Slavery and the race problem in the South : with special reference to the state of Georgia : address / of Hon. Wm. H. Fleming, before the Alumni society of the state university, Athens, June 19, 1906

SLAVERY AND THE RACE PROBLEM
IN THE SOUTH,
WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE STATE OF GEORGIA. . .
Address of Hon. Wm. H. Fleming Before the Alumni Society of the State University, Athens, June 19, 1906.
PRESS OF
THE AUGUSTA CHRONICLE JOB OFFICE AUGUSTA, GEORGIA

WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE STATE OF GEORGIA.

Address of Hon. Wm. H. Fleming Before the Alumni Society of the State University, Athens, June 19f 1906,

Brothers of the Alumni Society, Ladies discussion at this time before the alum

and Gentlemen:

ni of the university, and he added with

It is my purpose to discuss slavery and the race problem in the South, with special reference to our own State of
Georgia.
No public issue is more deserving of thoughtful consideration by our people, and no occasion could be more fit for its discussion. This audience is quali fied in head and heart to appreciate at its true value every argument that may be advanced, and this platform at our chief seat of learning is so lifted up, that words spoken here may be heard in all parts of the State, echoing among the "Hills of Habersham" and over the
"Sea Marshes of- Glynn." If there be any one present perturbed
by a secret doubt /is to the propriety of my bringing this subject and this occasion together in the midst of the pending political campaign in Georgia, let me hasten to allay his fears with the assurance that I shall carefully re frain from all offensive personal allu sions. Speaking to this very point

characteristic broadmindedness: "I wish my platform at Athens to be a place for the freest expression of hon
est thought." At the outset, we should realize that:
if we are to make any genuine prog ress toward a right solution of our problem, we must approach it in a spirit of the utmost candor, and with an eye single to the ascertainment of the truth. The pessimist "sailing ths Vesuvian Bay" listens for the dreaded rumblings of the distant mountain blind to the wondrous beauties of earth and sky about him. The optimist float ing down the placid upper stream pic tures to himself an endless panorama of peaceful landscapes deaf to the thundering cataract of Niagara just below him. But better than pessimism and better than optimism is that phil osophy which faces facts as they are, and courageously interprets their mean
ing.
Slavery and Christianity.

some weeks before his fatal illness, In the earlier civilizations slavery was

Chancellor Hill cordially approved of * the rule, not th e exception. But with

my selection of the race problem for the advent of the

LIBRARIES
GEOR^

ings, a silent, gentle, yet all-compelling worlds public opinion, its most logical

force began its work on the universal and profound defenders admitted the

heart of humanity. Christianity ad wrongfulness of white slavery, but jus

justed itself to existing governmental tified negro slavery on the plea of the

institutions including slavery. But it natural inferiority of the negro race.

inculcated such lofty doctrines of love *" Alexander Stephens, then vice-presi

and duty, and created such vivid con dent of the Southern Confederacy, in

ceptions of a personal God and Father his famous Corner Stone Speech at Sa

of us all, that it was only a question vannah in March, 1861, said: "Many

of time when Christian peoples could governments have been founded upon

not hold in slavery those of their own the principle of subordination and serf

faith and blood.

dom of certain classes of the same

In England in 1696 the doctrine had race. Such were, and are, in violation

obtained wide acceptance that Christian of the laws of nature. Our system con

baptism of itself worked a legal manu tains no such violation of natures laws.

mission of the slave. Argument to With us, all the white race, however,

that effect was urged by able lawyers high or low, rich or poor, are equal in

in the court of Kings Bench in the the eye of the law. Not so with the

suit of Chamberlain v. Herney, but the negro; subordination is his place."

case went off on another ground, and * * * * Referring to the Confederacy,

that point was not decided. About the he declared: "Its foundations are laid,

same time, however, the colonies of its corner stone rests, upon the great

Maryland, Virginia and South Carolina truth that the negro is not equal to

passed laws that Christian baptism the white man, that slavery subordi

should not free the negro slave, "any nation to the superior race is his nat

opinion or matter to the contrary not ural and normal condition."

withstanding." Thus we see a recog nition of the necessity at that period of our history of controlling by statu

The fact of race inequality here stated can not well be denied. But there is still a fatal flaw in the logic.

tory enactments this expanding senti That flaw lies in the assumption that

ment of Christian brotherhood among a superior race has the right to hold

the masses of the people, so as to pre an inferior race in slavery. A race can

vent it from embracing the alien negro not be justly deprived of liberty mere

race.

ly because it is relatively inferior to

The march of Christian civilization another. If so, all other branches of

had put an end to white slavery, but the human family could justly be re negro slavery still flourished, chiefly be duced to slavery by the highest, most

cause the negro was of a different race- masterful branch and that mastery

blood from his masters. Oneness in could only be determined by force of

faith and blood had grown to mean arms. The obligation of the superior

freedom for the whie man. But one to lead and direct does not carry with

ness in fafth, without oneness in blood, jt. the right to enslave.

still meant slavery for the negro. Indeed, negro slavery as a historical
institution in Western civilization oc cupies a unique position of its own. It began in the fifteenth century when white slavery had practically ceased. Most other slaveries were incidental re sults of wars. Negro slavery origi nated in commerce, in trade and barter, and so continued until it was sup
pressed.

Mr. Stephens further declared in his speech: It is upon this, as I have stated, our social fabric is firmly plant ed, and I can not permit myself to doubt the ultimate success of the full recognition of this principle through out the civilized and enlightened
world."
Here we have one of the ablest intel lects of his day not only asserting that negro slavery was legally and mor

Justification of Negro Slavery Based on ally right, but predicting that its rec

Race-Inferiority.

ognition would become universal

"When in later years the institution throughout the civilized world a pre

was summoned before the bar of the diction made within five years of its

abolition in the United States, and within twenty-seven years of its aboli tion in Brazil, which marked the final disappearance of human slavery as a legalized institution among civilized
peoples. Let me say in passing, that this Cor
ner Stone speech is not to be found in the authorized volume containing the biography and speeches of Mr. Stephens. One can scarcely suppress the question: Did the great commoner prefer for posterity to judge him by other speeches? Certain it is, that the views he expressed on negro slavery did not spring from hardness of heart, or want of sympathy with any suffer ing creature on earth. At his death, his negro body servant in tearful ac cents pronounced upon him this noble eulogy: "Mars Alec was kinder to dogs than most men is to folks."
But Mr. Stephens was defending the then existing institution of slavery handed down to his people by their fathers, recognized by historical anal ogies from the Bible, and sanctioned by the federal constitution. His mor al nature was uncompromising. There was no way to adjust that moral na ture to existing conditions except by, making the assumption, which he did make, of the right of a superior race, to enslave an inferior race.
If race environment could so warp the judgment of a great intellect like that of Alexander Stephens, other men may well be cautious lest they miss
the truth.
~ We need not stop to discuss wheth er the north or south was the more responsible for negro slavery in Amer ica. It takes two to make a bargain. Northern traders sold and southern planters bought. If Charleston, South Carolina was one of the chief ports of destination for slave trading ves sels Salem Massachusetts was one of the chief ports from whence those ves-
_isels sailed.
In the earlier days of the southern colonies there were many strong pro tests against negro slavery. But once established it continued to grow and nourish until we reached those un happy days foreshadowed by Mr. Mad ison, when he said in the constitu

