the Haytian government was unwilling that emigrants should remain upon the island and that the emigrants themselves desired to return to the United States. Acting upon the report, the President ordered the Secretary of War to dispatch a vessel to bring home the colonists desiring to return.[30] On the fourth of March the vessel set sail and landed at the Potomac River opposite Alexandria on the twentieth of the same month. On the twelfth of March, 1864, a report was submitted to the Senate showing what portion of the appropriation for colonization had been expended and the several steps which had been taken for the execution of the acts of Congress.[31] On July 2, 1864, Congress repealed its appropriation and no further effort was made at colonization.[32]

The failure of this project did not dim the vision of the successful colonization of the freed slaves in the mind of President Lincoln. As late as April, 1865, according to report, the following conversation is said to have ensued between the President and General Benjamin F. Butler: "But what shall we do with the Negroes after they are free?" inquired Lincoln. "I can hardly believe that the South and North can live in peace unless we get rid of the Negroes. Certainly they cannot, if we don't get rid of the Negroes whom we have armed and disciplined and who have fought with us, to the amount, I believe, of some 150,000 men. I believe that it would be better to export them all to some fertile country with a good climate, which they could have to themselves. You have been a staunch friend of the race from the time you first advised me to enlist them at New Orleans. You have had a great deal of experience in moving bodies of men by water—your movement up the James was a magnificent one. Now we shall have no use for our very large navy. What then are our difficulties in sending the blacks away?... I wish you would examine the question and give me your views upon it and go into the figures as you did before in some degree as to show whether the Negroes can be exported." Butler replied: "I will go over this matter with all diligence and tell you my conclusions as soon as I can." The second day after that Butler called early in the morning and said: "Mr. President, I have gone very carefully over my calculations as to the power of the country to export the Negroes of the South and I assure you that, using all your naval vessels and all the merchant marines fit to cross the seas with safety, it will be impossible for you to transport to the nearest place that can be found fit for them—and that is the Island of San Domingo, half as fast as Negro children will be born here."[33]

This completes all of the evidence obtainable concerning Lincoln's thought and plan for the colonization of the slaves freed by his proclamation. From the earliest period of his public life it is easily discernable that Abraham Lincoln was an ardent believer and supporter of the colonization idea. It was his plan not only to emancipate the Negro, but to colonize him in some foreign land. His views were presented not only to interested men of the white race, but to persons of color as well. As may have been expected, the plan for colonization failed, both because in principle such a plan would have been a great injustice to the newly emancipated race, and in practice it would have proved an impracticable and unsuccessful solution of the so-called race problem.

Charles H. Wesley.

Footnotes:

[1] Cf. Chapter XVII, Nicolay and Hay, Abraham Lincoln, a History.

[2] President Fillmore in his last message to Congress proposed a plan for Negro colonization and advocated its adoption. This part of his message was suppressed on the advice of his cabinet; but even had this not been done, there is no reason to suppose that the plan would have been adopted. President Buchanan made arrangements with the American Colonization Society for the transportation of a number of slaves captured on the slaver, Echo, in 1858.

[3] Eulogy on Henry Clay, delivered in the State House at Springfield, Illinois, July 16, 1852. The quotation here noted is taken from a speech by Henry Clay before the American Colonization Society, 1827. Lincoln continued: "If as friends of colonization hope, the present and coming generations of our countrymen shall by any means succeed in freeing our land from the dangerous presence of slavery, and at the same time in restoring a captive people to their long lost fatherland with bright prospects for the future, and this too so gradually that neither races nor individuals shall have suffered by the change, it will be a glorious consummation." The Works of Abraham Lincoln, Federal Edition, edited by A.B. Lapsley, VIII, pp. 173-174.

[4] "The political creed of Abraham Lincoln embraced among other tenets, a belief in the value and promise of colonization as one means of solving the great race problem involved in the existence of slavery in the United States.... Without being an enthusiast, Lincoln was a firm believer in Colonization." Nicolay and Hay, Abraham Lincoln—A History, VI, p. 354.

[5] Speech at Peoria, Ill., in reply to Douglas. Life and Works of Abraham Lincoln, II, Early Speeches. Centenary Edition, edited by M.M. Miller. The Lincoln-Douglas Debates, October 16, 1854; p. 74.

[6] In the same speech, Lincoln said: "I have said that the separation of the races is the only perfect preventive of amalgamation.... Such separation, if ever effected at all, must be effected by Colonization." The Works of Abraham Lincoln, Federal Edition, edited by A. B. Lapsley, II, p. 306.

[7] Nicolay and Hay, Speeches, Letters and State Papers, Abraham Lincoln, I, p. 235. Lincoln's Springfield Speech, June 26, 1857.

[8] Ibid., VI, p. 356.

[9] Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents, VI, p. 54. First Annual Message, December 3, 1861.

[10] Section XI of Act approved April 16, 1862.

[11] Nicolay and Hay, Abraham Lincoln, VI, p. 356. Act approved July 16, 1862.

[12] Raymond, Life, Public Services and State Papers, p. 504.

[13] Nicolay and Hay, Abraham Lincoln, VI, p. 357.

[14] Charles Sumner in a speech before a State Committee in Massachusetts, said: "A voice from the west—God save the west—revives the exploded theory of colonization, perhaps to divert attention from the great question of equal rights. To that voice, I reply, first, you ought not to do it, and secondly, you cannot do it. You ought not to do it, because besides its intrinsic and fatal injustice, you will deprive the country of what it most needs, which is labor. Those freedmen on the spot are better than mineral wealth. Each is a mine, out of which riches can be drawn, provided you let him share the product, and through him that general industry will be established which is better than anything but virtue, and is, indeed, a form of virtue. It is vain to say that this is a white man's country. It is the country of man. Whoever disowns any member of the human family as brother disowns God as father, and thus becomes impious as well as inhuman. It is the glory of republican institutions that they give practical form to this irresistible principle. If anybody is to be sent away, let it be the guilty and not the innocent."—Charles Sumner's Complete Works, XII, Section 3, p. 334.

[15] Nicolay and Hay, Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln, II, p. 205. Nicolay and Hay, A History of Abraham Lincoln, VI, p. 356.

[16] Raymond, Life, Public Services and State Papers of Abraham Lincoln, p. 504. Nicolay and Hay, Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln, VIII, p. 1.

[17] Richardson, The Messages and Papers of the President, 1789-1897, p. 127. Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln, VIII, p. 97.

[18] A section of the emancipation proclamation states that it is the President's purpose upon the next meeting of Congress to recommend the adoption of a practical measure so that the effort to "colonize persons of African decent with their consent, upon this continent or elsewhere with the previously obtained consent of the governments existing there," will be continued. Nicolay and Hay, A History, VI, p. 168.

[19] It is interesting to note that the colored population seemed very little in favor of colonization. "It is something singular that the colored race—those in reality most interested in the future destinies of Africa—should be so lightly affected by the evidences continually being presented in favor of colonization." The National Intelligencer, October 23, 1850. But an address issued by the National Emigration Convention of Colored people held at Cleveland, Ohio, urged the colored inhabitants of the United States seriously to consider the question of migrating to some foreign clime. See also Journal of Negro History, "Attitude of Free Negro on African Colonization," I.

[20] Diplomatic Correspondence, Part I, p. 202. Nicolay and Hay. Complete Works, p. 357.

[21] "Mr. Bates was for compulsory deportation. The Negro would not," he said, "go voluntary." "He had great local attachment but no enterprise or persistency. The President objected unequivocally to compulsion. The emigration must be voluntary and without expense to themselves. Great Britain, Denmark and perhaps other powers would take them. I remarked there was no necessity for a treaty which had been suggested. Any person who desired to leave the country could do so now, whether white or black, and it was best to have it so—a voluntary system; the emigrant who chose to leave our shores could and would go where there were the best inducements." Diary of Gideon Wells, I, p. 152.

[22] Cf. Account by Charles K. Tuckerman, Magazine of American History, October, 1886.

[23] Joseph Henry said to Assistant Secretary of State, September 5, 1862: "I hope the government will not make any contracts in regard to the purchase of the Chiriqui District until it has been thoroughly examined by persons of known capacity and integrity. A critical examination of all that has been reported on the existence of valuable beds of coal in that region has failed to convince me of the fact." Chiriqui is described in report Number 148, House of Representatives, 37th Congress, Second Session, July 16, 1862, by John Evans, geologist.

[24] "There was an indisposition to press the subject of Negro Emigration to Chiriqui at the meeting of the Cabinet against the wishes and remonstrances of the states of Central America." Diary of Gideon Wells, I, p. 162.

[25] Manuscript Archives of the Department of the Interior.

[26] Nicolay and Hay, A History, VI, p. 361.

[27] Richardson, Message and Papers of the President, I, p. 167.

[28] Nicolay and Hay, A History, VI, p. 362.

[29] Complete records to substantiate this statement have not been discovered.

[30] Lincoln addressed thus the Secretary of War, February 1, 1864: "Sir; You are directed to have a transport ... sent to the colored colony of San Domingo to bring back to this country such of the colonists there as desire to return. You will have a transport furnished with suitable supplies for that purpose and detail an officer of the quartermaster department, who under special instructions to be given shall have charge of the business. The colonists will be brought to Washington unless otherwise hereafter directed to be employed and provided for at the camps for colored persons around that city. Those only will be brought from the island who desire to return and their effects will be brought with them."

[31] Nicolay and Hay, Complete Works, II, p. 477.

[32] Statutes at Large, XIII, p. 352.

[33] Butler's Reminiscences, pp. 903-904.

LEMUEL HAYNES

Lemuel Haynes was born July 18, 1753, at West Hartford, Conn. He was a man of color, his father being of "unmingled African extraction, and his mother a white woman of respectable ancestry in New England." She was then a hired girl in the employ of a farmer who had a neighbor to whom belonged the Negro to whom the woman became attached. Haynes took neither the name of his father nor of his mother, but probably that of the man in whose home he was born. It is said that his mother, in a fit of displeasure with her host for some supposed neglect, called her child by the farmer's name. Mr. Haynes took the young mother to task, and while yet the baby was but a few days old, she disappeared. As she was the daughter of a Tolland County farmer, Mr. Haynes shielded the family from disgrace by having the child take his name with that of Lemuel which in Hebrew signifies "consecrated to God." The mother never had anything to do with her child, and it is said she married a white man, and lived a respectable life. Lemuel providentially met his mother once in an adjoining town, at the house of a relative, fondly expecting that he would receive some kind attentions from her. He was sadly disappointed, however, for she eluded the interview. Catching a glimpse of her at length when she was attempting to escape from him he accosted her in the language of severe but merited rebuke.

Mr. Haynes kept Lemuel till he was five months old, and then had him "bound out" to Deacon David Rose, of Granville, Massachusetts, a man of singular piety. There Lemuel grew up, and lived for thirty-two years. One condition of his indenture was that, in common with other children, he should enjoy the usual advantage of a district school education. Yet, as schools of that section were decidedly backward, his early opportunities for instruction were very limited. Like other farmer boys, however, he was instructed in the fundamentals of education and the principles of religion. His duties often kept him from school, or caused him to arrive at a late hour. Yet he said, "As I had the advantage of attending a common school equal with other children, I was early taught to read, to which I was greatly attached and could vie with almost any of my age."[1] He soon formed the habit of studying the Bible and early made a profession of faith in the Christian religion. While young he was baptized by the Reverend Jonathan Huntington.

He quickly mastered the studies of the district school but he struggled forward, becoming his own teacher and subjecting his mind to unremitting and severe discipline. The scarcity of books was one of the severest difficulties which he had to encounter. There was no public library in the place. The Bible, Psalter, spelling-book, and perhaps a volume or two of sermons, comprised the library of the intellectual people of those towns. But says he: "I was constantly inquiring after books, especially in theology. I was greatly pleased with the writings of Watts and Doddridge, and with Young's Night Thoughts. My good master encouraged me in the matter."[2]

There came a turning point in Haynes's life when in 1775 the excellent and pious Mrs. Rose died. She had been more to him than an employer. Adopting him as her own son in early infancy, she tenderly trained him up to intellectual and Christian manhood. Speaking of this, Haynes said: "Soon after I came of age, God was pleased to take my mistress away, to my inexpressible sorrow. It caused me bitter mourning and lamentation."[3] Prostrated thus, he sought relief from his affliction in the service of the continental army.

Lemuel Haynes was a patriot of the Revolution. He early imbibed those great principles respecting "the rights of man," in defense of which the colonies fought Great Britain. In 1774 he enlisted as a minute man. Under the regulations of this enlistment he was required to spend one day in the week in manual exercises, and to hold himself in readiness for actual service, but soon after the battle at Lexington the following year he joined the regular army at Roxbury. The next year he volunteered to join the expedition to Ticonderoga to expel the enemy. Referring to this service in an address some years later Haynes said: "Perhaps it is not ostentatious in the speaker to observe that in early life he devoted all for the sake of freedom and independence, and endured frequent campaigns in their defense, and has never viewed the sacrifice too great. And should an attack be made on this sacred ark, the poor remains of life would be devoted to its defense."

After the close of his northern campaign he returned to his former home to engage in agricultural pursuits. But while thus engaged he little anticipated the designs of Providence concerning him. Improving his leisure hours, he had made considerable progress in the study of theology. At length he selected his text, and composed a sermon, without education or teacher. It happened thus: In the family of Deacon Rose, the evening preceding the Sabbath was customarily devoted to family instruction and religious worship. Haynes was occasionally asked to read from the sermons of Watts, Whitefield, Doddridge or Davies. Called upon to read as usual one evening, he slipped into the book his own sermon which he had written, and read it to the family. Greatly delighted and edified by this sermon read with unusual vivacity and feeling, Deacon Rose, who was then blind, inquired: "Lemuel, whose work is that which you have been reading? Is it Davies's sermon, or Watts's, or Whitefield's?" Haynes blushed and hesitated, but at last was obliged to confess the truth—"It's Lemuel's sermon."[4]

It was then discovered that in this young man was the promise of usefulness. The community encouraged him to look forward to the Christian ministry. Referring to this, he said: "I was solicited by some to obtain a collegiate education, with a view to the gospel ministry. A door was opened for it at Dartmouth College, but I shrunk at the thought. Reverend Mr. Smith encouraged me with many others. I was at last persuaded to attend to studying the learned languages. I was invited (1779) by the Reverend Daniel Farrand, of Canaan, Connecticut, to visit him. I accordingly did. With him I resided some time, studying the Latin language."[5]

How long he studied under Mr. Farrand is not known. He devoted a part of his time to belles lettres and the writing of sermons. While with Mr. Farrand, Haynes composed a poem which was surreptitiously taken from his desk and afterward delivered by a plagiarist at a certain college on the day of commencement. During these years he labored in the field to defray the expense of board and tuition, but the mind of this student underwent unusual development for which Mr. Haynes retained to the end of life a grateful remembrance of his friend and patron.

After making an extensive study of the Latin language, he felt a desire to study Greek that he might read the New Testament in the original, but he had no means to prosecute this study. While in doubt as to how he could attain so desirable an end the Reverend William Bradford, of Wintonbury, a small parish composed, as its name imports, of a part of three towns, Winsor, Farmington and Symsbury, offered to instruct him in the Greek language. This benefactor promised also to secure there for Mr. Haynes a school paying him sufficient money to defray his expenses. Mr. Haynes said: "I exerted myself to the utmost to instruct the children of my school, and found I gave general satisfaction. The proficiency I made in studying the Greek language I found greatly exceeded the expectations of my preceptor."[6] He was thus serving as a "spiritual teacher in a respectable and enlightened congregation in New England, where he had been known from infancy only as a servant boy, and under all the disabilities of his humble extraction." "That reverence which it was the custom of the age to accord to ministers of the gospel," says his biographer, "was cheerfully rendered to Mr. Haynes."[7] All classes and ages were delighted with the sweet, animated eloquence of the man. In consideration of his talents Middlebury College later conferred upon him the degree of master of arts.[8]

This led friends to advise that he should be licensed to preach, and on November 29, 1780, after "an examination in the languages, sciences, doctrines and experimental religion," he was licensed and preached intelligently from Psalm 96:1. He was ordained soon thereafter. Then came an early call to begin his ministry at the Congregational meeting house at Middle Granville, where he labored five years, preaching eloquently with zeal. The time was one of moral darkness with intemperance, profanity and infidelity rife. Strange doctrines intruded. Vice came boldly forward, but, like a rock, the young minister stood by his Lord and faith.

Among the pious in the church was Bessie Babbitt. She was a woman of considerable education and was engaged as a teacher in her town. Looking to Heaven for guidance, she was led, with consistent delicacy, to offer her heart to her pastor. He commended the proposal to God in prayer, and consulted other ministers. Knowing his birth and race, he sought their counsel. They advised in favor, and on September 22, 1773, they were married. There began then their happy married life which was blessed with nine children.[9]

From his small retired parish, among the companions of his childhood, he was called to Torrington, Connecticut, where he continued preaching two years to large audiences.[10] It is said that at Torrington a leading citizen was much displeased that the church should have "a nigger minister," and, to show his disrespect, this man went to church and sat with his hat on his head. "He hadn't preached far," said he, "when I thought I saw the whitest man I ever knew in that pulpit, and I tossed my hat under the pew."

The number of communicants increased during the term of his residence in Torrington. Some of the most respectable families from adjoining towns, particularly from Goshen, became his warmest friends, who constantly attended on his ministry. His biographer says: "The aged refer to his ministry with many delightful recollections. He was held in high estimation, especially by the church, and was esteemed by all classes as "an apt and very ready man in the pulpit." The mere mention of his name even now, after the lapse of half a century, seems to renew in their minds interesting associations. The church and society were strengthened by his labors, and many wished to retain him as their permanent pastor. The sensibility of a few individuals prevented, it is said, the accomplishment of their desires.

His eloquence and Christian nobility won him much attention and led to his being called to the pastorate of the Congregational Church in West Rutland, Vermont. The town was a country seat, and the church was one of importance. Then in the meridian of life, rich with the spirit and devoted to his calling, he was singularly successful; and while there were those who saw in him "that colored minister," all knew his pure white soul. The first year of his pastorate he received forty-two members by profession. In 1803 there came a great revival, and there were one hundred and three conversions, together with one hundred and fifty in the adjoining town of Pittsfield. Five years later there was another revival and Haynes received one hundred and nine. Naturally he was in demand by other churches as a revival preacher.

At this time New England was in a very backward state. The genial influence of science and religion had not been generally felt. There was no college in Vermont and its only academy was the one at Norwich, near Dartmouth College. There were not more than four or five Congregational ministers on the west side of the Green Mountains. A religious revival of considerable extent, under the preaching of Reverend Jacob Wood and others, had resulted in the formation of small churches. Certain parts of Connecticut were not much more advanced. In 1804 the Connecticut Missionary Society, therefore, appointed Mr. Haynes to labor in the destitute sections of Vermont. In 1809 he was appointed to a similar service by the Vermont Missionary Society. In this capacity Haynes became a great factor in the religious awakening throughout New England at that time.

