Robert W. Woodruff
Library
EMORY UNIVERSITY
Special Collections & Archives
2fyarvey Jo/twos?, Q). Qt),
THE NATIONS
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW.
BY
HARVEY JOHNSON, D. D.
NASHVILLE, TENN..
NATIONAL BAPTIST PUBLISHING BOARD.
Copyrighted 1903,
By Harvey Johnson.
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
Page.
Introduction 17
CHAPTER I.
"The Nations From a New Point of View 43
CHAPTER II.
Race Divisions: Are They Ethnological or Histor¬
ical? 59
CHAPTER III.
Africa: As it is, and as it Has Been 83
CHAPTER IV.
The Hamite; or the Descendants of Ham 115
CHAPTER V.
The Question of Race: A Reply to Lawyer W. Ca¬
bell Bruce 137
CHAPTER VI.
The White Man's So-Called Scientific and Historic
"Negro." 165
CHAPTER VII.
Our Status: What is it in This Country? 176
CHAPTER VI IT.
Race Intermingling 188
CHAPTER IX.
The "Social Equality" Idea 197
CHAPTER X.
The White Man Carried Back to His Beginnings 208
CHAPTER XI.
Some Facts About Ancient Greece 228
CHAPTER XII.
Thu White Man a Failure in Government 238
SYNOPSIS.
CHAPTER I.
The starting place of mankind—Eden—Adam—Cain—
Abel—Cain builds the first city—Cain's sons: Jabal, n
herdsman; Jubal, an organ-builder; Tubal Cain, a mechanic
—End of the history of Cain—Adam again introduced—
His son Seth takes the place of Abel—Merging of two
branches of mankind into one—Little record given of the
achievements of Adam and his family in the interval be¬
tween the death of Abel and the birth of Seth—There
has always existed a twofold form of civilization—What
is meant by civilization—Which of the two forms is the
better?—What the Creator designed when he made man—
Man's idea of development and civilization—City-building
not of God—City and Tower of Babel—City-building and
city life make man selfish—The Ark—Noah—The two sons
of Noah: Shem and Ham—The arts and sciences with Ham
—Husbandry with Shem—The destruction of the cities of
Enoch, Ninevah, Erech, Accad and Calneh—Africa—Egypt
Ethiopia and Abyssinia, all dead and buried—Their re¬
mains now being exhumed—Cause of their death—Palestine
—Thousands of cities gone—Rome: Cause of her death—
Definition of civilization—False ideas concerning civiliza¬
tion—Nations styled "barbarous" and" savage" much nearer
proper civilization—Civilization in Africa largely natural—
The civilization of Africa a normal civilization, and not a
barbarous one—Modes, methods and results of modern
civilization—Prof. Geo. D. Carter in "Christian State"—
Political parties controlled by private corporations—Legis¬
lation determined by system of lobby—Chief work of Stat®
1 (1)
2
SYNOPSIS.
and National Legislatures to obstruct, defeat and cheat the
will of the people—Failures in the United States in the lfest
year—Failures under the white man's rule—TacomaBank
bursted—Building and Loan Association "gone up"—Seven
mercantile failures—Two express trains dynamited—Butch¬
ery of helpless lunatics in Illinois—Workmen threaten
bloodshed—Seventh Day Adventists working out fines for
working on Sunday—Starving garment workers strike—
Railway threatened with "tie up"—Five more strikes Incu¬
bating—Another bond issue—Millions of gold leave treas¬
ury for Europe—Thousands of working people receive pub¬
lic help—Advertisements for help—Foreclosures of farm
mortgages in Minnesota—Poor man steals a loaf, and mil¬
lionaires tap waterworks and steal a million dollars worth
of water—Are we living in a Christian civilization?—Man
tries to rob a bank and is captured: banks rob depositors
of $25,000,000 by failures, etc., and go free—Another re¬
sult of higher civilization under white man's management
—A gigantic railroad combine—Senator Chandler's "re¬
view"?—Statistics of persons killed and injured yearly on
railroads—Grounds for objections to modes and methods
of "higher states and conditions of life"—Argument for
natural civilization versus artificial.
CHAPTER II
RACE DIVISIONS: ARE THEY ETHNOLOGICAL OR
HISTORICAL?.
Race Divisions classified—What is Ethnology?—Deriva¬
tion of "Ethnology"—Linnaeus on Divisions of Mankind—
De Buffon on the same subject—Blumenbach and Law¬
rence on ditto—Theories, experiments and race tests of
Owen, the English anatomist—Peter Camper tells how
to ascertain to what race a man belongs—Dr. Morton gives
another method—Such statements contradictory and use*
SYNOPSIS*
3
less—History—What is true history?—How shall we sep¬
arate truth from falsehood?—Encyclopaedia Britannicaon
"History"—Do facts alone make history?—How facts for
hisfcpry-making are to be obtained—Myths and fiction can
never be the basis of true history—Origin of Greeks and
Romans altogether a myth; therefore cannot be history—
They can have a history of their myths, but none of them¬
selves as a people—They are entirely without records of
any kind—History as to the number of race divisions—
There were originally three divisions of mankind: Shem,
Haiti, and Japheth—Generation of the sons of Noah
—Statement regarding Japheth—Ham's pedigree—Shem
and his descendants—Japheth-inhabited islands—Ham-set¬
tled countries—Shem occupied lands—Ham the only son
of Noah after whom two countries were named—Coun¬
tries called after Ham—Definition of "Science"—-Was Mo¬
ses scientific?—Theories and guesses not knowledge—Rec¬
ord in Genesis true because of God—Records being found
by excavators in the Orient—Points in Africa that reveal
wonderful facts on the race question—"Ologists" inconsist¬
ent; they retain the branch or root name of Shem, but
create for Ham and Japheth fictitious race uames—Impos¬
sible. to get rid of Ham—Definition of the word "Aryan"—
Max Muller on the " Origin of the Word Aryan "—The
proper race name for Shem is Shemite; that for Ham,
Hamite, and for Japheth, Japhethite—Dr.Geikie on the ta¬
ble in Genesis—What is Philology?—Is it a science?—San¬
scrit can never become truly scientific—The Aryans: Who
and what were they?—American Encyclopaedia on "Arya"
—Only three branches of the human family—To which of
these do the colored races belong?—Must be of Ham—How
determined?—Properly called "colored people"—No other
name except "Hamite" suitable—Objections raised to be¬
ing called "colored"—Word "Colored" appropriate; the
word "Negro" inappropriate—Encyclopaedia Britannica on
"Negro"'—NO self-respecting colored man can be proud of
the term "Negro" as so treated—All must feel contempt
for the man who wrote it—not scientific—"Niger" a Latin
4
SYNOPSIS.
adjective—Not racial, but general—The word "Negro"
merely describes color.
CHAPTER III.
AFRICA AND SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
Origin of the name Africa—Position of Africa—Africa
a world within itself—Africa the source of light and knowl¬
edge—"The Book of the Dead"—Oldest book in the world
—The standard of morality of ancient Egyptians very high
—Africa still enlightening the world—Illustration of the
white' man's history-making—Long before the age of Mo¬
ses there was a belief in the resurrection—Both Greek and
Roman art and literature of African origin—Article on the
Lotus from "Biblia"—Prof. Goodyear on "The Lotiform
origin of the Greek Anthemion"—The white man's mode of
settling difficult questions—The relationship of the people
of Egypt to the inhabitants of Africa—Were they one and
the same?—Were they descended from Ham? After
the flood, every family carried with them their own lan¬
guage—Bible genealogy—Egyptians descendants of Ham—
Genealogical table of races—Egyptians traced—The Bible,
the only Book—Mizraim the first king of Egypt—Ethiopia
settled by Cush, the oldest son of Ham—We must continue
to bring in question the white man's use of terms—The
word Aryan derived from a verb—No proof that an Aryan
nation eyer existed—Philology an uncertain quantity—
Africa in Scripture called "The land of Cush"—Egypt
"The land of Ham"—Close connection between Egypt and
Ethiopia—Africa's historic fame—Great men among the
ancients studied in Africa:Plato the great philosopher,
and others—Moses, the great law-giver, born in Africa—
Relationship between Carthage and Phoenicia—The reader
warned as to the data of facts—Many so-called facts false
and unfit for history-making—Who established Carthage
and Rome?—Legend of the founding of Carthage—No
SYNOPSIS.
5
proof that Dido ever lived—Virgil's Aeneid nothing but a
poetical story—The only reasonable view that Carthage
was founded by native Africans—Writers disagree as to
the account of the establishment of Carthage—Cajthage's
relationship to the settlement of Rome, Italy and Latium
—The legend of the founding of Rome—The story of the
founding of Rome and Italy not history—The story of
Washington and his hatchet probably a "campaign yarn"
—No proof that Aeneas of Troy ever lived—Legend of
Aeneas—All a myth—The reasonable view is that the
Carthaginians were the colonizers of Rome—Evidences—
The Carthaginians available ones to do the work—Descend¬
ants of Ham the first colonizers of every habitable country
on the globe.
CHAPTER IV.
THE HAMITE.
The Hamite a "bone of contention—The first govern¬
ment after the flood formed by Nimrod, a descendant of
Ham--Canaan, the father of the Phoenicians—Cadmus, a
Phoenician—Hamitic people—Proofs—The race that first
settles a country gives to it its language—Hebrew unjustly
so cahed—Properly of Canaanitish origin—Language of
the Hebrews identical with that of the Canaanites—The
term "Hebrew language" not found in the Old Testament—
The basis of the Latin language also of Ham—The Hamite
has always been active—Civilization and religion devel¬
oped along the line of Ham—Abraham the new custodian
of true religion—Melchizedek a Canaanite—The race of
Ham has never had a "degradation"—The curse of Noah
on Canaan had no application to the three older sons of
Ham—Ham himself, nor any of his sons but Canaan, was
cursed—Unreasonable that the curse extend to all the pos¬
terity of Ham, when,it was Canaan who received the curse
—What was the curse?—Was the curse fulfilled?—Not the
6
SYNOPSIS.
posterity of Ham, but that of Shem, were the first servants
—Greeks and Romans descendants of Japheth—Among
them existed the most cruel system of slavery—White
sJavery over two thousand years older than black slavery
—Which of the races have been the most degraded by
slavery?—r-Both master and servant white—Difference be¬
tween race conditions and race characteristics—The term
"Negro" a misnomer—It describes only one complexion-—
Has no race honor about it?—The colored race can trace
its descent to Noah—Why be proud of the term "Negro?"—
It means only what is black—Much in the term "Hamitic"
of which to be proud—Worcester's definition of "Negro"—
Nothing in it of which to be proud—God "made of one
blood, all nations of men"—Blumenbach, the author of the
Caucasian race theory—Mount Caucasus not the dispers¬
ing point of the races—The Caucasian race rests upon a
single skull—Chambers on "The Georgians"—In what has
the Caucasian type of man distinguished itself—Knowl¬
edge of the fine arts derived from the descendants of
Ham—Hamite leaders and pioneers—Why the Caucas¬
ian race theory is false—Multiplicity of names—Anglo-
Saxon blood a mixture—Source of Anglo-Saxon blood—
a. he colored race claim but one origin—The Hamite can
stand the tests of time.
CHAPTER V.
THE QUESTION OF RACE: A REPLY TO LAWYER
W. CABELL BRUCE.
Lawyer Bruce's attack nothing but abuse and misrepre¬
sentation—Mr. Bruce's statements and arguments—Many
physical differences of appearance in the races—The white
man's color perhaps a freak of nature—God created man
dark—A very large portion of the world governed by the
darker races—Mr. Bruce's argument in support of the
superiority of the white race—Not ashamed of our origin
or history—The white man's history untrue and unfair
SYNOPSIS.
7
False theories—Max Muller breaks up linguistic families
—Conflicting statements as to Africa—History of the
three original branches of men stands out clear—
Facts as to Japheth—Inachus and Cadmus descendants
of Ham—Nimrod the first king—History of the Egyp¬
tians not known until 1790—Japheth and the Romans—
The Anglo-Saxons claim to be the offspring of the Romans
—Branches of the colored race—When does Roman his¬
tory begin?—The Roman's foster-mother a she-wolf—
The African brought to this country—Africa the only
country not conquered—The white man's Christianity not
in the way when he covets his neighbor's goods—Rea¬
sons given why the white man has not been able to take
Africa—Physical endurance lacking in the white man—
Other reasons why the white man has not gone into Africa
and conquered it—Africans making a living after their
own idea—Noted men of Africa—The colored race brought
in contrast with the Anglo-Saxon—What does Mr. Bruce
mean by "Anglo-Saxon" race?—Britain not great for many
years—Early stages in the life and history of Anglo-Saxons
—Why did the "superior race" remain for four hundred
years under the Romans?—Docility of the colored people
—Sixty millions of white slaves in the Roman province—•
White slaves exceeded the colored by the million—Efforts
of colored people for freedom—White race the "race of
reforms"—Mr. Bruce makes a thrust at the chastity of
our women—Some things the colored people know.
CHAPTER VI.
THE WHITE MAN'S SO-CALLED SCIENTIFIC AND
HISTORIC "NEGRO."
Term "Negro" not a proper name for the colored race—
The name "stuck on to us by the white man—An undis¬
guised fraud—Encyclopaedia Britannica on the word "Ne-
8
SYNOPSIS.
gro"—Description of a so-called "Negro"—Rev. Dr. Tucker
at the American Church Congress in 1883—Opinion of the
"Negro"—American Cyclopaedia on the term "Negro"—The
word "Negro" does not apply to Northern Africans—The
word "Negro" not synonymous with African—Denotes an
"ideal type"—Characteristics of "ideal type"—Ethiopians
merely any people darker than the Hellenic—The Caffres
of South Africa—Further characterises of the white man's
"ideal Negro."
Some of the peculiar characteristics of the so-called
scientific "Negro"—He mufct be black—He must have an
oily skin—His head must be flat—The arms must be Ions
--He must lean forward—Must be small and short—Can
the word "niger" describe such a wonderful being?—It
cannot be done—The white man all at sea—To the Latins,
word means "black"—To the Africans it means "great
river"—Not scientific after all—Where there is no agree¬
ment, there is no definite knowledge—Dr. Barth on the
word "niger"—Derived from a native African word—No
black people among the Latins—The Latins constructed
the word to mean a color—The word "Negro" is Spanish—
Simply means "black"—English Encyclopaedia says "Ne*
gro" is from the French "negre"—"Nigger" better English
for it than "Negro"—The word "Negro" is not used in Af¬
rica by Africans.
CHAPTER VII.
OUR STATUS: WHAT IS IT IN THIS COUNTRY?
The claim that the colored race has no right to this
country as a home—Discpuraging to the race—Historical
facts as to our occupation of this country—Columbus com¬
ing to this continent pure accident—Not the discoverer
First colony of Africans on this continent in 1503—Do-
SYNOPSIS.
9
scendants of Ham here before Columbus—Africans in the
West India Islands in 1502—Africans first removed to be
made slaves of in 1442—Portugal the first country to
which they were shipped—Data as to when Europe was
settled—Data as to when Africans were first brought to
this continent—Africans in the West Indies one hundred
and five years before the first colony was formed here—An
important fact in history—Africans more hardy than the
inhabitants of the Islands—Columbus and Priest De Las
Casas recommend the transportation of Africans—How
did they know they were more hardy than the Indians?—
Columbus, the priest, and the Governor Ovando, all offi¬
cers of the Spanish Government—A discrepancy between
history, and the report of Governor Ovando—Which shall
be accepted?—Acquirements of real estate and finance
give us a right in this country—Statistics from the Chi¬
cago Inter-Ocean—Amount of taxes paid by colored people
in the District of Columbia alone—Our educational status
—Students pay to the State of Virginia $10,COO a year for
their education—Our Constitutional and legal status—Ar¬
ticle Fourth of the Constitution—National Government re¬
sponsible for our citizen rights and privileges—Modes of
becoming citizens of the United States—United States
must protect her citizens—Article Fourteenm of the Con¬
stitution—The general government has stood still, and
seen mean customs grow into practice—This our home—
The white man not where he is by wise and deliberate
plans—He has reached his presenl status by haps and
mishaps—Mistakes with reference to this continent—Afri¬
cans not the first to be enslaved in America,—White wom¬
en sold to the colonies in Virginia with tke colored—The
white women "dissolute and vagabond"—Jail birds—The
white-man's so-called purpose in migrating to this country
to establish religious liberty and freedom of conscience—
Not out of a colonial state before they burned several per¬
sons a ive for their religious opinions—The white man
still persecuting people for religious opinions—No limit to
the instances.
10
SYNOPSIS.
CHAPTER VIII.
RACE INTERMINGLING.
Race intermixing began in antediluvian times, and kept
up to the present—Asserted that Caucasian races and de¬
scendants of Ham never mixed—Abraham took a Hamite
wife—The sons of Ishmael intermarried with the descend¬
ants of Cush—Joseph married to the daughter of an Egyp¬
tian priest—The wife of Moses a daughter of the race of
Ham—Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses—Moses' two sons
half Hamite—Esau took his wives of the daughters of Ca¬
naan—The line of the Saviour's birth—Judah, the leader
of the twelve tribes of Israel marries a Canaanite—Lot
and his family—Sampson a Shemite, married a Philistine
or Hamite—Solomon intermarried with the Egyptians—
Effort made to prove that Joseph did not serve under the
Egyptian kings—The Israelites the only people who can
be historically traced into Egypt—"Captive Shepherds,"
and "Shepherd Kings"—A nation of kings!—Conflicting
statements regarding them—Who were the "Shepherd
Kings?"—Some say they were Ishmaelites—IshmaeliteS
half Hamites—Ahab, a Shemite King, marries a princess
of Ham—Only to look about us for proofs that intermar¬
rying is still going on.
CHAPTER IX.
THE "SOCIAL EQUALITY" IDEA.
"Social equality" the terror of the white man—What is
meant by "social equality?"—The white man not disposed
to deal with realities—The white man's life barbarous and
degraded in its early stages—The doctrine of the "sur¬
vival of the fittest"—Is the white man sincere in his cry
of "social equality?"—Worcester's definition of "social"
The white man talking folly—Worcester on "equality"—
SYNOPSIS.
11
The white man declares in his constitution, that "all men
are created equal"—That the Creator has given all men cer
tain inalienable rights—The white man's own standards de¬
clare the colored man to be his social equal—It is impossible
for him to avoid social equality—We have homes of out1
own as sacred and pure as those of the white man—What
makes the white man's home a model of perfection?—
Life to the colored man, real, and not sham—The white
woman taught to believe herself only a thing of beauty to
her husband, and not a help—The colored woman knows
the realities of life. She is the real support and comfort—
The home life of the white man—His home not nearly so
sacred and dear to him as he wishes the world to believe
—The white man has two standards of morality—One
standard for the women, and another for the men—A cer¬
tain class begging for admission at the white man's "so¬
cial" door—Admission of white men and women—Proofs
that the standard of morality among the whites is very
low—Regularly organized companies that deal in human
flesh—230,000 erring girls in the country—The white man
winks at immorality, and sets himself up as a model and
example for human society—Rev. F. W. Farrar on the
family life among the Romans—Literature and art in¬
fected with the present degradation—Characteristics of
Roman civilization summed up—Women a3 "living pic¬
tures" at the present time—"Traffic in immorality—The
white man's code of morals—Morality and virtue com¬
pletely eliminated from politics and business—Assertion
made by Rev. Henry Ward Beecher—Case of Rev. Dr.
Brown—Further comment unnecessary.
CHAPTER X.
THE WHITE MAN CARRIED BACK TO HIS BEGIN¬
NINGS.
Origin of the white man; as a people—Has he con¬
nection with Noah, and his descendants?—History does
12
SYNOPSIS.
not show that the white man is the descendant of Japhetn
—Geikie on the"Cimbrians"—CyclopaediaBritannica on the
same—Distribution of nations based on distinctions of color
—The white man finds difficulty in making out an histori¬
cal descent from Japheth—The history of Japheth a total
blank—Lines from Homer purporting to refer to Japheth
and his desfcendants—A dark and dismal picture—The
white man's groundless assertions cannot stand for his¬
torical facts and data—Japheth's color not known—Knobel
thinks "white" the most "beautiful color"—Black also a
"beautiful color"—The white man does not know when
white people first began to exist in the world—Greek
origin of the white man—What does history say about
it—In no case can the white man talk of the greatness
and grandeur of his beginnings—What is Greek His¬
tory?—Homer as an historian—Plot of Homer's work—
Worcester on the History of Greece—Belden on the His¬
tory of the Greeks—The whole fabric received by the
Greeks as true—Some characters of Greek and Roman
times—Uranus—Saturn—King and god at the same time—
The "Golden Age"—Jupiter—Mythical trash called "beauti¬
ful conception of the Greek mind!"—If the myth and
fable were omitted from the white man's history he
would have none at all—Amphion—Orpheus—Mercury—
The white man's relationship to the State, as a man and
citizen—Mr. Ward on "Aryan," or "White Slavery"—The
growth of slavery before the beginning of the Christian
era the cause of great uprisings—Monopoly of public land's
by the few at Rome—30,000 war prisoners sold when Ta-
rentum was captured—Graecchus set upon by an infuriated
mob because his nature revolted against bloodshed and
atrocities—15,000 people sold as slaves after the siege of
Persia—Athens and her population—Corinth and her slave
population—The white man's race a race of slaves—Mil¬
lions of slaves without family, religion, possessions or
rights — Lower classes of the Roman Empire Their
wretched life.