tional convention of 1787 that the real antagonism would not arise between the large states on the one hand and the small states on the other as many seemed to fear, but that "The insti tution of slavery and its consequences formed the line of discrimination."
Slavery the Irritating Cause of the
,/ar.
No historian can ever truthfully as sert that the men who bore the ban ner of the Confederacy in victory and in defeat with such matchless courage, and heroic sacrifice were moved only by the selfish purpose of holding their black fellow men in bondage. They were inspired by the noblest senti ments of patriotism. So far from be ing traitors to the constitution of their fathers, which Mr. Gladstone declared was the "most wonderful work ever struck off at a given time by the brain and purpose of man," they reverenced that great instrument next to the Bible. So far from trampling it under foot, they held it up as their shield. They appealed to the north and west to rec ognize the binding obligation of that
constitution as interpreted by the high est court, only to hear it denounced at last as "a covenant with death and an agreement with hell."
And yet, we must in candor admit that the truthful historian will write it down that slavery was the parti cular irritating cause that forced on the conflict of arms between the sec tions, though deeper causes lay at the foundation of our sectional differences on centralization and state rights.
When Robert Toombs made his memorable farewell speech in the United States senate on January 7, 1861, he laid down five propositions setting forth the contentions of the south which, if granted, would have averted disunion. Every one of those five propositions was a clear cut, logi cal deduction from the original mean ing and intent of the constitution, and all five of them centered around the institution of slavery.
Again, when the conflict was over and the constitution was amended at three separate times, two of these amendments, the thirteenth and flf-

teenth referred exclusively to slavery, and the other, the fourteenth, referred chiefly to slavery. No other historical facts, though there are many, need to be cited to prove that slavery was the immediate precipitating cause of the Civil War.
The Thirteenth Amendment.
The thirteenth amendment, ratified in 1865, abolishing slavery was a legi timate and necessary result of the ar bitrament of the sword. Mr. Lincoln at first declared that the purpose of the war on the part of the government was to preserve the union and not to free the slaves. But the progress of events had rendered him powerless to confine the struggling forces of social upheaval within that limitation even if his personal views had undergone no change.
Great was the relief to many thoughtful minds in the south when this fruitful cause of sectional con tention had been removed. In an ad dress delivered from this platform in Itll, Benjamin H. Hill gave thanks ia fervid metaphor that the "dusky Heien" had left the crumbling walls of Troy, and that southern genius, once "bound like Prometheus" to the rock of slavery, had been loosed from its bonds.
The Fourteenth Amendment.
The fourteenth amendment ratified in 1868, was a combination of judicia! wisdom in the first section, of fruit less compromise in the second section, and of political proscription in the third section.
The first section of this amendment must now be ngavdr-d as one of the. very best parts of the entire instru ment. It gave for the first time an authorative definition - of United State-? citizenship, ana forbade any state to abridge the privileges of such citizens or to deprive any person oj life, liberty or property without due process of law, or to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. We had lived nearly threequarters of a century under a gov ernment that had no constitutional or statutory definition of its own citizen ship, and with no sufficient jurisdiction

in its courts to give adequate protec tion to the equal rights now attach ing to that citizenship.
What constituted one a citizen of the United States had long been a sub ject of discussion in the public journals in the executive departments and in the courts. The supreme court in tha Dred Scott case in 1857, decided that a person of African descent, whether slave or free, was not, and could not be a citizen of a state or of the United States. That decision was of course superceded by the fourteenth amend ment.
This first section was profound in its wisdom and far reaching in its ef fect upon the rights of life, liberty and property, not only of blacks but of whites. That eminent southern jurist, the Hon. Hannis Taylor, referring specially to this section, has well said: "From a purely scientific point of view the constitution of the United States never reached its logical completion until after the adoption of the fourteenth amendment."
The omission from the original con stitution of a definition of United States citizenship and of a distinct pro vision against state encroachment on equal rights attaching thereto, carried with it a deep significance.
Few facts in our history point more unerringly to the conclusion that in the minds of the framers of that instru ment, the paramount allegiance of the citizen was to his state, and not to the United States. It was this sense of duty which properly constrained Lee and other lovers of the Union to sur render their high commissions in the Federal army and cast their fortunes with their own seceding states. Hap pily the future holds for us no possi bility of the recurrence of that divided allegience.
Historically under the constitution the South was vght both as to slavery and secession, but the simple truth is that public opinion on those two sub jects had outgrown the constitution.
No man contributed more to the de velopment of public opinion against dis union than did Mr. Webster. When he

made his great speech in 1830 in re ply to Mr. Hayne, closing with that matchless tribute to the Union flag: "The broad ensign of the republic, now known and honored throughout the world, still full high advanced" he created and vitalized and electrified Union sentiment throughout the length and breadth of the land. That speech more than the word or deed of any other one man prepared the way for the coming of Lincoln, and made pos sible the vast armies of Grant. After all, should not Webster be given first place in the Hall of Fame dedicated to Saviors of the Union?
The Fifteenth Amendment,
The 15th amendment, ratified in 1872, prohibited the United States or any state, in prescribing suffrage qualifi cations, from discriminating against citizens of the United States on account of race, color or previous condition of servitude. It did not confer the ballot upon any one it only prohibited dis crimination on account of a specified difference. The right to vote is not a privilege or attribute of national cit izenship under either the 14th or 15th amendment; but the right to be exempt from discrimination in voting on ac count of race is an attribute of nation al citizenship under the 15th amend ment.
This amendment was at the time of its adoption a doubtful and dangerous experiment but once made, it is be yond recall.
It embodied a distinct addition to the principle set out in the second section of the 14th amendment, which latter impliedly permitted a state to deny the ballot to the negro if it were willingto suffer the penalty of a proportionate reduction of representation in the low er house of congress.
So far as the negro is concerned, the second section of the fourteenth amendment was a political com promise against him, while the fif teenth amendment was a complete dec laration of his equal suffrage rights.
A resolution for a fourteenth amend ment in almost the identical words fin ally used in this second section in 1868,

had been up for discussion in the sen ate as early as 1866. Charles Sumner then denounced it as "a compromise of human rights, the most immoral, in decent and utterly shameful of any in our history."
Mr. Blaine in his book "Twenty Years in Congress" took the position that the enactment of the fifteenth amendment operated as a practical repeal of the second section of the fourteenth amendment. He says: "Before the adoption of the fifteenth amend ment, if a state should exclude the ne gro from suffrage the next step would be for congress to exclude the negro from the basis of apportionment. After the adoption of the fifteenth amend ment, if a state should exclude the ne gro from suffrage, the next step would be for the supreme court to declare the act was unconstitutional and therefore null and void."
Some latter-day statesmen, who have introduced bills in congress to reduce southern representation, do not seem to agree with Mr. Blaine.
Verily, if the party of Sumner should ever abandon the vindication of the fif teenth amendment by substituting for it the compromise of the fourteenth amendment, the shade of that eminent statesman would surely be moved to indignation and contempt if it still concerns itself with mundane political affairs. Such a substitutecompromise now could bring no good to either whites or blacks of the south. It would work evil and evil only.
Some Reasons for Adopting the Fif teenth Amendment.
The fifteenth amendment was natur ally received with much bitterness by the white people of the south, because many of them interpreted it to mean that our political enemies of the north who held control of the government in tended thereby to doom the south to perpetual negro domination.
No doubt many of such advocates were moved by prejudice and hate, but we of the south, in this day, must not blind ourselves to the fact that this amendment was advocated by some men then in public life who were not