In 1814 he was fraternal delegate from the Vermont to the Connecticut Ministers' Association at Fairfield. On his way thither he stopped on Sunday at New Haven, where, at the Blue Church (formerly Dr. Edwards'), he preached a sermon to a crowded house, having in the audience President Dwight of Yale and many distinguished people. At Fairfield the association insisted on his preaching the annual sermon.

Haynes soon exhibited evidences of being no ordinary man. He readily engaged in the heated theological discussion of his time, taking first rank as a theologian.[11] His most interesting debate was that with the famous Hosea Ballou, whom Haynes vanquished in his famous sermon based on the text, Ye shall not surely die. Many strange doctrines were then abroad. A writer says: "The Stoddardian principle of admitting moral persons, without credible evidence of grace, to the Lord's Supper, and the half-way covenant by which parents, though not admitted to the Lord's Supper, were encouraged to offer their children in baptism, prevailed in many of the churches. Great apathy was prevalent among professing Christians, and the ruinous vices of profaneness, Sabbath-breaking and intemperance were affectingly prevalent among all classes. The spark of evangelical piety seemed to be nearly extinct in the churches. Revivals of religion were scarcely known except in the recollections of a former age. Some of the essential doctrines of grace were not received even by many in the churches.[12] Respecting the operations of the Holy Spirit, Mr. Haynes adopted the same principles as Edwards and Whitefield. He became effective in dispelling some of these clouds of doubt, bringing the people back to a more righteous conduct. Out of it he emerged a man of fame.

Happy as was this apostle in his work at Rutland the violent political controversy of his time was divided between two militant parties with one of which every freeman felt that he should be allied. Imbued with the spirit of the American Revolution, Haynes could not be neutral. "In principle," says his biographer, "he was a disciple of Washington and, therefore, favored those measures conducive of national government."[13] As party spirit rapidly developed into deeply rooted rancor, sharp differences of opinion led to controversy in his parish. Invited to preach on political occasions and in some cases to the public through the press, he discussed political affairs with such keenness and sarcasm that unprincipled parasites in his community were much disturbed. In one of his discourses he used the following expression: "A dissembler is one proud of applause—will advertise himself for office—dazzling the public man with high pretext, like aspiring Absolom, 'Oh that I were made judge in the land, that every man might come unto me and I would do him justice.' Such subjects to applause and hypocrisy will, even when the destinies of their country are at stake, be to a commonwealth what Arnold was to American freedom or Robespierre to a French Republic."[14]

It was not long before political excitement disturbed the harmony between the pastor and the people in West Rutland. On certain occasions Haynes was treated with unkindness and even with abuse by unprincipled men. Scandalous reports concerning him were circulated and he was denounced with profane language. But he gloried in tribulations, knowing that "tribulations worketh patience and patience experience and experience hope and hope maketh not ashamed." Observing the signs of the times, therefore, and governed by prayerful deliberation he felt that he should sever his connection with his church in Rutland. Accordingly, on the 27th of April, 1818, at a council convened to consider the serious question the pastoral relation was by mutual consent dissolved.

Haynes was then invited to preach in Manchester, Vermont, a desirable town west of the Green Mountains. Because of his reputation as a preacher here Haynes had the helpful contact of the Honorable Richard Skinner, who in early life was elected a member of Congress and afterwards served as a judge of the Supreme Court and finally as Governor of Vermont. He associated also with Joseph Burr, the liberal benefactor of several literary and religious institutions.

In 1822 Haynes removed from Manchester to Granville, New York. He had enjoyed the support of the best people in that New England community and had usually found them a generous and enlightened people. Under his ministration at Manchester the church was much enlarged, but he was now declining in intellectual vivacity and realized that, although there was entire harmony between him and the people in Manchester, they should have a younger man. His church accordingly yielded to the desire of the Congregational Church in Granville, New York, and he took leave of Vermont to preach in another State.

In going to Granville, Haynes connected with the renowned Deacon Elihu Atkins, of Granville, with whom he had corresponded for more than thirty years. There had been a cherished intimacy between them from their youth. Atkins had for years relied upon the convincing instruction which he endeavored to obtain through correspondence with Haynes. These letters show the tenderness and the watchfulness of a pastor over a flock, which reminds one of the relation existing between Paul and the aged Philemon. During the eleven years which he spent at Granville, his congregation was decidedly edified. Thousands of persons giving evidence of their piety, joined the church and lived above reproach. While laboring among these people he died in the year 1833.

Thus passed away the man who was regarded by those who knew him as a worker of unusual ability and a preacher of power. Says his biographer: "Although the tincture of his skin, and all his features bore strong indications of his paternal original, yet in his early life there was a peculiar expression which indicated the finest qualities of mind. Many, on seeing him in the pulpit, have been reminded of the inspired expression, 'I am black, but comely.' In his case the remarkable assemblage of grace which was thrown around his semi-African complexion, especially his eye, could not fail to prepossess the stranger in his favor."[15]

He was a man of a feeling heart, always sensibly affected at the sight of human suffering. His sensibility knew no bounds. He exhibited quickness of perception and had the advantage of a never-failing memory. The confidence generally reposed in him by both ministers and the people credit him with having mature judgment. Although lacking in what is commonly known as classical education, as he never penetrated very far into the Greek and Latin classics, his mind was decidedly literary. He read the Latin language fairly well but had never read more than the Greek testament and Septuagint. He was well read, however, in the English classics and his discourses show taste for the beauties of poetry and elegant composition.

Haynes was always industrious, his early habits having been formed in the rigid pursuits of business. At home he was a man of the highest domestic virtue. His family government was strictly parental, based on reason and principle, not on passion or blind indulgence. He was always strict, ever adhering to a standard of the most Puritanic order. Having early formed the high ideals of uprightness, no man could ever bring against him the charge of dishonesty. Above all he was a man of consistent piety and resignation to the will of God.

His dying testimony was: "I love my wife, I love my children, but I love my Saviour better than all." A plain marble marks his grave. On it is this inscription, prepared by himself:

"Here lies the dust of a poor hell-deserving sinner, who ventured into eternity trusting wholly on the merits of Christ for salvation. In the full belief of the great doctrines he preached while on earth, he invites his children and all who read this, to trust their eternal interest on the same foundation."

So lived and died one of the noblest of the New England Congregational ministers of a century ago. Of illegitimate birth, and of no advantageous circumstances of family, rank or station, he became one of the choicest instruments of Christ. His face betrayed his race and blood, and his life revealed his Lord.

W. H. Morse.

Hartford, Conn.

Footnotes:

[1] Cooley, Sketches of the Life and Character of the Rev. Lemuel Haynes, p. 36.

[2] Ibid., p. 38.

[3] The pious Deacon Rose lived some years thereafter and had the pleasure of seeing Lemuel a distinguished man. See Cooley, Sketches of the Life and Character of the Rev. Lemuel Haynes, p. 40.

[4] Cooley, Sketches of the Life and Character of the Rev. Lemuel Haynes, p. 48.

[5] Cooley, Sketches of the Life and Character of the Rev. Lemuel Haynes, p. 60.

[6] Cooley, Sketches of the Life and Character of the Rev. Lemuel Haynes, p. 63.

[7] Ibid., p. 66.

[8] Simmons, Men of Mark, p. 677.

[9] Ibid., p. 678.

[10] Special Report of the United States Commissioner of Education, 1871, p. 342.

[11] Woodson, The Education of the Negro Prior to 1861, p. 280.

[12] Cooley, Sketches of the Life and Character of the Rev. Lemuel Haynes, p. 67.

[13] Ibid., p. 169; Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, XLIX, p. 234.

[14] Cooley, Sketches of the Life and Character of the Rev. Lemuel Haynes, p. 170.

[15] Cooley, Sketches of the Life and Character of the Rev. Lemuel Haynes, pp. 372-373.

THE ANTI-SLAVERY SOCIETY OF CANADA

The Anti-Slavery Society of Canada was one of the forms in which the abolition sentiment of the province of Upper Canada made its contribution to the final settlement of the great issue in the neighboring country. Though founded comparatively late in the struggle, it was, after all, rather the union of forces long active than the creation of some new weapon to aid the battle. The men and women who composed its membership were abolitionists long before the society was founded. Its purpose was solely to bring united effort to bear upon the great task and the great responsibility that fell upon Canada when the passing of the Fugitive Slave Bill drove the Negroes from the North into Canada by the hundreds, if not by the thousands. With newcomers arriving every day, destitute, friendless and more or less dazed by the experiences through which they had passed, it was no small task that these Canadian abolitionists had undertaken to care for the fugitives, give them opportunities for education and social advancement and enable them to show by their own efforts that they were capable of becoming useful citizens.

The society had its birth in Toronto in February, 1851. There had been attempts before this to found such an organization but they had come to nothing. By 1851, however, the situation in the United States had changed and the effect had at once shown itself in Canada, so that the time was ripe for the bringing into one body of the various individuals who had been showing themselves the friends of the slave. The Society of Canada continued active right through the fifties and early sixties, not resting until the aim for which it had been founded had been accomplished. With the close of the Civil War there was a large emigration of Negroes back to their own land where their freedom had been bought in blood, and the need of any large organization to look after their welfare as a race gradually ceased. During its period of active work, however, the society spread out from Toronto to all the larger cities and towns where there was a Negro population, and in both educational and relief work showed itself an energetic body. Included in its active membership were some of the best-known men in the province and as its organ it had an outstanding newspaper, The Globe, of Toronto.

The meeting held in Toronto was large and enthusiastic. The Globe of Toronto of March 1, gives almost five columns to the report of the proceedings. The mayor of the city acted as chairman and the opening prayer was made by Rev. Dr. Michael Willis, the principal of Knox Presbyterian Theological College. A series of four resolutions were proposed and endorsed. The first of these declared as a platform of the society that "slavery is an outrage on the laws of humanity" and that "its continued practice demands the best exertions for its extinction." A second resolution, proposed by Dr. Willis, declared the United States slave laws "at open variance with the best interests of man, as endowed by our great creator with the privilege of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." A third resolution expressed sympathy with the abolitionists in the United States, while the fourth and concluding resolution proposed the formation of the Anti-Slavery Society of Canada. "The object," it declared, "shall be to aid in the extinction of slavery all over the world by means exclusively lawful and peaceable, moral and religious, such as by the diffusing of useful information and argument, by tracts, newspapers, lectures and correspondence, and by manifesting sympathy with the houseless and homeless victims of slavery flying to our soil."

Rev. Dr. Willis was chosen as the first president, an office which he filled during the whole of the period of the struggle. Rev. William McClure, a Methodist clergyman of the New Connection branch, was named as secretary, with Andrew Hamilton as treasurer and Captain Charles Stuart, corresponding secretary. A large committee was also named including, among others, George Brown, editor of The Globe, and Oliver Mowat, later a premier of the province of Ontario.

The aims of the society, as set forth in the resolution of organization, called for both educational and relief work. No time was lost in beginning each of these. Within a month after the founding of the society it was holding public meetings, both in Toronto and elsewhere throughout the province. The speakers included George Thompson, the noted English abolitionist; Fred Douglass, the Negro orator, and Rev. S. J. May, of Syracuse. Some hostility developed, The Patriot charging George Thompson with being an abolitionist for sordid motives, while The Leader called him a "hireling." Thompson, defending himself, declared that if he had sold his talents, as charged, he would not be found fighting the slaves' battle but would be sitting by the side of bloated prostitution in Washington." There were even some clerical critics of the society and its work. The Church, a denominational publication, took the ground that Canada was not bound in any way to denounce "compulsory labor." It was quite sufficient to welcome the slave when he came to Canada. To this The Globe replied that it was "truly melancholy to find men in the nineteenth century teaching doctrines which are only fit for the darkest ages."[1]

All through these earlier years of the society's history the public meetings were continued, much use being made of men like Rev. S. R. Ward and Rev. J. W. Loguen, who had known at first hand what slavery meant to their race. Rev. S. R. Ward was appointed an agent of the society in 1851 and traveled the province over, giving the facts with regard to slavery to awaken Canadian sentiment against it and asking aid and kindness for the fugitives then coming to the country in large numbers. Mr. Ward was instrumental in forming branches and auxiliaries of the society at a number of places and has left on record his own impressions of the efforts that were put forth on behalf of the refugees.[2]

The Globe, under Brown as editor, was a stout ally. Brown's personal interest in the fugitives was marked. His private generosity to the needy has been recorded by one of his biographers but greater service was rendered through the columns of his paper. He was outspoken in denunciation of anything that savored of an alliance with slavery. Canada, he believed, should stand four square against the whole system of human bondage. "We, too, are Americans," he declared on one occasion. "On us, as well as on them, lies the duty of preserving the honor of the continent. On us, as on them, rests the noble trust of shielding free institutions."[3]

Relief work in Toronto was looked after by a Ladies' Auxiliary, this being the general practice wherever branches were organized. The wives of the officers of the general or parent society figured largely in the work at Toronto. During the first year of the work in that city more than $900 was raised by the Ladies' Auxiliary. The report for 1853-5 says: "During the past inclement winter much suffering was alleviated and many cases of extreme hardship prevented. Throughout the year the committee continued to observe the practice of appointing weekly visitors to examine into the truth of every statement made by applicants for aid. In this way between 200 and 300 cases have been attended to, each receiving more or less according to their circumstances."[4] A night school opened in Toronto gave to the younger men and women an opportunity to get a little education.

The Canadian Society, at an early date in its history, entered into working relations with the anti-slavery societies of Great Britain and the United States. At the first anniversary meeting, held in March, 1852, a letter was presented from Lewis Tappan, secretary of the American and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society, enclosing a resolution of the executive of the American society to the effect that the committee had heard of the formation of the Anti-Slavery Society of Canada at Toronto with much satisfaction, and that they would be pleased to maintain correspondence with this society and unite their efforts for the promotion of the great cause of human freedom on this continent and throughout the world. At the same meeting there were read messages of greeting from S. H. Gay, secretary of the American Anti-Slavery Society, and from John Scoble, secretary of the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society.[5] At this first anniversary meeting the society was able to report a change in public sentiment toward its aims. At the start there had been coldness and some prejudice but this had largely disappeared and some who had formerly been hostile were now supporters.

The colonization question was before the society in its early period. In August, 1851, Toronto was visited by Rev. S. Oughten, a Jamaican, and later by William Wemyss Anderson, also of Jamaica. The question was also brought to the attention of the government of the province and the Governor-General asked the executive of the society to tender its opinion of the plan. Their decision was altogether unfavorable to colonization whether in Trinidad or Jamaica. With regard to Trinidad their opinion was that slavery in a modified form still existed there. Jamaica, they thought, had nothing to attract the refugee more than Canada, and the society was placed on record as approving the findings of the Great North American convention of colored people, which had met in Toronto the preceding September, to the effect that western Canada was the most desirable place of resort for colored people on the American continent, and that colored people in the United States should emigrate to Canada rather than to the West Indies or Africa, since in Canada they would be better able to assist their brethren flying from slavery. With regard to the American Colonization Society the finding of the Canadian Anti-Slavery Society was that its professions of promoting the abolition of slavery were "altogether delusive." It had originated with slaveholders and was protected by them to rid the country of free Negroes. "A colonization and a bitter, pro-slavery man are almost convertible terms," it was stated.[6]

The attitude taken by the church bodies in Canada towards this new movement is of interest. In general there was not much active support. George Brown brought forward a resolution at the 1852 meeting, deploring the indifference of some church bodies. Dr. Willis had been instrumental in getting the Presbyterians in line, a strong stand having been taken by the synod which declared by resolution that slavery was "inhuman, unjust and dishonoring to the common creator as it is replete with wrong to the subjects of such oppression." A second resolution called upon churches everywhere to testify against legislation which violated the commands of God and declared that the synod must condemn any alliance between religion and oppression, no matter how the latter might be bolstered up by the use of Scripture.

At the 1857 meeting the attitude of the churches was again to the front. Dr. Willis thought it was time that every church synod and conference in Canada should give up one day of its sessions to prayer and humiliation over the presence of human slavery so nearby. It was the duty of all the churches to remonstrate on this question. Rev. Dr. Dick, who followed, declared that the church was "the bulwark of the system." There were churches in Canada which fraternized with those in the United States that patronized slavery. He was equally outspoken on the attitude of the Sons of Temperance in deciding, against his protest, to shut out Negroes from its membership. There were several protests at this 1857 meeting against some slight evidences of race prejudice. Rev. Mr. Barrass said that, as the Negroes in Toronto set an example to the whites in morality, there was the less reason for any prejudice. Thomas Henning, the secretary of the society, probably put the matter right when he pointed out that talk of prejudice must not be understood as general. Negroes were not excluded from the schools, and the laws were administered to white and black alike. He drew attention to the dismissal of a magistrate who had been suspected of conniving at the return of a fugitive, as also to the case of a member of Parliament who had sought to have Negro immigration stopped and had been simply laughed at.

Necessity for action along industrial lines to provide suitable employment for the fugitives was emphasized by the Canadian Anti-Slavery Society and efforts were made to give the black man a fair chance in his new home. The question of cheap land for the immigrants was also kept to the front with the idea of making the refugees more self-dependent and preventing them from congregating in the cities and towns. Some idea of the extent of the relief work being carried on at this time may be gained from the statement presented at the 1857 meeting which showed disbursements of more than $2,200, a total of over 400 having been relieved.

Reference has been made to the support given the society by The Globe, of Toronto. For this George Brown was given the credit but it must be said in justice that no small share of the credit for The Globe's attitude should go to the lesser known brother, Gordon Brown, who was regarded by many as really more zealous for abolition than George Brown. This was tested during the Civil War period when the turn of sentiment against the North in Canada brought much criticism upon The Globe. There was a disposition on the part of George Brown to grow lukewarm in his support of the North, but Gordon Brown never wavered and is said to have threatened on one occasion to leave the paper if there were any more signs of hauling down the colors. When the war was over American citizens in Toronto presented Gordon Brown with a gold watch suitably inscribed, an indication possibly of the opinion of that day with regard to his services.

One duty of the American anti-slavery societies which fell but lightly on the Canadian society was the watching of legislation and the courts to see that the Negro obtained his rights. It was rare indeed that anything of this kind called for action in Canada, the only case of any importance that arose being that of the Negro, Anderson, whose return to Missouri was sought on a charge of killing his master in 1853. A slave catcher from Missouri recognized him in Canada in 1860 and had him arrested. The case was fought out in the courts, twice going against the Negro and then being appealed to the English Court of Queen's Bench, which granted a writ of habeas corpus. Anderson was defended by Gerrit Smith and the case attracted great attention throughout Canada. The executive of the Canadian Anti-Slavery Society kept the case well under observation and made its position quite clear by a resolution declaring that principles of right and humanity should prevail. In the end Anderson was acquitted.