SYNOPSIS.
13
CHAPTER XI.
SOME PACTS ABOUT ANCIENT GREECE.
The real facts about ancient Greece rarely brought out
in their true light—Extract from Whelpley's Compend of
History—The first civilization given the Greeks was by
the descendants of Ham—Inachus and the Kingdom of
Argos—Cecrops builds Cecropia—Cadmus, a Hamite,
founds Thebes—Why Greece and Greeks?—Who first in¬
habited Greece—Extract from "Biblia"—Eleusinian mys¬
teries—The Helots of Greece said not to have been in a
true sense—Slaves of Laeedaemon—Spartan slaves—Ser¬
vices required of Helots—The murder of a slave not pun¬
ishable by law—Once a year young Spartans waylay and
assassinate a Helot.
CHAPTER XII.
THE WHITE MAN IN GOVERNMENT.
The white man sentimental in government—As a
race, he is cruel, heartless and bloodthirsty—Set of
resolutions denouncing lynchings and other outrages ana
lawlessness—Is the white man capable of independ¬
ent self-government?—Are the rights of the people
safe in his hands—The fatal doctrine of State inde¬
pendence—Any city may entail international burdens
upon the general government—Outside parties busily
buying up the land in this country—English aristocrats
rule large dominions in the United States—A list of
English persons owning lands over here—English land
owners refuse to sell—Viscount Scully owns in Illinois
the best part of three counties—Effects of a "memorial"—
English landowners form an alliance among themselves
—European holdings of land in this country nearly twenty-
five millions of acres—Statistics from The Peninsular
14
SYNOPSIS.
Farmer—The country calling for men who will be true to
republican institutions—The Monroe Doctrine—Resolu¬
tions adopted at a Boston mass-meeting—The white man's
course in government a list of blunders and mistakes—A
deadlock in the country—The country billions of dollars
in debt—The white man tried to maintain a free and a
slave country at the same time—Still trying to debar ten
milions of citizens from their Constitutional rights—An¬
other source of weakness in this nation's government—-
Nine men can turn down the will of sixty-five millions of
people—No independence or sovereignty of* the people—
Crushing dictums of the Supreme Court—Cases that ought
to have come back to the people—The Declaration of Inde¬
pendence bestows rights upon all—The prejudiced judge
decided that we had no rights that the white man was
bound to respect—This principle has worked untold harm
to humanity everywhere—The purpose of the formation
of the Supreme Court—Judge Taney and his unjust deci¬
sion—The white man of this country too prejudiced and bi¬
ased and therefore unfit for the whole people — Senator
Sherman and his recent book—"Justice and Jurispru¬
dence:" a quotation—The President and the Monroe Doe-
trine—The Baltimore American on the Atlanta Exposition
—The World's Fair had a collapse—The Centennial cost
Philadelphia millions of dollars—The Exposition in New
Orleans a failure—The proposed Maryland Exposition—
Shall the colored race set the white man up as their
family, church and business model?—Mr. Depew on the
"Boom" system—The white man acts upon the ground of
haphazard and chan,ce—The Monroe Doctrine again—Ex¬
tracts from the English press on the Monroe Doctrine—
"Impossible to disguise the gravity of the difficulties that
have arisen between Great Britain and the United States"
—England bound to resist the claim of Monroeism—Sen¬
tences which include the Monroe Doctrine—Is the whit«
man a safe custodian of the rights of the people?—The
nation almost bankrupt—Nations turning from us to otk-
SYNOPSIS.
15
ers for their grain—Decision rendered by the Court of
Appeals in New York regarding saloons—A jumble of af¬
fairs—The Constitution like patchwork—Quotations from
an address of Senator Randall, of Maryland—Six hundred
and sixty-live new laws passed in 1894—A bad state of af¬
fairs—An immense amount of unnecessary legislation—■
One of the consequences of the present system of legisla¬
tion—The jury system an easy way of escape for certain
parties—The white map's former custom of trying beasts
and animals—Curious cases of animal trial nnd conviction
—A pig burnt for having eaten a child—Oxen and cows
punished legally for offences—Cocks believed to be asso¬
ciated with witches—Snails, fleas, mice, etc., proceeded
against and condemned—Anecdote of a Barbary Turk—■
Conjuration of witches, etc., practiced and taught in Lon¬
don—The white man not nearly so shrewd and wise as he
has thought himself to be—The Venezuelan question—The
white man not disposed to co-operate fairly—The white
man a gambler in the staples and means of human
life and livelihood—American Cyclopaedia on "Bulls and
Bears"—Dispatch from New York to the Baltimore World
—Wall Street robbery—Wicked work surpassed—Stock
gambling—How has the white man dealt with the people's
interests?—The white man's projects fly up like sky-rock¬
ets—Failure of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad—The white
man has had every advantage to show himself a success—
Disgraceful "row" between Senators—Plots to steal bills
before the Legislature of Virginia—Senator Flood cuts
Senator Flanagan's head to the bone—Compelled to lock
up bills in the safe of the Executive Office until needed by
the Senate.
INTRODUCTION.
Introductions are almost always valuable adjuncts to
books of a certain character; but it seems to the writer
that an introduction is indispensable to the present
volitme. The one purposed will consider three things:
First, the object of the work; then a short sketch of
the author's life; and lastly, the life-work of the same.
The writer of this introduction does not deem an
apology for undertaking this preface necessary; for,
since nothing but simple, plain, unvarnished f&cts will
be dealt with, it matters little, if anything, who shall
handle them.
The object, aim and import of the work shall be
considered first, because naturally one wishes to know
if it has an object, and what has constrained the au¬
thor to undertake it. A sketch of his' life will be
given, because when one reads of the aim, etc., one
would like to know something personal of the writer,
his career and advantages or training in order to be
able to draw conclusions as to his ability and authority
to write the book in question. His life, efforts and
work must necessarily follow; for one must be in¬
formed as to whether the author be sufficiently public-
spirited or interested in the well-being of his feUow
man to give him the right to talk as he does.
We will devote no more time to preliminaries, but
will consider the first part of our proposed course:
Why did the author of "The Nations: From a New
Point of View," choose such subjects as he has chosen,
to discuss in this book ? may be asked mentally by more
than one reader. The answer must be: For various
reasons, under various circumstances, and from va¬
rious moving causes.
2 (17)
18
INTRODUCTION.
One paper or essay, "The Hamite," was written from
a desire to show that the African had had something of
which to be proud, and to correct misleading state¬
ments, and as a sort of antidote for prejudice-poisoned
history. Another essay, "The Question of Race," was
written in defense of the race, against the coarse, scur¬
rilous pamphlet attack of a certain Wm. Cabell Bruce,
Esq., presumably a dyspeptic and evil-tempered barris¬
ter of the city'of -Baltimore. And so it goes on through
the list, aiming to set the colored race forth in an hon¬
est and true light; offsetting damaging and falsely-col¬
ored descriptions and so-called historical facts; endeav¬
oring to correct wrong ideas among ourselves, im¬
bibed from the too highly self-loving white people of
this country; tracing our ancestry back to the first and
only true source that we may have something solid to
go upon ; and last, if not least, giving our white brother
a taste of the lash of criticism; which is only fair, see¬
ing that it is ever his delight to lay it upon us, both for
causes well founded and unfounded. We, as a people,
do not claim to be saints and angels, but we can do very
well without the charges innumerable that are daily
trumped up against us by our not-by-any-means-too-
good white brethren.
There is much written about us, as a race, that is
intended to humiliate, mortify, and "keep us in our
place," as the white people of this country are fond of
puttin'P" it. But it is. not an easy taak to repress quicksil¬
ver, and, like it, we are continually bobbing up and slip¬
ping out of the way of our would-be repressers. Oh,
yes; a vast number of ill-natured whites have had a
fling at us. But times are changing, slowly but surely,
and the colored people are taking up the cudgels in our
own defence, and we mean to make a genuinely even-
handed fight: no mincing: no stepping back two steps
when one is taken; but giving just as hard blows as
the white man gives when he gives at all. Why should
we be careful of his feelings when he cares not a jot
INTRODUCTION.
19
for ours ? Why not make assertions that detract from
him, when he has always been doing so for us?
Because it is not Christianlike? Yes; but these are
white professing Christians I have in mind, the best of
their race. What is right for one Christian to do,
must surely be so for another. Color has nothing at
all to do with the matter. "It is not politic to do so?
The' white man holds the reins of government in his
hands; we will get no public office, nor will we share
in the electoral spoils if we hit the white man as he hits
us." Very well. So much the meaner is the white
man. But those who have tried the experiment
find that one gains just as much by being independent
as by cringing. We are not going to get very much
either way; but we might as well get our little with the
feeling that we got it standing as to feel that we got it
kneeling.
It is cowardly not to defend one's; self and one's peo¬
ple from calumny and false reports, if such defence can
possibly be made with any certainty or ground. The
white man needs but little ground on which to build his
statements. Why should we require more, even suppos¬
ing we cannot get it? And supposing we can, why,
we are so much the better off.
Now the writer of this introduction, for one, is quite
satisfied with the solidity of the groundwork furnished
in the present work, upon which we are to rest our race
history. It is quite as solid as the offsetting ground held
by the white historian for the use of the other side.
The white historian has ever striven to show the better
part of the best side a.s his share of the historical spoils,
and exhibit the worst part of the worst as ours, appar¬
ently with a refreshing innocence of the selfishness and
meanness of his act. To say the least, this is not fair;
but if we accept it unquestionably, really it is good
enough for us. But we do not all mean to accept it
unquestionably. But some of us are too fond of sifting
20
introduction.
and weighing the things the white brother says, in or¬
der to see which "is wheat and which is chaff . And why
should we not?
It is sifting, then, that the author of "The Nations"
has done. He has done it honestly, earnestly and
conscientiously. He believes every word he has writ¬
ten, and we consider that he has as good proofs for his
assertions as can possibly be produced on the opposing
side; for he has searched and compared both. Only,
when a white historian will overlook and twist things to
make them cover his particular case in the particular
way in which he wishes to have them, the author has
gone unswervingly down the line, and claimed what he
justly considers his own. No fault, surely, can be
found with this course. He has felt that there is a
deep need for a work of tViis kind; and truly there is,
since so many of us are Slow to contend for our right¬
ful place in the world's ranks—the place belonging to
a race of people calculated to be useful factors in its
achievements. There is no such thing as keeping us
down truly—keeping us back successfullv. We are
convinced that God from the first designed otherwise.
And no amount of abuse and falsehoods heaped upon
us, can suffice to cover us; and the false and prejudice-
tinged accounts by which historians seek to aid the un¬
just part of the world in the work of keeping us from
rising, are but so much material placed in our hands to
make us search out, examine, reject and deny the
wretched misrepresentations.
So much for the object of the author in writing
this book. Now in order to introduce the readers, to
the man himself, I cannot do better than insert the fol¬
lowing- sketch, taken from the Phrenological Journal
of February, 1877:
The South furnishes few, if any, better representatives of
true progress of the emancipated race than Rev. Harvey
.Johnson, pastor of the Union Baptist Church of Baltimore,
INTRODUCTION.
21
He is progressive in the highest sense of the term. * * *
He was born in Fauquier County, Va. (Aug. 4th, 1843.)
At an ea,rly age he became a freeman in the Lord, and with
a fearless courage and undaunted perseverance has gained
a well-earned reputation as an evangelieal leader that m&ny
in far more favored circumstances would be proud to pos¬
sess. He worked his way up by his own efforts, and is a
graduate of the Wayland Seminary, Washington, D. C.
He accepted a call as pastor of the Union Church in No¬
vember, 1872. It then had a membership of about 250, and
now has nearly 2,200, being the largest church in the State.
And this is not all, for it has "swarmed," so to speak, some
half dozen times; that is, has established six missions and
independent churches, all large and prosperous, and in
which former members are now laboring. This wonderful
success may be attributed, in part, to the pastor's executive
ability and indomitable energy as a worker; but more,
doubtless, to his true devotedness to the Master, and
implicit trust in His promises. He does not suffer himself
to be shackled by the creeds and opinions of men, but
reads and thinks for himself, and seeks by every means to
make men better. * * * He is an ardent temperance work¬
er, and is connected with several benevolent and humani¬
tarian institutions, and is truly a power for good among his
people and in the community at large. He was the origi¬
nator of the Baptist State Convention (now merged into the
Maryland State and District of Columbia Missionary Bap¬
tist Convention) and also of the "Mutual United Brother¬
hood of Liberty of the United States of America," which
was organized for the purpose of using "all legal means
within our power to procure and maintain our rights as
citizens of this our common country," * * * some important
cases have already been satisfactorily prosecuted. * * *
Harvey Johnson is emphatically a practical man of large
executive ability. * * *
The author's life work began in earnest, we may
say, in 1872, when he first became pastor of the Union
22
INTRODUCTION.
Baptist Church of this city. But this gradually took
in more than actual church work, other denominational
labors, such as Foreign Mission work (his church con¬
tributing $100.00 a year), Conventional work, benevo¬
lent projects, etc., but he has not ceased to lend a hand
in the struggles of the race for just recognition in this
city, in a number of directions.
Rev. Wm. J. Simmons, in his book, "Men of Mark,"
said of him:
He has never held any political position from the fact
he never took part in politics, except for prohibition; he
has labored, however, very earnestly in trying to obtain
the rights of the race as citizens, which has brought hitn
into communication with a large number of the prominent
men of the country.
In support of this statement it may be well to insert
just here the following extracts from personal letters
bearing on the admission of colored lawyers to prac¬
tice at the Baltimore bar:
Baltimore, March 20, 1885.
Dear Sir:—At 6:53 this a. m., I finished reading the de¬
cision of the Supreme Bench in the "Colored Lawyer's
Case," and at 6:54, I went to my desk to write you a con¬
gratulatory note as having been chiefly instrumental in
bringing about such a result. As reluctantly as it may
come by others, I, for one, accord you the undying honor
of having accomplished for this State, or the colored popu¬
lation thereof, a boon that has slumbered for years, and
would have continued to slumber but for the efforts of a
live and intelligent citizen, which has been found in the
person of the Rev. Harvey Johnson. All honor to Johnson
and Hobbs—not forgetting to let God be praised.
Fraternally yours,
(Rev.) P. S. Henry.
This extract is from a letter written by J. H. Wolff,
Esq., Attorney and Counsellor at Law:
Boston, Oct. 3rd, 1889.
My Dear Sir:—I take this opportunity to thank you for
INTRODUCTION.
23
the grand service you have rendered the race in removing
from the Maryland Code, a discrimination that was a dis¬
grace to the State, and a blot upon the American Judiciary.
I think that you have been instrumental in opening up a
rich field for a young colored lawyer of ability and charac¬
ter. * * *
This is from Mr. Joseph E. Briscoe, formerly Editor
of the Vindicator:
March 17th, 1885.
My Dear Sir: You will please accept my congratulations
and heartfelt gratitude for the grand victory that the col¬
ored people of Maryland have achieved through your ef¬
forts in testing, in our courts, the rights of colored law¬
yers to plead in the courts of our city and State as Attor¬
neys at Law. The victory is a grand one for Maryland and
the colored race; but to your unselfish and patriotic efforts
belong the victory. The colored race owe you, therefore,
more than they do any other man in Maryland. * * *
Now, Sir, one more effort to obtain the appointment of
some competent colored teachers in the colored schools of
our city. * * *
Just now (March, 1896), that the question of the
schools and colored teachers is making things so lively
in Baltimore, it will be apropos to quote the following
from an article of the author's sent to the National
Baptist, at that time the organ of the white Baptists of
Philadelphia, to show that his attention had already
turned in the direction of the schools:
July 16th, 1885.
Right here in the city of Baltimore we are not allowed
to teach our own children in the colored schools. I hold
that this is a gross injustice. Shall we forgive it while the
injustice continues? We have separate schools, and not a
single colored teacher allowed to teach, although they hold
certificates qualifying them for such a position. There is
a Normal School, a High School, and a City College in this
City of Baltimore for white boys and youth; but neither
High School (this was in 1885) nor College for the colored;
24
INTRODUCTION.
nor can we send our children to either of these institu*
tions. I admit that there is what is called a High School.
There is no High School building, and only one Grammar
School to accommodate the children of 65,000 inhabitants;
and this so-called High School for the colored chidren is a
simple class, consisting of 22 scholars, who are taught by
the Principal of the Grammar School, who receives the pay
of a Grammar School teacher only. To crown it all, these
children are not allowed to graduate even from this so-
called High School Department. Is this right? Is it just?
Is it an equal chance in the race for life? Is it fair? espe¬
cially in the face of the fact that there are being kept from
year to year, statistical records of our progress, which are
to count for or against us in after years. * * *
The following quotation is from a report taken by
the Baltimore Daily American of a public speech made
by the author in 1886, at Douglass Institute, this city:
Mr. Johnson attacked the Republican party of Maryland
for its neglect of the colored people during the past four¬
teen years. Not a public man nominated in fourteen years
had declared for the repeal of the bastardy law, the open¬
ing of the bar to colored men, the jury box to colored men,
and higher education for colored children (the speech
was in the interest of prohibiton).
Another extract from a report by the Daily American
of another speech for prohibition at a mass,meeting of
citizens held at Mount Pisgah Tabernacle:
If you announce through your public speakers, and put it
in your platform, promising to give us better opportunties
to educate our children, I guarantee that every colored
man will come into the movement. The faces you see here
to-oay expect such action. We have only one-third the fa¬
cilities now. It is not fair, etc. The speaker then named
the various high schools, including the Normal School, Bal¬
timore City College and two female high schools for white
children, while the sixty-five thousand colored citizens had
only a ricketty, condemned building on Holliday Street,
which was vacated by the city officers, because it was un-
INTRODUCTION.
25
safe. In this there were six hundred children. Twenty-
two scholars in the upper class constituted the high school.
Is this right? * * * If you want us, tell us that we shall
aave equal school facilities, etc., etc.
About two years later Baltimore did improve the
school facilities for its colored citizens. A new and
commodious High and Grammar School Was built; the
Grammar and High School courses properly graded;
annual commencements instituted, and pupils gradu¬
ated. So far, so good. But the good was not without
alloy. Instead of the new building being used exclu¬
sively as a High and Grammar School, for which it
would serve comfortably, those classes were cramped
and put to inconvenience by having included in the
building one of the primary schools, thereby taking
-from it a portion of its dignity. Another portion was
clipped off by the refusal of the Board to recognize
and pay to the principal a regular High Scjiool princi¬
pal's 'salary.* These and some other things still, in
1896, constitute a grievance to the colored people.
Strenuous efforts were put forth to have these differ¬
ences adjusted, as well as other just claims recognized.
The following clipping from the Baltimore Standard
of January, 1896, bears on this subject:
The announcement that Dr. Harvey Johnson, the able
divine, has come forward again in the immediate interest
of better educational facilities for the colored youth of our
city, should be received with great joy. It will be remem¬
bered that it was through the efforts of Dr. Johnson, and
a few other representative men of our race, that an ordi¬
nance was passed making it possible, under certain condi¬
tions, for colored teachers to get positions in our colored
public schools. At the time it was considered a radical de¬
parture from the ordinary, and looked upon by some as
an experiment. Good results, however, have been obtained
* Since the above was written these conditions have
been remedied.
26
introduction.
thereby, and it is our wish that Dr. Johnson will be emi¬
nently successful in his effort to obtain the desired and
rightful aim.
This editorial had reference to the following item in
the same paper:
Dr. Harvey Johnson has presented an ordinance to Dr.
J. Marcus Cargill (our colored representative in the Balti¬
more City Council) entitled "An Act to Perfect a Colored
School." The ordinance will be submitted to the City
Council on Monday night next.