controlled by such base motives, but were patriotically striving to settle a great fundamental question of gov ernment on an enduring basis.
Let us not forget that when congress passed the joint resolution submitting the fifteenth amendment, to the states for adoption, the negroes had already been made citizens of the United States by the fourteenth amendment, and it was impossible to conjoin thai status of citizenship with a total ex clusion of the negro race from the ballot without undermining some of the foundation principles of our repre sentative republic.
Bear in mind also that at the time when congress acted on that resolu tion in 1869, the negro had already ex ercised the right of suffrage under the reconstruction acts of congress begin ning in 1867. It was not under the fifteenth amendment but under the prior reconstruction acts, that the ne groes cast their first ballots.
So that the issue then was, not whether to give the negroes something they had never possessed, but whether to deny them in the future a privilege they had already actually enjoyed.
The southern states were expecting soon to be restored to political auton omy. What stand would the white people of those states take as to the rights of their former slaves? To what extremes of pillage and slaughter might not the millions of negroes go under fear of partial or total re-en slavement? These and other questions were hard to answer. To whatever point of the political horizon the thoughtful patriot turned his gaze, the clouds were dark and portentous. A crisis was at hand. It had to be met.
Giving the the ballot to five million of newly freed slaves of an inferior or or backward race, ignorant, unaccus tomed to do or think for themselves, could not have been the deliberate act of wise statesmanship, but only the choice of what seemed to be the les ser of two evils. In truth, the whole plan seems to have been an effort not only to obliterate at once, as with a stroke of the pen, all distinctions im

posed by law but to ignore all distinc tions imposed by natv.re.
Many thoughtful men at the north are now of the opinion that it would have been far better had the military control in the south been continued and the ballot withheld for a time at least, from the freed men and finally bestowed upon them by degrees. But that is a dead issue now.
As a practical measure of proce dure, the fifteenth amendment was in many respects harsh and cruel toward the white people of the south, but theoretically it was necessary to round out the constitution of a rep resentative republic based on that equality of citizenship before the law which had already been foreshadowed by the thirteenth and fourteenth amendments.
"We may well thank God that the south has recovered from the imme diate shock of these rough post-bellum operations in political surgery. In comparison to the past with its civil war and its reconstruction the fu ture can. hold no terrors for us. Only let us act with wisdom and not lose what we have gained through our suf fering.
Any Future Suffrage Amendment Will
Increase Power of Congress.
The fifteenth amendment may, by negative acquiescence of the Ameri can people, become for a time a dead letter, but that three-fourths of the forty-five or more states will ever affirmatively repeal it for the pur pose of allowing five or six southern states to withhold from our negro citizens as a race the right to the bal lot is to my mind an hallucination too extreme for serious consideration.
If these post-bellum amendments of the constitution bearing upon slavery shall ever be altered by future amend ments, the alteration will be in the di rection of placing under federal con trol the entire subject of suffrage qualifications in all national and state elections. The unmistakable trend of our political and social development from the beginning of the government has been toward the centre, not away

from it. The centripetal force has been stronger than the centrifugal force. Under a law of social gravita tion all the parts have been drawn more intimately into one national unity.
To suppose that this national au thority would of its own accord emas culate itself and surrender its own present consolidated power back to the former diverse elements from which it was wrested, would be to reverse every record of political his tory, and to ignore every lesson of po litical philosophy.
Indeed, when the resolution for the fifteenth amendment was under dis cussion in the senate in 1869, an amendment to that resolution was of fered to confer upon congress the full power to prescribe the qualifications for voters and officeholders both in the states and in the United States.
It was not adopted then because the time was not ripe. But we may accept it to be as certain as any fu ture movement of this kind can be, that if the constitution shall be amended on the subject of the suf frage that amendment will not re store lost power to the states, but will confer more power on the na tional government. The less we agi tate it the better.
Numerical Relation of Races.
We have now reached the stage in our discussion where we may best consider what is to my mind the most important factor in our problem, namely, the numerical relation of the whites and the blacks of the south ern states. Having the advantage in land-holdings and all other forms of wealth, in intellect, in racial pride and strength, our white supremacy can never he overthrown except by force of numbers. For many years after the war we could not rid ourselves of the apprehension that at some day in the future we might be borne down by nu merical majorities. These fears were not wholly unfounded at that time.
In slavery under the fostering care, as well as the commercial interest of the master, the negroes multiplied in

a greater ratio than the whites. What effect would the new social order of freedom have on that ratio of in crease? Was the Caucasian race of the south face to face with a pitiless force that might gradually but inevita bly overwhelm it by sheer weight of numbers? If so, would that race yield, or would it adopt extreme measures for self-preservation? These were momentous and perturbing questions.
The census of 1870 coming first af ter the war could give very little basis for deduction of any sort. But when the census figures of 1880 were made known and were compared with those of 1870, that comparison revealed a most ominous situation. Three states, South Carolina, Mississippi and Louis iana each had at that time an actual black majority, and the per cent of gain for the negroes in the southern group of states as shown by the statis tical experts was far in excess of that of the whites, being 34.3 as against 27.5 per cent from all sources.
Judge Tourgees Prophecies Not Ful
filled.
Judge Albion W Tourgee in his book "An Appeal to Caesar" published in 1884, declared that in the year 1900 every state between Maryland and Texas would have a black majority.
Time has exposed the falsity of that prediction. Not one of those states be tween Maryland and Texas that had a white majority in 1880 had lost it in 1900. On the contrary, every such state increased its white majority, while South Carolina, from 1890 to 1900, re duced her negro majority by 2,412, and Louisiana in the same period chan^ea a negro majority of 798 into a white
majority of 78,818. The white majority in the ten dis
tinctively southern states was increas ed by 1,002,662 from 1890 to 1900. In the same period our white majority in Georgia rose from 119,542 to 146,481. In every southern state, except Missis sippi, where peculiar conditions pre vailed, the margin of safety for white supremacy, even on the basis of num
bers, has increased. These predictions of negro majori-