The sentiment that was created in Canada by the friends of the fugitive in the decade before the Civil War had its effect when that struggle began. Sir John Macdonald, premier of Canada, made careful investigation to find out how many Canadians were in the northern armies and placed the number at 40,000.[7] The spirit that animated the youth of the North in this moral struggle was powerful in the minds of many of these young Canadians. There was present in Canada not a little of the feeling of responsibility for the honor of the continent that George Brown voiced and both by peaceful means and by the sword the people of the British-American province to the North had their part in striking off the shackles from the slave in the South.

Fred Landon.

Public Librarian,
London, Canada

Footnotes:

[1] The Globe, April 1, 1851.

[2] Ward, Autobiography of a Fugitive Slave.

[3] Lewis, George Brown, p. 114.

[4] Drew, North Side View of Slavery, p. 328.

[5] Anti-Slavery Society of Canada, First Annual Report, p. 10.

[6] First Annual Report, pp. 12-13.

[7] Letters of Goldwin Smith, p. 377.

DOCUMENTS

BENJAMIN FRANKLIN AND FREEDOM

Of the fathers of the republic who first saw the evils of slavery, none made a more forceful argument against the institution than Benjamin Franklin. A man of lowly estate himself, he could not sympathize with the man who felt that his bread should be wrung from the sweat of another's brow. Desiring to see the institution abolished, Franklin early connected himself with the anti-slavery forces of Pennsylvania and maintained this attitude of antagonism toward it until his death. His printing press was placed at the disposal of the pamphleteers who by their method endeavored to influence public opinion, and as a means of effecting the liberation of the blacks he cooperated with others in educating them as a preparation for citizenship.

His first effort to promote the education of the Negroes was the assistance he gave the work established by Dr. Thomas Bray, who passed a large part of his life in performing deeds of benevolence and charity. This philanthropist became acquainted at the Hague with M. D'Allone, who approved and promoted his schemes. M. D'Allone, during his lifetime, gave to Dr. Bray a considerable sum of money, which was to be applied to the conversion of Negroes in America. At his death he left an additional sum of nine hundred pounds for the same object. Dr. Bray formed an association for the management and proper disposal of these funds. He died in 1730, and the same trust continued to be executed by a company of gentlemen, called "Dr. Bray's Associates." Franklin was for several years one of these workers.

Writing about this work, he said to a friend:

I have not yet seen Mr. Beatty, nor do I know where to write to him. He forwarded your letter to me from Ireland. The paragraph of your letter, inserted in the papers, related to the negro school. I gave it to the gentlemen concerned, as it was a testimony in favor of their pious design. But I did not expect they would print it with your name. They have since chosen me one of the Society, and I am at present chairman for the current year. I enclose you an account of their proceedings.[1]

Franklin's argument against slavery was economic as well as moral. He said:

It is an ill-grounded opinion that, by the labor of slaves, America may possibly vie in cheapness of manufactures with Britain. The labor of slaves can never be so cheap here as the labor of working men is in Britain. Any one may compute it. Interest of money is in the colonies from six to ten per cent. Slaves, one with another, cost thirty pounds sterling per head. Reckon then the interest of the first purchase of a slave, the insurance or risk on his life, his clothing and diet, expenses in his sickness and loss of time, loss by his neglect of business (neglect is natural to the man who is not to be benefited by his own care or diligence), expense of a driver to keep him at work, and his pilfering from time to time, almost every slave being by nature a thief, and compare the whole amount with the wages of a manufacturer of iron or wool in England, you will see that labor is much cheaper there than it ever can be by Negroes here. Why then will Americans purchase slaves? Because slaves may be kept as long as a man pleases, or has occasion for their labor; while hired men are continually leaving their masters (often in the midst of his business and setting up for themselves).[2]

The Negroes brought into the English sugar islands have greatly diminished the whites there; the poor are, by this means, deprived of employment, while a few families acquire vast estates, which they spend on foreign luxuries, and educating their children in the habit of those luxuries; the same income is needed for the support of one that might have maintained one hundred. The whites who have slaves, not laboring, are enfeebled, and therefore not so generally prolific; the slaves being worked too hard, and ill fed, their constitutions are broken and the deaths among them are more than the births; so that a continual supply is needed from Africa. The northern colonies, having few slaves, increase in whites. Slaves also pejorate the families that use them; the white children become proud, disgusted with labor, and, being educated in idleness, are rendered unfit to get a living by industry.[3]

As the following letter indicates, Franklin was in close touch with one of the most ardent anti-slavery men of his day, Anthony Benezet, whose pamphlets he often published:

London, 22 August, 1772.

Dear Friend,

I made a little extract from yours of April 27th, of the number of slaves imported and perishing, with some close remarks on the hypocrisy of this country, which encourages such a detestable commerce by laws for promoting the Guinea trade; while it piqued itself on its virtue, love of liberty, and the equity of its courts, in setting free a single Negro. This was inserted in the London Chronicle, of the 20th of June last.

I thank you for the Virginia address, which I shall also publish with some remarks. I am glad to hear that the disposition against keeping Negroes grows more general in North America. Several pieces have been lately printed here against the practice, and I hope in time it will be taken into consideration and suppressed by the legislature. Your labors have already been attended with great effects. I hope, therefore, you and your friends will be encouraged to proceed. My hearty wishes of success attend you, being ever, my dear friend, yours affectionately,

B. Franklin.[4]

The same sentiments of Franklin are expressed in the following letter to Dean Woodward in 1773:

London, 10 April, 1773.

Reverend Sir,

Desirous of being revived in your memory, I take this opportunity, by my good friend Mrs. Blacker, of sending you a printed piece, and a manuscript, both on a subject you and I frequently conversed upon with concurring sentiments, when I had the pleasure of seeing you in Dublin. I have since had the satisfaction to learn, that a disposition to abolish slavery prevails in North America, that many of the Pennsylvanians have set their slaves at liberty, and that even the Virginia Assembly have petitioned the King for permission to make a law for preventing the importation of more into that colony. This request, however, will probably not be granted, as their former laws of that kind have always been repealed, and as the interest of a few merchants here has more weight with government than that of thousands at a distance.[5]

The following letter from Richard Price attests Franklin's interest and efforts in behalf of the slaves:

Hackney, 26 September, 1787.

My dear Friend,

I am very happy when I think of the encouragement which you have given me to address you under this appellation. Your friendship I reckon indeed one of the distinctions of my life. I frequently receive great pleasure from the accounts of you, which Dr. Rush and Mr. Vaughan send me. But I receive much greater pleasure from seeing your own hand.

I have lately been favored with two letters, which have given me this pleasure, the last of which acquaints me, that my name has been added to the number of the corresponding members of the Pennsylvania Society for Abolishing Negro Slavery, of which you are president, and also brought me a pamphlet containing the constitution and the laws of Pennsylvania, which relate to the object of the Society. I hope that you and the Society will accept my thanks, and believe that I am truly sensible of the honor done me. As for any services I can do, they are indeed but small; for I find, that, far from possessing, in the decline of life, your vigor of body and mind, every kind of business is becoming more and more an incumbrance to me. At the same time, the calls of business increase upon me, as you will learn in some measure from the Report at the end of the Discourse, which you will receive with this letter.

A similar institution to yours, for abolishing Negro slavery, is just formed in London, and I have been desired to make one of the acting committee, but I have begged to be excused. I have sent you some of their papers. I need not say how earnestly I wish success to such institutions. Something, perhaps, will be done with this view by the convention of delegates. This convention, consisting of many of the first men, in respect of wisdom and influence, in the United States, must be a most august and venerable assembly. May God guide their deliberations. The happiness of the world depends, in some degree, on the result. I am waiting with patience for an account of it.[6]

At the instigation of Franklin, the Pennsylvania Society for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery and the Relief of Free Negroes Unlawfully held in Bondage[7] published this address:

It is with peculiar satisfaction we assure the friends of humanity, that, in prosecuting the design of our association, our endeavours have proved successful, far beyond our most sanguine expectations.

Encouraged by this success, and by the daily progress of that luminous and benign spirit of liberty, which is diffusing itself throughout the world, and humbly hoping for the continuance of the divine blessing on our labors, we have ventured to make an important addition to our original plan, and do therefore earnestly solicit the support and assistance of all who can feel the tender emotions of sympathy and compassion or relish the exalted pleasure of beneficence.

Slavery is such an atrocious debasement of human nature, that its very extirpation, if not performed with solicitous care, may sometimes open a source of serious evils.

The unhappy man, who has long been treated as a brute animal, too frequently sinks beneath the common standard of the human species. The galling chains, that bind his body, do also fetter his intellectual faculties, and impair the social affections of his heart. Accustomed to move like a mere machine, by the will of a master, reflection is suspended; he has not the power of choice; and reason and conscience have but little influence over his conduct, because he is chiefly governed by the passion of fear. He is poor and friendless; perhaps worn out by extreme labor, age, and disease.

Under such circumstances, freedom may often prove a misfortune to himself, and prejudicial to society.

Attention to emancipated black people, it is therefore to be hoped, will become a branch of our national policy; but, as far as we contribute to promote this emancipation, so far that attention is evidently a serious duty incumbent on us, and which we mean to discharge to the best of our judgment and abilities.

To instruct, to advise, to qualify those, who have been restored to freedom, for the exercise and enjoyment of civil liberty, to promote in them habits of industry, to furnish them with employments suited to their age, sex, talents, and other circumstances, and to procure their children an education calculated for their future situation in life; these are the great outlines of the annexed plan, which we have adopted, and which we conceive will essentially promote the public good, and the happiness of these our hitherto too much neglected fellow-creatures.

A plan so extensive cannot be carried into execution without considerable pecuniary resources, beyond the present ordinary funds of the Society. We hope much from the generosity of enlightened and benevolent freemen, and will gratefully receive any donations or subscriptions for this purpose, which may be made to our treasurer, James Starr, or to James Pemberton, chairman of our committee of correspondence.

Signed, by order of the Society,

B. Franklin, President.

Philadelphia, 9th of November, 1789.

Writing to John Wright in London in 1789, Franklin showed that he never neglected the movement to abolish the slave trade:

Philadelphia, 4 November, 1789.

I wish success to your endeavours for obtaining an abolition of the Slave Trade. The epistle from your Yearly Meeting, for the year 1768, was not the first sowing of the good seed you mention; for I find by an old pamphlet in my possession, that George Keith, near a hundred years since, wrote a paper against the practice, said to be "given forth by the appointment of the meeting held by him, at Phillip James's house, in the city of Philadelphia, about the year 1693"; wherein a strict charge was given to Friends, "that they should set their Negroes at liberty, after some reasonable time of service, &c., &c." And about the year 1728, or 1729, I myself printed a book for Ralph Sandyford, another of your Friends in this city, against keeping Negroes in slavery, two editions of which he distributed gratis. And about the year 1736 I printed another book on the same subject for Benjamin Lay, who also professed being one of your Friends, and he distributed the books chiefly among them. By these instances it appears, that the seed was indeed sown in the good ground of your profession, though much earlier than the time you mention, and its springing up to effect at last, though so late, is some confirmation of Lord Bacon's observation, that a good motion never dies; and it may encourage us in making such, though hopeless of their taking immediate effect.[8]

Footnotes:

[1] The Works of Benjamin Franklin, Correspondence, VII, pp. 201-202.

[2] Ibid., II, p. 314.

[3] The Works of Benjamin Franklin, II, p. 316.

[4] Ibid., VIII, pp. 16-17.

[5] Works of Benjamin Franklin, VIII, p. 42.

[6] Works of Benjamin Franklin, X, p. 320.

[7] Ibid., II, p. 515.

[8] Works of Benjamin Franklin, X, p. 403.

ON THE SLAVE TRADE

"Dr. Franklin's name, as President of the Abolition Society, was signed to the memorial presented to the House of Representatives of the United States, on the 12th of February, 1789, praying them to exert the full extent of power vested in them by the Constitution, in discouraging the traffic of the human species. This was his last public act. In the debates to which this memorial gave rise, several attempts were made to justify the trade. In the Federal Gazette of March 25th, 1790, there appeared an essay, signed Historicus, written by Dr. Franklin, in which he communicated a Speech, said to have been delivered in the Divan of Algiers, in 1687, in opposition to the prayer of the petition of a sect called Erika, or Purists, for the abolition of piracy and slavery. This pretended African speech was an excellent parody of one delivered by Mr. Jackson, of Georgia. All the arguments urged in favor of Negro slavery are applied with equal force to justify the plundering and enslaving of Europeans. It affords, at the same time, a demonstration of the futility of the arguments in defense of the slave-trade, and of the strength of mind and ingenuity of the author, at his advanced period of life. It furnishes, too, a no less convincing proof of his power of imitating the style of other times and nations, than his celebrated Parable against Persecution. And as the latter led many persons to search the Scriptures with a view to find it, so the former caused many persons to search the bookstores and libraries for the work from which it was said to be extracted."—Dr. Stuber.

To the Editor of the Federal Gazette.[1]

March 23d, 1790.

Sir,

Reading last night in your excellent paper the speech of Mr. Jackson in Congress against their meddling with the affair of slavery, or attempting to mend the condition of the slaves, it put me in mind of a similar one made about one hundred years since by Sidi Mehemet Ibrahim, a member of the Divan of Algiers, which may be seen in Martin's Account of his Consulship, anno 1687. It was against granting the petition of the sect called Erika, or Purists, who prayed for the abolition of piracy and slavery as being unjust. Mr. Jackson does not quote it; perhaps he has not seen it. If, therefore, some of its reasonings are to be found in his eloquent speech, it may only show that men's interests and intellects operate and are operated on with surprising similarity in all countries and climates, whenever they are under similar circumstances. The African's speech, as translated, is as follows:

"Allah Bismillah, &c. God is great, and Mahomet is his Prophet.

"Have these Erika considered the consequences of granting their petition? If we cease our cruises against the Christians, how shall we be furnished with the commodities their countries produce, and which are so necessary for us? If we forbear to make slaves of their people, who in this hot climate are to cultivate our lands? Who are to perform the common labors of our city, and in our families? Must we not then be our own slaves? And is there not more compassion and more favor due to us as Mussulmen, than to these Christian dogs? We have now above fifty thousand slaves in and near Algiers. This number, if not kept up by fresh supplies, will soon diminish, and be gradually annihilated. If we then cease taking and plundering the infidel ships, and making slaves of the seamen and passengers, our lands will become of no value for want of cultivation; the rents of houses in the city will sink one half; and the revenue of government arising from its share of prizes be totally destroyed! And for what? To gratify the whims of a whimsical sect, who would have us, not only forbear making more slaves, but even manumit those we have.[2]

"But who is to indemnify their masters for the loss! Will the state do it? Is our treasury sufficient? Will the Erika do it? Can they do it? Or would they, to do what they think justice to the slaves, do a greater injustice to the owners? And if we set our slaves free, what is to be done with them? Few of them will return to their countries; they know too well the greater hardships they must there be subject to; they will not embrace our holy religion; they will not adopt our manners; our people will not pollute themselves by intermarrying with them. Must we maintain them as beggars in our streets, or suffer our properties to be the prey of their pillage? For men accustomed to slavery will not work for a livelihood when not compelled. And what is there so pitiable in their present condition? Were they not slaves in their own countries?

"Are not Spain, Portugal, France, and the Italian states governed by despots, who hold all their subjects in slavery, without exception? Even England treats its sailors as slaves; for they are, whenever the government pleases, seized, and confined in ships of war, condemned not only to work, but to fight, for small wages, or a mere subsistence, not better than our slaves are allowed by us. Is their condition then made worse by their falling into our hands? No; they have only exchanged one slavery for another and I may say a better; for here they are brought into a land where the sun of Islamism gives forth its light, and shines in full splendor, and they have an opportunity of making themselves acquainted with the true doctrine, and thereby saving their immortal souls. Those who remain at home have not that happiness. Sending the slaves home then would be sending them out of light into darkness.[3]

"I repeat the question, What is to be done with them? I have heard it suggested, that they may be planted in the wilderness, where there is plenty of land for them to subsist on, and where they may flourish as a free state; but they are, I doubt, too little disposed to labor without compulsion, as well as too ignorant to establish a good government, and the wild Arabs would soon molest and destroy or again enslave them. While serving us, we take care to provide them with everything, and they are treated with humanity. The laborers in their own country are, as I am well informed, worse fed, lodged, and clothed. The condition of most of them is therefore already mended, and requires no further improvement. Here their lives are in safety. They are not liable to be impressed for soldiers, and forced to cut one another's Christian throats, as in the wars of their own countries. If some of the religious mad bigots, who now tease us with their silly petitions, have in a fit of blind zeal freed their slaves, it was not generosity, it was not humanity, that moved them to the action; it was from the conscious burthen of a load of sins, and a hope, from the supposed merits of so good a work, to be excused from damnation.[4]

"How grossly are they mistaken to suppose slavery to be disallowed by the Alcoran! Are not the two precepts, to quote no more, 'Masters, treat your slaves with kindness; Slaves, serve your masters with cheerfulness and fidelity,' clear proofs to the contrary? Nor can the plundering of infidels be in that sacred book forbidden, since it is well known from it, that God has given the world, and all that it contains, to his faithful Mussulmen, who are to enjoy it of right as fast as they conquer it. Let us then hear no more of this detestable proposition, the manumission of Christian slaves, the adoption of which would, by depreciating our lands, and houses, and thereby depriving so many good citizens of their properties, create universal discontent, and provoke insurrections, to the endangering of government and producing general confusion. I have therefore no doubt, but this wise council will prefer the comfort and happiness of a whole nation of true believers to the whim of a few Erika, and dismiss their petition."

The result was, as Martin tells us, that the Divan came to this resolution: "The doctrine, that plundering and enslaving the Christians is unjust, is at best problematical; but that it is the interest of this state to continue the practice, is clear; therefore let the petition be rejected."

And it was rejected accordingly.

And since like motives are apt to produce in the minds of men like opinions and resolutions, may we not, Mr. Brown, venture to predict, from this account, that the petitions to the Parliament of England for abolishing the slave-trade, to say nothing of other legislatures, and the debates upon them, will have a similar conclusion? I am, Sir, your constant reader and humble servant,

Historicus.[5]

Footnotes:

[1] The Works of Benjamin Franklin, II, p. 517.

[2] Ibid., II, pp. 518-519.

[3] The Works of Benjamin Franklin, II, pp. 519-520.