And also this:
The Committee on Education of the First Branch City
Council is favorable to the ordinance known as "An Act
for a Perfect Colored High School," which Rev. Harvey
Johnson, through our Councilman, Dr. J. Marcus Cargill,
submitted. Dr. Johnson should have the support of all in
his endeavor to bring about this needed improvement. * * *
Now is the time to clamor for reform. Dr. Harvey John¬
son has a thorough appreciation of the situation, and noth¬
ing less than a perfect High School, with, the same facili¬
ties for both races, should meet the demand of the colored
people of our city.
The following letter received by the author from a
former colored representative of the Baltimore City
Council, Harry S. Cummings, Esq., while on a subject
perhaps not of so very much importance as the fore¬
going, will, however, go to show his interest and care
for the general welfare of his people. The letter will
speak for itself:
Baltimore, April 13, 1902.
My Dear Friend:—You will remember the talk we had
sometime since concerning the changing of the names of
alleys to streets. The enclosed clipping will show that I
have carried out the promise I made you. On Monday
evening I offered an ordinance to change the name of every
alley in my ward to a street, and it has been passed. * • *
I have also succeeded in having a great many alleys in all
sections of the city changed to streets. As I told you, this
INTRODUCTION.
27
was a matter that concerned our people, and that I would
see it through.
Very truly,
Harry S. Cummings.
The reason why the author desired this change
made was because many of our very respectable fam¬
ilies lived in small streets which were very generally
dubbed "alleys," which name carries with it a by no
means pleasant sound and appearance. Now, why, he
argued, should these good people be put to the mortifi¬
cation of writing "alley" on their address, when they
paid rent and were otherwise self-respecting and in¬
dustrious? Hence his request to Councilman Cum¬
mings.
On the barbarous practice of lynching, too, the au¬
thor of "The Nations" was' ever ready with protests
and denunciations. As he expressed himself on the
subject in the National Baptist: "* * * * As Christians,
we propose to pray, and as citizens, we will protest
against these lawless Outrages; and we will petition the
nation in general and the Legislature of the United
States in particular, that they so make and enforce the
laws that this curse upon the nation cease." This, of
course, had reference to the object and intention of the
"Brotherhood of Liberty," the body organized for the
purpose of raising funds for prosecuting cases of un¬
just discrimination in the courts, and obtaining, if pos¬
sible, justice.
In the meeting of November 28, 1887, strong pro¬
tests against the brutal crime of lynching were made;
and in the case of a man who had been lynched about
that time the Brotherhood, in condemning lynching,
called on the authorities to offer a reward for the ap¬
prehension of the lynchers, and also offered a reward
of $500 for the arrest and conviction of the party con¬
nected with the lynching. It would consume too much
time to mention more of such instances of the author's
interest and labors in the public weal, and so I will pass
28
INTRODUCTION.
on to his efforts along a literary line. Among his first
efforts is a collection of sermons and papers, which he
published at different periods in pamphlet form. Of
one of these sermons, viz.: "The Equality of the Father
and the Son," the late Major Martin R. Delaney has
this to say:
My Dear Sir:—I have read your extraordinary discourse
in the "Equality of the Father and the Son." I never be¬
fore had a clear conception of the relation of the Three
Persons in the Godhead. Though I believed it was simply
by faith, yet I confess I did not understand. But you-have
made us understand by giving us the mental sight of the
functions, the offices to be performed by the" Three-One
God, and thereby of the Godhead. I could wish that all our
people had an opportunity to read this able discourse—as
originally coming from one of their own race—as treated,
that it might thereby inspire them with that love and pride
of race so desirable among us. I am, dear sir,
Your friend and brother,
M. R. Delaney.
These sermons have all been well received and favor¬
ably commented upon; but the author "found his level,"
as the expression goes, when he began to search out
facts about and write upon the subject of the Hamitic
Race. With reference to his pamphlet, "The Hamite,"
Prof. Pegues has this to say in his book entitled "Our
Baptist Ministers"It has cost the author years of
research," which is certainly true. Prof. Pegues fur¬
ther says: " 'The Hamite' has had a large sale, has
been widely read, and has -been received with marked
favor, and even with enthusiasm in some cases, when
offered for sale." I will here insert a few press notices
of the above-named pamphlet:
From the Baltimore Daily American:
Rev. Dr. Harvey Johnson, of Union Baptist Church, has
just published a book called "The Hamite." It gives an
original and spicy history of the origin of the colored race.
J. F. Weishampel is publisher.
INTRODUCTION.
29
From the Kansas Citizen'.
Dr. Johnson's "Hamite," and sermons of that order, will
do more good than a century's rant on the "Sea of Glass"
and "Shining Pavements." In his efforts to show what
the race has been, in exploding the popular fallacy that
Ham was cursed and that our present condition is of divine
origin and sanction, in endeavoring, to lift the Hamites to
their proper level in the human family, he well deserves
the thanks of the race and the thinking people generally.
We quite agree with him when he says, "No one knows
what a depressing effect the application of the words, 'a
servant of servants shall he be', have had upon us as a
race." Black men still cower in the presence of a white
face, the hat slides off, the knees become nimble and the
teeth visible from the fallacious interpretation of the scrip¬
tures. "The Hamite" is a good book, and well worth read¬
ing.
From the Sunday Scho'ol Helper (Baltimore) :
"The Hamite" is the title of a very interesting pamphlet
by the Rev. Harvey Johnson, D. D. This is one of a series
of sermons and addresses by this distinguished divine, and
it will fully repay a perusal. Those of our friends who
claim that the colored man came from nowhere, and is go¬
ing nowhere, should read this paper, and they would, no
doubt, have good cause for reflection.
From the Home Protector (Baltimore) :
It will help to remove the idea so long entertained that
an eternal curse was put on the colored race, who are the
descendants of Ham, and that they are forever to be sub¬
ordinate to the other two branches of the sons of Noah.
It is a looking glass in which a Hamite can look and see
his origin, struggles, achievements and the disadvantages
with which the race has to contend.
From the Sower and Reaper (Baltimore) :
On the whole, the Doctor has given us a magfcerly produc¬
tion well digested, well written, concise and conclusive.
30
INTRODUCTION.
It is a book that should be read by every member of the
colored race; for no one can read it without feeling a re¬
newed interest in the achievements of his race, and a
desire to be an honor to it.
From an article by Rev. W. A. Creditt, in t5ie
Sower and Reaper:
Becoming enthusiastic over the contents as suitable to
awaken the noblest ambitions of our young, without invita¬
tion, I sought the privilege of an agency. The pamphlet
has been enthusiastically received as one of the greatest
helps to our future development. It is one of the most
helpful articles I ever read. At first reading, the facts are
simply startling. Having been in darkness many years,
the suddenness and glare of the light blind one until his
optics become inured. At first the men are as trees; medi¬
tation and personal research say they are men—after all,
the trouble was with my sight. May Dr. Harvey Johnson
live long to champion our cause, and to infuse enthusiasm
in our young.
From the American Baptist (Louisville, Ky.) :
* * * You will find in it the other side of the question
that sheds light upon which way the Negro went, where
he came from and how he got along for thousands of years;
and it removes much prejudice and blindness that have
hung over the mind so long. As a man, he (the author) is
full of life, educated, talented and a gifted minister of Jesus
Christ, warm and enthusiastic in speech, a strong Bap¬
tist and a lover of his race.
I will also quote from the following correspondence
with reference to "The Hamite
From Harry S. Cummings, Esq., Attorney and
Counsellor at Law, Baltimore, Md.:
Rev. Harvey Johnson, D. D.:
My Dear Sir:—I have read with much pleasure and
profit your treatise on the "Hamite," and it gives me much
pleasure to say that it is an able and careful treatment
of the subject. I confess that from a perusal of it, I have
introduction.
31
gathered much instruction, and from the strong and conclu¬
sive manner in which your assertions are authenticated,
one may well be proud that he is a son of Ham. A subject
of this kind, treated in such a manner, is calculated to in¬
spire the young of the race and disabuse their minds of
the erroneous idea that to be a Hamite is to be doomed,
and lead them to play the part in these, that their ances¬
tors played in days of yore. You have my congratulations
and my sincere thanks for the instruction which I have
acquired. I sincerely hope that this contribution to the lit¬
erature of our race may have the influence and publicity
to which it is justly entitled.
From Rev. W. A. Creditt, Pastor Berean Church,
Waohington, D. C.
Dear Bro. Johnson:—To-night I sold my fifty "Kara¬
ites" at one move. Oh, that I had then about two hundred!
Send me at once, one hundred more. * * * You are doing
wonderful good through your pamphlets.
From Rev. R. A. McGuinn, of Baltimore, Md.:
* * * I have read it (The Hamite) with much interest,
and have had my mind awakened and enlightened in a re¬
search of history, both novel and valuable. It ought to
rid the race of some odious misconceptions and lead, as
well, to an exhaustive and patient study of whether those
things were so.
From Mr. G. F. Riehings, Philadelphia, Pa.
* * * U you had never done anything else in the interest
of your race but write that little book, why that in itself
marks you as a great man, I tell you, there is some deep
thought in that very "Hamite." I only wish you could
make every Southerner read that, and when he had read it,
have sense enough to understand it.
From Mr. J. E. Bruce, newspaper correspondent and
writer:
My Dear Dr. Johnson:—I have read the "Hamite" very
carefully. It is well written and its style is graceful and
forceful. The argument is, in my judgment, unanswerable
32
INTRODUCTION.
and the facts of history—modern and profane—upon which
it is based, make it invulnerable at every point. The book
ought to have wide circulation. It contains facts and in¬
formation which the great mass of our people should be
possessed of. For myself, I wish to thank you for the in¬
tellectual and historical feast you have given me in this
book.
From Mr. Thomas H. White, a student of the Vir¬
ginia Seminary, Lynchburg, Va.:
My Dear Sir:—Your favor was duly received. * * * "The
Hamite" is a history in itself. * * * Your kind offer to an¬
swer any difficult question that we may find in studying the
"Negro Race," is highly appreciated by me, and meets the
hearty concurrence of all the rest. Please accept our
many thanks and congratulations upon the advance steps
which we see in your work to uplift the race.
His next effort along his favorite line of study and
argument was ,a pamphlet of thirty-one pages, entitled
the "Question of Race." This little book, in the form
of a "paper," was read before the Monumental Liter¬
ary and Scientific Association of Baltimore by special
invitation; and at its close, the following resolution
was adopted:
Whereas, the Monumental Literary and Scientific Asso¬
ciation of Baltimore, Md., has listened with great pleasure
to the reading by Dr. Harvey Johnson of his exhaustive
paper, "A Reply to W. Cabell Bruce's Pamphlet on the
Negro Problem," and believing that such a paper should be
generally read; therefore,
Be it Resolved, That the Association respectfully request
Dr. Johnson to print his paper in pamphlet form that it
may be available to all.
J. McGuinness, President.
W. Ashbie Hawkins, Secretary.
This pamphlet, as I have said, was a reply to an
abusive and contemptible harangue published by Law¬
yer W. Cabell Bruce, and when "The Question of
INTRODUCTION.
33
Race" was published, it was received gladly as a
defence' against and reply to the ranting utterances of
this lawyer. The Richmond Planet, in speaking of it,
says:
We have received "The Question of Race," by Rev. Har¬
vey Johnson, D. D. This is an admirable reply to W. Cabell
Bruce, Esq., relative to his strictures upon the colored race.
Rev. Johnson ably maintains his position, gives facts from
history, and proves that the colored race has an ancestry
of which it may well be proud. His assertions are from
biblical history, supported by the incontrovertible evidence
adduced by writers of even profane history. We are en¬
thusiastic over his efforts, and hasten to congratulate him
upon the service he has rendered the race.
The National Monitor (Brooklyn, N. Y.) says:
Dr. Johnson is unmerciful, but dignified, in his scathing
castigation of Mr. Cabell (Bruce), and in his effective
thrusts with his javelin of logic at Mr. Cabell's false prop¬
ositions, which he calls nothing more nor less than a bun¬
dle of abuse, slander, vituperation and misrepresentation
cast and heaped upon a whole race of people. He then goes
on and shows that Mr. Cabell must better arm himself in
defence of his race prejudices, or hide himself and let the
"Negro Problem" alone.
The American Baptist says:
It is a strong and vigorous attack upon the false and il¬
logical position assumed by Mr. Bruce in regard to the race.
He handles the subject in his usual entertaining and chaste
manner; and it is withal, a very instructive treatise on an
interesting subject.
The Waylan.d Alumni Journal (Washington, D. C.)
says:
Few men in this country are as well prepared to discuss
the Hamitic question as Dr. Johnson, because for years he
has studied the best authors on Ethnology, and is pecu¬
liarly fitted to grasp a subject of that kind. He is also an
able logician, having a way of disarming the most obdurate
3
34
INTRODUCTION.
antagonist, and carrying conviction to the skeptic. We are
proud of bis scholarship and any production from his eru¬
dite pen.
The Baptist Messenger (Baltimore, Md.) says:
It is a reply to one W. Cabell Bruce, Esq., who has ma¬
liciously assailed the whole colored race. * * * Mr. Bruce
boasted claims for the white race, but his only foundation
for such claims is bold assertion. On the other hand, Mr.
Johnson has given facts, stubborn facts, historical facts;
such facts as no one with common sense would attempt to
dispute. Such a pamphlet as this is what is needed in
every home as a text book to instruct the race and to en¬
lighten the enemies who are blinded by unreasoning preju¬
dice and conceit.
The Gloucester Letter says:
Dr. Harvey Johnson, of Baltimore, takes the front rank in
discussing the race question. He is a stern advocate of
the descendants of Ham, and in his able reply to Mr. W.
C. Bruce, proved by historical facts that he is master of
the subject.
C. Osborne Ward, Esq., Librarian of the Department
of Labor, Washington, D. C., writes:
I have not seen the Bruce pamphlet, but was already pre¬
pared by my own study of the question to see that your
excoriating quill has done justice to an egotistical brag¬
gart.
J. M. Townsend, Esq., Recorder General Land Of¬
fice, Washington, D. C., writes:
I have read with pleasure your work, "The Question of
Race." I congratulate you upon your unanswerable reply
to Mr. Bruce.
Mr. D. Virgil, of Bermuda, writes:
The book seems to open or throw a great light where
darkness has been for a long, long time. Thanks to kind
Providence that he has made you the instrument of such a
work; and may he keep and strengthen you to continue.
INTRODUCTION.
35
Mr. John E. Bruce, writes:
I have read with profit and instruction your scathing re¬
view to this man's puny effort to detract from and belittle
the reputation of the black race; and here is my hand;
I'm with you. The Hon. John H. Smythe, Ex-Minister to
Liberia, and his estimable wife have also read the book,
and they are delighted 'with it.
Lawyer Chas. W. Johnson, writes:
It is a work that I think ought to be in the hands of
every member of our race.
Mr.. G. F. Richings, writes:
Your book proves two things: first, your ability as a
writer, and, next, your great knowledge from a historical
standpoint of your own and other races.
Prof. I. Garland Penn, writes:
It is a complete answer to Bruce. It is indeed worthy
of every laudable remark that has been made about it. * * *
It is simply unanswerable.
Rev. W. T. Dixon, Pastor Concord Baptist Church,
Brooklyn, N. Y., writes:
With all my heart I thank our God for giving to us a
Harvey Johnson to defend our race from the cowardly as¬
saults of such men as W. Cabell Bruce, as you have so man¬
fully done by arguments conclusive and logic irresistible, in
your paper, "The Question of Race," now in pamphlet
form.
T. D. Tharpe, M. D., writes:
I have read with admiration and delight the kindred
productions, "The Hamite" and "The Question of Race,"
and consider them a masterpiece. These should certainly
be read by every colored person, and with feelings of due
pride that they have a representative capable of defending
the race so incontrovertibly.
Prof. J. E. Jones, of Richmond (Va.) Theological
Seminary, writes:
Your book I have read'with great joy and satisfaction.
It is excellent, and goes at the matter with a master hand,
36
INTRODUCTION.
I am prepared to say after reading it that you have taken
in the situation and "gone for" the man with gloves off.
The race feels proud to have one who can champion its
cause in such a masterly manner.
Rev. A. P. Eaton, writes:
I have just finished reading "The Equality of the Father
and Son;" "Christ the Covenant Messenger;" "The Ham-
ite;" "The Question of Race;" and now sit down after re¬
viewing them, to thank you heartily for them. And after
all of the great men of the Hamitic race, you are the big¬
gest man I see. Surely W. Cabell Bruce will not again at¬
tempt to touch that subject, for you have whipped him out
of the fight of the race problem.
Rev. H. N. Jeter, of Newport, R. I., writes:
It is the best thing I ever read on the Race Question. It
is sublime. You have completely used Bruce up and shown
him to be ignorant of history.
And the following is from the Suburban Enterprise,
Lawyer Rufus White, Editor:
We return our thanks to Dr. Harvey Johnson, of Balti¬
more, for two very interesting and able sermons from his
pen-; also for "The Hamite' and the 'Question of Race;'
the former showing that colored men ■ are directly de¬
scended frpm Ham, and have been once powerful in civili¬
zation and glorious in history; while the latter deals with
the race from an ethnological standpoint.
And now that I have dealt with the three sections
into which I at first divided this Introduction, viz: The
aim and object of the author in writing- this work, a
personal sketch of the same, and, thirdly, his life work
and literary efforts, there yet remains one accompani¬
ment to a thorough Introduction, and that is, a brief re¬
view of such personal opinions and expressions of ap¬
preciation with regard to the author's character and
standing in the community in which he lives, and
among the people with whom he is a co-worker, both at
home and elsewhere, Tp this end, I shall make some
INTRODUCTION.
37
quotations from correspondence and public print. One
cannot in good taste speak in praise of oneself, even
if he be not too modest to do so; and one does not al¬
ways care to have one's autobiographer do so; but
when a person has so comported himself that he has
made friends both at home and abroad, and those
friends have been good and kind enough to speak well
of him, heartily and sincerely, believing that he is wor¬
thy of the same, I think that those opinions and ex¬
pressions ought to be carefully preserved out of a feel¬
ing qf gratitude to and appreciation of, the ones who
have given them. And from them, too, the reader
can draw his own conclusions or inferences, as to the
writer's right to a hearing.
This clipping from the Suburban Enterprise will
serve to show that the author, as the Chinaman would
exoress it, "can muchee talkee," which, to be sure, a
pers'on ought to be able to do when he aims to be an au¬
thority on such subjects as he makes a special study:
"Your correspondent spent a very enjoyable hour with
Dr. Harvey Johnson on Saturday. The Doctor is one of the
most interesting gentlemen to talk to, it has been our pleas¬
ure to meet. He seems brimful of theology, philosophy,
law, and above all, common sense, which he showers down
upon hib auditor in that Telemaquen manner for which he
is noted.
While in Boston attending the Baptist Anniversaries
held there in May, 1889, he met a correspondent to the
New York Age, a young lawyer, and judging from
his report of the meetings, a keen observer:
From the New York Age:
Re\. Harvey Johnson, D. D., pastor of the North Street
Baptist Church in Baltimore, and so well known as the
missionary preacher of that city, made a very favorable
impression by his earnest simplicity and plain practical
views*. He carries in his very air the courteous gentleman,
the experienced man of affairs, and the friend of the peo-
INTRODUCTION.
pie. His broad views on religion, his earnest stand for
temperance, and his efforts in opening free schools, in hav¬
ing colored men admitted to the Maryland bar, and for the
removal of all odious black laws from the legis'ation of ibe
State, stamp him a live, public-spirited citizen of ability
and courage. Some years ago the society of the Twelfth
Baptist Church in this city extended him a call to their pul¬
pit; but he did not see fit to accept it. Sunday evening he
preached in that pulpit to a very large audience of his old
friends. Monday evening he spoke to a crowded audience
at Tremont Temple on educational work among the colored
people of the South. Earnest, incisive, practical and fear¬
less, his address was so admirably tempered with consider¬
ation for those holding opposite opinions that the audience
would not have it when he finished, and he was compelled
to decline to speak longer, in order not to disarrange the
program of otner speakers.
A Baltimore Correspondent to the New York Age,
has this to say:
Among the Baptists, Rev. Harvey Johnson, D. D., stands
well. He has been to Afro-Americans here a Colossus of
strength, and wrought many reforms, and no great reform
has come to us here that he has not assisted in bringing
about. He is an earnest Christian. As a speaker, in style
and manner of composition and delivery, he is like the late
Spurgeon, on account of the simplicity of his language.
For more than twenty years he has been pastor of the
Union Baptist Church, with a membership of over 2,000,
and his congregation is undying in its affection for him.
Lawyer E. J. Waring, of the Baltimore Bar, writes
thus in the Baltimore News:
In all that concerns his people, he is aggressive ana
fearless. In agitating the question of equal rights before
the law, he has been in the front rank and took a leading
part in the movements that opened the Bar to colored
lawyers in Baltimore.