ties were not confined to writers of fiction like Judge Tourgee. Prof. GUliam, a statistician of high repute, an nounced that among the whites of the old slave states the rate of natural in crease from 1870 to 1880 was 20 per cent, while that of the blacks in the same states was 35 per cent.
With these figures as a basis he reached the conclusion that the 6,000,000 of southern blacks in 1880 would increase to 12,000,000 in 1900. But when the census takers of 1900 had counted every colored man, woman and child in the whole United States, the total footed up only 8,383,994, which is 3,616,006 less than the professor had pre dicted would be found in the southern states alone.
Judge Tourgee using these percent ages given by Prof. Gilliam, argued that all the conditions pointed to a greater discrepancy in the future.
But the census of 1900 shows that the rate of increase of the blacks in the South Atlantic States where the conditions are most favorable, was only 14.3 per cent, from 1890 to 1900, in stead of 35 per cent, as reported for a previous decade, while that of the whites stood substantially at its pre vious record of 20 per cent.
It is now an accepted fact that the census of 1870 did not give a complete enumeration of the negroes in the South, and this deficiency by compari son with the more accurate census of 1880 necessarily showed a greater pro portionate increase among the negroes than among the whites. It was this error in figures that lead to all these unfounded predictions, which for a times hung like a pall over the South. Margin of Safety for White Supremacy
Steadily Increasing.
But the census figures of 1890 and 1900 supplied the necessary data for a correct comparison. The resulting demonstration was that instead of the whites of the South being overwhelmed with a deluge of negroes, the cer tainty of continued white supremacy has steadily increased with every dec ade.
One cause of this comparative de cline of the negroes in numbers is to

be found in the fact that they have no course of supply from immigration, while the whites are receiving constant accessions from other States and from foreign countries. This influx of whites comparatively small at present, will undoubtedly continue and become larg er with our growing industrial pros perity, which was never on so firm a foundation as now. The completion of the Panama canal will accelerate the development of our resources and give new impetus to white immigration, and thus help vastly in the solution of our problem.
A second cause of this comparative decline is that the death rate among the negroes is abnormally high. In typical Southern cities where the death rate among the whites stands at the moderate figures of 10 to 12 per thou sand, it reaches among the negroes from 20 to 25 per thousand.
It has recently been asserted by some supposedly competent authorities that the death rateof the negroes is now probably in excess of their birth rate, so that an actual numerical de crease has set in, owing largely to the ravages of consumption and certain other diseases. Nature exacts obedi ence to her laws she knows neither pity nor revenge.
Prof. Wilcox of Cornell University and Prof. Smith of Tulane University, and others, have undertaken a more far-reaching investigation into the the census figures and the facts
of ethnological history, and have
deduced therefrom the conclusion that "the negroes will continue to be a steadily smaller proportion of our pop ulation," and that in the course of time they will die out in America from in herent and natural causes.
"Whether these extreme speculations for they are speculations are well founded or not, yet the established facts as to the relative increase of the races have a most important bear ing on the solution of our problem. They show that this problem is not near so difficult as it was supposed to be twenty years ago, when false pro phets were predicting white submer
gence. ""*And more important still, these facts

show that the white people of the South and especially of the State of Georgia, can now proceed to work out their racial problem on lines of justice to the negro without imperilling whito supremacy. Those fears which once appalled us we may now dismiss and let reason resume its sway.
If future years should develop enough race pride in the negroes to make them concentrate in one locality, they might gain ascendency there and give the world a practical demonstration of their capacity or incapacity as a raceforce in civilization. But we see no clear signs of such a movement now, and Georgia at least is in no danger of being chosen as the Canaan for that sort of an experiment.
A Working Plan of Justice.
In seeking a solution of any difficult problem, the first step should be to eliminate the impossible schemes pro posed, and then concentrate on some line of operation that is at least possi ble. We often hear the epigrammatic dictum that there are but three possi ble solutions of our race problem: de portation, assimilation or annihilation. When we bring our sober sences to bear, all three of these so-called possipilities appear to be practical impos sibilities. Not one of the three pre sents a working hypothesis. Physical facts alone prevent deportation. Phy sical facts, stressed by an ineradicable race pride, bar the way against as similation. Physical facts backed by our religion, our civilization, our very selves, forbid annihilation. We can
not imitate Herod.
This much seems clear beyond doubt, that the whites are going to stay in this Southland for all time, and so are the negroes going to stay here in greater or less proportions for generations to come. If, then,
both races are to remain together, the plainly sensible thing for statesmen cf this day to do is to devise the best modus vivendi or working plan by which the greatest good can be accom plished for ourselves and our posterity. We of this day are not expected to overload ourselves with the burden of settling all the problems of all future ages. If we take good care of the next

few centuries, we may well be content

to leave some matters to be attended to by our remote posterity aided, of

course, by Providence.

Over against that Trinity of impos-

sibilies deportation, assimilation or

annihilation let us offer the simple

plan of justice.

v

The first and absolutely essential fac

tor in any working hypothesis at the South so far as human ken can now foresee, is white supremacy suprem

acy arising from present natural su

periority, but based always on justico

to the negro. Those whose stock in trade is "hat
ing the nigger" may easily gain some temporary advantage for themselves in

our white primaries, where it requires no courage either physical or moral to
strike those who have no power to strike back not even with a paper ballot. But these men will achieve
nothing permanent for the good of the State or of the nation by stirring up race passion and prejudice. Injustice and persecution will not solve any of
the problems of the ages. God did not

so ordain His universe.

Justly proud of our race, we refuse

to amalgamate with the negro. Never theless, the negro is a human being,
under the Fatherhood of God, and con sequently within the Brotherhood of Man for those two relations are in separably joined together. All soul-
possessing creatures must be sons of God, and joint heirs of immortality.

Moreover, the negro is an American

citizen, and is protected as such, by guarantees of the constitution that are

as irrepealable almost as the Bill of Rights itself. Nor if such a thing as

repealing these guarantees were possi ble, would it be wise for the south.

Suppose we admit the oft re-iterated
proposition that no two races so dis tinct as the Caucasian and the negro can live together on terms of perfect

equality; yet it is equally true that

without some access to the ballot, pres ent or prospective, some participation

in the government, no inferior race In

an elective republic could long protect itself against reduction to slavery in many of its substantial forms and

God knows the South wants no more

of that curse.

9

We have long passed the crisis of Him whose gospel of love and light

the disease brought on by the exist he once preached to erring men.

ence of slavery in the blood of the If the true purpose of this rever

republic. Let us now build up the body end gentleman be to preserve the blood

politic in health and strength, and of our race in its purity by creating

guard it against ever again being in a sentiment against intermarriage of

oculated with a poison even remotely the whites and blacks, let him con

resembling that deadly virus. Sporadic fine his play to Chicago and Boston

cases of peonage have already devel and New York and Philadelphia and

oped in several States and have been other like places, where some few

suppressed. Let us provide against of such marriages are said to occur.

every appearance of contagion.