[4] The Works of Benjamin Franklin, II, pp. 520-521.

[5] Ibid., II, p. 521.

THE PROCEEDINGS OF A MISSISSIPPI MIGRATION CONVENTION IN 1879[1]

The convention of the planters of the Mississippi Valley, which has attracted the attention of the entire county, ever since the call for its assembly was published, met in this city, this morning. Delegates from all sections of the country are present and more are expected. The original intention was to hold the meeting of the convention in the Operahouse, but owing to the large crowd present, and the warm weather, the place of meeting was changed to the Concert Garden.

At half past twelve Judge Farrar called the meeting to order, and requested Gen. W. R. Miles to act as temporary chairman. On taking the chair the General delivered a short address and then announced that the convention would proceed to permanent organization.

A committee of twenty on permanent organization was appointed.

While the committee was out the convention was addressed by Judge H. Simrall, of Mississippi, and Hon. Henry S. Foote, of Louisiana.

The following gentlemen were elected permanent officers of the convention:

President—Gen. W. R. Miles, of Yazoo county.

Vice-presidents—T. F. Cassell, of Tennessee; James Hill, of Jackson, Mississippi; H. B. Robinson, of Arkansas; David Young, of Louisiana.

Secretary—A. W. Crandall, Louisiana.

Assistant Secretaries—Jno. A. Galbreth, Jackson; J. D. Webster, Washington county.

Sergeant at Arms—J. B. Pegram, Vicksburg.

Assistant sergeant at Arms—J. W. Crichloy, Vicksburg; George Volker, Vicksburg; G. W. Walton, Vicksburg; Wesley Crayton, Vicksburg.

After appointing a committee on credentials, the convention took a recess until three o'clock.

Second Day

The convention was called to order by the president at half past nine.

Col. W. L. Nugent, chairman of the committee, presented the following preamble and resolutions:

Mr. President. Your committee on resolutions beg leave respectfully to report that they have inquired into the causes which have given rise to the recent exodus of our colored population, as far as possible within the limited time allowed, and while these causes are difficult to ascertain, owing to the exceptional cases of all kinds brought to their attention, they believe the following to include those which may be considered prominent:

1st. The low price of cotton and the partial failure of the crop of the past year.

2d. The irrational system of planting adopted in some sections, whereby labor was deprived of intelligence to direct it, and the presence of economy to make it profitable.

3d. The vicious system of credit fostered by laws permitting laborers and tenants to mortgage crops before they were grown or even planted.

4th. The apprehension on the part of many colored people, produced by insidious reports circulated among them, that their civil and political rights are endangered, or are likely to be.

5th. The hurtful and false rumors, diligently disseminated, that by emigrating to Kansas, the colored people would obtain lands, mules and money from the government without cost to themselves, and become independent forever.

It is a matter of astonishment to your committees that the colored people could be induced to credit the idle stories circulated of a promised land, where their wants would be supplied, and their independence secured, without exertion on their part. It was going to the extent of ignorance and credulity to credit them; and yet evidences of an undoubted character was furnished your committee as to this matter. It is one of the factors in a movement the end of which we cannot now forecaste. There are in the State of Mississippi alone five million five hundred thousand acres of land belonging to the United States now subject to homestead entries. Any thrifty colored man in the South can pre-empt one hundred and sixty acres of this land at the moderate cost of about eighteen dollars. Lands in Kansas cannot be acquired for less. In no part of the civilized world can unskilled labor secure a larger return, by honest toil, than among us, but idleness accompanied by extravagance produces suffering and want here as elsewhere.

Your committee believes that the legislation of our States should be shaped so as to foster habits of industry among the colored people, elevate the standard of social morals, and improve and preserve our common school system.

Diverse views have been expressed by parties equally desirous of reaching the same conclusion: To ascertain grievances and apply as far as it can be done by us, the proper redress. If the single purpose of all was to accomplish this result, without the influences which our past experiences have engendered to expect it, this might be done; but it can only be done with full knowledge of all the facts. That errors have been committed by the whites and blacks alike as each in turn have controlled the government of the States here represented, may be safely admitted. Disregarding the past, burying its dead with it, standing upon the living present, and looking hopefully to the future which is before us, your committee think their duty accomplished when they have adopted and reported these resolutions:

Resolved, That the interests of planters and laborers, landlords and tenants are identical; and that they must prosper or suffer together; and that it is the duty of the planters and landlords of the States here represented to devise and adopt some contract system with laborers and tenants by which both parties will receive the full benefit of labor governed by intelligence and economy.

Resolved, That this convention does affirm that the colored race has been placed by the constitution of the United States and the States here represented, of the laws thereof, on a plane of absolute legal equality with the white race; and does declare that the colored race shall be accorded the practical enjoyment of all rights, civil and political, guaranteed by the said constitution and laws.

Resolved, That, to this end, the members of this convention pledge themselves to use whatever of power and influence they possess, to protect the colored race against all dangers in respect to the fair expression of their wills at the polls, which they may apprehend may result from fraud, intimidation or "bull dozing," on the part of the whites. And as there can be no liberty of action without freedom of thought, they demand that all elections shall be fair and free and that no repressive measure shall be employed by the colored people to deprive their own race of any part of the fullest freedom in the exercise of the highest right of citizenship.

Resolved, That the unrestricted credit system pervading the States here represented, based upon liens and mortgages on stock and crops to be grown in the future, followed by a failure of that crop, has provoked distrust, created unrest, and disturbed their entire laboring population. All laws authorizing liens on crops for advances constituted on articles other than those of prime necessity at moderate profits, where such advances are made by landlords, planters or merchants, should be discontinued and repealed.

Resolved, That this convention call upon the colored people here represented to contradict the false reports circulated among and impressed upon the more ignorant and credulous; to instruct them that no lands nor mules nor money await them in Kansas or elsewhere without labor or price and to report to the civil authorities all persons engaging in disseminating any such reports.

Resolved, That it is the constitutional right of the colored people to migrate where they please, and to whatever State they may select for their residence; but this convention urges them to proceed on their movement towards migration as reasonable human beings, providing in advance, by economy and effective labor, the means for transportation and settlement, and sustain their reputation for honesty and fair dealing, by preserving intact until completion the contracts for labor and leasing, which they have made. If, when they have done this, they still desire to leave, all obstacles to their departure be removed; all practicable assistance will be afforded to them, and their places will be supplied with other and contented labor.

Your committee believe that if the views employed in the foregoing resolutions are practically carried out by the people of both races, in good faith, the disquiet of our people will subside. We appeal to the people of both races, in the States here represented, to aid us in carrying these resolutions into effect, and to report to the authorities all violations of the laws and all interference with private rights.

W. L. Nugent,

Chairman.

Gov. Foote moved to amend by substituting other resolutions, and addressed the convention in support of his motion.

Speeches were made in favor of the original resolutions by Judge Simrall, Hon. James Hill, Capt. W. B. Pittman, Mr. Robinson, of Arkansas, and Col. Nugent.

At the conclusion of Col. Nugent's address the resolutions were adopted unanimously and the convention adjourned sine die.

Footnotes:

[1] These proceedings appeared in The Vicksburg Commercial Daily Advertiser, May 5, 1879.

HOW THE NEGROES WERE DUPED[1]

Washington Letter to New York Herald.

Gorgeously illuminated chromo-lithographs of Kansas scenes have been distributed among the blacks. The gentleman who has seen some of these chromos writes that the most ravishing presentment of rural life in Kansas is depicted. The Negroes look on the State as a second paradise, compared with which old Canaan is a Florida swamp. One of these pictures, entitled "A Freedman's Home," represents a fine landscape, with fields of ripening grain stretching away to the setting sun.

In the foreground, illuminated by a marvelous sunset, stood the freedman's home. It was a picturesque cottage with gables, dormer windows and wide verandas. French windows reached down to the floor, and through the open casements appeared a seductive scene in the family sitting room. The colored father, who had just returned from his harvest fields, sat in an easy chair reading a newspaper, while the children and babies rollicked on the floor of the piazza. Through the open door of the kitchen the colored wife could be seen directing the servants and cooks who were preparing the evening meal. In the parlor, however, was the most enchanting feature, for at a grand piano was poised the belle of the household, and beside the piano where she was playing stood her colored lover, devouring her with his eyes while he abstractedly turned the leaves of her music. Just to one side of the dwelling appeared a commodious barn and carriage house and workmen busily engaged in putting in order their reapers and mowers for the following day.

In one of these pictures, "Old Auntie" sits on the veranda knitting stockings while she gazes on herds of buffalo and antelope, which are feeding on the prairies beyond the wheat fields. Approaching the gate a handsome colored man is seen coming in from the hunt, with a dead buck and a string of wild turkeys slung over his shoulders. These agricultural cartoons, in vivid coloring, the writer reports are doing much to influence the minds of the more ignorant Negroes.

Footnotes:

[1] This appeared in The Vicksburg Commercial Daily Advertiser, May 6, 1879.

REMARKS ON THIS EXODUS BY FREDERICK DOUGLASS[1]

Washington, May 6.

Fred. Douglass, marshal of the District, is out in a very strong letter, published in the National View, the new Greenback organ here, vigorously opposing the emigration of Negroes from the South. He earnestly advises the colored men to remain at home.

The letter has caused a good deal of annoyance among the leading Republicans, who have been vigorously working up this movement, believing that it was a godsend to them and would be a strong issue in future campaigns.

Fred. Douglass winds up his letter as follows:

"I am opposed to this exodus, because it is an untimely concession to the idea that white people and colored people cannot live together in peace and prosperity unless the whites are a majority and control the legislation and hold the offices of the State. I am opposed to this exodus, because it will pour upon the people of Kansas and other Northern States a multitude of deluded, hungry, homeless people to be supported in a large measure by alms. I am opposed to this exodus, because it will enable our political adversaries to make successful appeals to popular prejudice (as in the case of the Chinese) on the ground that these people, so ignorant and helpless, have been imported for the purpose of making the North solid by outvoting intelligent white Northern citizens. I am opposed to this exodus, because 'rolling stones gather no moss;' and I agree with Emerson that the men who made Rome or any other locality worth going to see stayed there. There is, in my judgment, no part of the United States where an industrious and intelligent man can serve his race more wisely and efficiently than upon the soil where he was born and reared and is known. I am opposed to this exodus because I see in it a tendency to convert colored laboring men into traveling tramps, first going North because they are persecuted, and then returning South because they have been deceived in their expectations, which will excite against themselves and against our whole race an increasing measure of popular contempt and scorn. I am opposed to this exodus because I believe that the conditions of existence in the Southern States are steadily improving, and that the colored man there will ultimately realize the fullest measure of liberty and equality accorded and secured in any section of our common country.

Footnotes:

[1] This appeared in The Vicksburg Commercial Daily Advertiser, May 7, 1879.

THE SENATE REPORT ON THE EXODUS OF 1879

Hearing of the commotion among the Negroes in Louisiana and Mississippi in 1879, Senator D. W. Voorhees, of Indiana, offered the following resolution which was accepted:

Whereas, large numbers of Negroes from the Southern States, and especially from the State of North Carolina, are migrating to the Northern States, and especially to the State of Indiana; and,

Whereas, it is currently alleged that they are induced to do so by the unjust and cruel conduct of their white fellow citizens toward them in the South; therefore,

Be it Resolved, That a committee of five members of this body be appointed by its presiding officer, whose duty it shall be to investigate the causes which have led to the aforesaid migration, and to report the same to the Senate; and said committee shall have power to send for persons and papers, compelling the defense of witnesses, and to sit at any time.[1]

Thereupon Senator William Windom, of Minnesota, offered the following amendment which led to the discussion of all sorts of phases of the race problem and finally to a majority and minority report on the exodus:[2]

And Be it Therefore Resolved, That in case said committee shall find that said migration of colored people from the South has been caused by cruel and unjust treatment or by the denial or abridgement of personal or political rights, have so far inquired and reported to the Senate, first; what, if any, action of Congress may be necessary to secure to every citizen of the United States the full and free enjoyment of all rights guaranteed by the constitution; second; where the peaceful adjustment of the colored race of all sectional issues may not be best secured by the distribution of the colored race through their partial migration from those States and congressional districts where, by reason of their numerical majority, they are not allowed to freely and peacefully exercise the rights of citizenship; and third; that said committee shall inquire and report as to the expediency and practicability of providing such territory or territories as may be necessary for the use and occupation of persons who may desire to migrate from their present homes in order to secure the free, full, and peaceful enjoyment of their constitutional rights and privileges.[2a]

Report

The Select Committee, appointed by the Senate to investigate the causes which have led to the migration of the Negroes from the Southern States to the Northern States, having duly considered the same, beg leave to submit the following report:[3]

On the 18th day of December, 1879, the Senate passed the following resolution:

Whereas, large numbers of Negroes from the Southern States are emigrating to the Northern States; and,

Whereas, it is currently alleged that they are induced to do so by the unjust and cruel conduct of their white fellow-citizens towards them in the South, and by the denial or abridgement of their personal and political rights and privileges; therefore,

Be it Resolved, That a committee of five members of this body be appointed by its presiding officer, whose duty it shall be to investigate the causes which have led to the aforesaid emigration, and to report the same to the Senate; and said committee shall have power to send for persons and papers, and to sit at any time.

In obedience to this resolution the committee proceeded to take testimony on the 19th day of January, and continuing from time to time until 153 witnesses had been examined, embracing persons from the States of North Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, Missouri, Kansas, and Indiana. Much of this testimony is of such a character as would not be received in a court of justice, being hearsay, the opinions of witnesses, &c., but we received it with a view to ascertaining, if possible, the real state of facts in regard to the condition of the Southern colored people, their opinions and feelings, and the feelings and opinions of their white neighbors. We think it clearly established from the testimony that the following may be said to be the causes which have induced this migration of the colored people from various portions of the South to Northern States, chiefly to Kansas, and Indiana: That from North Carolina, the State to which we first directed our attention, was undoubtedly induced in a great degree by Northern politicians, and by Negro leaders in their employ, and in the employ of railroad lines.

Examining particularly into the condition of the colored men in that State, it was disclosed by the testimony of whites and blacks, Republicans and Democrats, that the causes of discontent among those people could not have arisen from any deprivation of their political rights or any hardship in their condition. A minute examination into their situation shows that the average rate of wages, according to the age and strength of the hand for field labor, was from eight to fifteen dollars per month, including board and house to live in, garden and truck patches, around the house, fire-wood, and certain other privileges, all rent free.

These, added to the extra labor which could be earned by hands during the season of gathering turpentine and resin, or of picking cotton made the general average of compensation for labor in that State quite equal to if not better than in any Northern State to which these people were going, to say nothing of the climate of North Carolina, which was infinitely better adapted to them.

The closest scrutiny could detect no outrage or violence inflicted upon their political rights in North Carolina for many years past. They all testified that they voted freely; that their votes were counted fairly; that no improper influence whatsoever was exerted over them; and many were acquiring real estate, and were enjoying the same privileges of education for their children, precisely, that the whites were enjoying.

It was also disclosed by the testimony that there existed aid societies in the city of Washington, in the city of Topeka, Kans., Indianapolis, and elsewhere throughout the West, whose avowed object was to furnish aid to colored men migrating to the West and North; and notwithstanding that the agents and members of these societies generally disclaimed that it was their intention to induce any colored men to leave their homes, but only to aid in taking care of them after they had arrived, yet it was established undeniably, not only that the effect of these societies and of the aid extended by them operated to cause the exodus originally, but that they stimulated it directly by publishing and distributing among the colored men circulars artfully designed and calculated to stir up discontent. Every single member, agent, friend, or sympathizer with these societies and their purposes were ascertained to belong to the Republican party, and generally to be active members thereof. Some of the circulars contained the grossest misrepresentation of facts, and in almost all cases the immigrants expected large aid from the government of clothes, or land, or money or free transportation, or something of that kind. Hundreds of them, on given days at various points in the South, crowded to the depots or to the steamboat landings upon a rumor that free transportation was to be furnished to all who would go. It was also disclosed by the testimony on the part of some very candid and intelligent witnesses that their object in promoting this exodus of the colored people was purely political. They thought it would be well to remove a sufficient number of blacks from the South, where their votes could not be made to tell, into close States in the North, and thus turn the scale in favor of the Republican party.

Wages, rents, method of cropping on shares, &c., were inquired into in all of the Southern States mentioned, and the fact ascertained that the aggregate was about the same as in North Carolina. In most of the Southern States, where wages were higher than in North Carolina, expenses were also higher, so that the aggregate, as before stated, was about the same.

One cause of complaint alleged as a reason for this exodus of the colored people from the South was their mistreatment in the courts of justice. Directing our attention to this the committee have ascertained that in many of the districts of the South the courts were under entire Republican control—judges, prosecuting attorneys, sheriffs, &c., and that there were generally as many complaints from districts thus controlled as there were from districts which were under the control of the Democratic officials; and that the whole of the complaints taken together might be said to be such as are generally made by the ignorant who fail to receive in courts what they think is justice.

Your committee found no State or county in the South, into which this investigation extended, where colored men were excluded from juries either in theory or in practice; they found no county or district in the South where they were excluded, either in theory or practice, from their share in the management of county affairs and of the control of county government. On the contrary, whenever their votes were in a majority we found that the officers were most generally divided among the black people, or among white people of their choice. Frequently we found the schools to be controlled by them, especially that portion of the school fund which was allotted to their race, and the complaints which had been so often made of excessive punishment of the blacks by the courts as compared with the whites upon investigation in nearly all cases, proved to be either unfounded in fact or that if there was an apparent excess of punishment of a black man the cause was ascertained to be in the nature of the crime with which he was charged, or the attendant circumstances.

The educational advantages in the South, the committee regret to say, were found to be insufficient, and far inferior to those of most of the States of the North, but such as they were we found in every case that the blacks had precisely the same advantages that the whites enjoyed; that the school fund was divided among them according to numbers; that their teachers were quite as good, and chosen with as much care; that their schools existed as many months in the year; in short, the same facilities were afforded to the blacks as were to the whites in this respect; and that these schools were generally supported by the voluntary taxation imposed by the legislatures composed of white men, levied upon their own property for the common benefit.

With regard to political outrages which have formed the staple of complaint for many years against the people of the South, your committee diligently inquired, and have to report that they found nothing or almost nothing new. Many old stories were revived and dwelt upon by zealous witnesses, but very few indeed ventured to say that any considerable violence or outrage had been exhibited toward the colored people of the South within the last few years, and still fewer of all those who testified upon this subject, and who were evidently anxious to make the most of it, testified to anything as within their own knowledge. It was all hearsay, and nothing but hearsay, with rare exceptions.