INTRODUCTION.
39
Miss Ida B. Wells, (Iola) writes in the New York
AgeJ as follows:
Rev. Harvey Johnson, of Baltimore, has stood in the fore¬
front battling for his race's rights, and is still wielding an
influence by which his race is benefiting and will benefit,
long after he is dead.
He has been invited to lecture in different places,
both on his favorite theme, "The Harnite," which has
always been enthusiastically received, and on other sub¬
jects. In speaking of a lecture at Wayland Seminary,
the Wayland Alumni Journal says:
Dr. Harvey Johnson's lecture before the students on "Our
Obligations," was a masterpiece. It was an eloquent ex¬
position of the Negro's position as a factor in our social,
political and religious life.
He has been honored in many ways: in positions of¬
fered; by invitations to take part in public gatherings,
and in numberless other directions. When these hon¬
ors have not conflicted either with his work, duty, or
conscience, they have been gratefully accepted; other¬
wise they have been respectfully declined, for he has
never cared for honors that would merely benefit him¬
self ; but such as he felt would reflect credit on his race
and be of service to mankind, he has not refused. He
was enrolled a member of the Virginia Teachers' As¬
sociation, in 1892. It was in 1888, that the degree of
"Doctor of Divinity" was conferred upon him by the
Richmond Theological Seminary, this being the first
degree, I believe, conferred by this institution.
Of late years, becoming more and more convinced,
both from observation and experience, that the colored
Baptists, in order to better develop themselves along
educational- and other lines, should make efforts to
found, support and manage their own educational in¬
stitutions, etc., as they build, support and manage their
own churches; for, as he said, "Why else are we being
educated?" To this end he wrote a series of "Open
Letters" to Baptists of America through the Philadel-
40
INTRODUCTION.
phi a Christian Banner. These letters created some stift
arguments and spirited debates. The letters themselves
were a plea for independence of thought and action
along the various lines of progress and advancement,
which, one would suppose, would commend itself to all
freedom-loving people. It is truly self-evident that
our white friends do not wish us to rise beyond certain
boundSj and that they will use every advantage they
possess—and they possess many—to thwUrt us and
keep us within those bonds. Some of us will not sei
this, but there are those who do see it.
The Open Letters referred to created considerable
comment, as I have said. Editor T. Thomas Fortune,
of the Nezv York Age, wrote the author with refer¬
ence to the opening one:
Dear Friend:—I have read your luminous and unanswer¬
able article in the Christian Banner of June 21st, and I
commend you for the position you have taken, and endorse
the position without reservation. If the Afro-American
Baptists cannot stand upon their own legs, they ought to
fall down. They are rated as a separate organization, and
are at the same time unable to move hand or foot without
permission of the whites' organization. I hope your strike
for liberty-will succeed.
In commenting on theste same Open Letters, Rev. Dr.
E. K. Love says in the Banner:
If there was nothing else grand in Dr. Harvey Johnson,
his race pride, independence, love of our denomination,
and manhood, should commend him most highly to every
Negro Baptist in this great country. * * * Sooner or later,
Dr. Johnson's ideas must obtain.
An editorial in the Baptist Magazine says:
Dr. Harvey Johnson's Open Letters in the Christian Ban¬
ner, of Philadelphia, Pa., are characteristic of the man.
They are pointed, dignified and honest in statement. The
American Baptist Home Mission Society is a public institu
tion. and as such may expect to have its methods criticised.
INTRODUCTION.
41
The man who crosses swords with the Secretary of that
organization in this controversy is a life member of the
Society and regular money contributor to its school at
Washington (and has been for perhaps over fifteen years),
sending the best of his young men and women from his
church to the institution under its (the Society's) care, and
since the controversy has made an appropriation to Way-
land Seminary. Now, we submit, such a man is entitled to
a respectful hearing; such a grand man as Harvey John¬
son should not have his motives impugned when he asks
in his way for information. He has many sympathizers
who believe in the sincerity of his motives and the justness
of his cause * * *. The controversy has opened many eyes,
and puts, in part, in our possession the very facts Dr. John¬
son was anxious to secure.
This brings us around again to the starting point in
our introduction. The aim or object of the author of
"The Nations," in writing these Open Letters, was his
anxiety for the true and independent advancement of
his people, and his aim, or object, in putting this book
into the hands of that same people is' to further among
them the same ends, which is the only genuine way to
become again a great nation on the earth. Many things
will conspire to defeat these ends, but they cannot be
permanently thwarted if God be with us and for us, as
it has been well proven He is. And now having done
what I could to make his readers acquainted with the
author of this book, I close, feeling sure that if it be
accepted and read as sincerely as' it is offered and writ¬
ten, it cannot fail of the object for which it is published.
A. E. J.
THE NATIONS FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW.
CHAPTER I.
WHAT IS THE NEW POINT OF VIEW?
To answer such an inquiry as the above properly,
would require volumes upon volumes. But still there
are many things, both profitable and interesting, that
may be said of the nations, in very small space. And
I know of no better place to begin than at the starting
place of mankind, and that is1 at Eden. There we find
after the great tragedy in the garden, and the expul¬
sion of man therefrom, that the nations began to flow
down the stream of time in a two-fold form, sometimes
obscure and almost invisible, and then, again, showing
themselves plain and distinct. After Cain slew his
brother Abel, he betook himself to himself, and he and
his family formed one of the branches of the race of
mankind that has come down to us in history. The
other branch consisted of Adam, and the other part of
his family, including his wife and others that were
born to them after Cain left.
The life of Cain stands out clear and plain after he
broke away from the rest of the family, or, rather, after
he was driven off to himself, for his great wickedness
in so stealthily and cruelly slaying his brother Abel.
History informs us that he moved off to the East of
Eden, and built the city of Enoch and dwelt there with
his posterity and became the artisans and artificers of
the antediluvian world. In other words, they were
the skilled workmen. One of his sons was also a herds¬
man, namely the family of Jabal, and Jubal, was the or¬
gan builder of his age;and Tubal-cain, who had part of
44
THE NATIONS
his Grandfather Cain's name, was the chief mechanic
of his day, for he is said to be an instructor in brass,
iron, etc., or, in other words, the artificer in all kinds of
cunning- work. But just here seems to end the history
of Cain in about the same way as it began, for he comes
on the stage of life in a scene that ends in the cruel death
of his brother. So we hear Lamaeh saying, "I have
slain a man !".and thus ends the history of Cain in its
public and national form.
So Adam, and that line or branch of the nation that
came down through him, is again introduced in the
form of the birth of his son Seth, who is to take the
place of Abel in Adam's family. So we have here what
I call two important epochs in the early history of man¬
kind. The end of Cain, and his posterity, as a distinct
nation, and the birth of Seth, which marks the merging
of the two branches of mankind into one, which had
been kept separate since the death of Abel, and, as I
said, Cain's history stops here, and Adam's alone is
taken up again, and the history comes down through
him alcne, until after the flood. When I say through
Adam alone, I mean we have no one of his family living
apart from the rest of the family as did Cain and his
posterity. We have shown that Cain and his descend¬
ants were actively busying themselves with that side
of life that pertains to the arts and sciences, both in
agriculture and other arts, for Cain was a tiller of the
ground and his sons and their descendants were artisans
of the different kinds that then existed.
Now, let us turn to Adam, and see what he and his
family were dtfing during the period of which we have
just been waiting. Strange as it may appear, it is
nevertheless a fact that we have very little record of
anything that Adam and the rest of his family did dur¬
ing1 this laps'e of time between the death of Abel and
the birth of Seth. The most that is said of Adam in
this interval, is, that certain ones were added to his
family at different times; but whether he taught his
from a new point op view. 45
descendants any of the trades is not stated, or whether
he and they followed a life of shepherdy and farming
altogether, is not said; or whether they did neither, is
not said. But as they had to live, and that, too, accord¬
ing to the prediction and commandment of God, in the
sweat of their faces, we may well suppose that they
were agriculturists solely, that is, I mean, they were
not, in any sense, mechanics, but farmers.
So we have before us the life of mankind in its earli¬
est stages, presented in a twofold form of civilization;
and so most of the time, until the present, there has,
speaking in general terms, existed a twofold form of
civilization. The question is, therefore, here raised as
to which of the two was, and is, the proper, or better,
form. But we might first ask, What is civilization ? or,
what is meant by the termi? It depends entirely upon
who it is that asks the question; that is, of what race
or nation is he ? And in what stage of the world's his¬
tory does he live. For it will be remembered that in
the past there was what we may call the Adamic Age,
and a civilization with which he was concerned. Then
there was a Cainite civilization, which we have des¬
cribed at some length, and it was totally different from
that of Adam. And these forms continued on down
through the antediluvian ages, and the patriarchal pe¬
riods and to the earlier times of the present generations,
if not even to now, which I think it does, though not as
sharoly and distinctlv marked as in the past.
I have been speaking wholly thus far of civilization
as seen in Biblical history; but when we turn aside and
view what is "known as Gentile civilization, the aspects
are entirely different; for, indeed, the beginnings of
Gentile or Greek and Briton life had not even the
g-erms nor symptoms of a civilization, but were, when
first found, in a state of savagery of the lowest grade.
Y_t they did, in the course of long generations, strug¬
gle into semi-forms of civilization. But let us retrace
our steps to where we started, with this important ques-
46
THE NATIONS
tion, and let us ask again, What is civilization, and th*1
best form of it?
Well, I would venture the following, as the best defi¬
nition of which I know anything, or the best I can give:
Civilization is that form or mode of human' life that
brines the greatest amount of true happiness and com¬
fort to the greatest number of God's creatures, without
respect to kinds of creatures, or, in other words, what¬
ever makes man and the other orders of God's crea¬
tures live the longest with the greatest amount of ease
and comfort, and, at the same time, make them best
serve the ends of their creation, is civilization, and the
best form of the same. It would probably be well to
state just here that the term civilization is, itself, a
very equivocal one, as we find it defined in dictionaries,
histories on political economy, cyclopaedias, etc., for
with one people it means one thing, and with other
ages and peoples, quite another. And, indeed, I do not
find booked a real clear-cut, concise definition of the
term anywhere.
We have asked which of the two forms of civilization
that have come down to us, and is now prevalent among
us, is the better. Of course, this carries us back to our
beginning again, or to man's starting off in life. And
this, as a matter of fact, finds us in the Garden' of Eden,
face to' face with that civilization with which our fore-
parents were surrounded. And all know how simple and
plain and easy-going, and non-perplexing it was, for it
was truly innocent and guiltless in the extreme. Now
it will be remembered that this state and form of civili¬
zation was not of man's choosing or making, but it was
made for him, and he was placed in it, and commanded
to carry it on. And he was, so far as we are informed,
to carry it on after the same mode and manner as was
given him by his Creator. Now, just here arises a very
grave and serious point, and that is : Had man the right
and authority to make the many different changes in
the mode of living that have appeared since man left
from a new point of view. 47
his garden home in Eden, Of course, it is almost uni¬
versally held and argued that he had both the right and
authority to make progress and improvement, and that
these impressions and desires were, and are, inherent in
man, and, therefore, right and authorized. But, if
you will keep in mind that the whole of the above is an
argument, based on a proposition that has nothing un¬
der it but the supposition of those holding the view,
vou will conclude that there is not one word of com¬
mand or hinted permission from the Creator, and noth¬
ing given of the first forms of civilization to alter or
change them in any respect whatever.
You say, "Yes; but it is argued from the fact, as
has already been said, that man finds within him, a de¬
sire and. capacity for change and improvement, and
that is, therefore, proof that the Creator designed that
all the powers and faculties in a man should be devel¬
oped, and in as much as there was not sufficient breadth
and scope within the first forms of civilization, the
Creator designed that man should go on until he had
reached his full capacity."
The trouble with this last proposition is, that it also
assumes what it has never proven, and that is, that the
Creator designed when he made man, that he should
be developed to his full capacity, and that he shcxuld
nut his developed faculties into full operation, or that
they should be used to their fullest extent.
Now, it can be proven, not by argument, but by tht
citation of facts, that it never was the design of the
Creator that man should do all that he finds himself
with inclination and ability to do. So, we will start
with the first prohibition with which man is confronted
after his creation. And that is this: that "Of every tree
of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of
the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of
it."
It is further said: "And when the woman saw that
48
THE NATIONS
the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to
the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she
took of the fruit thereof/' You see, in the passage just
quoted, that there are three important characteristics
of that tree pointed out; namely: It was a food tree, a
pleasant tree, a tree of wisdom. Yet, from all of these
man was barred right at the very beginning of his ca¬
reer in life. So here is proof positive that it is not the
design of the Creator that man should develop to the
fullest capacity all the faculties and inclinations with
which he finds himself endowed. And we see here,
also, that there is a progress that is neither civil noi
civilizing in its results; for it was very uncivil in our
first parents to break over the desire and command¬
ment of their Creator, simply to satisfy their own ideas
of what was best.
Then there is Cain. He found vested in himself
both the faculty and inclination to murder his brother,
and it is also a fact, that he had not developed his full
powers until he did this. And yet, we see bow dis¬
pleased was God with him for so doing, even to the
driving of him from His presence forever.
I repeat, that God started man oft" with the kind and
form of civilization that He desired man to have, and
that was best for him. He knew what kind was the
best for him, and it was not city building, nor was it
the manufacture of tools, nor what is known to-day as
instruments of art. But He simply created this earth
and furnished it with all that was good for man, and
commanded him to take care of them. He did not tell
him to make anything; but to take care of that He,
himself had made.
So city building is not of God, but of man, and a
v£ry wicked man, too, for the first city builder history
gives us a record of, was Cain, and the name of the city
he built was Enoch. And he went off there and walled
himself in for two reasons. One was, that he was not
from a new point of view. 49
fit for general society, because he had been driven from
society as a vagabond. The other was, his sins made
him feel unsafe outside of city walls.
The next city we have on record makes us have to
'drop down the line of time to between sixteen and
seventeen hundred years to the building of the city
and tower of Babel; and we all know what their fate
was, and of thos^ who built them: they were dispersed,
divided up, and sent forth to people and settle the dif¬
ferent parts of the earth. And in no case do we find
anywhere that they were commanded or recommended
to build a city; but they lived a pastoral and shepherd
life, that which God has smiled uoon, because, as 1
take it, a life of agriculture and husbandry is the near¬
est to God's plan and purpose for man on the earth.
And because it is the only natural life for man to live;
all other modes of life are artificial and, therefore, un¬
certain, unstable and unsatisfactory. City building and
citv life make man selfish and self-seeking. They also
make him very unsociable, though he be very closely
associated.
After we leave the Ark of Noah, for a few years
it seems that the life of man was wholly that of hus¬
bandry ; and life seems to continue in the family of
Noah, as a whole, just as it had done with Adam be¬
fore the flood, from the birth of Seth until the birth of
Noah. I mean to say we first see man after the floo'l
living a natural, not an artificial life. And he is happy,
too, and well pleasing to his Creator and Benefactor.
But there seems to dawn on the minds of some of
that once happy household that a change is needed for
the betterment of mankind. It seems that they re¬
solve to break away from the rest of mankind, and
make the change. And the thing to be clonle is to build
a city and tower. It was done—Babel is built. But
What prompted it? Why, a proud ambition to better
the condition that God had made and placed man in;
4
50
THE NATIONS
the same thing that had brought ruin and destruction
upon him at the beginning im the Garden. Here we
see the two branches of civilization take up again, and
come down to us, through two of the sons of Noah,
just as they did in the families oif Adam and Cain after
the death of Abel. The two> sons are Shem and Ham.
The art and sciences are with Ham almost wholly and
solely, for at least three thousand years forward; but
husbandry, and husbandry alone, is with Shem for al¬
most the same length of time. I repeat, that God no¬
where ever commanded the founding and building of
a city; but he has commanded the destruction of them
by the thousand, beginning with the city of Babel. And
as a proof of this, let us call up the city of Enoch which
Cain built, and the first city ever built by man: Then
call up old Babel, Nineveh, Erech, Accad, and Calneh,
and ask the question: "Where are they?" Again the
solemn answer will be: "They are destroyed, and gone
down, and are no more."
Then leave Asia, and come over into Africa, and
ask for all that vast number of cities and kingdoms of
Egypt, Ethiopia, Abyssinia, etc., and the answer will
be: They have been dead and buried for thousands of
years, and their remains are now beinp" exhumed by
busy and energetic excavators, who are trying to find
out with what disease they died, and in every case,
when they examine closely, they find written on their
temples, tablets, and tombs the words: "Died of hyper
or abnormal civilization!"
Come, now, into Palestine, where there were thou¬
sands of cities, and inquire about them, and you will be
told that the displeasure of God rested upon them, and
they are no more, but are gone the way of all the cities.
Go, now, to Rome and Greece, and ask for Argos,
Cccropia, Sparta, Troy, and even "the eternal city" of
Rome itself, and the answer will be: Died of arrogance
and corruption. This raises the important question: Is
the civilization of the present day after the order and
From a new point of view. 51
purpose of God? And I answer emphatically, No!
and it must either be altered or go down as have' all
the ages of the past.
It will be seen by reference to the definition given in
these pages, that civilization does not consist of the
amount of clothes worn by a people, nor of the texture
of them, that is, as to whether they be coarse
or fine, thin or heavy; nor of the amount of
what is known as the arts, fine arts; but of the
amount of ease, comfort, and the regularity with
which a community, state or nation of people live
and carry out the laws by which they are governed,
and that, too, as it relates to the individual first,
and then to the whole people, as a consequence. So it
is a mistaken idea that has taken hold of the nations,
that civilization, that is, the best form of it, consists of
great cities, massive structures, beautiful architecture,
railroads of all kinds, steamboats, etc., for it is a fact
that nations who have these and they that have had
them in the past, have often been, and are now, often
the' most oppressive and burdensome to mankind. In¬
deed, under them it is only the so-called "fittest" that
•can maintain themselves and live.
I repeat that in order to the best state of govern¬
ment, the individual is to be first in consideration, on
the ground that all proper calculation must begin with
one or the unit and not with ten nor the ten thou¬
sand; therefore, any government or form of it that
takes first into consideration the many and not the few,
is unsound and is sure to be oppressive and unsatisfac¬
tory, and therefore can only endure for a time. It must
necessarily fall to pieces as a consequence. But when
government is formed it should be regulated for the
best good of the individual, and then for the whole, on
the basis that what is good for one is also good for a
hundred, and so on to the whole community. But it is a
fact that those governments who undertake to carry out
52
THE NATIONS
what are called great improvements and enterprises,
are soulless, heartless and thoughtless of the individual
and individual rights and, in turn, the rights of the
whole, simply because the rights of the whole must be¬
gin with the rights of the one; and this can at no time
be lost sight of any more than you can lose sight of
the unit in a problem and then expect to get a correct
result.
I also want to say that I believe that those nations
and races that are generally styled barbarous and sav¬
age because of their manners and customs of living,
are much nearer a normal and proper civilization than
those who consider themselves at the very height of
refinement and culture. Refinement and culture races
and nations ought to have; but it ought to be natural,
true, pure and simple, and not artificial, frothy and
false. So I am now prepared to say, for the reasons
already given and many others I might try to name,
that I do net share the shame, sorrow and chagrin for
what is known as "African civilization, that many others
seem to, and many of my own race, too. But I repeat
that I am not one of those.
First, because the civilization of Africa is largely
natural; and it is natural because, and only because, it
is in keeping with nature, and it may be said to be
more in keeping with nature for the reason that it is
nearer to the divine model that was given to man when
he was created and started off in life. For, as I have
said, man's life model was simplicity itself; yes, it was
a personified simplicity.
Secondly, it is a normal civilization and not a bar¬
barous one; for they have well-regulated governments,
with laws and practices that were established thousands
of years ago, and they still stand all of the tests and
ravages of time unchanged, and the oeople are happy
under them, and live to reach an age in years that is
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 53
unknown to modern nations, where men and women
seem to be born, as it were, to-day and die to-morrow,
and that, too, a natural death—that is, if they do not
commit suicide in the meantime. But let me now give
an example of some of the modes, methods and results
of what is known as modern higher civilization. So
in order to do that, as a beginning, I here insert what
Prof. Geo. D. Carter has to say in his new book, en¬
titled "Christian State:" We do not select the repre¬
sentatives we elect; we do not make our own laws; we
do not govern ourselves. Our political parties are con¬
trolled by private, close corporations that exist as para¬
sites upon the body politic, giving us the most corrupt¬
ing and humiliating despotisms in political history, and
tending to destroy all political faith in righteousness.