As for us in the South, we need no

Race Pride Versus Race Prejudice.
One of the most serious difficulties about the solution of our problem is to be found in getting the dominent whites of the South to draw a proper discrimination betwen a laudable pride

artificial stimulant to arouse our peo ple against that sort of racial inter marriage. Our law forbids it, and that is one law no man or woman ever violates.
Race Purity.

in our race, and an unworthy preju

In this connection let us of the South

dice against the negro race. Prejudice realize the hard fact that the greatest

of any sort is hostile to that sound obstacle to the preservation of the

judgement which the Creator gave us purity of the blood of our race, about

for our guide. Race prejudice . pre which we hear so much in this day,

sents this disturbing element in one was removed when slavery was abol

of its most unreasoning forms. In ished. That institution, as indisput

violence it ranks next to religious fan able facts too plainly show, wrought

aticism. The one is based on a sup much contamination of Caucasian

posed duty to God; the other on a sup blood.

posed duty to ones race-blood. The

In Virginia in 1630 a white man

deeper this sense of duty, the more servant wa^s publicly flogged for con

hardened the mind against every ap sorting with a negro slave, and was

peal to reason. In persecuting the required to make public confession of

early Christians, Paul thought he was his guilt on the following Sabbath

ffioing his duty to God. The men who but clearly the custom of flogging for

*T""" the witches in New England that form of offense must soon have

thought they were doing their duty.

fallen into "innocuous desuetude."

So, perhaps, may think that expreacher, who in our own day has turn
ed playright, and calling to his aid all the accessories of the stage and all the realisms of the living drama, seeks to fan Into flame the fiercest passions of

In calmly considering now the sit uation that confronted our statesmen of the ante-bellum period, that which most astounds us is their apparent failure to foresee what would have been the inevitable consequence of an indefinite continuance of slavery in

the whites and blacks. His chief pur - its effect on race purity and on rela

pose so far as one can logically de tive race numbers. The ratio of in

duce it, seems to be to force into im crease of the negroes was far in ex

mediate conflagration combustible ma cess of the whites. The great labor

terials, which his heated imagination ing middle class, which forms the

tells him must burn sometime in the backbone of every nations pluck and

future. Apparently he chafes under power, was fast migrating westward,

the delay of Providence in bringing on and the remaining population was

the ghastly spectacle, and yearns to rapidly crystalizing into an upper class

witness with his own eyes in the flesh of white slave holders and a lower

that reign of hell on earth before his class of negro slaves the latter out-

own redeemed soul is ushered into the multiplying their masters in numbers.

calm, serene and gentle presence of Another one hundred years of sla-

10

very would in all probability have doomed the south to absolute negro
domination by mere weight of num bers whenever emancipation should come and come it was sure to do at some time in the evolution of the ele mental forces that were at work.
If there be a Providence who watch es over the affairs of nations and "slumbers not nor sleeps," we may say in all reverence that he would have made an almost inexcusable blunder if he had delayed much longer the abolition of slavery.
Social recognition of the true dig nity of labor, which is so necessary to the growth of a vigorous and selfrespecting middle clp.ss, could not be maintained in the presence of slavery v,-here manual toil is so generally re garded as a hndge of servitude. Negro Race Projected Forward Be
yond Natural Development. When a subject people in the hard V tchool of experience gradually assert themselves and esvolve from within the physical, mental ,: nd spiritual for ces that achieve their freedom, as did the Anglo-Saxons from under the yoke of their Norman conquerors, they come forth by natural growth prepared for the duties and responsibilities of self government. But the negro as a race had under gone no such process of evolution. His transportation from Africa to Amer ica and his transition from slavery to freedom were both the results of ex ternal impositions and not of inter nal development. The power came from without, not from within. He did not win his freedom. It was be stowed upon him. Granting that he is only a back ward member of the great human fam ily, which as most evolutionists and Christians believe, is moving steadily on toward the distant goal of Millen nial perfection, yet, we can not fail to see that the negro race was sud denly projected forward into a stage of civilization many generations in advance of its own natural develop ment.
Is it any wonder, then, that the ne gro as a race should not be altogeth er fitted to the laws and customs and

political institutions of those among-

whom his lot was cast?



Again, is it any wonder that this ad- **

vanced civilization should find it nec

essary at times to apply sterner pen

alties for the curbing of his savage in

stincts when he was freed from the

accustomed control of his master?

Unfortunately, soon after emanci-*"*

pation, some of the worst specimens

of the blacks began to commit an un

pardonable crime. Instantly the white

man placed over the door of his home,

whether it were proud mansion or

humble cabin, a warning more terri

ble in its meaning than that which

Dante dreamed he saw over the gate

way to hell: "Let the brute who en

ters here leave all hope behind." In

the presence of that crime, men do

not think, they only feel.

But how shall we fix bounds for

those who rush madly outside the lim

its of the law? Lynching began with

this and similar savage crimes. But,

alas, where will they all end? Let us

hope that these excesses of both races

are merely incidental factors in our

problem, and that they will soon di

minish ana eventually disappear

Abhorrent as are the crimes of some

degenerate members of the negro race,

we Southern people can never forget

the simple faith and tragic loyalty

of those thousands of slaves who

guarded and protected the women and

children at home, while the men were

at the front fighting to drive back an

invading foe whose victory meant free-

doom to those slaves themselves.

Negro Military Salute Confederate
Monument.
Nor is there a total dearth of touch ing- incidents in these latter days. Only about a year or so ago, a negro mili.tary company from Savannah came marching in full array up Broadway n Augusta. In front of them rising- to ward the sky in beautiful artistic pro portions stood a marble monument erected by loving women to the dead Confederacy. At its base were statue-? of Lee and Jackson and Cobb and Walker, and lifted high up above them all on the top of the towering shaft stood the statue of a private Confed erate soldier. No white military com-

11

pany, no camp of maimed Confederate veterans ever pass that monument without giving it the honor of a for mal salute.
As the negro military comes
nearer, one of two gentlemen standing in the doorway of a building nearby says: "Let us watch now and see if those fellows will salute the Confeder ate monument." The other gentleman explains that no salute will be given because it will not occur to the com manding officer, but that the omission will not be intended as an affront. Scarcely are the words spoken, when the negro captain, in clear, ringing tones that prove the sincerity of his tribute, gives the command to salute, and every black arm instantly obeys that command.
There was cheering among the white
bystanders. When the great Wade Hampton lay
upon his death bed he made this pray er: "God bless all my people white and black God bless them all."
Suffrage Qualifications.
While the issue of political control under the 15th amendment still con fronted the Southern States, Mississippi having the greatest negro majority, led off with her constitution of 1891 pro viding an educational qualification for voting. There being more illiterate blacks than illiterate whites in Missis sippi, the necessary effect of this law was to promote white supremacy. But the law on its face did not discrimi nate against the negro on account of his race. It covered whites and blacks
alike.
The supreme court of the United States promptly decided that this Mis sissippi law did not violate the federal constitution. What the effect of its practical administration has been need not now be discussed.
Other States followed with similar laws based primarily on educational qualifications, but soon a proviso was evolved to preserve the ballot to illit erate whites. An honest administra tion of a suffrage law based on an educational qualification would neces sarily disfranchise a great many whites. Hence a proviso was devised to the effect that the educational qualification