Many of the witnesses before us were colored politicians, men who make their living by politics, and whose business it was to stir up feeling between the whites and blacks; keep alive the embers of political hatred; and were men of considerable intelligence, so that what they failed to set forth of outrages perpetrated against their race may be safely assumed not to exist. Many, on the contrary, were intelligent, sober, industrious, and respectable men, who testified to their own condition, the amount of property that they had accumulated since their emancipation, the comfort in which they lived, the respect with which they were regarded by their white neighbors. These universally expressed the opinion that all colored men who would practice equal industry and sobriety could have fared equally well; and in fact their own condition was ample proof of the treatment of the colored people by the whites of the South, and of their opportunities to thrive, if they were so determined. Some of these men owned so much as a thousand acres of real estate in the best portions of the South; many of them had tenants of their own, white men, occupying their premises and paying them rent; and your committee naturally arrived at the conclusion that if one black man could attain to this degree of prosperity and respectable citizenship, others could, having the same capacity for business and practicing the same sobriety and industry.

Your committee also directed their attention to the complaints frequently made with regard to the laws passed in various States of the South relating to landlord and tenant, and to the system adopted by many planters for furnishing their tenants and laborers with supplies. We found, upon investigation of these laws, and of the witnesses in relation to their operation, that as a general rule they were urgently called for by the circumstances in which the South found itself after the war. The universal adoption of homestead and personal property exemption laws deprived poor men of credit, and the landlord class, for its own protection, procured the passage of these laws giving them a lien upon the crop made by the tenant until his rents and his supplies furnished for the subsistence of the tenant and his family had been paid and discharged; and while upon the surface these laws appeared to be hard and in favor of the landlord, they were, as was actually testified by many intelligent witnesses, quite as much or more in favor of the tenant, as it enabled him to obtain credit, to subsist himself and his family, and to make a crop without any means whatsoever but his own labor. It was alleged also that in many instances landlords, or if not landlords then merchants, would establish country stores for furnishing supplies to laborers and tenants, and the laborer, having no money to go elsewhere or take the natural advantages of competition, was forced to buy at these stores at exorbitant prices.

Your committee regret to say that they found it to be frequently the case that designing men, or bad and dishonest men, would take advantage of the ignorance or necessity of the Negroes to obtain these exorbitant prices; but at the same time your committee is not aware of a spot on earth where the cunning and unscrupulous do not take advantage of the ignorant; and cannot regard it as a sufficient cause for these black people leaving their homes and going into distant States and among strangers unless they had a proper assurance that the State to which they were going contained no dishonest men, or men who would take such advantage of them. Your committee feel bound to say, however, in justice to the planters of the South, that this abuse is not at all general nor frequent; and that as a general rule while exorbitant prices are exacted sometimes from men in the situation of the blacks, yet the excuse for it is the risk which planter and merchant run. Should a bad crop year come, should the Army worm devour the cotton, or any other calamity come upon the crop, the landlord is without his rent, the storekeeper is without his pay, and worse than all the laborer is without a means of subsistence for the next year. It is hoped and believed that when the heretofore disturbed condition of the people of the South settles down into regularity and order, the natural laws of trade and competition will assert themselves and this evil will be to a great extent remedied, whilst the diffusion of education among the colored people will enable them to keep their own accounts and hold a check upon those who would act dishonestly towards them.

On the whole, your committee express the positive opinion that the condition of the colored people of the South is not only as good as could have been reasonably expected, but is better than if large communities were transferred to a colder and more inhospitable climate, thrust into competition with a different system of labor, among strangers who are not accustomed to them, their ways, habits of thought and action, their idiosyncrasies, and their feelings. While a gradual migration, such as circumstances dictate among the white races, might benefit the individual black man and his family as it does those of the white race, we cannot but regard this wholesale attempt to transfer a people without means and without intelligence, from the homes of their nativity in this manner, as injurious to the people of the South, injurious to the people and the labor system of the State where they go, and, more than all, injurious to the last degree to the black people themselves. That there is much in their condition to be deplored in the South no one will deny; that that condition is gradually and steadily improving in every respect is equally true. That there have been clashings of the races in the South, socially and politically, is never to be denied nor to be wondered at; but when we come to consider the method in which the people were freed, as the result of a bitter and desolating civil war; and that for purposes of party politics these incompetent, ignorant, landless, homeless people, without any qualifications of citizenship, without any of the ties of property or the obligations of education, were suddenly thrown into political power, and the effort was made not only to place them upon an equality with their late masters, but to absolutely place them in front and hold them there by legislation, by military violence, and by every other means that could possibly be resorted to; when we consider these things no philosophical mind can behold their present condition, and the present comparative state of peace and amity between the two races, without wonder that their condition is as good as it is.

No man can behold this extraordinary spectacle of two people attempting to reconcile themselves in spite of the interference of outsiders, and to live in harmony, to promote each other's prosperity in spite of the bitter animosities which the sudden elevation of the one has engendered, without the liveliest hope that if left to themselves, the condition of the former subject race will still more rapidly improve, and that the best results may be reasonably and fairly expected.

Your committee is further of the opinion that all the attempts of legislation; that all the inflammatory appeals of politicians upon the stump and through the newspapers; that the wild and misdirected philanthropy of certain classes of our citizens; that these aid societies, and all other of the influences which are so industriously brought to bear to disturb the equanimity of the colored people of the South and to make them discontented with their position, are doing them a positive and almost incalculable injury, to say nothing of pecuniary losses which have thus been inflicted upon Southern communities.

Your committee is further of opinion that Congress having enacted all the legislation for the benefit of the colored people of the South which under the Constitution it can enact, and having seen that all the States of the South have done the same; that by the Constitution of the United States and the constitutions of the various States these people are placed upon a footing of perfect equality before the law, and given the chance to work out their own civilization and improvements, any further attempts at legislation or agitation of the subject will but excite in them hopes of exterior aid that will be disappointing to them, and will prevent them from working out diligently and with care their own salvation; that the sooner they are taught to depend upon themselves, the sooner they will learn to take care of themselves; the sooner they are taught to know that their true interest is promoted by cultivating the friendship of their white neighbors instead of their enmity, the sooner they will gain that friendship; and that friendship and harmony once fully attained, there is nothing to bar the way to their speedy civilization and advancement in wealth and prosperity, except such as hinder all people in that great work.

D. W. Voorhees.
Z. B. Vance.
Geo. II. Pendleton.

Report of the Minority

The undersigned, a minority of the committee appointed under resolution of the Senate of December 15, 1879, to investigate the causes which have led to the emigration of Negroes from the Southern to the Northern States, submit the following report:[4]

In the month of December last a few hundred colored men, women, and children, discontented with their condition in North Carolina, and hoping to improve it, were emigrating to Indiana.

This movement, though utterly insignificant in comparison with the vastly greater numbers which were moving from other Southern States into Kansas, seemed to be considered of very much more importance, in certain quarters, on account of its alleged political purposes and bearing. The theory upon which the investigation was asked was that the emigration into the State of Indiana was the result of a conspiracy on the part of Northern leaders of the Republican party to colonize that State with Negroes for political purposes. The utter absurdity of this theory should have been apparent to everybody, for if the Republican party, or its leaders, proposed to import Negroes into Indiana for political purposes, why take them from North Carolina? Why import them from a State where the Republicans hope and expect to carry the election, when there were thousands upon thousands ready and anxious to come from States certainly Democratic. Why transport them by rail at heavy expense half way across the continent when they could have taken them from Kentucky without any expense, or brought them up the Mississippi River by steamers at merely nominal cost? Why send twenty-five thousand to Kansas to swell her 40,000 Republican majority, and only seven or eight hundred to Indiana? These considerations brand with falsehood and folly the charge that the exodus was a political movement induced by Northern partisan leaders? And yet to prove this absurd proposition the committee devoted six months of hard and fruitless labor, during which they examined one hundred and fifty-nine witnesses, selected from all parts of the country, mainly with reference to their supposed readiness to prove said theory, expended over $30,000 and filled three large volumes of testimony.

The undersigned feel themselves authorized to say that there is no evidence whatever even tending to sustain the charge that the Republican party, or any of its leaders, have been instrumental, either directly or indirectly, in aiding or encouraging these people to come from their homes in the South to any of the Northern States. A good deal of complaint was made that certain "aid societies" in the North had encouraged and aided this migration, and a futile attempt was made to prove that these societies were acting in the interest of the Republican party. Upon inquiry, however, it was ascertained that their purposes were purely charitable and had no connection whatever with any political motive or movement. They were composed almost wholly of colored people, and were brought into existence solely to afford temporary relief to the destitute and suffering emigrants who had already come into the Northern and Western States.

In the spring of 1879 thousands of colored people, unable longer to endure the intolerable hardships, injustice, and suffering inflicted upon them by a class of Democrats in the South, had, in utter despair, fled panic-stricken from their homes and sought protection among strangers in a strange land. Homeless, penniless, and in rags, these poor people were thronging the wharves of Saint Louis, crowding the steamers on the Mississippi River, and in pitiable destitution throwing themselves upon the charity of Kansas. Thousands more were congregating along the banks of the Mississippi River, hailing the passing steamers, and imploring them for a passage to the land of freedom, where their rights of citizens were respected and honest toil rewarded by honest compensation. The newspapers were filled with accounts of their destitution, and the very air was burdened with the cry of distress from a class of American citizens flying from persecutions which they could not longer endure. Their piteous tales of outrage, suffering and wrong touched the hearts of the more fortunate members of their race in the North and West, and aid societies, designed to afford temporary relief, and composed largely, almost wholly, of colored people, were organized in Washington, Saint Louis, Topeka, and in various other places. That they were organized to induce migration for political purposes, or to aid or to encourage these people to leave their homes for any purpose, or that they ever contributed one dollar to that end, is utterly untrue, and there is absolutely nothing in the testimony to sustain such a charge. Their purposes and objects were purely charitable. They found a race of wretched miserable people flying from oppression and wrong, and they sought to relieve their distress. The refugees were hungry, and they fed them: in rags, and they clothed them; homeless, and they sheltered them; destitute, and they found employment for them—only this and nothing more.

The real origin of the exodus movement and the organizations at the South which have promoted it are very clearly stated by the witnesses who have been most active in regard to it.

Henry Adams, of Shreveport, Louisiana, an uneducated colored laborer, but a man of very unusual natural abilities, and, so far as the committee could learn, entirely reliable and truthful, states that he entered the United States Army in 1866 and remained in it until 1869; that when he left the Army he returned to his former home at Shreveport, and, finding the condition of his race intolerable, he and a number of other men who had also been in the Army set themselves to work to better the condition of their people.

In 1870—

He says—

a parcel of us got together and said we would organize ourselves into a committee and look into affairs and see the true condition of our race, to see whether it was possible we could stay under a people who held us in bondage or not.

That committee increased until it numbered about five hundred and Mr. Adams says:

Some of the members of the committee was ordered by the committee to go into every State in the South where we had been slaves, and post one another from time to time about the true condition of our race, and nothing but the truth.

In answer to the question whether they traveled over various States he said:

"Yes, sir; and we worked, some of us, worked our way from place to place, and went from State to State and worked—some of them did—amongst our people, in the fields, everywhere, to see what sort of a living our people lived—whether we could live in the South amongst the people that held us as slaves or not. We continued that on till 1874. Every one paid his own expenses, except the one we sent to Louisiana and Mississippi. We took money out of our pockets and sent him, and said to him you must now go to work. You can't find out anything till you get amongst them. You can talk as much as you please, but you got to go right into the field and work with them and sleep with them to know all about them."

I think about one hundred or one hundred and fifty went from one place or another.

Q. What was the character of the information that they gave you? A. Well, the character of the information they brought to us was very bad, sir.

---

Q. Do you remember any of these reports that you got from members of your committee?—A. Yes, sir; they said in several parts where they was that the land rent was still higher there in that part of the country than it was where we first organized it, and the people was still being whipped, some of them, by the old owners, the men that had owned them as slaves, and some of them was being cheated out of their crops just the same as they was there.

Q. Was anything said about their personal and political rights in these reports as to how they were treated?—A. Yes; some of them stated that in some parts of the country where they voted they would be shot. Some of them stated that if they voted the Democratic ticket they would not be injured.

Q. Now let us understand more distinctly, before we go any further, the kind of people who composed that association. The committee, as I understand you, was composed entirely of laboring people?—A. Yes, sir.

Q Did it include any politicians of either color, white or black?—A. No politicianers didn't belong to it, because we didn't allow them to know nothing about it, because we was afraid that if we allowed the colored politicianers to belong to it he would tell it to the Republican politicianers, and from that the men that was doing all this to us would get hold of it too, and then get after us.

---

Q. About what time did you lose all hope and confidence that your condition could be tolerable in the Southern States?—A. Well we never lost all hopes in the world till 1877.

Q. Why did you lose all hope in that year?—A. Well, we found ourselves in such condition that we looked around and we seed that there was no way on earth, it seemed, that we could better our condition there, and we discussed that thoroughly in our organization in May. We said that the whole South—every State in the South—had got into the hands of the very men that held us slaves—from one thing to another—and we thought that the men that held us slaves was holding the reins of government over our heads in every respect almost, even the constable up to the governor. We felt we had almost as well be slaves under these men. In regard to the whole matter that was discussed it came up in every council. Then we said there was no hope for us and we had better go.

Q. You say, then, that in 1877 you lost all hope of being able to remain in the South, and you began to think of moving somewhere else?—A. Yes; we said we was going if we had to run away and go into the woods.

Q. About how many did this committee consist of before you organized your council? Give us the number as near as you can tell.—A. As many as five hundred in all.

Q. The committee, do you mean? A. Yes; the committee has been that large.

Q. What was the largest number reached by your colonization council, in your best judgment?—A. Well, it is not exactly five hundred men belonging to the council that we have in our council, but they all agreed to go with us and enroll their names with us from time to time, so that they have now got at this time ninety-eight thousand names enrolled.

Q. Then through that council, as sort of subscribers to its purpose and acts and for carrying out its objects, there were ninety-eight thousand names?—A. Yes; ninety-eight thousand names enrolled.

Q. In what parts of the country were these ninety-eight thousand people scattered?—A. Well some in Louisiana—the majority of them in Louisiana—and some in Texas, and some in Arkansas. We joins Arkansas.

Q. Were there any in Mississippi?—A. Yes, sir; a few in Mississippi.

Q. And a few in Alabama?—A. Yes, sir; a few in Alabama, too.

Q. Did the organization extend at all into other States farther away?—A. O, yes, sir.

Q. Have you members in all the Southern States?—A. Not in every one, but in a great many of the others.

Q. Are these members of that colonization council in communication as to the condition of your race, and as to the best thing to be done to alleviate their troubles?—A. O, yes.

Q. What do you know about inducements being held out from politicians of the North, or from politicians anywhere else, to induce these people to leave their section of country and go into the Northern or Western States?—A. There is nobody has written letters of that kind, individually—not no white persons, I know, not to me, to induce anybody to come.

Q. Well, to any of the other members of your council?—A. No, I don't think to any of the members. If they have, they haven't said nothing to me about it.

It appears also from the evidence of Samuel L. Perry, of North Carolina, a colored man, who accompanied most of the emigrants from that State to Indiana, and who had more to do with the exodus from that quarter than any other man, that the movement had its origin as far back as 1872, as the following questions and answers will show:

Q. You have heard a good deal of this testimony with reference to this exodus from North Carolina. Now begin at the beginning and tell us all you know about it.—A. Well, the beginning, I suppose, was in this way: The first idea or the first thing was, we used to have little meetings to talk over these matters. In 1872 we first received some circulars or pamphlets from O. F. Davis, of Omaha, Nebraska.

Q. In 1872?—A. Yes, sir; in 1872—giving a description of government lands and railroads that could be got cheap; and we held little meetings then; that is, we would meet and talk about it Sunday evenings—that is, the laboring class of our people—the only ones I knew anything about; I had not much to do with the big professional Negroes, the rich men. I did not associate with them much, but I got among the workingmen, and they would take these pamphlets and read them over.

Mr. Perry says that the feeling in favor of migrating subsided somewhat, but sprung up again in 1876. From that time down to 1879 there were frequent consultations upon the subject, much dissatisfaction expressed respecting their condition, and a desire to emigrate to some part of the West. He says about "that time I was a subscriber to the New York Herald, and from an article in that paper the report was that the people were going to Kansas, and we thought we could go to Kansas, too; that we could get a colony to go West. That was last spring. We came back and formed ourselves into a colony of some hundred men." They did not, however, begin their westward movements until the fall of 1879, when it being ascertained by the railroad companies that a considerable number of people were proposing to migrate from North Carolina to the West, several railroad companies, notably the Baltimore and Ohio, offered to certain active and influential colored men $1 per head for all the passengers they could procure for the respective competing lines.

By reference to this evidence, part 3, page 136, it will be seen that the emigration movement in Alabama originated as far back as the year 1871, when an organization of colored people, called the State Labor Union, delegated Hon. George F. Marlow to visit Kansas, and other parts of the West, for the purpose of examining that country and reporting back to a future convention his views as to the expediency of removing thereto. A convention of colored people was held again in 1872, at which Mr. Marlow made the following glowing report of the condition of things in Kansas and the inducements that State offered to the colored people. He said:

In August, 1871, being delegated by your president for the purpose, I visited the State of Kansas, and here give the results of my observations, briefly stated.

It is a new State, and as such possesses many advantages over the old.

It is much more productive than most other States.

What is raised yields more profit than elsewhere, as it is raised at less expense.

The weather and roads enable you to do more work here than elsewhere.

The climate is mild and pleasant.

Winters short and require little food for stock.

Fine grazing country; stock can be grazed all winter.

The population is enterprising, towns and villages spring up rapidly and great profits arise from all investments.

Climate dry, and land free from swamps.

The money paid to doctors in less healthy regions can here be used to build up a house.

People quiet and orderly, schools and churches to be found in every neighborhood, and ample provision for free schools is made by the State.

Money, plenty, and what you raise commands a good price.

Fruits of all kinds easily grown and sold at large profits.

Railroads are being built in every direction.

The country is well watered.

Salt and coal are plentiful.

It is within the reach of every man, no matter how poor, to have a home in Kansas. The best lands are to be had at from $2 to $10 an acre, on time. The different railroads own large tracts of land, and offer liberal inducements to emigrants. You can get good land in some places for $1.25 an acre. The country is mostly open prairie, and level, with deep, rich soil, producing from forty to one hundred bushels of corn and wheat to the acre. The corn grows about eight or nine feet high, and I never saw better fruit anywhere than there.

The report was adopted.