Our legislation is determined by a vast system of lob¬
by. The people know, though, that our legislative
methods have become the organization of indirect brib¬
ery and corruption. It is hardly an exaggeration to
sav that the chief work of both state and national legis¬
latures in recent years has been to obstruct, defeat or
cheat the will of the people." Listen again to this:
"There were 9,299 mercantile failures in the United
States during the past nine months, 48 more than in the
like portion of last year, which coincidence is paralleled
by the total amount of assets and liabilities of failing
trades this year, being substantially the same as in like
period one year ago."
The Baltimore Daily Record, Sept. 30, 1895, says:
" The total number of business failures reported
throughout the United States last week aggregated
289, as against 274 in the previous week, 253 in the
like week one year ago." The following is one day's
record, taken from a report made in the daily press
—only for one day! and this state of affairs is a condi¬
tion to be found not in Africa, but in proud and boast¬
ing America and under the white man's rule:
54
THE NATIONS
"Tacoma bank bursted; liabilities, $477,000; assets,
$44.00.
"Building and loan association gone up; liabilities,
$1,900,000 ; assets 40 per cent of dues.
"Seven .mercantile failures, involving from $50,000
to $200,000 each.
"Two express trains dynamited by robbers.
"Horrible butchery of helpless lunatics in an Illinois
asylum.
"Locked out workmen threaten bloodshed in Wis¬
consin.
"Seventh Day Adventists wearing ball and chain in
Kentucky and working out fines on rock piles, for
working on' Sunday.
"Starving garment workers in Boston win their
strike. Great Northern Railway threated with a tie-
up. Five-more strikes incubating.
"Another bond issue coming.
"Four and. a quarter millions of gold leaves the
treasury for Europe in the last two days. 19,000 work¬
ing people in Minneapolis receiving public help.
A widow's ad: "Wanted—Some one to give me
work in exchange for winter clothing for my children."
Another: "Please try and give me any kind of work,
at any price, to help feed my dear children; won't
some one please try ?"
"Foreclosures of farm mortgages aggregate over
300,000 acres in Minnesota annually.
Ad: "Homes for sale for cash for amount of mort¬
gage on them and foreclosure costs."
This time I quote from the Coming Nation; and here
is what it has to say: "A few days ago a hungry man,
stripped of his natural and social rights, by our Chris¬
tian civilization, broke into a bakery in Chicago and
stole a loaf. He was arrested and sent to the house of
correction. A day or two later the discovery was made
that some 'respectable' millionaire heads of the packing
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 55
concerns of Chicago had tapped the socialistic water¬
works and stole a million dollars' worth of water. They
will probably be elected to the house of representa¬
tives."
Hurrah for the most individualistic nation on earth!
If working for seventy hours a week in a tempera¬
ture as hot as Hades for the price of three meals a day
don't prove that bakers are opulent., is it because we
are living in a Christian civilization? If working in a
coal mine, furnishing your own tools, buying at a
"pluck me" store and never netting a taste or smell of
nature, for less than enough to live on, don't prove that
miners are opulent, is it because we are living in a
Christian civilization?
If working before a fiery furnace, doing two men's
work for a slave's pay, exhausting one's vitality in the
effort, never hearing the sweet strains of the church
organ, because of pains in the body, and rags on' the
back, don't prove that glass workers are opulent, is it
because we are living in a Christian civilization ?
If riding in a box car across the country, looking af¬
ter some bob-tailed horses consigned to the monopolis¬
tic coxcombs, for a dollar and a quarter, seeking a
"job," seeing the horses removed to a padded stall in a
palace stable, and then walking the streets without as
much as ten cents for a bed, don't prove that cigar-
makers are opulent, is it because we are living in a
Christian civilization? If working in a filthy factory
Leti hours a day for enough to pull ends together at
home, because father can't find work, with the body
stunted, mind destroyed, and soul seared, don't prove
that children are having "good times" in this country,
is it because we are living in a Christian civilization?
"On Tuesday a man tried to rob a bank in Butte,
Mont., and was captured, as he ought to be. He is a
bad man, and should be punished. During last year the
banks robbed their depositors in this country of $25,-
56
THE NATIONS
000,000 by failures, etc., but that's different. The bank¬
ers are at large yet. The crime in this country con¬
sists not in robbing the depositors, but in robbing the
bankers."^Nezv Charter, San Jose. Cal.
And here is still another result of higher civilization,
under the white man's superior rule and management:
"A gigantic railroad combine involving three bil¬
lions of capital, is reported between the leading rail¬
roads of the United States. They have effected thus
to prevent low, and to secure high, rates of railroad
transportation. It has been many months in develop¬
ing, but it is at last completed and made known to the
public. Senator Chandler calls it 'the most gigantic
and powerful union of corporate interests against the
people that the world has ever known.' Thev having a
complete monopoly of the transportation business in the
territory involved mean to charge 'all the traffic will
bear,' a phrase which means the death warrant to every
productive enterprise not specially favored by the
combine. It will be in condition to dictate to politi¬
cians more effectually than ever, and in connection with
its sister trusts and combines, will rule the nation more
despotically than ever. Where is the reformer who
claims that free coinage of silver will cure all ills ? Let
him look at this and a hundred other trusts and com¬
bines recently developed under our system of competi¬
tive industry, and hasten to atone for being so blind to
our industrial and political needs by now working the
harder for the public ownership of all monopolies."
The New York Voice ably reviews the situation
thus:
"The facts to which Senator Chandler calls attention
afe but another evidence of an irresistible tendency of
the age. Competition is to-day 'played out' in business
wherever combination can be effected. The people
must recognize this fact and act accordingly. How¬
ever carefully the Inter-State Commerce Commission
may watch this last attempt at combination by
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 57
the great common-carriers, we believe that past ex¬
perience justifies the assertion that the commission will
be able to do little to protect the peopte. What
then ? One remedy stares us in the face, and only one:
tlie people must protect themselves by making the
roads public highways instead of private roads run by
private parties for private profits.
"The interests at stake are too great and too momen¬
tous to much longer leave the highways of the nation
to be managed for private ends. Public ownership is
the solution—public ownership of railroads, or else the
ownership of the public by the road. Which shall it
be?"
"Any people on the globe where the railroads are
subject to even partial control in the interest of the
people. Persons who have paid no attention to the
subject do not realize the fearful carnage of our present
corporate railroad management. The official tables of
the Interstate Commerce Commission statistics (fifth
annual report, page 58) show the killed and injured
from 1888 to 1892, inclusive (five years), as follows:
Persons killed :. .31,616
Fersons injured 151,755
Average per annum:
Persons killed 6,323
Persons injured 30,351
"In other words, we are killing and wounding on our
railroads an annual average of 36,764 persons.
"All have heard with sadness of the battle of Shiloh,
one of the bloodiest struggles of the late war. Bryant's
history says that not far from 100,000 men were en¬
gaged on the two sides, and that about every fifth man
was killed or wounded, making on the two sides
20,000 men killed or wounded.
"The tables referred to show the average annual
casualties in the management of the American rail¬
roads to be nearly twice as great as the carnage at the
battle of Shiloh. The killed and wounded at Shiloh,
58
THE NATIONS.
with an aggregate of 100,000 men engaged, did not
exceed 20,000; the killed and wounded on our rail¬
roads in 1892 were 43, 699, and the annual average for
five years, as already stated, was 36,664 persons. By
comparison of statistics it is foun-d that the slaugh1-
ter of people by the American railroads is far greater
here than in England or Continental Europe, in propor¬
tion to mileage, and more than three times greater in
proportion to the number of passengers carried (Inter-
slate Commerce Report, 1890, pages 58, 59; Todd's
Railway in Europe and America, pafe 74.) The Amer¬
ican people can vote the railroads into collective hu-
manitarian control at the next election if they want to."
—Peninsula Farmer.
Yes, and I wish to say just here that no better
ground need be desired for objection to the modes and
methods of the so-called higher states and conditions
of life than the power and opportunity it affords for
combination by way of trusts and monopolies—and
thus the centralization of power, affluence and influence
to the very great detriment of the state or general good
of mankind. Thus combined, wealth becomes king,
monarch and ruler of the people. So as to better see
this, read again the article I have just inserted, entitled
"A Gigantic Railroad Combine."
I repeat that the proper state of civilization for man
is a normal one, because that is the most natural one;
and a natural one in accordance to the purpose and plan
of the great Creator and all others are artificial, ficti¬
tious, false and delusive; for the facts shown prove it,
and facts are facts! Yes, they stand as monuments to
reality and truth, while fictions and fancies fade, reel,
crumble and fall to the dust, notwithstanding the bold,
loud and repeated assertion of the "greatest and most
superior race on earth," to the contrary.
CHAPTER II.
RACE DIVISIONS: ARE THEY .ETHNOUJGICAI, OR HIS¬
TORICAL?
Into how many divisions is the human family di¬
vided ?
Secondly. To which of the divisions does the col¬
ored race belong-?
The answer to the first question depends upon an¬
other, namely. What kind,do we mean: historical or
theoretical division ? All depends upon the answer to
this last.
What I mean by historical, Is a division made upon
anciently recorded facts as against a division made
upon modernly recorded theories and fancies. What
I mean by a theoretical division, is one based upon
modern theories: for example, ethnology, ethnography
and anthropology. These are all modern theories,
which are in a speculative and formative state; that is,
neither of them, is universally accepted as a fixed
science, like mathematics. For instance, all civilized
men and nations, in all ages, have accepted the mathe¬
matical fact that two. and two make four, and no more,
and no less, no matter who manipulates them—whether
the celebrated geometrician, Euclid, or the little boy
just learning multiplication—four will be the only re¬
sult that can possibly be gotten.
Not so with the "ologies" and "ographies" about
which I have just.been speaking. They can be, and
have been, ever since their institution, used to teach
different lessons, and reach different conclusions, just
according to the views, tastes and opinions of the per-
(59)
60
THE NATIONS
son using them. I -repeat that the above named tenta¬
tive theories have nothing like the scientific certainty
of mathematics.
Let us take ethnology for example: It is the oldest
and is probably in some sense the mother of them all,
and yet, ethnology is only about a hundred years old,
for Peter Camper, its author, just died in 1789, and it
was in the latter end of his life he wrote. I said by
means of the above theories, different speculators
reached different conclusions.
The American Cyclopaedia says, when speaking of
ethnology as a science: "It may well be conceived
from the difficulties inherent in the subject, and from
the rarity with which the necessary qualifications exisc
in observers, that the science of ethnology is at present
in a verv unsatisfactorv though progressive condition.
Cyclopaedia Britannica, when speaking of ethnology
and its indefiniteness as a teacher and definer of the
characteristics of the different races, says: "We are
obliged fo^ the sake of convenience to draw up classi¬
fications, but the more rigorous and strict we make
them, the more artificial they become."
Lamarck, the celebrated French naturalist, said
when writing on the subject: "Nature recognizes nei¬
ther kingdom nor classes, nor orders, nor genera, nor
sub-genera. Nature recognizes nothing but individ¬
uals."
It is he»e further stated that ethnqlogy is as yet in
its infancy, for its very name does not date back fur¬
ther thatr the present generation, and ethnologists
themselves are said to be mere squatters in the far-
west of learning,* and yet their findings, decisions and
dictums are almost universallv taken as settling beyond
a doubt which are the superior, and which are the in¬
ferior races. And all this pretended knowledge is
made to r^st on two great words, namely: "ethnos,''
* Encyclopaedia Britannica.
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 61
and "logos." The first of these means "race," and
that is all it does mean in its own tongue—the Greek;
whether it be a race of birds, sheep, horses, cats, dogs,
or what not; the same word, "ethnos," is used to define
it; and it is also used to define a race of men.
The second word "logos" means "talk," and talk
about anything and everything under Heaven about
vvhich the Greeks wanted, and had to talk. Now,
what I warnt to know is, how in the name of facts,
science and common-sense, can these two simple Greek
words,'"logos," and "ethnos," in themselves—that is,
in. their etymological nature, or thefir scientific arrange¬
ment, or by their philosophical teaching, being simply
translated into English, and making the colmpound word
ethnology, contain or teach any such wonders about
the races of men, as is claimed for ihem. One of them,
as I have said, means simply a race, or tribe, whether
that tribe or race be of men, beasts or birds?* The
other means simply a talk, a discourse, or a conversa¬
tion about anything in the world, and only means a
race of men when applied to them, or when the talk
is about them. Remember, I have not said that in ap¬
plication they are not made to teach more than I have
described, but in their etymological or root form they
mean and teach nothing else than I have said; and
that they themsjelves, or in themselves, do teach
anything else, is what I am demanding to be shown.
If I multiply two and two, or put two and two to¬
gether, I get four; or if the little infant does the same
he gets the same result. The four is the result of
addition or multiplication, and not by imagination. Or
take the acorn, and plant it, and the result is a tree;
nothing but a tree, no matter who plants it; whether
scientist, philosopher or laborer. If any result comes,
it is a tree, and if an acorn has been planted it is an
oak tree, no matter on what part of the globe, or in
* See Liddell and Scott's Greek Lexicon.
62
THE NATIONS
what age of the world's history it may have been
planted. And this is true of "ethnos," wherever found
in its simple root meaning: that is, it means a "race,"
without any reference whatever to the kind or charac¬
ter of that race; and so, the simple word "logos,"
means 'Halk." But when it gets into the- hands of the
theorist, and is made into an "ology," or "ethnology,"
it is. made to produce wonderful things about man
and his kind. But they are all productions of theory,
and never become a fact, because the theorist of the
next age comes along in his search for knowledge and
forms the proposition or hypothesis of his predecessors;
and whatever conclusion the former may have reached,
the latter's simple denial of them, and the laying down
of other premises, puts the word and work of the form¬
er again into speculation, or a question as to their truth
or falsity.
Not so with the addition of two and two. For all
the world says it is four. The denial of all the geom¬
etricians in the world will not alter that fact; it is set-
tied beyond contradiction. And so with the tree from
the acorn; it stands there a living fact, with its trunk,
limbs, branches and leaves. All the naturalists, biolo¬
gists and botanists to the contrary, notwithstanding.
They ipay. all theorize upon it, but it is there—a tree,
and nothing but a tree.
But let us return to our first question; that is, Into
how many divisions is the human family divided?—I
mean now theoretical divisions. The matter depends
altogether upon the name of the author we quote. For
example, Linnaeus, a Swedish naturalist, born in 1707,
in his "Genus homo" makes four, based upon the color
of the skin: The European, whitish; the American,
coppery; the Asiatic, tawny; and the African, black.
Now, one has only to stop a minute, and examine into
such a division and its basis, i. e., the color of the skin,
from a new point of view. 63
to see how false and uncertain it is, as a proof of
which race one belongs; because the colors and shades
often differ greatly within a single family, and I was
about to say, yes, all the four shades named by this
writer, namely, whitish, coppery, tawny and black,
much less whole nations. But De Buffon, a French
philosopher, born in 1707, says, "No, the color of the
skin will not do for a basis of division of the races."
He says it "must be geographical," and the number
must be "five," not four, and that they "include the
oolar regions of eastern Asia, southern Asiatic, Euro¬
pean, Ethiopian and American, or the Indian of this
country.
Blumenbach, a German anatomist, says that the five¬
fold division will do, but that DeBuffon is wrong as to
the names to be applied to the races cited in his divi¬
sion. He says they should be Caucasian, Mongolian,
Ethiopian, American and Malay.' Blumenbach says
Linnaeus' theory, i. e., the color of the skin, will not do
for a basis of division of mankind, but a proper division
must be based on the complexion, hair and skull.
Then in comes Lawrence and says, "Yes, Blumenbach
is right as to a proper basis for the division, but is
wrong when he makes all the races of mankind to have
but one origin.
The American Cyclopaedia notes that Owen's exam¬
ination of the base of the skull as a test of a race affin¬
ity was very valuable in the study of anthropology, but
is of little or no good in the study of ethnology.
Now, let us pause for a moment. Who was Owen ?
He was an English zoologist and "anatomist and palaeon¬
tologist, born in 1804, and a graduate of the Univer¬
sity of Edinburg. I call especial attention to the theo¬
ries, experiments and race-tests of this author, because
of his greater qualification to learn and know race-
affinities, being, as he was, a zoologist, which led him
into the study of animal nature and animal character
64
THE} NATIONS
of all kinds; and as an anatomist he must study and
know along structural lines, both of man and beast.
He was also a palaeontologist, and as ruch must be in¬
formed not only about living creatures but dead ones,
and their remains, and also extinct species and their
remains.
[ have quoted thus largely and fully at this point,
to show how those wonderful sciences, the "ologies,"
do not prove anything as to which race a man belongs,
for Owen uses the laws according to anthropology,
which say, the way to know to which race a man be¬
longs, is simply "to measure the base of the skull,"
and you have the solution. But Blumenbach says,
"No," the way to do it is "to measure the breadth of
the skull and the projection of the face, etc. . .
"No," says Peter Camper, who lived and wrote before
Blumenbach, "the way to tell to which race a man be¬
longs, you must draw two straight lines through the
head, one of which must be drawn through the open¬
ing of the ear to the base of the nose, and the other
touching the most prominent centre of the forehead,
and falling thence on the most advancing part of the
upper jaw-bone, etc. *
Dr. Morton, in his ethnological works, says, If
you want to know to which race a man belongs, you
must fill his skull with small grain of some sort. I
might continue this list of contradictory statements
almost 'ad infinitum. But why do so? for it is all con¬
jecture and supposition, for neither Ethnology, An¬
thropology, Zoology, or Philology, separately, or com¬
bined, contain the germ that is necessary to make them
certain in their teaching. And, indeed, at best they
are only points of view, from which one may argue
and theorize. Now, how different the facts of history
to all this! I say the facts of history; and I mean
by that, the things that did really take place, and are
* See works of Blumenbach and Camper.
FROM A NEW POINT OF1 VIi£W. 65
taking place every day in this world of ours; yes, and
in other worlds, too.
Nothing- is true history but a line of facts. And
nothing is true written history but a record of that
line of facts. And there are no facts but the things
that did actually happen. But just here we meet with
a difficulty that is not gotten over simply with a pass¬
ing notice; and it is not simply an imaginary diffi¬
culty, but a real one, and one that only the sincere
seeker after truth will in any true sense overcome, and
that is, how to separate facts from falsehood, and so
get at true and real history.
In other words, the difficulty lies in, How shall I
know of two or more records made of certain happen
ings—that one is true and all the others are false?
And again: How shall I prove to others, for instance,
that this one is the record of the facts, and the others
false? For it is one thing to know for oneself, and
quite another to show it to others. Indeed, under
certain circumstances it is impossible to do so. For
instance, any one who does not want to be convinced
or acknowledge that he is convinced, has only to say,
"I do not believe that ycu are right,'' or "I do not ac¬
cept your nroof as sufficiently satisfactory," and that
settles the matter so far as he is concerned, though I
may have an array of proofs that will satisfy all the
world besides. But his simple refusal to accept the
facts, does not alter them, for they are facts still, and
will remain so throughout eternity, because facts are
principles, and principles are eternal.
Not so with theories, propositions and hypotheses.,
for they rest solely on the reason, ideas and judgment
of the man holding them, and so are unsettled and un-
established.
Let us insert just here what Mr. J. C. Morrison
says of history in Encyclopaedia Britannica: * "His-
* See "Historv," Encyclopaedia Britannica.
5
66
THE NATIONS
lory, in the most correct use of the word, means the
prose narrative of past events, as probably true as the
fallibility of human testimony will allow. This defini¬
tion takes no account of chronicles in verse which
were not uncommon in the Middle Ages. With this
exception the definition is fairly exact, both in what
it comprehends and what it excludes. Obviously pjose
narrative is not history when it deals with fictitious
events, as in the case of the novel; and verse narrative
even when it deals with true events (as in the ac¬
count of the battle of Salamis in the Persae of iEschy-
lus, etc.), is either more or less than history, and in
any case a sub-species by itself.
In practice, the line between history and mythology is
often not easy to draw, but the theoretical distinction
is plain. History reposes, however remotely, on con¬
temporary witness to the fact related. Written rec¬
ords are not absolutely indispensable, as history may
supply their place, and represent authentic contempo¬
rary testimony. But tradition is very insecure and apt
to be equally inventive and oblivious. It is in the-half
light of tradition that- mythology is born of the creative
farcy of man, and the difficulty of separating fact from
fiction in this border land of mingled fable and reality
very often amounts to impossibility.