should not apply to any person, nor to the descendant of any person, who could have voted at some past date, say, for example, Jan. 1, 1867, when negroes as a class were not allowed to vote. This proviso was popularly known as the "Grandfather clause," because under it, a, man otherwise dis qualified, might, so to speak, inherit the right of suffrage from his grand father.
The manifest purpose of this clause was to nullify the educational require ment of the State law as to the whites, while leaving it in full force as to the negroes, and in this way to get around the 15th amendment of the federal constitution which forbids discrimina
tion on account of race. The supreme court of the United
States ha,s gone as far as any one could have expected it to go in up holding the reserved rights of the States on the subject of suffrage. But that court has never directly nor in directly sanctioned the validity of any suffrage law containing the Grandfather clause or any other clause based on the same principle.
Whenever the supreme court shall take judicial notice, as it will do, of the historical fact that on the date selected for the Grandfather clause to begin to operate, say Jan. 1, 1867, the negroes as a class had no right to vote, or when that undeniable or easily proven fact is made to appear by evi dence, this device of the Grandfather clause must fall of its own crooked ness. A preference to one race is nec essarily the legal equivalent of a dis crimination against the other race.
It will mark a new departure in American constitutional law when the right to vote is made inheritable from the non-transmissible attributes of an ancestor instead of being based on the
personal attributes of the voter. It will mark a still further depart
ure in judicial construction when the supreme court finds in this new doc trine a legal justification for sanction ing the race discrimination forbidden
by the 15th amendment. The Mississippi law, the only one
ever squarely considered and directly construed by the supreme court, 170 U. S., 213, does not contain the Grand-

father clause. That was a device of later invention.
The case of Giles v. Harris, 189 U. S.. 475, involving the Alabama law, was dismissed in the supreme court for want of jurisdiction in the lower court but Justices Brewer, Brown and Harlan dissented in vigorous terms.
The latest case of Jones v. Montague, 194 U. S- 147, involving the Virginia
law, was dismissed because the act sought to be enjoined the issuing of certificates of election, etc., to mem bers of Congress had already been done, and the congressmen had taken their seats before the case was reached in the supreme court.
Indeed, it is no secret that those law yers who undertake to defend these disfranchisement enactments, place their chief reliance in the technical difficulties of getting the merits of the question before the supreme court. It goes without saying, however, that law yers can be found to surmount those technical difficulties, and at the bar of the supreme court confront th? "Grandfather" clause of the State con stitutions with the "anti-race-discrimi nation" clause of the federal constitu tion.
The result scarcely admits of a doubt Disfranchisement Movement in Georgia
What, then, shall we, as Georgians
and Americans, true to our own great State, and true to the greater nation of which it is a part, say of the move ment which is now being so freely discussed, and which has seemingly gained some headway, to so amend our State constitution as to disfranchise the negroes as a race?
We have read in the public press repeated statements that prominent leaders are openly announcing their in tention to "disfranchise the negro," and promising to "eliminate" him from poli
tics." Not only so, but they further promise to accomplish that end through a so-called educational quali fication or understanding clause, and at the same time not to deprive a sin gle white man of his ballot, no matter how illiterate or ignorant he may be.
I might hesitate here and now, even at this last moment, to proceed fur ther with the discussion of this branch
of my subject if the facts as to in

tentions and methods, as I have just stated them, were at all in dispute. But as I understand it, there is no disposition to deny them rather an increasing boldness in asserting them. Therefore we may quite properly, it seems to me, proceed to draw some necessary deductions from those ad mitted facts as they bear on the law and morals of the situation.
How then are these two purposes, to put out all the negroes and put in all the whites, to be accomplished in the tV-ice of the prohibition .yf the fifteenth amendment 7 Clearly, it can no: tta dor.e by open avowal in the body of the law, because in that event, the law would convict itself in any court in the land. How then is this avowed purpose to be accomplished? Pardon me, my friends, but let us face the truth; the scheme must be to disfran chise the negro by a fraudulent admin istration of the law. In no other way is U possible to produce the promised results. Legislative ingenuity must be "backed up by administrative fraud else the avowed purpose can not be
accomplished. It must be admitted that the ma
chinery of the proposed law could be easily perverted to fraudulent purposes. Before a citizen can register to vote, he is to be required to read and ex plain, or to be able to understand, any paragraph of the state constitution. Now we lawyers all know that there are some parts of our constitution that the supreme court judges themselves have never been able fully to explain even granting that they understand them all. But who are to judge of this explanation or understanding? The registrars of course. Suppose the most learned explanation could be given, who will vouch that the registrars themselves will understand it, or will accept it as satisfactory?
Of course, the officers ol registra
tion are to be white. An easy para graph for a white applicant; a diffi cult paragraph for a negro applicant; the acceptance of any sort of an ex planation from a white applicant; the rejection of any sort of an explanation from a negro applicant there you have

the hidden cards with which the game of cheat is to be played. And it is on this miserable bare-faced scheme of fraud that our proud and noble peo ple are asked to rest their safety and their civilization.
How long do the advocates of this method of disfranchisement think they can expose their purpose to the political eye and keep it concealed from the ju dicial eye? How long can they pro claim it on the hustings and hush it in the court house?
Referring to one of these laws, a learned commentator on our supreme court decisions has said: "If in the light of their history and conditions and the avowed purpose of the authors of the laws, their objects are clothed in stat utes so worded that the real designs are not expressed in terms, the situa tion would seem to be one to require the court to reason from cause to ef fect."
The court in construing- the four teenth amendment (118 U. S. 356) has said: "Though the law itself be fair on its face and impartial in appear ance, yet if it be applied and admin istered by public authority with an evil eye and an unequal hand so as practically to make unjust and un equal discriminations between persons in similar circumstances, material to their rights, the denial of equal jus tice is still within the prohibition of the constitution."
Nor can escape be found in that line of decisions by the supreme court to the effect that the prohibition of the fifteenth amendment applies to state action and not to acts of private citi zens. The registrars who are to en force this disfranchisement law are officers and agents of the state. The supreme court (100 U. S. 339) have further said: "Whoever by virtue of his public position under a state gov ernment, deprives another of life, lib erty or property without due process of law, or denies or takes away the equal protection of the law, violates the inhibition of the fourteenth amend ment, and as he acts in the name of,

and for, the state and is clothed with her power, his act is her act."
This same principle of responsibility will be applied to the registrars under this disfranchisement law. Their acts will be the acts of the state, and will consequently come within the prohibi tion of the fifteenth amendment, and will also be within the jurisdiction of the federal courts, where alleged viola tions of the law will be tried-
But aside from these legal aspects of the matter, let us ask ourselves if there is not a more serious practical diffi culty to be overcome. These registrars as officers must take the usual oath co perform their duties impartially under the law. Let us put the plain blunt question: How many counties in Georgia can be relied on to furnish three citizens for registrars who will agree in advance to violate their sol emn oaths? Will not honest men point at them the finger of scorn?
The great John C. Calhoun sought to nullify a federal statute law on the tariff by state action because he be lieved it to be in violation of the federal constitution, which he loved and hon
ored. But these latter day nullifiers are
seeking to nullify the federal constitu tion by a state law no, not by a state law itself, but by the fraudulent ad ministration of a state law. No power on earth could have made Mr. Cal houn stoop to such chicanery he was fashioned in a nobler mould. What a contrast between the great nullifier and these little nullifiers!
The abuses to which the broad dis cretionary powers of the registrars un der these disfranchisement laws might be carried in times of fierce partisan politics are absolutely unlimited. We need not natter ourselves that white men will never be the victims of such abuses. When moral character is once defied and fraud seeks its selfish ends, it will not stop at the color line.
One Danger in Educational Qualifica
tion.
There can be no legal objection whenever the public necessity requires it, to establishing a reasonable educa-