The feeling of the colored people in that State in 1872 was well expressed by Hon. Robert H. Knox, of Montgomery, a prominent colored citizen, who, in addressing the convention, spoke as follows:

I have listened with great attention to the report of the commissioner appointed by authority of the State Labor Union to visit Kansas, and while I own the inducements held out to the laboring man in that far-off State are much greater than those enjoyed by our State, I yet would say let us rest here awhile longer; let us trust in God, the President, and Congress to give us what is most needed here, personal security to the laboring masses, the suppression of violence, disorder, and kukluxism, the protection which the Constitution and laws of the United States guarantee, and to which as citizens and men we are entitled. Failing in these, it is time then, I repeat, to desert the State and seek homes elsewhere where there may be the fruition of hopes inaugurated when by the hand of Providence the shackles were stricken from the limbs of four million men, where there may be enjoyed in peace and happiness by your own fireside the earnings of your daily toil.

Benjamin Singleton, an aged colored man, now residing in Kansas, swears that he began the work inducing his race to migrate to that State as early as 1869, and that he has brought mainly from Tennessee, and located in two colonies—one in Cherokee County, and another in Lyons County, Kansas—a total of 7,432 colored people. The old man spoke in the most touching manner of the sufferings and wrongs of his people in the South, and in the most glowing terms of their condition in their new homes; and when asked as to who originated the movement, he proudly asserted, "I am the father of the exodus." He said that during these years since he began the movement he has paid from his own pocket over $600 for circulars, which he has caused to be printed and circulated all over the Southern States, advising all who can pay their way to come to Kansas. In these circulars he advised the colored people of the advantages of living in a free State, and told them how well the emigrants whom he had taken there were getting on. He says that the emigrants whom he has taken to Kansas are happy and doing well. The old man insists with great enthusiasm that he is the "Whole cause of the Kansas immigration," and is very proud of his achievement.

Here, then, we have conclusive proof from the Negroes themselves that they have been preparing for this movement for many years. Organizations to this end have existed in many States, and the agents of such organizations have traveled throughout the South. One of these organizations alone kept one hundred and fifty men in the field for years, traveling among their brethren and secretly discussing this among other means of relief. As stated by Adams and Perry, politicians were excluded, and the movement was confined wholly to the working classes.

The movement has doubtless been somewhat stimulated by circulars from railroad companies and State emigration societies which have found their way into the South, but these have had comparatively little effect. The following specimen of these emigration documents, which was gotten up and circulated by Indiana Democrats, printed at a Democratic printing office, and written by a Democrat, in our judgment appeals more strongly to the imagination and wants of the Negro than any we have been able to find:

In every county of the State there is an asylum where those who are unable to work and have no means of support are cared for at the public expense.

Laborers who work by the month or by the year make their own contract with the employer, and all disputes subsequently arising are settled by legal processes in the proper courts, everybody being equal before the law in Indiana. The price of farm labor has varied considerably in the last twenty years. About $16 per month may be assumed as about the average per month, and this is understood to include board and lodging at the farm-house. This amount is paid in current money at the end of each month, unless otherwise stipulated in the contract. Occasionally a tenement house is found on the larger farms, where a laborer lives with his family, and either rents a portion of the farm or cultivates it on special contract with the landlord. With us there is no class of laborers as such. The young man who today may be hired as a laborer at monthly wages, may in five years from now be himself a proprietor, owning the soil he cultivates and paying wages to laborers. The upward road is open to all, and its highest elevation is attainable by industry, economy, and perseverance.

Sixteen dollars per month, with board! Everybody equal before the law! No class of laborers as such! The hired man of today himself the owner of a farm in five years! No cheating of tenants, but everything paid in current money. And if all this will not attract the Negro he is told there is an "asylum in every county" to which he can go when unable to support himself. The document also promises to everybody "free schools" in "brick or stone school-houses," and says they have "2,000,000 greater school fund than any State in the Union." These Democratic documents have been circulated by the thousand, and doubtless many of them have found their way into the Negro cabins of North Carolina. It is not surprising that the Negro looks with longing eyes to that great and noble State.

Causes of the Exodus

There is surely some adequate cause for such a movement. The majority of the committee have utterly failed to find it, or, if found, to recognize it. When it was found that any of their own witnesses were ready to state causes which did not accord with their theory they were dismissed without examination, as in the cases of Ruby and Stafford, and a half dozen others who were brought from Kansas, but who on their arrival here were found to entertain views not agreeable to the majority.

We regret that a faithful and honest discussion of this subject compels a reference to the darkest, bloodiest, and most shameful chapter of our political history. Gladly would we avoid it, but candor compels us to say that the volume which shall faithfully record the crimes which, in the name of Democracy, have been committed against the citizenship, the lives, and the personal rights of these people, and which have finally driven them in utter despair from their homes, will stand forever without a parallel in the annals of Christian civilization. In discussing these sad and shameful events, we wish it distinctly understood that we do not arraign the whole people nor even the entire Democratic party of the States in which they have occurred. The colored and other witnesses all declare that the lawlessness from which they have suffered does not meet the approval of the better class of Democrats at the South. They are generally committed by the reckless, dissolute classes who unfortunately too often control and dominate the Democratic party and dictate its policy. We have no doubt there are many Democrats in the South who deeply regret this condition of things, and who would gladly welcome a change, but they are in a helpless, and we fear a hopeless, minority in many sections of that country.

The unfortunate and inexcusable feature of the case is that, however much they may deplore such lawlessness, they have never, so far as we can learn, declined to accept its fruits. They may regret the violence and crimes by which American citizens are prevented from voting, but they rejoice in the Democratic victories which result therefrom. So long as they shall continue thus to accept the fruits of crime, the criminals will have but little fear of punishment or restraint, and the lawless conduct which is depopulating some sections of their laboring classes will go on. There is another unfortunate feature of this matter. So long as crimes against American citizenship shall continue to suppress Republican majorities, and to give a "solid South" to the Democracy, there will be found enough Democrats at the North who will shut their eyes to the means by which it is accomplished, and seek to cover up and excuse the conduct of their political partisans at the South.

This is well illustrated by the report of the majority of the committee. In the presence of most diabolic outrages clearly proven; in the face of the declaration of thousands of refugees that they had fled because of the insecurity of their lives and property at the South, and because the Democratic party of that section had, by means too shocking and shameful to relate, deprived them of their rights as American citizens; in the face of the fact that it has been clearly shown by the evidence that organizations of colored laborers, one of which numbered ninety-eight thousand, have existed for many years and extending into many States of the South, designed to improve their condition by emigration—in the face of all these facts the majority of the committee can see no cause for the exodus growing out of such wrongs, but endeavor to charge it to the Republicans of the North.

In view of this fact, it is our painful duty to point out some of the real causes of this movement. It is, however, quite impossible to enumerate all or any considerable part of the causes of discontent and utter despair which have finally culminated in this movement. To do so would be to repeat a history of violence and crime which for fifteen years have reddened with the blood of innocent victims many of the fairest portions of our country; to do so would be to read the numberless volumes of sworn testimony which have been carefully corded away in the crypt and basement of this Capitol, reciting shocking instances of crime, crying from the ground against the perpetrators of the deeds which they record. The most which we can hope to do within the limits of this report is to present a very few facts which shall be merely illustrative of the conditions which have driven from their homes, and the graves of their fathers an industrious, patient, and law-abiding people, whom we are bound by every obligation of honor and patriotism to protect in their personal and political rights and privileges.

We begin with the State of North Carolina because the migration from that State has been comparatively insignificant, and also because the conditions there are more favorable to the colored race than in any of the other cotton States of the South. Owing to the lack of funds, and to the time employed in the examination of witnesses called by the majority the Republican members of the committee summoned no witnesses from the State of North Carolina, and were obliged to content themselves with such facts as could be obtained from one or two persons who happened to be in this city, and such other facts as were brought out upon cross-examination of the witnesses called by the other side. By the careful selection of a few well-to-do and more fortunate colored men from that State, the majority of the committee secured some evidence tending to show that a portion of the Negroes of North Carolina are exceptionally well treated and contented, and yet upon cross-examination of their own witnesses facts were disclosed which showed that, even there, conditions exist which are ample to account for the migration of the entire colored population.

There are three things in that State which create great discontent among the colored people: First, the abridgment of their rights of self-government; second, their disadvantages as to common schools; third, discriminations against them in the courts; and, fourth, the memory of Democratic outrages. Prior to Democratic rule the people of each county elected five commissioners, who had supervision over the whole county, and who chose the judges of elections. The Democrats changed the constitution so as to take this power from the people, and gave to the general assembly authority to appoint these officers. This they regard not only as practically depriving them of self-government, but, as stated by one of the witnesses, Hon. R. C. Badger, as placing the elections, even in Republican townships, wholly under the control of the Democrats, who thereby "have the power to count up the returns and throw out the balance for any technicality, exactly as Garcelon & Co. did in Maine." This creates much dissatisfaction, because they believe they are cheated out of their votes. The Negro values the ballot more than anything else, because he knows that it is his only means of defense and protection. A law which places all the returning boards in the hands of his political opponents necessarily and justly produces discontent.

Next to the ballot the Negro values the privileges of common schools, for in them he sees the future elevation of his race. The prejudice even in North Carolina against white teachers of colored schools seems to have abated but little since the war. Mr. Badger, when cross-examined on this point, said:

Q. Is there any prejudice still remaining there against white teachers of colored schools?—A. I think there is.

Q. Will you explain it?—A. I cannot explain it, except by the prejudices between the races.

Q. You mean, white persons teaching a colored school lose social status?—A. Yes, sir.

Q. Now, a white lady who comes from the North and teaches a colored school, to what extent is she tabooed?—A. I don't think she would have any acquaintances in white society.

Q. Would she be any quicker invited into white society than a colored woman?—A. Just about the same.

This fact contains within itself a volume of testimony. It shows that the Negro is still regarded as a sort of social and political pariah, whom no white person may teach without incurring social ostracism and being degraded to the level of the social outcast he or she would elevate in the scale of being. Is it surprising that the Negro is dissatisfied with his condition and desires to emigrate to some country where his children may hope for better things?

The most serious complaints, however, which are made against the treatment of colored citizens of North Carolina is that justice is not fairly administered in the courts as between themselves and the whites. On this point the evidence of Mr. R. C. Badger reveals a condition of things to which no people can long submit. Here is his illustration of the manner in which justice is usually meted out as between the Negroes and the whites:

Q. How about the discrimination in the courts as between the whites and blacks?—A. That is principally in matters of larceny. In such cases the presumption is reversed as to the Negro. A white man can't be convicted without the fullest proof, and with the Negroes, in matters between themselves, such as assault and battery, they get as fair a trial as the whites. At the January term of our court Judge Avery presided. A white man and a colored woman were indicted for an affray. The woman was in her husband's barn getting out corn; they were going to move, and the white man came down there and said, "You seem to have a good time laughing here this morning," and she said, yes, she had a right to laugh. He said, "You are getting that corn out, and you would have made more if you had stuck to your husband." She seemed to be a sort of termagant, and she said nobody said that about her unless you told them. He made some insulting remark, and she made something in return to him, and he took a billet of wood and struck her on the shoulder, and he pulled a pistol and beat her with it, and she went for him to kill him. They found the man not guilty and they found her guilty, but Judge Avery set the verdict aside and ordered the case nolle prossed against her.

Q. Do you think that is a fair sample of the justice they get?—A. Yes, sir.

Q. Do you think they will convict a colored woman in order to get a chance to turn loose a white man?—A. Yes, sir.

Mr. Badger was not our witness. He was called by the majority, but he is a gentleman of high character, the son of an ex-member of this body, and thoroughly acquainted with the condition of things in his State. He puts the case just mentioned as a "fair sample" of North Carolina justice toward the Negro. It is true the judge set aside the verdict, but this does not change the fact that before a North Carolina jury the Negro has but little hope of justice.

Back of all these things lies the distrust of Democracy which was inspired during the days when the "Kuklux," the "White Brotherhood," the Universal Empire, and the "Stonewall Guard" spread terror and desolation over the State in order to wrest it from Republicanism to Democracy. The memory of those dark days and bloody deeds, the prejudice which still forbids white ladies to teach colored schools, and denies "even-handed" justice in the courts, and the usurpations which place the returning boards all in the hands of Democrats, have inspired a feeling of discontent which has found expression in the efforts of a few to leave the State. These facts, taken in connection with the bonus of one dollar per head offered by the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company (a Democratic corporation represented by a Democratic agent) to leading colored men who would secure passengers for their road, has led to the emigration of some seven or eight hundred colored people from that State, and the only wonder is that thousands instead of hundreds have not gone.

Louisiana and Mississippi

The States of Louisiana and Mississippi have furnished the larger portion of the migration to Kansas, and as the conditions which caused the exodus are the same in both of these States, we may speak of them together. No single act of wrong has inspired this movement, but a long series of oppression, injustice, and violence, extending over a period of fifteen years. These people have been long-suffering and wonderfully patient, but the time came when they could endure it no longer and they resolved to go. We can convey no adequate idea of what they endured before adopting this desperate resolve, but will mention a few facts drawn from well authenticated history, from sworn public documents, and from the evidence taken by the Exodus Investigating Committee. Writing under date of January 10, 1875, General P. H. Sheridan, then in command at New Orleans, says:

Since the year 1866 nearly thirty-five hundred persons, a great majority of whom were colored men, have been killed and wounded in this State. In 1868 the official records show that eighteen hundred and eighty-five were killed and wounded. From 1868 to the present time no official investigation has been made, and the civil authorities in all but a few cases have been unable to arrest, convict or punish the perpetrators. Consequently there are no correct records to be consulted for information. There is ample evidence, however, to show that more than twelve hundred persons have been killed and wounded during this time on account of their political sentiments. Frightful massacres have occurred in the parishes of Bossier, Caddo, Catahoula, Saint Bernard, Saint Landry, Grant, and Orleans.

He then proceeds to enumerate the political murders of colored men in the various parishes, and says:

"Human life in this State is held so cheaply that when men are killed on account of political opinions, the murderers are regarded rather as heroes than criminals in the localities where they reside."

This brief summary is not by a politician, but by a distinguished soldier, who recounts the events which have occurred within his own military jurisdiction. Volumes of testimony have since been taken confirming, in all respects, General Sheridan's statement, and giving in detail the facts relating to such murders, and the times and circumstances of their occurrence. The results of the elections which immediately followed them disclose the motives and purposes of their perpetrators. These reports show that in the year 1868 a reign of terror prevailed over almost the entire State. In the parish of Saint Landry there was a massacre from three to six days, during which between two and three hundred colored men were killed. "Thirteen captives were taken from the jail and shot, and a pile of twenty-five dead bodies were found burned in the woods." The result of this Democratic campaign in the parish was that the registered Republican majority of 1,071 was wholly obliterated, and at the election which followed a few weeks later not a vote was cast for General Grant, while Seymour and Blair received 4,787.

In the parish of Bossier a similar massacre occurred between the 20th and 30th of September, 1868, which lasted from three to four days, during which two hundred colored people were killed. By the official registry of that year the Republican voters in Bossier parish numbered 1,938, but at the ensuing election only one Republican vote was cast.

In the parish of Caddo during the month of October, 1868, over forty colored people were killed. The result of that massacre was that out of a Republican registered vote of 2,894 only one was cast for General Grant. Similar scenes were enacted throughout the State, varying in extent and atrocity according to the magnitude of the Republican majority to be overcome.

The total summing-up of murders, maimings, and whippings which took place for political reasons in the months of September, October and November, 1868, as shown by official sources, is over one thousand. The net political results achieved thereby may be succinctly stated as follows: The official registration for that year in twenty-eight parishes contained 47,923 names of Republican voters, but at the Presidential election, held a few weeks after the occurrence of these events but 5,360 Republican votes were cast, making the net Democratic gain from said transactions 42,563.

In nine of these parishes where the reign of terror was most prevalent out of 11,604 registered Republican votes only 19 were cast for General Grant. In seven of said parishes there were 7,253 registered Republican votes, but not one was cast at the ensuing election for the Republican ticket.

In the years succeeding 1868, when some restraint was imposed upon political lawlessness and a comparatively peaceful election was held, these same Republican parishes cast from 33,000 to 37,000 Republican votes, thus demonstrating the purpose and the effects of the reign of murder in 1868. In 1876 the spirit of violence and persecution, which in parts of the State had been partially restrained for a time, broke forth again with renewed fury. It was deemed necessary to carry that State for Tilden and Hendricks, and the policy which had proved so successful in 1868 was again invoked and with like results. On the day of general election in 1876 there were in the State of Louisiana 92,996 registered white voters and 115,310 colored, making a Republican majority of the latter of 22,314. The number of white Republicans was far in excess of the number of colored Democrats. It was, therefore, well known that if a fair election should be made the State would go Republican by from twenty-five to forty thousand majority. The policy adopted this time was to select a few of the largest Republican parishes and by terrorism and violence not only obliterate their Republican majorities, but also intimidate the Negroes in the other parishes. The testimony found in our public documents, and records shows that the same system of assassinations, whippings, burnings, and other acts of political persecution of colored citizens which had occurred in 1868 was again repeated in 1876 and with like results.

In fifteen parishes where 17,726 Republicans were registered in 1876 only 5,758 votes were cast for Hayes and Wheeler, and in one of them (East Feliciana), where there were 2,127 Republicans registered, but one Republican vote was cast. By such methods the Republican majority of the State was supposed to have been effectually suppressed and a Democratic victory assured. And because the legally constituted authorities of Louisiana, acting in conformity with law and justice, declined to count some of the parishes thus carried by violence and blood, the Democratic party, both North and South, has ever since complained that it was fraudulently deprived of the fruits of victory, and it now proposes to make this grievance the principal plank in the party platform.

On the 6th of December, 1876, President Grant in a message to Congress transmitted the evidence of these horrible crimes against the colored race, committed in the name and in the interest of the Democracy. They are not mere estimates nor conjectures, but the names of the persons murdered, maimed and whipped, and of the perpetrators of the crimes, the places where they occurred, and the revolting circumstances under which they were committed, are all set forth in detail. This shocking record embraces a period of eight years, from 1868 to 1876, inclusive, and covers ninety-eight pages of fine type, giving an average of about one victim to each line. We have not counted the list, but it is safe to say that it numbers over four thousand.

These crimes did not end in 1876 with the accession of the Democracy to control of the State administration. The witnesses examined by your committee gave numerous instances of like character which occurred in 1878. Madison Parish may serve as an illustration. This parish, which furnished perhaps the largest number of refugees to Kansas, had been exceptionally free from bull-dozing in former years. William Murrell, one of the witnesses called by the committee, states the reasons for the exodus from that parish as follows:

You have not read of any exodus yet as there will be from that section this summer, and the reason for it is that, for the first time since the war in Madison Parish last December, we had bull-dozing there. Armed bodies of men came into the parish—not people who lived in the parish, but men from Ouachita Parish and Richland Parish; and I can name the leader who commanded them. He was a gentleman by the name of Captain Tibbals, of Ouachita Parish, who lives in Monroe, who was noted in the celebrated massacre there in other times. His very name among the colored people is sufficient to intimidate them almost. He came with a crowd of men on the 28th of December into Madison Parish, when all was quiet and peaceable. There was no quarrel, no excitement. We had always elected our tickets in the parish, and we had put Democrats on the ticket in many cases to satisfy them. There were only 238 white voters and about 2,700 colored registered voters.