"But even authentic facts alone are not sufficient to
constitute history. Many facts and dates are recorded
with reference to China, Egypt, and Assyriai in olden
times, which in all probability are true; but these facts
and dates are not enough to give those countries a his¬
tory, The bare fact that a certain ting reigned in a
certain year, and conquered or was defeated in battle
with a neighbor, is, perhaps, chronologically valuable,
but it is not history. History only attains its full stat¬
ure when it not only records but describes in consider¬
able fulness social events and evolutions, when it iriarlcs
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW.
67
change and growth, the movement of society from one
phase to another," etc.
This is the clearest definition of what history is,
that I have been permitted to read, and yet I cannot
agree with Mr. Morrison when he says that "history
is more than the record of factsfor he says: "But
even authentic facts alone are not sufficient to consti¬
tute history." He further says, "History only attains
its full stature when it not only records but describes
in considerable fulness, social events and evolution;
when it marks change and growth, the movements of
society from one phase to another."
But the trouble here with Mr. Morrison's argument
is in the latter part of this paragraph. He is arguing
the point between history in its beginnings, and his¬
tory at its full stature. But the question is, Do facts
and facts alone make history? I hold they do. Sup¬
pose, in order to a full and complete history, the differ¬
ent changes cf all kinds which a people, society, or
the individual undergo, must be noted: These changes
of whatever kind, are also facts. Yes, as much so, as
the chronology of the reigning of a certain king over
a certain country, in, a given year, but no more so.
All true history must adhere for a foundation or
basis in the individuals who know the events they nar¬
rate or transmit to others. And in order to a full and
complete nariation the when and 'how, cause and ef¬
fect of the same, no matter whether that be moral or
phenomenal; that is, whether referring to animate or
inanimate nature, all are the subjects and objects of,
and are essential to history and history-making, be¬
cause they have a relation bearing on man and his
destiny. So, properly speaking, and in the broadest
sense of the term, history apprehends and compre¬
hends all past and present knowledge of whatever
kind, only provided- it is the knowledge of facts.
But how are the facts to be obtained for history-
making ; or how are we to know that the narratives
68
THE NATIONS
about any one stage of the world's history are true?
Only, of course, by contemporaneous, corroborated
testimony and circumstantial evidence. There must
be those who saw, felt or heard the things they com¬
municated ; and if they saw, felt or heard them, then
they are facts and arc proper matter for history. But
if they were created by their imagination, either as a
whole, or in part, then they are not proper objects and
subjects of history, but are the subjects of fictitious lit¬
erature only, and so belong to the realm of myths, and
not to history. Myths and fiction can never make his¬
tory nor the basis of it. Nor can time, or age, ever
make them become the proper material for history.
Thus, the Greeks and Romans, in their origin as
races and nations, were conceived in a myth, and
born in the same, and can never have a history of their
origin. They can have a history, and a true one, too,
of their myths—yes, a wonderful one; but of them¬
selves as a people, never, while the world stands, nor
throughout eternity, because history consists of facts,
and facts are eternal, but myths are nothing but fabu¬
lously imaginative stories and of such' are the histories
of the Greeks and Romans made up"; for hundreds
and hundreds of years of their existence as a people,
and so, as I said, they have no true, or real, history.
For in their early beginning, or as to how and when
they begian, they have neither monuments, books, nor
parchments to show that the stories they tell of them¬
selves are true, and so are without proper corrobora¬
tive testimony, either personal, or circumstantial;
whereas, they should have both in order to the best
form of history-making.
Now, what is the history as to the number of the di¬
visions into which the races are divided? I have said
that in order to make history, there must be the facts,
and the corroboration of these facts: these are pre¬
requisites. Now, then, what is the testimony of his-
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 69
lory about the divisions of mankind ? It is that 'they
were originally three, namely, Shem, Ham. and Ja¬
pheth. Well, what is the evidence that this is true?
First, their names are recorded in books, and on
parchments as the heads and progenitors of families
and nations.
I will here quote from the oldest record in existence,
if we may accept the hieroglyphics of Egypt and the
cuniforms of Assyria, and the Chinese writings. The
book of Genesis, tenth chapter, first verse: Here is
what it says:
"Now these are the generations of the sons of
Noah; Shem, Ham, and Japheth: and unto them were
sons born after the flood." Here is a positive record
/'f the progenitors of the human family after the flood
and they are three, and only three—Shem, Ham and
Japheth. It is also here shown that the race was per
petuated, for it says "unto them were sons born;" and
that has continued true to the present time—that is, unto
chem, through their descendants, sons are born. Thus
we have a continual stream of humanity, traceable back
to Noah, and his three sons, and from them, down thf*
ages to the present time, with the records of each,
more or less clear, as they were careful to make them.
We also have here a chronology of the event when
these divisions began, which is very important to a
correct knowledge of history. It was "after the
flood." says the record.
Turning now to Genesis, tenth chapter, and thirty-
second verse, you will find the following plain and
clear-cut record made of the three sons of Noah and
their families and nations, for it shows that they be¬
gan with families, and then grew into nations. Here
is what it says about them: "These are the families
of the sons of Noah, after their generations, in their
nations: and by these were the nations divided in the
earth after the flood."
70
THE NATIONS
It will be borne in mind, that before the flood the
divisions were two, namely, at first represented bv
Adam himself and his sen Cain, and afterwards in
Cain and his brother Seth. Then follows a plain
statement with reference to all three of the sons of
Noah. Of Japheth, it is said: "By these were the
isles of the Gentiles divided in their lands; every one
after his tongue, after their families, in their nations."
In the twentieth verse of the tenth chapte1* is found
Ham's pedigree, which reads thus: "These are the
son's of Ham, after their families, after their tongues,
in their countries and in their nations." Then in the
thirty-first verse of the tenth chapter Shem and his
descendants are noted; of them it is said: "These ar<-'
the sons of Shem, after their families, after their
tongues, in their lands, after their nations."
Of Japheth it is here said he inhabitated the islands,
and that Ham settled countries, and Shem occupied
lands. Two countries bore the name of Ham, and he
is the only one of Noah's sons who has that honor.
The countries which bore the name of Ham are Af¬
rica and a country of Palestine. (Psalm 105:23.)
Israel also came into Egypt; and Jacob sojourned in
the land of Ham. (See also Psalm 78:51. For the
country in Palestine see Genesis 14:5.) It is in that
part of the country that was afterwards occupied by
the Amonites, who were the descendants of Lot. That
this place is called Ham, need not be thought strange,
for it is within the borders of the land of Canaan, who
was the son of Ham: and that a country within his
territory should bear his father's name is very much
in keeping, indeed.
We are here called to note that there are those who,
in order to get rid of the historical and geographical
record I have just been citing, declare that the Bible
narrative of the division of races and nations is not
scientific. But they do not seem to be aware that in
from a new point of view. 71
so saying it is equivalent to saying that the Bible is
false; because a thing that is not scientific is not true.
Or else it is saying that science is false, and if science
is false, it -would not help the Bible narrative, even if
that narrative were scientific.
The first definition Worcester gives of "Science" is
"Knowledge : that which one knows." This definition
of "Scientific" is: "Proceeding by, or, founded on the
methods of science." The question is, then: Did
Moses have knowledge? Worcester also says, "Science
is that which one knows." Did Moses know the
things he wrote? If so, his knowledge was science,
and he could, therefore, be scientific; but was he
scientific ?
Worcester says to be scientific is to proceed by the
methods of science. Then, did the writer of the
chronological table of the races given above proceed
by method? If he did, then he was, according to
Worcester, scientific. Read it, and it will be found
that the orden is wonderfully methodical and beauti¬
ful. It starts with Noah and his three sons, and it
starts with them after the flood and proceeds to give
the names of the heads of the families of all three of
them, what countries they settled and the boundaries
that marked them.
We see, then, that "science" is knowledge, and
"scientific" is knowledge methodically arranged. Well,
there is more knowledge found in the table of na¬
tions, as given in ^Genesis tenth and other chapters,
than in all other works combined. Not more theories
and guesses, but more knowledge* for the whole is
a plain, simple positive statement of facts, and when
there are not facts, there is not really true knowledge,
for true knowledge must rest on facts, and facts only.
Yes, there may be knowledge of falsehoods, but it is
unprofitable because untrue. But the record of -Gene¬
sis is- true, because it is of God, and it is backed up by
72
the nations
numberless evidences, such as records made of the
events, cr, rather, corroborating records at or about
the time of their occurrence by the Babylonians and
Egyptians. These are now being found by the exca¬
vations that are being made daily in the Orient, and
csneciallv in or about ancient Ninevah and the cities
of Egypt, or rather, Africa, for there are a number of
pther points in Africa that reveal wonderful facts on
this race question, such as Ethiopia, Lybia, Nubia, Ab¬
yssinia and others.
'But I find that even the "ologists," because of the
late discoveries which have so fully and completely
corroborated the Scripture record, now admit that the
original divisions were three, but they are very in¬
consistent in that in one case, namely, that of Shem,
they retain his branch or root name; but in the cases
of Ham and Japheth they create for them mythical
and fictitious names—that is, for their family, or race
names, so instead of the Hamite race and the Japheth-
ite race, for Ham we have absolutely no name in the
modern table of nations to tell us that such a person as
Ham and his descendants ever lived. I do not mean
that there is no record of him and his descendants to
be fov.nd in historical and biographical works, for
there is any amount of it, because he played such an
important part in the history; of mankind it is impossi¬
ble to get rid of him, for we meet with him in every
a^e, and at every epoch of the world's history; but I
mean there is no name given to designate him in the
modern table of nations. We have for Shem and the
Shemite, his own original, ethnic, or race name; and
for Japheth and his descendants the name Aryan is
given. But, when (he name to designate Ham and
his descendants ought to ccrrenn, we have in its stea-.l
the term Turanian, which points entirely away from
Fam, and leads into the Persians.
See the .term "Turanian" in the Chambers,' Britannica,
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 73
and the American Encyclopedias: They will refer
you to the word "Iran," and then tell you to see "Per¬
sians;" not Ham or Hamite, but Persians. Now,
have I not proven that there is no name to designate
Ham and his posterity?
But, for Japheth and his descendants, the name
Aryan is given, which as I said before, is a mythical,
fictitious cognomen, and so means nothing as a race
title, and can mean nothing, because its very origin is
based on Hindoo and Persian mythology. And,
again, I wish to be directly understood, that the name
Aryan is derived, or rather, made from the word
Arya, and that word does not point to a people, but
a language; namely: the Sanscrit, which is nothing
but the Hindoo. (See American Encyclopedia and
Article "Arya.") It says when naming the branches
into which Sanscrit is divided, that the branches are
first the Sanscrit or Hindoo, then naming ^ix others,
making seven.
Now, let us see what Max Muller, Professor of
Comparative Philology in the University of Oxford,
has to say cn the subject. I quote him to how that
the word Arya, from which Aryan is. derived is not
settled even now. Professor Bopp says, the root is
"Ar," wihich is "to go." Not the name of a people,
but simply "to go." The same writer also says that
the word "Aryan" mav just as well be derived from
"Ark," which, means "to venerate." Yes, Professor
Bopp, whb was the founder of modern Comparative
Philology, born 1791, says the word "Ar," from which
Aryan can, and, therefore, may have been derived,
means "to go." But I ask, "Go where? Well, I suppose
anywhere one may want, but more probably off on a
search for a great, mysteriously wonderful and mighty
people, in whom all the languages, all the arts and
sciences have adhered in all ag"es, and do still abide.
What is its name? Friedricn Schlegel says that the
74
THE NATIONS
name should be Indo-Germanic; Bopp says: No, the
name is not Indo-Germanic, but Indo-European, and
others say Japhetic; others, Sanscritic; and others,
Mediterranean. Others say it is Indo-Celtic rather
than Indo-Germanic. Prof. Bopp says again it should
be Indo-Classic.
I am well aware that these names are technically
attached to the language known as Sanscrit, but it is
well known that all languages must be spoken by a
people, and I have just been giving the names of the
people that is said to have spoken it, and all these
names are said to grew out of the word "Arya." Btit
at the same time, although so many names have been
mentioned, they all mean one and the same people.
Is not the very idea in itself ridiculous? And Prof.
Bopp also says that the word "Ar," from which all
these may be derived—I-mean directly, and indirectly,
first and last, means "to go." Will we - not have to
keep on1 the go? And where will we arrive at a cer¬
tainty that there ever was a people who lived on the
earth bearing the name of Aryan? Prof. Bopp says,
too, that the word may be derived from "Ark," which
means "to venerate or worshin," and of course points,
not to the name of a people, but to the Hindoo gods
whom they worshipped.
We here insert the words of Prof. Max Muller; they
are as follows: "Origin of the word Aryan as a tech¬
nical term has been borrowed from the Sanscrit arya or
arya. In the latter Sanscrit, Arya means a 'good fam
ily.' It is used as a complimentary address. Originally,
however, it was used as a national name, and evert
as late as the time of the Laws of Manu. India is still
called the Arya Avarta, i. e., the abode of the Aryas."
It can be seen here that Max Muller says that the word
Aryan is borrowed from the Sanscrit; but then, as Bopp
saj£, the word in the Sanscrit may be derived from
"Ar—to go" or "Ark—to venerate," How does that
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 75
help us to get at a proper name for Japheth and his
descendants, for the term "to go" is not a fit and proper
name, and, he says, Aryan is from "Ax," or may be,
which means "to go." I ask again, How can we get
to Japheth if we follow that root? All must agree that
it is impossible. Or, take the word "Ark," which
means "to venerate;" that is as unsuitable for a name
as the other, and, indeed, any one can see that it would
make no sense at all in the first case, and in the second
one could never derive the word Aryan from Ark.
I mean that it could never be done etymologically. It
may be done technically and arbitrarily, and, in fact,
that is th« only way the name "Aryan" ever became a
proper name for the Japhetic family; that is to say,
technically and arbitrarily. It has just been boldly so
declared by the ethnologist and philologist. Yes, and
regardless, too, of the fact that all the obstacles I have
been citing were lying squarely across their path.
What other conclusion, now, can we come to, but that
Japheth, according to modern history, as well as Ham,
has been ruled out of a proper race name? So, the
only one of the three sons of Noah, who remains, and
has a proper race name, is Shem, and his race name
is Shemite. The proper race name for Ham is Ham-
ite, and for Japheth, Japhethite, so it can be seen we
are necessarily thrown back on the doctrine of the
threefold division of the human family, going by the
names just quoted: Shem, Ham and Japheth.
Rev. Dr. Geikie, who is the author of "The Life and
Words of Jesus," says, the table in Genesis is not phil-
ologically scientific; that is, it is not scientific, accord¬
ing to philology. We will readily admit that to be true.
What other conclusion, now, can we come to, but that
historically scientific? And it is historically scientific
if it notes the facts in the case. It says .that the nations
that, now inhabit the earth sprang from Noah and his
three sons. Well, did they? If they did, then the table
76
THE NATIONS
is a table of facts; and if of facts, and methodically nar¬
rated in history, it is absolutely scientific. Not, how¬
ever, according to philology, for philology itself is
not scientific, but simply hypothetical, and, therefore,
still in the realm of guess work or speculation. Let
us notice its definition: That given in Liddell and
Scott's Greek lexicon of "Dhilogia" is "love, of discus¬
sion ; love of learning, and literature; the study of lan¬
guage and history." Hence, the English word, "philol¬
ogy" must of necessity mean the love to talk and dis¬
cuss literature, learning, language and history.
Now for further proof that philology as a science is
wholly unsettled and unestablished, see Encyclopaedia
Britannica, article, Philology." And if it is not fixed
and settled, how can it be a science? It dwells and la¬
bors in the field of myths; yes, almost wholly so, for its
main field of operation is the Sanscrit, or rather, more
properly the Hindoo, and all information about that
language that is to be found in their books is nothing
else than Hindoo and Persian myths; and what is a
myth but a never-to-be-proven conjecture; for the very
idea of a myth, or its very meaning is that which is
false. So Sanscrit can never become truly scientific,
because all that is known or can be known of it is
founded on myths, and myths are not facts, and can
never become such while true science must rest on
nothing but facts.
And one is no less bewildered and confused when he
asks just where to look for that wonderful people, the
Aryans, and where they begin and end, and of what
race or races were they comoosed; for one writer of au¬
thority says the word "Arya" refers to the country in
which the Sanscrit laneuage is found; and hence is not
an ethnic term, but ethnographical, or rather it is geo¬
graphical, and only ethnographical incidentally, in that
it is said a people lived there. Says the American Cy¬
clopaedia; "Arya is a name given to various Asiatic
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 77
countries. In the most general and extensive significa¬
tion in the remotest antiquity Arva was the denomina¬
tion for a great part of western and southwestern
Asia." But just hear what the same work further says
of the Aryans as a people: "Their history disappears in
the remotest and darkest night of time: more than
twenty-three centuries before the Christian Era." Thus
it has been ever four thousand years since this so-
called people lived and acted. But what is the truth of
the matter? Why the people through their descend¬
ants who spoke the language now known as Sanscrit
still live and act their party and are now known as In¬
dians of Hindoostan, or India in Asia.
Now, having, as we think, established beyond con¬
tradiction, the fact that historicallv there were three,
and only three, branches of the human family—thi
Shemite, Hamite and Japhethite—our second question
is, To which of the three do the colored race or races be¬
long? Current history says positively, not to Shem,
nor of Japheth: then they must be of Ham. Well, how
is that to be determined ? Certainly not by color of the
skin, nor the texture of the hair, tor all the shades of
color to be found on the globe are found to exist among
the eight or ten millions of colored people in this coun¬
try, and each of the shades, from coal black to snow
white, is classed as belonging to the colored race. And
I also assert that there is not a form of the human hair
that is not found among us here in America, from the
close criso to the curly and wavy and from that to the
straight black, auburn and flaxen, and yet all who weat
them are classed colored and there is no trouble about
it, either. The nation, the state, and society know just
where to place them; that is, they are placed among
the colored race, no matter how straight, how auburn,
or flaxen the hair; they are classed as colored. Nol
because of any one color among them, nor the texture
of the hair, shape of the skull, or structure of the body
78
The nations
but because of the diversity of colors and shades, yes,
and for that reason, and that reason alone. And they
are properly called colored people. No other name
would so truly designate them except the term Hamite,
and that is not sufficiently familiar for ready local use,
but is the proper universal ethnic term, for it will des¬
ignate all branches of the race from the days of Noah
to the present time; no matter in what country found,
or to what stem they adhere, they can rightly be called
Hamites. Objections are sometimes raised by mem¬
bers of our race to being called colored, for the reason
I heard one say in a public meeting, that he was not
colored, but was born as he was." His hair was au¬
burn and his color the shade of those who are known as
white, but his mother, I am told, was quite black. Now,
where did he get his shade of color ? There must cer¬
tainly have been some coloring done somewhere, or
how did he get his shade so different from that of his
mother ? The word "colored" is grandly appropriate for
a local name, for no matter what the hue of the face, that
word comprehends it completely; but the word "Ne¬
gro" is offensively inappropriate, unmeaning and out
of place. It is inappropriate because it in no sense fills
the function assigned it, namely, the designation of
the colored race. It does not describe the race, because
it was not made or originated with that view. And if it
had been, it could not do it, because the etymology of
the word itself bars the possibility. It is said to be
from the Latin niger. Weil, let us admit that although
there are those who hold it to be derived from the
French word negre, and that from negre, "Nigger"
is the proper name by which the race should be
called. But to this the whole race, with one consent,
object, and rightly, too. But it has just as much mean¬
ing and is just as appropriate as "Negro." Yes, one
means about as much as the other, and that is, they
both mean black. Certainly all will agree that is what
the Latin word niger means. How then does that word
from a new point of view. 79
describe a race of people whose shades of color are
probably from five to ten in number? And even if it
meant brown cr dark brown, then) how does that cover
it still ? The fact is, niger is a conventional term, and
not an ethnic one, and so does not refer to races of any
kind, but to a color, or to the color of anything
that is black; not to the thing itself as such, but to the
color of it. That is, I mean, it does not in any sense
refer to the character, nature or qualities of a person
cr thing. How, then, can the word niger be adequate
to designate the so-called historical "Negro," for he, the
"Negro," is described as differentiated by the following
peculiar characteristics. He is depicted in Encyclopae¬
dia Britannica by Prof. A. H. Keane in these words:
"Negro (Spanish, from Latin Niger, black) in anthro¬
pology designates the distinctly dark as opposed to the
fair, yellow and brown varieties of mankind. .. .By the
nearly unanimous consent of anthropologists this type
occupies at the same time the lowest position in the evo¬
lutionary scale, thus affording the best material for the
comparative study of the highest anthropoids and the
human soecies. The chief points in which the Negro
either approaches the Quadrnmana, or differs miost
from his own congeners are:—(i) the abnormal length
of the arm, which in the erect position sometimes
reaches the knee-pan, and which on average exceeds
that of the Caucasian by about two inches; (2) the pro¬
jection of the jaws; (3) weight of brain, as indicating
cranial capacity, 35 ounces (highest gorilla 20, average
European, 45) ; (4) full black eye, with black iris and
yellowish sclerotic coat, a very marked feature; (5)
short, flat snub nose, deeply depressed at the base or
frontal suture, broad at extremity, with dilated nostrils
and concave edge; (6) thick, protruding lips, plainly
showing the inner red surface; (7) high and prom¬
inent cheek bones; (8) exceedingly thick cranium, en¬
abling the negro to butt with the head and resist blows
80
THE NATIONS
which would inevitably break any ordinary European's
skull; (9) correspondingly weak lower limbs, terminat¬
ing" in a broad, flat foot, with low instep, divergent and
somewhat prehensile great toe, and heel projecting
backwards ("lark heel"); C10) complexion deep
brown, or blackish, and in some cases even distinctly
black, due not to any special pigment, as is often sup¬
posed, but merely to the greater abundance of the col¬
oring matter in the Malpighian mucous membrance be¬
tween the inner or true, and the epidermis or scarf
skin; (li) short, black hair, eccentrically elliptical or
almost flat in section, and distinctly woolly, not merely
frizzly, as Pritchard supposed on insufficient evidence;
(12) thick epidermis (skin), cool, soft and velvety to
the touch mostly hairless, and emitting a peculiar
rancid odour; (13) frame of medium height, thrown
somewhat out of the perpendicular by the shape of the
pelvis, the spine and the projection of the head, and the
anatomical structure; (14) the cranial sutures which
close much earlier in theNegro than in other races.