14

tional qualification for voters, provid ed that qualification is fairly and hon estly applied. But if this educational qualification is to be used as a fraud ulent subterfuge to disfranchise the negro, then there is another very se rious consequence which will necessar ily follow.
If by appeals to race prejudice and fear these negro disfranchisers estab lish the educational test in fulfilment of their promise to "eliminate the negro from politics," then of necessity, these same leaders and their followers must (recognize that from their point of view it is not the ignorant, but the educated negroes who will be the most dangerous political enemies of the whites.
The question will at once arise why should the white people create danger ous political enemies by allowing the negroes to be educated? Why not - "eliminate them from politics" by keep ing them in ignorance? There is no escape from the logic of this argument if the premise be correct. Thus we would find ourselves committed to the degrading policy of enforcing ignor ance on a weaker race, with its attenda.nt results of peonage and semi-slavery from which all good men would pray for deliverance.
Division of School Fund on Race Line.
Even now there are signs of a move ment in Georgia to give the negro schools only that pittance of money arising from the negros taxes. A law to that effect has already been de clared invalid by the state court in North Carolina (94 N. C. 709); also by the state court in Kentucky (83 Ky. 49); and also by the federal courts
In three decisions from Kentucky (16 Fed. R. p. 297; 23 Fed. R. 634, and 72 Fed. R. 689.)
In our own stale a bill to the same effect was passed in 1888 for a local school system, and Governor John B. Gordon, while Hon. Clifford Anderson was attorney general, vetoed it on the ground that it was against sound pol icy and a violation of the constitution of the state and the United States.
There is nothing in the decision of

our state supreme court in the Eatonton case (80 Ga. 755) nor in the Rich mond county high school case (103 Ga. 641) to sustain the proposition that the common school funds of the state, or of any subdivision of the state, can be divided between the races in pro portion to the property or taxes of each. On the contrary, in the latter case, our state court said: "So far as the record discloses, both races have the same facilities of attending them (the free common schools). And the United States supreme court, in re viewing this Georgia case (175 U. S. 528) say it is an admitted principle of law that the "benefits and burdens of public taxation must be shared by citizens without discrimination against any class on account of their race."
Along this same line spoke Governor Charles 3. Jenkins, known to Geor gians as the "Noblest Roman of Them All," when he took the chair as pres ident of the constitutional convention of 1877. He said:
"I utter no caution against class leg islation or discrimination against our citizens of African descent. I feel a perfect assurance that there is no member of this body who would pro pose such a.ction, and if there were, he would soon find himself without a following."
These are the words of a highminded statesman not of a time serv ing politician. There are many differ ences between these two types of pub lic men. One difference is that a poli tician seeks to find out what public opinion is and hastens to follow it, while a statesman seeks to find out what public opinion ought to be and helps to mould it,
Our late Chancellor Hill, whose un timely death is so deeply deplored by us all, belonged to that higher class of moulders of public opinion. By ex ample as well as by precept he led the way to the nobler ends of life. Should Georgia Follow Other States.
Surely nothing but the direst neces sity of self-preservation could induce any people to resort to such suffrage expedients as are now being proposed to the people of Georgia. Nothing less than an impending overthrow of

15

white civilization by negro domination could excuse such extreme measures. But if our discussion has shown any thing, it has shown that Georgia Is not now in danger of negro domin
ation. One argument that is being press
ed upon our people is, that Georgia should follow the example of other Southern states that have passed sim ilar disfranchisement laws. But let us ask, why should Georgia follow them? Is there anything in their ex amples on this subject worthy of our imitation? If their necessities compell ed such questionable action, let us sympathize with them in their extrem ity. But let us not imitate them when no such necessity besets us. Did not Georgia first redeem herself after re construction? Has she not kept abreast of her sister states in material, intel lectual and moral progress? Is she not still the Empire State of the South? What state can show a cleaner official record for thirty years? Rather let Georgia continue to lead in wise and conservative statesmanship. On all fundamental questions our white people are sufficiently united in thought and purpose to come together in a solid phalanx if the negroes should ever return to the ballot box in suffi cient numbers on one side of an issue to jeopardize the public safety.
As a legal means of maintaining white supremacy, no plan yet devised approaches in effectiveness our party primary system, in combination with the cumulative poll tax provision of
the constitution. Whatever may be the final political
status of the negro we are now unde niably in a transition stage of evolu tion. It is scarcely conceivable that the conditions created by the disfranchisement laws of some southern states can be permanent. The battle for su premacy between those laws and the federal constitution remains to be fought out. If the federal constitu tion proves victorious, as it is very apt to do, then the entire electoral system of these states may have to
be changed. On the other hand, Georgia, through
her superior statesmanship, has put

herself in a position of safety, ready to take advantage of whatever hopeful developments the future may unfold. She has violated no federal law- She has maintained white supremacy with the least possible friction, and can continue to so maintain it.
Not only is this campaign against the negro unnecessary and unjust, but it is most inopportune at this juncture. When every county in the state is calling loudly for more labor to serve the household and till the fields and de velop our resources, why should we seek to enact more oppressive laws against the labor we now have?
We do not know what shifting phases this vexing race problem may assume, but we may rest in the conviction that its ultimate solution must be reached by proceeding along the lines of hon esty and justice. Let us not in cow ardice or in want of faith, needlessly sacrifice our higher ideals of private and public life. Race differences may necessitate social distinctions. But race differences can not repeal the
moral law.
The Moral Law--Its Origin and Sanc
tion.
What is this thing we call the moral law? It is a mere weak sentiment, suitable only for children and preach ers and Sunday school teachers? Or is it the fiat of Nature and Natures God, commanding obedience from all men under the sanction of inevitable penalties? We will waive all ques tions as to weight of authority, and reason out the matter for ourselves.
Whence come our morals or ethical conceptions? Briefly let us summarize:
First: The theological school rests the foundation of morals on divine commandment or revelation which quickens the conscience.
God spake through Moses, the Prophets and the Christ.
Second: The psychological school traces the source of morals to an in stinct or sense that is innate in the mind itself the conscience.
The philosopher and metaphysician Immanuel Kant, reasoned back to his