Mr. Murrell says that David Armstrong, who was president of third ward Republican club, a man who stood high in the community, and against whom no charge was made except that of being a Republican, made the remark:

"What right have these white men to come here from Morehouse Parish, and Richland Parish, and Franklin Parish to interfere with our election?" And some white men heard of it and got a squad by themselves and said, "We'll go down and give that nigger a whipping." So Sunday night, about ten o'clock, they went to his house to take him out and whip him. They saw him run out the back way and fired on him. One in the crowd cried out, "Don't kill him!" "It is too late, now," they said, "he's dead." The Carroll Conservative, a Democratic newspaper, published the whole thing; but the reason they did it was because we had one of their men on our ticket as judge, and they got sore about it, and we beat him. They killed Armstrong and took him three hundred yards to the river, in a sheet, threw him in the river, and left the sheet in the bushes.

Proceeding with the account of that transaction, Mr. Murrell swears that the colored people had heard that the bulldozers were coming from the surrounding parishes, and that he and others called on some of the leading Democrats in order to prevent it, but all in vain. He says:

We waited on Mr. Holmes, the clerk of the court, and we said to him, "Mr. Holmes, it is not necessary to do any bulldozing here; you have the counting machinery all in your hands, and we would rather be counted out than bulldozed; can't we arrange this thing? I made a proposition to him and said, "You know I am renominated on the Republican ticket, but I will get out of the way for any moderate Democrat you may name to save the State and district ticket. We will not vote for your State ticket; you cannot make the colored people vote the State ticket; but if you will let us have our State ticket we will give you the local offices." We offered them the clerk of the court, not the sheriff, and the two representatives. We told him we would not give them the senator, but the district judge and attorney. After this interview Holmes sent us to Dr. Askew, ex-chairman of the Democratic committee, and he said to me, "Now, Murrell, there is no use talking, I advise you to stand from under. When these men get in here we can't control them. We like you well enough and would not like to see you hurt. I will see you to-night at Mr. Holmes." We had an interview with Mr. Holmes and made this proposition, and Holmes asked me this question: "Murrell, you know damned well the niggers in this parish won't vote the Democratic ticket—there is no use to tell me you will give us the clerk of the court, you know the niggers won't do it. You can't trust the niggers in politics; all your eloquence and all the speeches you can make won't make these niggers vote this ticket or what you suggest, even if we was to accept it. No, by God, we are going to carry it. Why," said he, "there is more eloquence in double-barreled shot-guns to convince niggers than there is in forty Ciceros." I said to him, "Well, do you suppose the merchants and planters will back you up," and he said, "O, by God, they have got nothing to do with it. We have charge of it. We three men, the Democratic committee, have full power to work."

The result of this "work" was, as stated by the witness, and not disputed by any one before the committee, that in this parish, containing 2,700 registered Republican voters, and only 238 Democrats, the Democrats returned a majority of 2,300. The witness, who was a candidate on the Republican ticket, swears that not more than 360 votes were cast. Democratic shot-gun eloquence did its "work," as prophesied by Mr. Askew, ex-chairman of the Democratic committee, but it also served as a wonderful stimulus to migration from Madison Parish.

We cite this case for two reasons: First, because it has been said that the Negroes have not emigrated from bulldozed parishes; and, secondly, because it serves as an illustration of the many similar cases which were given to the committee.

We desire also to invite attention to the evidence of Henry Adams, a colored witness from Shreveport, La. Adams is a man of very remarkable energy and native ability. Scores of witnesses were summoned by the majority of the committee from Shreveport but none of them ventured to question his integrity or truthfulness. Though a common laborer, he has devoted much of his time in traveling through Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, working his way and taking notes of the crimes committed against his race. His notes, written in terse and simple language, embraced the names of six hundred and eighty-three colored men who have been whipped, maimed or murdered within the last eight years, and his statement of these crimes covers thirty-five pages of closely printed matter in the report. We are sure no one can read it without a conviction of its truthfulness, and a feeling of horror at the barbarous details he relates. Adams is the man who has organized a colonization council, composed of laboring colored people, and rigidly excluding politicians, which numbers ninety-eight thousand who have enrolled themselves with a view to emigration from that country as early as possible. He details the character and the purpose of the organization and the efforts it has made to obtain relief and protection for its members. "First," he says, "we appealed to the President of the United States to help us out of our distress, to protect us in our rights and privileges. Next, we appealed to Congress for a territory to which we might go and live with our families. Failing in that," says he, "our other object was to ask for help to ship us all to Liberia, Africa, somewhere where we could live in peace and quiet. If that could not be done," he adds, "our idea was to appeal to other governments outside of the United States to help us to get away from the United States and go and live there under their flag." What a commentary upon our own boasted equality and freedom! Finding no relief in any direction, they finally resolved to emigrate to some of the Northern States. He says they had some hope of securing better treatment at home until 1877, when "we lost all hopes and determined to go anywhere on God's earth, we didn't care where; we said we was going if we had to run away and go into the woods." Perhaps we can best summarize the condition of affairs in Louisiana and the causes of the exodus from that State, as the Negroes themselves regarded them, by quoting a brief extract from the report of the business committee to the colored State convention held in New Orleans on the 21st of April, 1879:

New Orleans, April 21, 1879.

Mr. President: Your committee on business have the honor to submit this their final report. Discussing the general and widespread alarm among the colored people of Louisiana, including so potent a fear that in many parishes, and in others perhaps largely to follow, there is an exodus of agricultural labor which indicates the prostration and destruction of the productive, and therefore essentially vital, interests of the State. The Committee find that the primary cause of this lies in the absence of a republican form of government to the people of Louisiana. Crime and lawlessness existing to an extent that laughs at all restraint, and the misgovernment naturally induced from a State administration itself the product of violence, have created an absorbing and constantly increasing distrust and alarm among our people throughout the State. All rights of freemen denied and all claims to a just recompense for labor rendered or honorable dealings between planter and laborer disallowed, justice a mockery, and the laws a cheat, the very officers of the courts being themselves the mobocrats and violators of the law, the only remedy left the colored citizens in many of parishes of our State today is to emigrate. The fiat to go forth is irresistible. The constantly recurring, nay, ever-present, fear which haunts the minds of these our people in the turbulent parishes of the State is that slavery in the horrible form of peonage is approaching; that the avowed disposition of men in power to reduce the laborer and his interest to the minimum of advantages as freemen and to absolutely none as citizens has produced so absolute a feat that in many cases it has become a panic. It is flight from present sufferings and from wrongs to come.

Here are the reasons for the exodus as stated by the colored people themselves. In view of the facts which we have stated, and of the terrible history which we cannot here repeat, does any one believe their statement of grievances is overdrawn? Is there any other race of freemen on the face of the earth who would have endured and patiently suffered as they have? Is there any other government among civilized nations which would have permitted such acts to be perpetrated against its citizens?

We will not dwell upon the conditions which have driven these people from Mississippi. It would be but a repetition of the intolerance, persecutions, and violence which have prevailed in Louisiana. The same Democratic "shot-gun eloquence" which was so potent for the conversion of colored Republicans in the one has proven equally powerful in the other. The same "eloquence" which wrested Louisiana from Republicans also converted Mississippi. And in both the same results are visible in the determination of the colored people to get away.

Nearly all the witnesses who were asked as to the causes of the exodus answered that it was because of a feeling of insecurity for life and property; a denial of their political rights as citizens; long-continued persecutions for political reasons; a system of cheating by landlords and storekeepers which rendered it impossible for them to make a living no matter how hard they might work; the inadequacy of school advantages, and a fear that they would be eventually reduced to a system of peonage even worse than slavery itself.

On the latter point they quoted the laws of Mississippi, which authorize the sheriff to hire the convicts to planters and others for twenty-five cents a day to work out the fine and cost, and which provide that for every day lost from sickness he shall work another to pay for his board while sick. Under these laws they allege that a colored man may be fined $500 for some trifling misdemeanor, and be compelled to work five or six years to pay the fine; and that it is not uncommon for colored men thus hired out to be worked in a chain gang upon the plantations under overseers, with whip in hand, precisely as in the days of slavery. And some of the witnesses declared that if an attempt be made to escape they are pursued by blood-hounds, as before the war.

Henry Ruby, a witness summoned by the majority of the committee, swore that in Texas, under a law similar to that in Mississippi, a colored man had been arrested for carrying a "six-shooter" and fined $65, including costs, and that he had been at work nearly three years to pay it. The laws of that State do not fix the rate for hiring, but "county convicts" may be hired at any price the county judge may determine. He mentioned the case of a colored woman who was hired out for a quarter of a cent a day. Describing this process of hiring, he says:

They call these people county convicts, and if you have got a farm you can hire them out of the jail. They have got that system, and the colored men object to it. I know some of these men who have State convicts that they hire and they work them under shotguns. A farmer hires so many of the State, and they are under the supervision of a sergeant with a gun and nigger-hounds to run them with if they get away. They hire them and put them in the same gang with the striped suit on, and, if they want, the guard can bring them down with his shotgun! Then they have these nigger-hounds, and if one of them gets off and they can't find him they take the hounds, and from a shoe or anything of the kind belonging to the convict they trail him down.

Q. Are these the same sort of blood-hounds they used to have to run the Negroes with?—A. Yes, sir.

These things need no comment. To the Negro they are painfully suggestive of slavery. Is it a wonder that he has resolved to go where peonage and blood-hounds are unknown?

Several witnesses were called from Saint Louis and Kansas, who had conversed with thousands of the refugees, and who swore that they all told the same story of injustice, oppression and wrong. Upon the arrival of the first boat-loads at Saint Louis, in the early spring of 1879, the people of that city were deeply moved by the evident destitution and distress which they presented, and thousands of them were interviewed as to the causes which impelled them to leave their homes at that inclement season of the year. In the presence of these people, and with a full knowledge of their condition and of the flight, a memorial to Congress was prepared, and signed by a large number of the most prominent and most respectable citizens of Saint Louis, embracing such names as Mayor Overholtz (a Democrat), Hon. John F. Dillon, judge of the United States circuit court, ex-United States Senator J.B. Henderson and nearly a hundred other leading citizens, in which the condition and grievances of the refugees are stated as follows:

The undersigned, your memorialists, respectfully represent that within the last two weeks there have come by steamboats up the Mississippi River, from chiefly the States of Louisiana and Mississippi, and landed at Saint Louis, Mo., a great number of colored citizens of the United States, not less than twenty hundred and composed of men and women, old and young, and with them many of their children.

This multitude is eager to proceed to Kansas, and without exception, so far as we have learned, refuse all overtures or inducements to return South, even if their passage back is paid for them.

The condition of the great majority is absolute poverty; they are clothed in thin and ragged garments for the most part, and while here have been supported to some extent by public, but mostly by private charity.

The older ones are the former slaves of the South; all now entitled to life and liberty.

The weather from the first advent of these people in this Northern city has been unusually cold, attended with ice and snow, so that their sufferings have been greatly increased, and if there was in their hearts a single kind remembrance of their sunny Southern homes they would naturally give it expression now.

We have taken occasion to examine into the causes they themselves assign for their extraordinary and unexpected transit, and beg leave to submit herewith the written statements of a number of individuals of the refugees, which were taken without any effort to have one thing said more than another, and to express the sense of the witness in his own language as nearly as possible.

The story is about the same in each instance: a great privation and want from excessive rent exacted for land, connected with murder of colored neighbors and threats of personal violence to themselves. The tone of each statement is that of suffering and terror. Election days and Christmas, by the concurrent testimony, seem to have been appropriated to killing the smart men, while robbery and personal violence in one form and another seem to have run the year round.

---

We submit that the great migration of Negroes from the South is itself a fact that overbears all contradiction and proves conclusively that great causes must exist at the South to account for it.

Here they are in multitudes, not men alone, but women and children, old, middle-aged, and young, with common consent leaving their old homes in a natural climate and facing storms and unknown dangers to go to Northern Kansas. Why? Among them all there is little said of hope in the future; it is all of fear in the past. They are not drawn by the attractions of Kansas; they are driven by the terrors of Mississippi and Louisiana. Whatever becomes of them, they are unanimous in their unalterable determination not to return.

There are others coming. Those who have come and gone on to Kansas must suffer even unto death, we fear; at all events more than any body of people entitled to liberty and law, the possession of property, the right to vote, and the pursuit of happiness, should be compelled to suffer under a free government from terror inspired by robbery, threats, assaults, and murders.

We protest against the dire necessities that have impelled this exodus, and against the violation of common right, natural and constitutional, proven to be of most frequent occurrences in places named; and we ask such action at the hands of our representatives and our government as shall investigate the full extent of the causes leading to this unnatural state of affairs and protect the people from its continuance, and not only protect liberty and life, but enforce law and order.

It is intolerable to believe that with the increased representation of the Southern States in Congress those shall not be allowed freely to cast their ballots upon whose right to vote that representation has been enlarged. We believe no government can prosper that will allow such a state of injustice to the body of its people to exist, any more than society can endure where robbery and murder go unchallenged.

The occasion is, we think, a fit one for us to protest against a state of affairs thus exhibited in those parts of the Union from which these Negroes come, which is not only most barbarous toward the Negro, but is destructive to the constitutional rights of all citizens of our common country.

Accompanying this memorial are numerous affidavits of the refugees fully confirming all its statements.

As to the future of the exodus we can only say that every witness, whose opinion was asked upon this point, declared that it has only begun, and that what we have seen in the past is nothing compared to what is to come, unless there shall be a radical change on the part of Democrats in the South. They say that the Negro has no confidence in the Democratic party, and that if a Democratic President shall be elected there will be a general stampede of the colored race.

There is but one remedy for the exodus—fair treatment of the Negro. If the better class of white men in the South would retain the colored labor, they must recognize his manhood and his citizenship, and restrain the vicious and lawless elements in their midst. If Northern Democrats would check the threatened inundation of black labor into their States, they must recognize the facts which have produced the exodus and unite with us in removing its causes.

We present in conclusion the following brief summary of the results of the investigation:

First: This movement was not instigated, aided or encouraged by Republican leaders at the North. The only aid they have ever given was purely as a matter of charity, to relieve the distress of the destitute and suffering emigrants who had already come to the North.

Second. Not one dollar has ever been contributed by anybody at the North to bring these people from their homes. On the contrary, the only contributions shown to have been made for such purpose were made by the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company, a Democratic corporation which employed agents to work up the emigration from North Carolina, paying $1 per head therefor.

Third. It is not proven that the emigrants are dissatisfied in their new homes and wish to return to the South. On the contrary, a standing offer to pay their expenses back to the South has not induced more than about three hundred out of thirty thousand to return.

Fourth. It is not proven that there is no demand for their labor at the North, for nearly all those who have come have found employment, and even in Indiana hundreds of applications for them were presented to the committee.

Fifth. It is not proven that there is any sufficient reason for the grave political apprehensions entertained in some quarters, for it was shown by Mr. Dukehart, who sold all the tickets to those who came from North Carolina, that not more than two hundred voters had gone to Indiana.

Sixth. The exodus movement originated entirely with the colored people themselves, who for many years have been organizing for the purpose of finding relief in that way, and the colored agents of such organizations have traveled all over the South consulting with their race on this subject.

Seventh. A long series of political persecutions, whippings, maimings and murders committed by Democrats and in the interest of the Democratic party, extending over a period of fifteen years, has finally driven the Negro to despair, and compelled him to seek peace and safety by flight.

Eighth. In some States a system of convict hiring is authorized by law, which reinstates the chain-gang, the overseer, and the bloodhound substantially as in the days of slavery.

Ninth. A system of labor and renting has been adopted in some parts of the South which reduces a Negro to a condition but little better than that of peonage and which renders it impossible for him to make a comfortable living, no matter how hard he may work.

Tenth. The only remedy for the exodus is in the hands of Southern Democrats themselves, and if they do not change their treatment of the Negro and recognize his rights as a man and a citizen, the movement will go on, greatly to the injury of the labor interests of the South, if not the whole country.

William Windom.
Henry W. Blair.

Footnotes:

[1] Congressional Record, 46th Congress, 2d Session, X, p. 155.

[2] Ibid., pp. 155-170.

[2a] Congressional Record, 46th Congress, 2d Session, X, p. 170.

[3] Reports of Committees of Senate of the United States for the First and Second Sessions of the Forty-Sixth Congress, 1879-80, VII, pp. iii-xiii.

[4] Report of the Committee of the Senate of the United States for the First and Second Sessions of the Forty-Sixth Congress, 1879-80, VII, pp. viii-xxv.

SOME UNDISTINGUISHED NEGROES

Mr. J. H. Latrobe, corresponding secretary of the Maryland Colonization Society and later President of the American Colonization Society, has left the following story:

"It was while I was reading in the same room with General Harper that there entered one day a tall, gaunt, square-shouldered, spare, light mulatto, who announced himself as Abel Hurd. He was a Bostonian by birth, and a seaman by profession. In a voyage to the East his vessel had been captured by the Malays, and he alone, if I recollect rightly, escaped death, owing to his complexion. He had a varied fortune; had at one time been in Cochin-China, again in Tibet, and, after passing some twenty years in the East, had returned to America, and was looking out for employment. Some one had heard how deeply interested General Harper was in Africa and African colonization, and had sent Hurd to him. About this time there was a great doubt as to the mouth of the Niger; whether it was to be found at the bottom of the Bight of Benin, and whether it was not identical with the Congo, or Zaire, south of the line. This was a question in which General Harper was interested, and he determined to fit out Hurd and send him northward from Liberia until he struck the river, which he was then to follow to its mouth, and I was deputed to superintend the outfit.