To this premature ossification of the skull, preventing
all further development of the brain, many pathologists
have attributed the inherent inferiority which is even
more marked than the physical differences."
The above description is brought down as the stand¬
ard characteristics of the "Negro" to so late a date as
1888, and so to the present. Yes, this is "the white
man's so-called scientific definition of his "scientific Ne¬
gro race!" Now, what any self-respecting colored
man, with a great and noble Hamitic origin and de¬
scent can be thinking about when he is proud of the
name "Negro" while he is being thus characterized, I
confess with sadness I cannot tell; and, yes, I am more
than ashamed when I see some of the race whose shade
of color haopens to be a little different than that given
in this table, willing to accept the description as true
and correct of their forefathers or ancestry. The table
from a new point of view. 81
lwe given makes us all their offspring, and if they have
no intelligence, business capacity and honorable histor¬
ical record, where do anv of us get ours ? For it is
aimed in this to show that the branches are like the
parent stock and have been in all ages.
Can any one read the table of comparison just noted
without feeling a deep, silent contempt for the man
who wrote it, and for a company who" would publish
such to the world as the standard bv which a race is to
be remembered and judged? To call such bosh as that
scientific is a travestv on science. For a thing to be
scientific, it must be in accordance with truth, for sci¬
ence is ascertained truth, and not the white man's cul¬
tivated prejudice and race hate. But let us examine a
little more closely that wonderfully much-used, and still
more abused "scientific" term "Negro," for it is made
the genus of the characteristics of the so-called "Ne¬
gro," since it is said to be a common character, agree¬
ing with his other characteristics, noted in the table of
comparisons.
Now, in what sense is there any agreement between
the term "Negro" and the several special peculiar
characteristics he is said in that table to have. And if
there is not that agreement, where does the science
come in ? And how can the table of comparison be a
scientific one? It must be kept in mind that the term
niger from which "Negro" is derived is a Latin adjec¬
tive, and of conventional origin, and not ethnical, and
so not racial, but general in application, and can there¬
fore as well mean a black horse, sheep, fowl or bird as
man. So, then, the only proper and logical conclusion
that can be reached is that a "negro" horse, because he
is "negro" is inferior io a white one simply and only
because the first is "negro" or black, and the latter
white. The truth is, the whole table of differences will
have to be ruled out as non-scientific, because the term
"Negro" fails to point out anything that shows the black
82
THE} NATIONS.
man to be in any sense different from the white man,
save in the color of his skin; for no ethnologist will
contend for a moment that the word "Negro" shows
that his, the ''Negro's," arms reach to the kneepan, and
that they are "about two inches longer than those of
the Caucasiannor does it in any way show a differ¬
ence in the set of his jaws to that of other men.
CHAPTER III.
AFRICA : AS IT IS, AND AS IT HAS BEEN.
The name Africa is of uncertain origin, but it is
thought to be of Roman origin. The proper and origin¬
al name for Africa is the "Land of Ham," because
it was named after Ham, the second son of Noah; and
the Bible calls it, in more than one place, the "Land of
Ham." (See that Book for reference.) Africa is one
of the main and largest divisions of earth, being nearly
one-fourth of the surface of the globe, and is inhab¬
ited by nearly one-fourth of the people of the earth.
Africa occupies the most prominent place with refer¬
ence to the solar system, of any country on the earth,
for it is the center of the globe. Yes, the center of the
world; and the proof of this is that the equator passes
clear through it from East to West. Hence, if you
wanted to cut this world into two globes, or in half,
you would have to go to the Continent of Africa to per¬
form the act. Is Africa, then, the least of all the conti¬
nents as geographers and other writers and historians
tell us it is ? Are they honest and truthful ?
Africa is a world within itself, being a continent
5,000 miles long, and 4,000 miles wide, with nearly or
quite 300,000,000 of people to live in it, cultivate its
scil, and enjoy its many and abundant products; for its
soil and climate produce every variety of vegetation
that is known to earth, and it has every climate of the
four quarters of the globe shut up within her bounds,
from a cold North with its snow-capped and icy
mountains, down through a temperate region, to a more
84
THE NATIONS
torrid—to a hot, burning South. A glorious country,
this!
Africa has in all ages of the past, and does at the
present time, stand to the other parts of the world as
the fountain and source of light and knowledge; for
the prominent men among the ancients did not con¬
sider their education complete without it was finished
up in Africa. "I shall give a number of examples to
show the truthfulness of this assertion, and the various
exploration and excavation societies now at work in
the different parts of Africa unearthing its stores of
buried and hidden knowledge, is sufficient proof that
Africa is the fountain of light for the present age,
because the knowledge being now dug up, which has
been buried for thousands of years, is now throwing a
flood of light on the history of all the ages of the past.
Yes, it is bringing into the light of a noonday sun
things that have been in the past, and to the present
age, dark, hidden, unknown; but now they are made
clear and plain, for Africa, as of old, is still teaching
the world knowledge. If proof of this is sought, go
to the musuems and libraries of the world, and ask
them to show you the wisdom and knowledge that has
been Africa's for thousands upon thousands of years,
and you will stand abashed in wonder and with awe, as
cn<e library after another is brought forth in the form of
ancient tablets, parchments, manuscripts, papyri and
many other hieroglyphic documents and inscriptions,
etc.
We here introduce a statement found in "Biblia," a
work treating of exploration in Egypt and other parts
of Africa. The article will show that Herodotus, who
is called the "Father of History," is wrongly thus cred¬
ited, and the honor belongs to the ancient Egyptians;
for history tells us, that Herodotus himself traveled
and studied in Egypt, so as to fit himself to write his
historical work, The article which I shall insert speaks
FROM A NEW I>OINT OF VIEW. 85
of this special Egyptian literature as the "Book of the
Dead,'" as it is said, because it speaks of the dead, and
the state of the soul hereafter. But this is very mis¬
leading, for it circumscribes the work, and makes it ap¬
pear that it is simply a book in Which the Egyptian
deaths were recorded; whereas the wxork consists of
large numbers of books, and, indeed, a whole library
containing their moral and religious laws, and their
rules of life and practice for more than 5,000 years.
No\V, to call such a work simply the "Book of the
Dead," I say again, is a great iniustice, and especially
when the Egyptians themselves, have the title alreadv
written on its pages. You will see by reference to the
article that'follows, that the title of the work is "The
Manifestation of Light." Yes, and this fact sustains
whet I have.just been saying about the light of Africa.
"The Book of the Dead," is the most ancient, and the
most important of the religious texts which have come
down to the present day, as regards the extent and va¬
riety of information that it affords.
"This celebrated Egyptian theological work, and the
oldest book work in the world, is a group of hermetic
books, which has been called the 'Funeral Ritual, or
Book of the Dead,' and was. considered by the Egyp¬
tians as an inspired work, and for over 5,000 years its
prayers and hymns and litanies were in use. Some
chapters of the book declare that they were written
by God himself, and that they reveal His will and the
divine mysteries to man.
"The Egyptian title was 'The Manifestation of
Light," or, in other words, the Book Revealing Light
to the Soul. The book was destined to instruct the soul
in that which would befall it after death, and its con¬
tents informed the reader what he would have to pass
through, and their efficacy secured him against the
dangers feared and assured to him blessings desired
86
The nations
"The 'Book of the Dead' gives us the completest ac¬
count of primitive belief. We learn from this remark¬
able book, that the standard of morality with the an¬
cient Egyptians -was very high. 'Not one of the Chris¬
tian virtues,' writes Chabas, 'is forgotten in the Egyp¬
tian code: piety, charity, gentleness, self-command in
word and action, chastity, the protection of the weak,
benevolence toward the needy, deference to superiors,
respect for property in its minutest details,' etc. It
shows that thousands of years before Christ, the
Egyptians held lofty conceptions of the Deity; that
they believed in one God, self-existent and omnipotent,
and that their moral ideas were of t3ie purest and
best."
I quote as further proof that Africa is still enlight¬
ening the world on things not only that pertain to this
world, but on that also which is t;o come, because the
quotation which I shall make will show that the inhab¬
itants of Africa-believed in the immortality of the soul,
and the resurrection of the dead, not only before the
days of the Children of Israel and Moses, but long be¬
fore Abraham, their father, was born. The author
from whom I now quote, is still calling the Egyptian
book of revelation, the "Book of the Dead," thus still
making and perpetuating an erroneous impression and
giving a false idea of what this great Egyptian religious
and literary work really is; for as it will be seen, they,
themselves, call it the "Manifestation of Light," or,
in other words the "Revelation of Light,'* because the
word "manifestation" means "revelation" and so it
might well be called the Egyptian Bible, or sacred book,
■—but the "Bock of the Dead," never, because such a
name is unmeaning, as to the true char?~ter of the
work.
I may say just here that the foregoing is a good il¬
lustration of the white man's history-making still, for
it is a settled fact that nothing that pertains to the
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 87
Hamite can come under liis noticf and escape the
bane and Has of his malignant rp"e prejrHice and
pride.
Another peculiar characteristic of the white histo¬
rian is the readiness with which he, in his blindness and
ignorance as to the facts in any given case, falls into
error as to the truth of said facts, and his slowness
to make proper corrections when the truth is made
known to him. For instance, here is a case that will
illustrate the false practice of styling all time prior to
Herodotus as prehistoric, or before history-making be¬
gan, when at the same time it has been shown by many
infallible proofs, even by Herodotus himself, that the
greater part of his history was written from data col¬
lected from African documents that were stored in the
archives of Egypt, and that many of them were writ¬
ten over 5,°oo years before Herodotus himself was
born, and that the Egyptians, Abyssinians and Assyri¬
ans all had written historical works for thousands of
years before Herodotus' day. Yes, you may touch any
part of the history of mankind that l as been written by
the white man, and it will be found to be largely false.
But let me here make the quotation I spoke of above.
It is from a report made by the President of the "Bibli¬
cal Archaeological Society" of the British Museum.
The President read before the body a translation of the
sixty-fourth chapter'-of that Egyptian work known by
them as the "Manifestation of Light," but here falsely
called the "Book of the Dead
" 'The Book of the Dead' is the title generally used
for a collection of religious treatises which have been
recovered amidst Egyptian antiquities. This one is
profoundly interesting from its immense antiquity. As
early as the eleventh dvnasty—that is to say, at a date
prior to the times of the patriarchs—it was known as
an ancient book. A rubric tells us 'This chapter was
discovered at Hermopolis upon a slab of alabaster in-
88
THU NATIONS
scribed in blue at the time of King Menkara by the
royal prince, Hortalaf, when he was journeying for the
purpose of inspecting the temples, and he carried off
the slab in the royal chariot when he saw what was on
it.' The rubric of another copy tells, 'This chapter
was discovered on a plinth of the god of the Hemm-
bark, by a master builder of the wall in the time of
King Septa, the victorious.' No other composition
claims a remoter antiquity. Here then/is a religious
treatise coming to us from the earliest ages of history.
"The rubrics show the work to be very remarkable.
In the Turin papyrus it is headed 'Chapter of going
out by days, sole chapter.' Another papyrus heads it
'Knowledge of going out by day in a single chapter/
indicating that this contains the complete knowledge
required by the spirit at the day of resurrection. This
is confirmed by the statements of later texts, and by a
note at the conclusion, which runs, ~To be said on com¬
ing forth by day, that one may not be kept back on
the path of the Gnat (or Hades), whether on entering
or cn coming forth; for taking all the forms which one
desireth and the soul of the person die not a second
time. If, then, this chapter be known, the person is
made triumphant upon earth (and in' the Netherworld),
and he performeth all things which are done by the liv¬
ing.' No wonder another note asserts that he who re¬
cites this must be sanctified and pure.
"The value of such a record as this in our inquiries
with the history of religious thought cannot but be
great. Examining these statements in connection with
others in the treatise, we found that long anterior to
the age of Moses there was a belief in the resurrection
after death. And further, that this belief was a ground
of very anxious inquiry. And, again, that there was a,
peril of not rising to a state of blessedness which was
spoken of as 'coming forth by day;' and yet, again, that
there was a danger of a second death. And, still more
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 89
remarkable, that the method of salvation was by the use
of an inspired written revelation. Thus 'Salvation by
faith' is one of the oldest known religious ideas."
Here I quote again, to show that the white man has
at last been made to admit, and to submit, proof that
both Greek and Roman art and literature—yes, and
that of all Europe an'd America at the present day—
is of African origin; yes, the original production of
the Hamites. The article is from "Biblia" again, and
the title is: "The Lotus, in Egyptian and Greek Art."
The Lotus, the beautiful lily of the Nile, is one of the
most characteristic forms of Egyptian ornament. The
columns of the temples have originally their capitals
in the form of the lotus bud, or of the fully expanded
flower, and we find the same beautiful symbol again in
the pottery, jewelry, and, in fact, everything suscep¬
tible of decoration. The Egyptians fully felt the beauty
of natural forms, yet they gave us but little beyond the
lotus, the papyrus or the palm. There is but little doubt
but that the stem of the lotus, with its open flower at
the top, was the prototype of the Egyptian column, and
that the Greeks borrowed the Doric from Egypt, where
it was known for more than a thousand years before
its introduction into Greece, as proved by the monu¬
ments of Beni Hassan. At Karnac is an example of
a granite pillar on which is carved in relief a column
having a trefoil lotus capital with incipient Ionic vol¬
utes. This is the only Egvptian example in actual ar¬
chitecture of an Egyptian Ionic form, for the reason
that in Egyptian use the form was confined to capitals
of wood, and these have all disappeared.
Prisse d'.Avcnnes, in 1879, brought forward proofs
that such capitals of wood once existed, from the tomb
paintings. Prof. Goodyear has shown in his "Gram¬
mar of the Lotus" that this plant presents itself in nu¬
merous modifications throughout every varieiv of art
products in Egypt—reliefs, wood-carvings, amulets,
90
THE NATIONS
frescoes, terra cottas, etc., and also that tlie lotus mi¬
grated from Egypt in every direction as an inspiration
and pattern of beauty in Phoenician, Cypriote, Rhodian,
Melian, Mysenaen; in fact, every style, school or de¬
velopment of Greek art.
Mariette contended, however, that the bell-shaped
capital was freely copied from the plume of the papy¬
rus plant, -and Perrot and Chipieg contend that the lo¬
tus has no more right than the papyrus to be considered
the unique origin, of the various decorative forms.
Many other .writers have claimed that the cyperus
plant, out of which papyrus was manufactured, was
frequently copied in the architectural columns of Egypt
ahd in. decoration throughout Egyptian art.
In tlie Architectural Record for March, Prof. Good¬
year has a well-written article on "The Lotiform Ori¬
gin of the Greek Anthemion," with upwards of one
hundred illustrations, in which he shows in the matter
of the Ionic column, certain significant indications
drawn from Egyptian examples. Great importance is
given to the character of the sepals of the lotus, and
the writer shows that the successive conventional steps
eliminated in the petals (in some cases) until the skele¬
ton form of the three sepals alone survived. This is the
origin of the lotus trefoil, which is so common in' Egyp¬
tian art; in the Greek art derived from it; in the Byz¬
antine art derived from the Greek, and in the Arab de¬
signs derived from the Byzantine. It is also the form
from which the conventional "fleur-de-lis" is derived.
Prof. Goodyear has made it plain that the trefoil
capitals of the tomb paintings are lotuses, and conse¬
quently that the volutes of the trefoils are volutes of
the sepals—a point made especially clear by an amulet
in the Louvre and by a tombstone from Cyprus, which
he illustrates. Prof. Goodyear positively asserts that
that the lotus of Egypt did have, among other forms,
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 91
an Ionic or volute form, and that this Ionic form di<l
positively produce the.Greek Ionic capital." * * *
" 'It is my wish to show that Greek conventional pat¬
terns g-o back to a system of magical beliefs centering
in Egypt, and to prove in so doing, that the history ot
the system of patterns, which we know best through
Greek developments in the history of the rise and dif¬
fusion of later civilization from its great development
in the Valley of the Nile."
"Students of Greek art will find this article of Prof.
Goodyear very instructive, as well as a series of these
other articles by the same writer, in the Architectural
Record on the evolution of classic ornament from the
Egyptian lotus. The Architectural Record for Sep¬
tember contains the fifth paper of the series, entitled
"Origin of the Acanthus Motive and Egg and Dart
Moulding." The author shows that all of the spirals
and scrolls of Greek art are lotuses in origin and that
the egg moulding" which is in such universal use
wherever European civilization has penetrated, as is so
well known to be derived from Greek art, is also of
Egyptian origin. The idea advanced, will not be re¬
ceived without some protest, but the arguments of
Prof. Goodyear seem indisputable."
Just here let me call attention to a very important
matter, and settle it for all time. That is, I mean, settle
it as to what are the facts by pointing out and show¬
ing the facts, and I am going to give facts, real, as¬
certained facts, and not hypotheses and guesses and
suppositions. But I do not mean that I will not use
hypotheses and propositions, for these I shall make,
but they* shall only serve to prove, sustain and make it
clear that the things I give for facts are the facts in the
case given, cited or maintained. I mean to say, that I
do not intend to resort to the white man's mode of
settling the difficult matters, and that is, by just declar¬
ing- that a thing is so, because and only because, he de-
92
THE NATIONS
clares it to be so, which is no proof whatever, but as I
said, I purpose to give the facts, and then prove, be¬
yond a reasonable doubt, that the things I give as facts,
are facts in deed and in truth, and not mere bold and
unfounded assertions which are so easily made. Now,
it must constantly be kept in mind by the reader of any
document that a thing is either true or false, or par¬
tially true or false, and that there are certain things
that make it so, unless it be true or false in and of itself.
But there are proofs to be applied in either case, and
here, is where the reasoning comes in—that is, as to
whether the proofs given are sufficient to sustain the
statement made, or the case given as a fact is a fact,
and so I said I would prove my statements beyond a
reasonable doubt. I say prove it beyond a reasonable
doubt because there are many, yes, very many very un¬
reasonable doubts, and doubters,\ too. But the reader
must determine for himself, whether or not a fact has
been given and proven to be a fact.
Now, the subject to which I want to call your atten¬
tion, and which is a question in dispute with many, but
not with myself, is the relationship that the people of
Egypt sustain to< the rest of the inhabitants of Africa.
Ancient Egyptians: The question is, were they one
and the same race of people, or, in other words, were
they descended fromi Ham, who was the second son of
Noah, or were they the descendants of one of the oth¬
er of the sons of Noah ? Now the reader will bear in
mind, that this is the question before us. And this
question confines us to these well and almost universal¬
ly conceded facts, and that is, that. Noah had three sons,
and three sons only, and that the whole human family
of the present were descended from them. But with
any who may deny either of these points, I am not now
arguing, but my proofs are for those who concede the
two things I have just stated about Noah and his
sons to be true. And the other is that the aboriginal
FROM A NEW POINT Of VIEW. 93
inhabitants of Africa were the descendants of Ham;
that is, if we leave out Egypt, which is in dispute. So
my purpose is to show that the ancient Egyptians were
also the descendants of Ham, the second son of Noah.