16

celebrated postulate of a "categorical imperative" call to duty.
Third: The utilitarian school evolves morals from human experience, sanc tioning as "good" or "right" that con duct "which has proven beneficial, and condemning as "bad" or "wrong" that conduct which has proven injurious, thus creating and developing the con science by successive stages of experi mental knowledge.
Herbert Spencer thus evolved his system of utilitarian ethics till it al most flowered out in the beauty of the "Golden Rule."
Prof. Huxley discussing the scientific doctrine of causation, says: "The safety of morality lies, in a real and living belief in that fixed order of na ture which sends social disorganization upon the track of immorality as surely as it sends physical disease after physi cal trespassers."
It is not necessary for us to deter mine how much of truth there is in each of these schools of thought. Enough for us to know that all three reach substantially the same conclu sion as to right rules of conduct for men. By different routes they arrive at the same goal. In reasoning they are three: in acting they are one. Here is a subject on which religion and science are in full accord, namely, that the moral law is the wisest rule of hu man conduct.
So much for the individual man.
The Moral Law Applies to States as
Well as Individuals.
Now does the same moral law apply to states and nations as well as to Individuals? Or are there two codes of morality, one for individuals and another for aggregations of individu als? Ca.n we practice fraud as a col lective body of citizens and still presere our personal integrity as indi vidual citizens?
We might quote Mr. Jefferson as an authority for the doctrine that "moral duties are as obligatory on nations as on individuals." But again let us waive authority and reason out our own conclusions. We will test the ques

tion by the standards of the three schools of thought first named.
If we assume that the theological school is correct, it is manifest that there can not be a code of public morals different in principle from the code of private morals. God must deal with individuals and nations alike, be cause the former are the responsible units of the latter.
If we assume that the psychological school is correct, it is equally manifest that the conscience being an innate mental quality can not reverse its ac tion by changing from private to pub lic capacity, from individual to collec tive functions.
If we assume that the utilitarian school is correct, it ought to be equally as clear that the rule of conduct which experience has proven to be beneficial as between individuals, is also bene ficial as between states under like con ditions.
It is true that aggregations of indi viduals, by reason of divided respon sibility, do not usually act up to the code of morals recognized by single in dividuals. That historical fact shows the imperfection of our past civiliza tion, and calls upon us for better work in the future. No one accepts the con dition as permanent or satisfactory. The great task of civilization, the dearest hope of philisophers and noble minded statesmen, is to constantly im prove that condition and bring nations more under the sway of the moral law. Though perfection be unattainable, ev ery step is progress.
In proportion, as international inter course becomes more free will a code of international ethics based on a code of personal ethics be developed to the immeasurable advantage of all con cerned. Such is the doctrine underlyiner The Hague tribunal, which has al ready done so much for the peace of the world.
One of the noblest tributes ever paid to Gladstone was, that he had applied the moral law to British politics.
It wa.s Aristides, surname^ the Just a brave soldier, a successful general, a man of sound practical judgment.

17

not a mere dreamer who, when named by the Athenians to consider a secret plan suggested by Thelfcnistocles to gain naval supremacy for Athens by burning the ships of her allies, reported against the unscrupul ous scheme and said: "What Thetynistocles proposes might be to your pres ent advantage, but O Athenians, it is not just."
Speaking of the ideal, universal, moral code, one of the least sentimental of modern scientific writers says: "A*though its realization may lie in the un seen future, civilization must hold fast to it, if it would be any more than a
blind natural process; and it is certain ly the noblest function of social science to point out the wearisome way along which mankind dripping with blood, yet pants for the distant goal."
Another deep thinker summing up the facts of history and the reasonings of philosophers says: "That the moral law
is the unchanging law of social progress in human society is the lesson which appears to be written over all things."
Solution of Race Problem; Give Negro Justice.
The foundation of the moral law is justice. Let us solve the negro problem by giving the negro justice, and apply ing to him the recognized principles ot the moral law.
This does not require social equality. It does not require that we should sur render into his inexperienced and incom petent hands the reins of political gov ernment. But it does require that we recognize hfs fundamental rights as a man, and that we judge each individual according to his own qualifications anu not according to the lower average char acteristics of his race. Political rights cannot justly be withheld from those American citizens of an inferior or back ward race who raise themselves up to the standard of citizenship which the superior race applies to its own mem bers.
It is true that the right of suffrage is not one of those inalienable rights of man, like life, liberty and the pur suit of happiness, as enumerated in the declaration of independence, but the right of exemption from discrimination

in the exercise of suffrage on account of race, is one of the guaranteed constitu tional rights of all American citizens.

We of the south are an integral part of this great country. We .should stand . ready to make every sacrifice demanded by honor and permitted by wisdom to remove the last vestige of an excuse for the perpetuation of that spirit of sec tionalism which excludes us from the full participation in governmental honors to which our brain and character enti
tle us.

Let us respect the national laws to the limit of endurance, and it that limit should be passed, let us resort to some means of redress more typical of south ern manhood than fraudulent subter fuge. The future material proseprity of the south is already assured. Let us resolve that there shall remain in grained in the moral fibre of our new south the high character of our old south which can best be described in the memorable words of Edmund Burke as "that sensibility of principle, that chastity of honor which felt a strain

like a wound."

"* We cannot afford to sacrifice our ideais

of justice, of law and of religion for the

purpose of preventing the negro from

elevating himself. If we wish to pre

serve the wide gap between our race

and his in the onward progress of civ

ilization, let us do it by lifting ourselves

up, not by holding him down.

* If, as some predict, the negro in the

distant future must fail afid fall by the

wayside in the strenuous march of the

nations, let him fall by his own inferior

ity, and not by our tyranny. Give him a

fair cnance to work out what is in him.

Carl McKinley, that brilliant and

noble hearted author of "An Appeal to

Pharaoh," who advocated so earnestly

and so eloquently the impracticable poi-

icy of deportation, declared himself on

this subject as follows:

"We should have learned by this time

moreover, that we can not treat the ne

gro with injustice, however disguised,

without sharing the consequences with

him. *

* It would be a foul wrong

to beat him back in his upward strug

gle, and consign him to a lower plain

and establish him on it."

If the negro as a race is to be disfran-

18

chised regardless of the personal quali fications of meritorious individual mem bers of that race, consider for a moment some of the changes we must make in many of the fundamental doctrines lying at the base of our government. The re vised version of our political Bible would have to read something like this: "No taxation without representation except as to negroes;" "equal rights to all ex cept as to negroes;" "all men are creat ed equal except as to negroes." No Recantation of Jeffersons Doctrine.
Some modern critics seriously suggest, that we should amend that paragrapn of the declaration of independence which
asserts the equal rights of men, so as to adjust it more accurately to histori cal and scientific facts. But that epochmaking document needs no alteration
upon the subject of human rights when interpreted as it was intended to be in terpreted by the man who drafted it. Mark you, Mr. Jefferson did not write: "All men are born free," as the quota

tion is sometimes given. That looser lan guage is found in the constitution of Massachusetts, not in the declaration ot independence. Such an assertion would have been disproved by the historical fact of slavery then existing. What Mr. Jefferson wrote was "All men are created equal." That is to say, not equal in exterior circumstances, nor in physi cal or mental attributes but equal in the
sight of God /and just human
law, in theirAv**lienable rights
to life, liberty and the pursuit of .happiness. Americans want no re cantation of that declaration. It is the political corollary of the Christian doc trine of the justice and the Fatherhood of God. Let it stand as it was penneu
by Jefferson an ennobling, even though unattainable, ideal, demanded by the spiritual nature of man one of inose ideals that have done more to life up humanity and to build up civilization than all the gold from all the mines of all the world.

19