"Hurd's idea was to take as little baggage with him as possible, and to rely upon the resources of his wit and ingenuity in making his way among the interior tribes. He had had a vast experience, and he directed his own equipment. I do not recollect all that he was furnished with, but I recollect having devised a hollow cane, in the top of which was a compass and the tube of which contained papers and pencils. These were to be resorted to when the compass and materials openly were lost. I think I wrote, at General Harper's dictation, a letter of instructions. Had Hurd lived and succeeded, he would have anticipated the Landers, Richard and John, who explored the Niger in 1832-34. He arrived safely in Liberia, and made several short excursions into the interior, but he had a theory that it was necessary to train himself for the great journey. Abstinence was a part of his training. It was a mistake. He took the acclimating fever, and, although he recovered from the first attack, he had a relapse brought on by some imprudence and died."[1]

Charles H. Webb.—During the years when the American Colonization Society was preparing to establish a colony of freedmen in Africa, it early became evident that the mere transportation of the blacks to their native home would mean little in establishing them in life. It was, therefore, necessary to organize schools in which Negroes desiring to be colonized could be trained in agriculture, mechanical arts and even in the professions. Among the first to qualify in the field of medicine was Charles H. Webb. In his examinations he exhibited evidences of ripe scholarship and much proficiency in his chosen field. He set sail for Liberia in 1834, after having completed his medical studies, which he had pursued under the direction of the American Colonization Society for a number of years. In the following autumn, however, he fell a victim to the local fever aggravated by some imprudence on his part and died before he could render his people much service.[2]

A Shrewd Negro.—A Kentucky slave, named Jim, with the humiliation of slavery rankling in his breast, resolved to make an effort to gain freedom. At last the opportunity came and he started for the Ohio River. There he told his story to a sympathetic member of his race, offering him a part of his money, if he would row him across to the Indiana shore. He was directed to George De Baptist, a free man of color, who was then living in Madison but removed soon afterwards to Detroit, Michigan. The master of the slave arrived in town with a posse and diligently searched it for the Negro. His sympathizers contrived, however, to avoid the slave hunters and the fugitive was conducted through the corn fields and byways to a depot of the Underground Railroad. He rested a few days at the station kept by William Byrd, of Union County, Indiana. From that point he was speedily forwarded northward until he reached Canada.

Appreciating as he had never done before the real value of freedom, he longed to do something to confer this great boon upon his wife and children whom he left behind him in Kentucky. He soon found a way to solve this problem. He said to himself, "I'll go to old Massa's plantation, and I'll make believe I am tired of freedom. I'll tell old Massa a story that will please him; then I will go to work hard and watch for a chance to slip away my wife and children."

His master was greatly surprised one morning to see Jim return home. In answer to the many questions propounded to him, he gave the explanation which he had planned. He told his master that he found that Canada was no place for Negroes, and that it was too cold and that they could not earn any money there. He spoke of how the Negroes were cheated by the whites and subjected to other humiliations, which made him tired of his freedom. His master was very much pleased with the story, spoke pleasantly to him and permitted him to work among his slaves and those of his neighbors as a missionary to convince the blacks of the folly of escaping to Canada.

The slave resumed his usual labor, working during that fall and winter but planning at the same time a second flight. In the spring he succeeded in bringing together his wife and children and a few of his slave friends on the Indiana side of the Ohio River. He reached the first station of the Underground Railway with his party numbering fourteen and hurried them from point to point until they reached the home of Levi Coffin in Indiana. They were hotly pursued and had narrow escapes, but by wise management they made their way through Spartansburg, Greenville and Mercer County, Ohio, to Sandusky, from which they crossed over to Canada.[3]

B. F. Grant.[4]—I was born in the State of Pennsylvania, Little Britain Township, Lancaster County, Sunday morning, August 12, 1838. I am the son of the late Henry and Charlotte Grant.

My father was born a slave in the State of Maryland in Cecil County. He was freed at the age of nineteen, upon the death of his master. My mother was born of free parents in Harford County, Maryland. Both came in their youth to Pennsylvania, where they were married. Of that union there were born twelve children, eight boys and four girls. The subject of this sketch was the fifth son of the family.

In 1844 my father moved with his family from Lancaster to York County, across the Susquehanna River. I was then between five and six years old.

The first political event that I remember was the Presidential campaign of Henry Clay and James K. Polk in 1844. In the fall of that year each party had a pole raising at Peach Bottom, York County, Pennsylvania. Mother took us to see the pole raising and then the people were all shouting for Henry Clay, but soon after that I remember hearing them singing a song::

"Oh poor cooney Clay,
The white house was never made for you
And home you better stay."

Polk was elected, and soon after the inauguration of President Polk in 1845 the great controversy over the Mexican War and Negro slavery arose. The Negro question was the topic of the day, both in and out of Congress and among all classes. This continued until in 1846, when the war broke out between the United States and Mexico, and lasted two years.

When it was over the United States had the victory. Then the slaveholders of the South, with the copperheads of the North, tried to force their slaves or their slave influence into every State and territory of the United States. So great became the agitation and excitement that the poor slaves became restless and uneasy over their condition, and they commenced to run away by the thousands from the Southern States. They made for the free States and Canada. This gave rise to what was known as the Underground Railroad.

This brings me to consider what I call my boyhood days. Having passed my childhood, I now began to think, feel and consider that I was a human being as well as the white boys who surrounded me, living on farms just as I lived. Therefore I began to believe that I had the same God-given rights that they had, and was not born to be kicked around like a dog any more than they were.

About this time I began to attend the so-called public school. I well remember those school days, for they made a lasting impression upon my mind. If God had not had mercy on the poor little Negro who attended the public school of Pennsylvania in those days, I know not what would have become of me; for the poor white trash from the teacher down had no mercy upon him. They were upon him like vultures upon their prey, ready to devour him at any time for any cause.

I will mention only a few things which the little Negro had to endure, simply because he was a Negro. He was not permitted to drink from the same bucket or cup as the white children. He was compelled to sit back in the corner from the fire no matter how cold the weather might be. There he must wait until the white children had recited. If the cold became too intense to endure, he must ask permission of the teacher, stand by the fire a few minutes to warm and then return to the same cold corner. I have sat in an old log school house with no chinking between the logs until my heels were frost-bitten and cracked open. Sometimes we had a poor white trashy skunk that would sit in the school room and call us "niggers" or "darkeys." If the little Negro got his lesson at all, he got it; if not, it was all the same.

For seven long years, 1844 to 1851, my father lived about five miles from the Maryland line and about one mile from the Susquehanna River. That is where I saw some of the evils of the institution called slavery. Sometimes I wondered whether there was any God for the Negro.

My father was one of the members of the Underground Railroad. I well remember some of the members of that club which used to meet at our house. They were Robert Fisher, Lige Sarkey, Isaac Waters, Henry W. Grant, Isaac Fields, Thomas Clarke and others who used to meet and make their arrangements to convey the fugitives across the Susquehanna River. The night was never too dark or the storm never too severe for those brave, noble-hearted, courageous men to do their work. They did not fear death. Although they were uneducated men ignorant of the letter, they were directed by a Higher Power. The hand of God led them, and so they succeeded in carrying off hundreds, nay I might truthfully say thousands from the counties of Cecil, Harford and Baltimore. All lived to be old men.

After the Mexican War the Southern slaveholders and copperheads of the North got it into their heads to extend slavery throughout the borders of the United States. Robt. Toombs, one of the noted fire-eaters of the South, said he would call the roll of his slaves at the foot of Bunker Hill Monument. In 1848 came the crisis of the Presidential election. The Mexican War was over and the country had a vast amount of territory added to her southern borders. The cotton gin had been invented, and cotton had come into great demand. It was as good as gold. The Negro, therefore, was in great demand.

Presidential nominations were made. The Whigs nominated Gen. Taylor, and the Democrats nominated Lewis Cass. The Whig candidate was successful. While Gen. Taylor was a Southern man, he was somewhat opposed to the extension of slavery, and, therefore, not a favorite of the nullifiers of the South. He did not live long. Then they got their dupe, the Vice-President, Millard Fillmore, a northern man, but a red-hot copperhead who stood in with the South. I can well remember those times when all the fire-eating leaders of the South and the poor dirty trash of the North got their desire when that poor dupe of a President allowed the mischievous fugitive slave act to become a law of the land. This law was a curse to the nation, an outrage upon the poor Negro and suffering humanity. This bill gave the poor Negro no protection in the land of his birth, a country boasting of being the land of the brave and the home of the free. These terms, however, were nothing but bombast; they would just come and take a freeman and carry him into absolute slavery without judge or jury.

I can well remember the Christiana riot. I was not living far from there at that time. Those were the days that tried the poor Negro's soul, and were a disgrace to the white man. I was then about fifteen years old and we had to suffer everything but death, and sometimes that; for the slave hunters were like their bloodhounds, always upon the Negro's track. There were daily riots between the slaves and Negro hunters.

While quite young, and claiming to be a Christian, too, I was almost ready to say with Job, "Cursed was the night wherein I was born, and the night in which it was said, there is a man child conceived." My disgust at the treatment given my people made me resolve to leave the country and to go to Liberia, Africa, because the fugitive slave law was too obnoxious for me both in principle and practice. Because of the outbreak of the Civil War, however, I failed to carry out this plan.

Now I recall my third Presidential election. The candidates were Gen. Winfield Scott and Franklin Pierce. Pierce was the Democratic candidate and he overwhelmingly defeated Gen. Scott, which placed the Democrats in absolute power. All the fire-eaters of the South with the copperheads of the North held full sway, arrayed against the anti-slavery party of the North and East, and backed by the President, the Supreme Court and Congress. The world knows the condition of the country at that time. The Negro's condition during all of that administration recalls to my memory a picture too dark to attempt to describe.

During this administration there was a man by the name of Dred Scott, owned by an army officer named Emerson. He took Scott into a free territory; this slave, Scott, sued for his freedom; the case was carried from court to court until it reached the Supreme Court, which handed down that opinion known throughout the world as the Dred Scott decision. It meant that a Negro had no rights that a white man was bound to respect; that he was of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race either in social or political relation; and so far inferior that they need not be respected, but might be reduced to slavery for the white man's benefit. This decision placed the damnation seal on the poor Negro in the United States. It left him absolutely without help.

In 1856 opened the great political drama. The candidates were James Buchanan, the Democrat, John C. Fremont, Republican, and ex-Vice-President Millard Fillmore, of the Know Nothing Party. James Buchanan, the Democrat, was elected; the world knows the consequences of the next four years in and out of Congress. Death and destruction were in the path. We had John Brown's insurrection, the Christiana riot, the tragic death of Lovejoy, and hundreds of other events which I cannot mention at this time.

In 1860 the Presidential campaign came off. The candidates were Abraham Lincoln, Republican, John C. Breckenridge, Southern Democrat, and S. A. Douglass, Northern Democrat, with John Bell, Union Democrat. This was a hot contest. Lincoln was elected.

Then came the Great Rebellion. On April 12, 1862, in company with my brother, John H. Grant, we left our home in York Co., Pa., for Washington, D. C., then the center of war activities. Both of us found employment as teamsters in the Quartermaster's Department. On June 15 we were transferred into Gen. Pope's Army in Virginia. We were relieved of our teams and put to herding horses and mules throughout Gen. Pope's campaign. After Pope was defeated at the second battle of Bull Run, I returned to Washington and went back to driving my team. In 1863 I was transferred to the woodcutter department as an outside clerk and put to measuring wood which was cut every two weeks. I also looked after the commissary. I was there until the Confederates ran us out in June.

I returned to Washington, D. C., and began my Christian and literary work. I was converted sixty-five years ago, and joined the A. M. E. Z. Church, then called Wesley Church. Rev. Abner Bishop was the pastor. The church was in Peach Bottom Township, York County, Pennsylvania.

I have been always a lover of the Sunday School work. My interest continues to this day. There is one little incident in my Sunday School work which I will relate. When I was a boy, with another young boy like myself, we found that our Sunday School needed some literature. We succeeded in collecting some money, and Moses Jones and I found that the nearest place to get the books was Lancaster City, about twenty-five miles from the church. Undaunted, we took the money and walked to Lancaster, and back again with the books. Some of those books remained a great many years in the library of that school.

I am the man who opened the first free school to colored boys in the District of Columbia. This was in the basement of the old Mt. Zion Church in 1863 under the Friends' Association of Philadelphia, of which Mr. H. M. Laing, of that city, was president. I also opened a school to freedmen in Fairfax County, Virginia, at Bull Run. After being there about three months, one of the Freedmen's Bureau Officers came over from Manassas and placed me and my school back under the direction of the Friends' Association and the same Mr. Laing was still its president. I remained there two years.

When I opened the school it was a little log cabin built as a headquarters by the Confederates. They were encamped there in the spring or rather the winter of 1861-62. While I was teaching at Bull Run, Prof. John M. Langston was appointed to a position in the Freedmen's Bureau. I became acquainted with him, interested him in my work and he secured me one hundred and fifty dollars to assist in building there a house for two purposes, a church and a school. In this school I gave the founder of the Manasses Industrial School, Miss Jennie Dean, her first lessons. Now after the lapse of fifty years, the Bull Run School is still standing as one of the public schools of Fairfax County, Virginia.

While teaching in the Bull Run School I was elected a delegate to the first National Negro Convention after the Civil War. This met in the Israel Church, Washington, D. C., in 1868. This church was then A. M. E. Zion, but now C. M. E. There I met some of the leading Negroes of the world. Among them were Hon. Frederick Douglass, Prof. John M. Langston, Rev. Henry H. Garnett, C. L. Remond, Robert Purvis, Geo. T. Downing, Geo. B. Vashon, Rev. Wm. Howard Day, Prof. Bassett, Robt. W. Elliot, Bishop Henry M. Turner, Prof. Isaac C. Weaver, Richard Clarke, John Jones, Prof. O. M. Green, Geo. W. White, P. H. Martin, John R. Lynch, and A. R. Green. These were some of the lights in that convention. Hon. Fred. Douglass was elected president, with Rev. H. L. Garnett as vice-president.

After two years at Bull Run, I returned to the District of Columbia, where I became acquainted with a white gentleman named Edmond Tewney, from the State of Maine, who came to the District as one of the founders of Wayland Seminary. As there was some misunderstanding between him and some of the other members of the faculty, he left the school, and organized another, known as the National Theological Institution for the Instruction of Young Colored Men and Women for preachers and teachers.

I became associated with that school, and was an assistant teacher and a pupil at the same time. It was a Baptist institution, and some of those who afterward became the most able Baptist preachers in the city attended that school. Some of them were Rev. John D. Brooks, Rev. James Jefferson, Rev. Edward Willis, Rev. M. J. Laws, Rev. J. M. Johnson, Rev. Henry Lee, and many others who did great good for God's church and for suffering humanity.

I will return to my church and Sunday School work in the District of Columbia and its vicinity. I was the Church Clerk for Union Wesley A. M. E. Z. Church for twenty-five years, and the superintendent of its Sunday School for thirty years.

I have been acquainted with all the bishops of that Church and a great many of its leading elders since I joined the church in 1853, sixty-five years ago. Some of the worthy prelates and leaders who have been my warm personal friends are: Bishops J. J. Clinton, J. J. Moore, C. C. Petty, C. R. Harris, J. W. Hood, J. W. Smith, J. Logan, J. W. Small, and Elders J. Harvey Anderson, Geo. W. Adams, Thos. Betters, R. J. Daniels, R. S. G. Dyson, and many others who have gone from my mind at this writing. I have had much of joy and happiness in my church life.

I am still in the Master's service. I am at present District Sunday School Superintendent of the Washington District of the Philadelphia and Baltimore Conference of the A. M. E. Z. Church. On August 12, 1918, I was eighty years old.

Mary L. Mason.

Footnotes:

[1] Semmes, John H. B. Latrobe, pp. 140-142.

[2] The African Repository, X, 104, and XII, 18.

[3] Coffin, Reminiscences, pp. 139-144.

[4] This personal narrative was secured from B.F. Grant, of Washington, D. C., by Miss Mary L. Mason.

BOOK REVIEWS

American Negro Slavery. By Ulrich Bonnell Phillips. A Survey of the Supply, Employment and Control of Negro Labor as determined by the Plantation Regime. D. Appleton and Company, New York and London, 1918. Pp. 529.

This book is both more and less than a history of slavery in America. It transcends the limit of the average treatise in this field in that it shows how the institution influenced the economic history of America in all its ramifications. It falls far short of being a complete history of slavery for the reason of the neglect of many aspects by the author. The book is successful as a compilation or digest of the sources of the history of slavery cast in the mind of a man of southern birth and northern environment in manhood.

The author furnishes adequate background for this work in tracing the slave trade, beginning with the exploitation of Guinea and proceeding to a detailed consideration of the maritime traffic. Slavery as it existed in the West Indies is portrayed in his account of the sugar industry. In the continental colonies it appears in his treatment of the tobacco industry, rice culture and the interests of the northern colonies. He shows how the struggle for the rights of man resulted in a sort of reaction against slavery in the North and the so-called prohibition of the African slave trade.

In his discussion of the introduction of cotton and the domestic slave trade, there are few facts which cannot be obtained from several standard works. His treatment of types of plantations, with reference to their management, labor, social aspects and tendencies, is more informing. The contrast between town and country slaves, the discussion of free Negroes, slave crime and the force of the law, do not give us very much that is new. On the whole, however, the book is a valuable piece of research giving a more intensive treatment of economic slavery than any other single volume hitherto published.

On the other hand, the book falls far short of giving a complete history of the institution of slavery. In the first place, the book is too much of a commercial account. The slaves are mentioned as representing both persons and property, but this treatise lacks proportion in that it deals primarily with the slaves as property in the cold-blooded fashion that the southerners usually bartered them away. Very little is said about the blacks themselves, seemingly to give more space to the history of the whites, who profited by their labor, just as one would in writing a history of the New England fisheries say very little about the species figuring in the industry, but more about the life of the people participating in it. It is evident that although a southerner, Mr. Phillips has lived so far from the Negroes that he knows less about them than those who have periodically come into contact with them but on certain occasions have given the blacks serious study. This is evidenced by Mr. Phillips' own statement when he says in his preface, that "a generation of freedom has wrought less transformation in the bulk of the blacks than might casually be supposed." This failure to understand what the Negroes have thought and felt and done, in other words, the failure to fathom the Negro mind, constitutes a defect of the work.

Another neglected aspect of the book is the failure of the author to treat adequately the anti-slavery movement. It was not necessary for him to give an extensive treatment of abolition but it is impossible to set forth exactly what the institution was without giving sufficient space to this attitude of a militant minority toward it. It was certainly proper for the author to say more about the northerners and southerners who arrayed themselves in opposition to the institution. In his chapter on the economic views of slavery this aspect was mentioned but not properly amplified. Some references to it elsewhere, of course, appear in parts of the book but, considering the importance of this phase of the history of slavery in America, one can say it has been decidedly neglected. The author, as he says in his preface, avoided "polemic writings, for their fuel went so much to heat that their light upon the living conditions is faint." It was not necessary also to avoid the controversy in which these writers participated. No one will gainsay the fact that persons who engage in controversy cannot be depended upon to tell the truth, but if the slavery dispute largely influenced the history of the country, it should have adequate treatment in a history of this kind.

John H. B. Latrobe and His Times. By John E. Semmes. The Norman, Remington Company, Baltimore, Maryland. Pp. 595. Price $6.00.