Now here, before I go further, I want to give an ex¬
ample of the white man's way of disposing of this
whole vexing and, to him, perplexing question: He
does it by the use of one simple phrase, and the phrase
is this: "That without doubt, the ancient Egyptians
were descended from Shem, the oldest son of Noah,"
and yet, he attempts to prove the very thing which
he has declared already to be beyond a doubt. This
he has done by saying that the thing stated was with¬
out doubt; for if it is without doubt, then it must be
positively true.
Now, what is the first thing he presents as proof of
his already-declared-to-be-proven thing? Why, it is
this: The great similiarity there is between the lan¬
guage spoken by the Egyptians and that which was
spoken by the descendants of Shem. And here, again,
he simply starts out with another bold-assumption, and
it is this: That Shem was made the custodian and
propagator of the language which the Egyptians spoke,
because, as he says, there was such a similarity between
them; but he gives no real proof that Shem was
the transmitter of language to the Egyptians; but the
facts in the case prove it to have been otherwise, and
that is, every family, when they moved off from Babel,
or out of the Shinar Valley, to re-people the earth after
the flood, carried their language with them. Now, let
us prove that assertion before we go further. I pur¬
pose to do this by history, and by true history, too, and
not by the false works of men. So I will quote from
Genesis 10:2, 5, 20, 31, which reads as follows:
"The sons of Japheth; Gomer and Magog, and Ma-
dai, and Javan, and Tubal, and Meshech, and Tiras.
* *
94
THE NATIONS
"By these were the isles of the Gentiles divided in
their lands; every one after his tongue, after their fam¬
ilies, in their nations. * * *"
"These are the sons of Ham, after their families, af¬
ter their tongues, in their countries, and in' their na¬
tions. * * *"
"These are the sons of Shem, after their families, af¬
ter their tongues, in their lands, after their nations."
Now, these passages of Scripture history just quoted,
prove, beyond a doubt, that Shem did not transmit his
language to the Egyptians, for each nation had its own
tongue. But whether each one had a different language
or not when they left the Tower of Babel, these passages
do not say; but they do say, each had his language or
tongue; that is, each had his national speech; but
whether they were the same or not is not said any¬
where in the Bible, the book with which I deal. But
I consider that it is plainly inferred, for there is a pas¬
sage that says that God, when He destroyed the Tower
of Babel, also says he confused their language in such
a manner as to cause them to stop building, and there
is no other passage in the Bible that tells us that he
ever made them cne again; so the only logical con¬
clusion is, that each of the sons of Noah started out of
the Valley of Shinar with a somewhat different lan¬
guage from the other. So here is a reasonable ground,
and the only reasonable ground as to how the earth to¬
day has more than one form of language; for it can
naturally be concluded that they are a growth from
intermixture, just as the many shades of color of the
people are caused by intermixture. And we know
that languages to-day, are both very materially
changed in that way, and even new ones are made; for
example the English, and many others.
I have said Noah had three sons, and only three;
that is, I mean that we have the record of only three.
If there had been any more, their names are not on
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 95
record, or they have never been found yet. All three
of Noah's sons had offspring. Some of their sons did
hot have any, as the following table will show; and for
proof of the correctness of the genealogical table given
on page 96, see Book of Genesis, ioth chapter.
Now, I wish to be distinctly understood, that it is
to the genealogy given in the Bible, and to that alone
all tests are to be brought as to the descent and rela¬
tionship of the tribes and nations of the earth. I mean
that the proof of descent must have its starting pou t
here, and not in ethnology, philology, or any other
"ology." But the biographical and historical account,
as given in that Book of History and Biography,
known and accepted everywhere as Genesis, I want
the readers of this work to know and remember, is the
first and only correct and faithful list of the beginning
of man's descent on the earth that is to be found any¬
where ; so come to it and call all men to it for all argu¬
ments, discussions and proofs of the relationship of any
and all of the families, tribes, races and nations on the
earth.
Then let us turn to it for our information and prove
that the ancient Egyptians and the present ones, too,
are the descendants of Ham—as much so as any of the
other nations and tribes of Africa.
Jyet us now start from the Book of Genesis and
trace what is now known as the Egyptians to their
home in Egypt, and, at the same time, show that they
£re the descendants of Ham, the second son of Noah,
and that they,therefore, belong with the colored races
pf the earth, yes, of the whole earth, for I hold all of
the colored races are descendants of Ham. I repeat,
that we are to be guided entirely by the genealogical
table found in Genesis, and not to resort to Caucasian-
ism, Sanskritism, Aryanism,. Anglo-Saxonism, or any
other "ism," but are to go to the Book, and to the Book
only.
THESE ARE THE SONS OF NOAH, AND THEIR DIFFERENT BRANCHES.
SONS and GRANDSONS.
JapMlr
( Ashkenaz, Ri-
rTnmpi>)PHATH a°d To
UUllicl j garmah 3
[families.
No Families.
No Families.
[ Elishah, Tar-
■tflvfln' shish< kittim,
JdlfdIi)and Dodanim—
(4 fatnil
llies.
Tubal { No Families,
ttesherii |no Families.
Tiras{ No Families.
f SONS and GRANDSONS.
[Seba. Havilah,
plkll' sabtah' kaamah,
UUollj n i m r o d. sabte-
[chah—7 families.
Mizraim
Ham-i
Ludim, Anamim,
Lehabim,
Naphtuhim,
pathri;sim,
Casluhim, 'out
of whom came
Philistrin,) and
Caphtohim—7
families.
Phut j No Families.
11 families includ
ing Sikon and
Huth ; and the
Jebusite, and the
_ Amorite.and the
Canaan Girgasite, and
1 the Hivite, and
the Arkite, and
the Linite, and
I tlie Arvadite.and
the Zemarite.and
I the Hamathite."
Sbem
SONS and GRANDSONS.
Elamj No Families.
AsshuH No Families.
( Salah and
•j EBER 2
( Families.
Lud ■5 No Families.
Uz. Hul, Geth-
Aram \ ER and Mash—
4 familes.
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 97
We are to do this, because in the Book, Egypt is
called the "Land of Ham." I will here quote the pas¬
sages in full, in which Egypt is called the "Land of
Ham." Psalms 105th and 106th; "Israel also came-
into Egypt, and Jacob sojourned in the land df Ham."
"They forgot God their Saviour, which had done
great things m Egpyt; Wondrous things in the land
of Ham."
Now I have gone to the Book, and the only Book
that contains an original, historical account of the line
of descent of the nations; and that Book says that
Egypt belonged to Ham. Then, if Egypt belonged to
Ham, it, for that reason, belonged also to his sons who
dwelt there; and all of his sons bore the relation of
brothers to each other, just as sons of the same father
do to-day. And all historians, I think, without a sin¬
gle exception, agree that Mizraim, the second son of
Ham, settled and reigned over Egypt as its first king.
And Cush, Mizraim, and Phut were the only sons of
Ham that went into Africa to settle, for Canaan never
went to Africa, but went and settled another country,
and called it Canaan, after himself. And Phut went
to Africa, but he did not have any offspring; so the
two sons of Ham who are known to have had any part
in the settlement of Africa, are Cush, the oldest son of
Ham, and Mizraim, the second son of Ham.
I repeat that it is agreed on all hands, and by ail
writers, that Mizraim settled Egypt, and Cush, the old¬
est son, settled Ethiopia and other parts of Africa; and
Cush is brother to Mizraim, who settled Egypt. How,
then, could the ancient Egyptians be anything else
than the same people as the rest of Africa. I say they
are, beyond a doubt, one and the same, for, as i have
shown, there is no ground for doubt. Yet, I am aware
that there has been any number of arguments advanced
to prove that the Egyptians were a different race from
the rest of Africa; but this I have shown to be impos-
98
THE NATIONS
sible, for they were the children of two brothers,
namely Cush and Mizraim, the first and second sons
of Ham.
I have said that it is agreed on all hands, that Miz¬
raim settled Egypt, but the Bible history of the matter
does not say so, foir the first history we have of the
matter, after it is called the "land of Ham," is, that the
Ethiopians are the ones that are found there, and if the
Ethiopians settled Egypt also, then we do not have
even a brother to come in between the Egyptians and
the other inhabitants of Africa, because if Cush settled
both Ethiopia and Egypt, why, they are to all intents
and purposes the same people in a clearer light still.
The argument that is now being advanced that there
were physical differences in the appearances of the
Ethiopians and Egyptians, I simply want to say, does
not prove anything whatever as to the race descent of
a people. It simply shows that in the course of time
there has been an intermixture among them, just as
does the difference in make-up of the colored people
in this caiimry to-day and others show the same
thing.
I want to say right here that the thing for us to do
in dealing with this all-important question of proper
race descent and relation of the Egyptians to the rest
of the inhabitants of Africa and all other historical
matter and information that, concerns the history of our
race in all ages and countries of the world, is for us
to continue to bring in question the white man's use
of words and terms. Yes, call them in question, so as
to have an opportunity to examine into their accuracy,
and also whether thev are not foreign to the matter that
is being considered, or whether he is not making his
words and terms stand for a great deal more than thev
really mean and teach. For this is what I consider a
great weakness in the white man. He will overdraw,
&nd he will overtjo almost everything he lays his hand
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 99
upon to do. Why, the white man can do wonders with
one simple word. He can take one word and produce
a race of people; yes, with one single word! Take, for
example, the word "Caucasian." Now, Blumenbach
took this single word and produced out of it his great
"Caucasian race." But not only so, but so great,
mighty and wonderful is the white man when he comes
to the use of words that one of them can take one word
and use it to the production of a whole race of people,
and then another one can take another different word
altogether, and one that means something else en¬
tirely, and make this other new word produce the
same people who were already produced by the former
word. You say, "Why that is impossible! because if
one word has already produced them, how can another
word do the same thing?" Well, this w6uld be an im¬
possibility, yes, an utter impossibility with any other
race on earth but the white man. This thing he
claims to have done. Now. let me prove that he has
made such a claim.
I have given you Blumenbach's word, "Caucasian,''
out of which he gets the "Caucasian race;" and the
other word out of which other white men .get the very
same race, is "Arya," from which is produced the
Anglo-Saxon race," which is said to> be precisely the
same sis the "Caucasian race."
Now, the term "Aryan," they tell us, is from "Ar,"
which, in this sense, means "to go;" and the word
"Caucasian" is an adjective, and means anything that
pertains to Mount Caucasus, and it does not mean any¬
thing else, onlv as it .is forced to mean other and more
than that; and this is just what the white man has
done in the person "of Blumenbach, the author of the
word. And so the word "aryan" is a verb, derived
from "Ar," its root, which means "to go."
Now I am sure I have given good reasons why we,
3.S a race, are to watch with great care for the decep-
100
THE NATIONS
tiveness of the white man's words and terms. It will
also be remembered that I stated in the opening of
this chapter, that the white man would make things
like he wanted them to be by simple assertion. So
let us now prove the assertion. .Just listen to these
quotations from Chambers' Encyclopaedia. The first
of these quotations will show that the whole theory of
the existence of an Aryan race is based upon supposi¬
tion, and the paragraph distinctly says that the views
advanced rest solely upon supposing the thing to be so;
not that it is, but they suppose it, and that this was
done because it could not be explained in any other
way. Now read the following paragraph which I here
quote:
"The researches of philologv have within the present
century, established such affinities as can be accounted
for1 only by supposing that the nations speaking them
had a common origin."
Now just listen to another paragraph.. It shows
up the fraud and pretence of the greatly learned white
man in a worse light still, for here is what it says:
"No one of these nations, whether existing, or his¬
torical, can claim to be the parent nation of which the
others are colonies. ,The »elation among the languages
mentioned, is that of sisters,—daughters of on" moth¬
er, which' perished, as ii were, in: giving them, birth.
No monuments of this mother-language have been pre¬
served, nor have we any history (listen, reader) or
even traditions of the nation that spoke it. That such
a nation of people ever existed and spoke such a tongue
is an inference of comparative philology."
Only an inference, mind you; not a settled, proven
fact, but an inference only, Oh, think of it! that a na¬
tion—and said to be now the greatest nation on the
earth—built on an "inference," yes, an "inference," a
simple insignificant . thing like an "inference!" But
thanks to the facts, yes, solid facts, as recorded on
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 101
monuments, tombs, tablets and parchments in number¬
less instances, the great Hamitic races have the history
of the storv told to the ages by these monuments,
tablets and parchments, as the foundation of their ori¬
gin, and record in the world as a race of people. So
we. the colored race, do not have to resort to that
young, yes, that very young and uncertain quantity
known as philology, which was just born here in the
latter part of the nineteenth century of the world's his¬
tory.
Oh, may what I have written inspire some one else
to search for the truth and find it, and be profited by
it! But let us consider a little further, the subject of
the race connection of the Egyptians to the rest of Af¬
rica and the people.
The country of Africa is called in Scripture the
''Land of Cush,"as well as Egypt is called the"Land of
Ham." Of course the reasoning is that Ham left his
country to his oldest son, who was Cush, and it there¬
fore took his name, like it had before gone by the name
of Ham, his father. We now want to bring Egypt
and Africa together and show them to be one and the
same people—not by the supposition, but by the writ¬
ten record made of them; and the people who made it
are living to-day, which are the Jews.
I here quote Isaiah, and the passages are to show
the close connection that existed at that time between
Egypt and Ethiopia:
"My servant Isaiah walked three years before Egypt
and Ethiopia, for a sign unto them. * * * *
"And they shall be ashamed and afraid of Egypt
their glory.
"I will make the land of Egypt utterly waste and
desolate from the tower of Syene, even unto the bor¬
ders of Ethiopia."
Now, these passages show that the kingdoms and
countries of Egypt joined each other. So they are
brought together in that respect, that is, in the relation
102
THE NATIONS
of cooperation witn each other, which argues to some
extent their oneness as a people.
Here is another passage in Daniel which strengthens
the statement just made. It is this: "But he shall have
power over the treasures of gold and of silver, and
over all the precious things of Egypt * * * * the
Ethiopians shall be at his steps."
These passages, as I have said, go to show the close
relationship of these two peoples to each other in des¬
tiny, war and danger. But the real and conclusive ev¬
idence of the oneness of the Egyptians and Ethiopians,
as to race and descent, is the grand and important fact
that they are both the offsprings of the same father,
namely, Ham, the second son of Noah; for Cush, the
oldest son of Ham, was the progenitor of the Cushites,
who are also called Ethiopians; and Mizraim, the fa¬
ther of the Egyptians, was the second son of Ham,
therefore making Cush and Mizraim own brothers.
How, then, in the name of the Scriptures which record
the facts, and in the name of common sense and com¬
mon reason, could the Egyptians and Ethiopians be
other than one and the same people?
I think I have now settled this vexed question be¬
yond a reasonable doubt, because it is settled according
to the facts in the case, and not simply by supposition,
assumption and assertion. Yes, it will stay settled for¬
ever in favor of the oneness of the Egyptians and the
rest of the original inhabitants of Africa, if we in our
history-searching will simply brush aside the white
man's cobweb "supposings," and take the original re¬
corded facts and stand by them, hold to them, and
teach them and nothing else.
Then, again, Africa's historic fame stands out boldly
when we recall the fact that the three most noted and
far-famed war generals of the world are lying buried
in Africa. They are Hannibal, Alexander and Napo¬
leon. Their remains are sleeping in African soil.
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 103
I asserted in another part of this chapter that the
great men among- the ancients did not consider their
education complete until they had traveled and studied
in Africa. So let me here give the names of a few of
them for an example. The following are their names:
Plato, the greatest of Greek philosophers; Herodotus,
the preatest of Greek historians, and falsely called the
"Father of History;" Menetho, the great Egyptian
historian; Polybius, a Greek historian whose works
consisted of forty books; Mark Antony, a great Ro¬
man general; Solon,, another Greek philosopher : Philo,
the great Jewish historian, etc.
Then it was in Africa that Moses, tjhe great lawgivelr,
was born, reared and educated. It was in Africa that
all of the children of Israel were born and reared, with
the exception of seventy who went down with Jacob.
It was also in Africa that the first paschal lamb was
slain' and the passover of the Jews was instituted and
eaten. But I come now to speak of Africa in connec¬
tion with another one of her great cities and kingdoms,
namely, Carthage. This mighty city was at one time
one of the most far-famed and historical of the earth.
Now it is about her connection with Phoenicia and
Rome that I want to speak. But let us take Phoenicia
first, and show what relationship Carthage may reason¬
ably be supposed to have held to Phoenicia; and then in
the same manner, and with the same object in view,
turn our attention to Rome—"Old Rome!" Yes, great
and mighty Rome!—and let us see if we cannot find
the truly reasonable relationship which she,- proud and
haughty Rome, bore to Carthage; yes, from her foun¬
dation to the destruction of Carthage by the Romans.
The first and.most important, thing I want to do, in
this connection, is to put the reader on his guard
as to the true nature of the matter with which we have
to deal—that is, as to date or facts or our narrative.
Because what ought to be facts and what has been
104
THE NATIONS
received and brought dow.ti' the. ages as facts about the
matter, are nothing but myths and fiction, and so are
false and unfit for true history-making.
But there are some facts about the matter, and on
these we will have to base what we shall have to say on
this subject, and so find a reasonable ground upon
which to rest our conclusions, for in no case in connec¬
tion with the history given of the origin either of-Rome
or Carthage has this been done, but on the contrary,
the histories and narratives we have to-day of them
rest wholly and entirely on fiction and myth. But it is
an established fact, that there were such places as Car¬
thage and Rome established, and it is also a fact that
somebody established them.
Now then the question is, Who established them?
As for Carthage, we are told that the Phoenicians es¬
tablished it; but I do not believe a word of it to be the
facts in the case. One of the many, many stories told
us for history about the establishment of Carthage is,
that a widowed aueen of .the Phoenicians, her husband
having been killed by Pygmalion, who was king of
Tyre, and brother of Dido, whiph was the name of the
queen, who, we are told established the city and king¬
dom of Carthage. It is said she became despondent on
account of the cruel death of her husband, and that
she also got disgusted with her people and country.
Tyre and the Tynans, and started out in search of a
kingdom for herself, and that a great storm arose at
sea, and she and those who accompanied her, were
driven upon the shores of Africa, where she landed
and negotiated with the inhabitants for a piece of land
on which sh$ might build a citadel. She said she only
wanted as much as an ox's hide would compass, so they
readily—as the story goes—granted her that for noth¬
ing ; they having no idea of the "caper" she intended to
"cut" in the matter. But when the grant was made,
she took an ox's liide and made it into small thongs,
FROM A NEW POINT OE VIEW. 105
and made it encircle a large tract of land. And it was
upon this and at this time, and these are the circum¬
stances under which the City of Carthage was estab¬
lished. And such a story is the kind of history we
have, as to how the Phoenicians came to be credited
with the establishment of Carthage.
That such a nerson as Dido ever lived in Tyre or
anywhere else, rests upon the authority of Virgil,
as told in his book the -ZEneid, and it will be remem¬
bered and carefully thought of, that the iEneid of
Virgil is nothing in the world but an adventurous
poetical story of how ^neas, one of the so-called he¬
roes of the so-called city of Troy, escaped after its de¬
struction and made his way into Italy and Latium.
The reader can see that as soon as I say that it is a
poetical story, that of itself destroys the historical char¬
acter of the narrative, or in other words, shows that it
cannot be the real facts as to how Carthage was found¬
ed, because all secular or profane poetry is nothing but
the work of imagination of the mind. Of course I
make an exception when I come to Bible poetry, be¬
cause that is revealed from God, and is not, there¬
fore, the work of the undirected and unaided mind.
But Virgil's story of Dido and Carthage is simply
myth of the rankest kind.
I have shown that the theory of the establishment of
Carthage by the Phoenicians through a woman called
Dido is based wholly on the mythical poems of Virgil,
and so is no history at all of the matter. Now, what
then is the reasonable side of the question? for it is a
question; but is-so only because of the great efforts
that have been-put forth to give a fictitious origin to
the city. The only reasonable view to take of it is,
that Carthage was established by native Africans them¬
selves. Then, and then only, do we have an assump¬
tion with some sense about it. But that foolish idiotic
lie of some Dido or other, wandering all the way from
106
THE NATIONS
Tyre in Phoenicia to build the city, is too childish and
unreasonable for an intelligent people to receive and
believe for a single moment. And yet, the white man
has received and believed it for thousands of years.
But, may we ask,Why is it so reasonable to believe
that the Africans themselves founded the city and king¬
dom of Carthage? Because city-building is a natural
trait of character with all the descendants of Ham, and
the Africans are no exception to the fact; for -look at
Egypt, Ethiopia, Nubia and all the other great cities
that are found in Africa. So why not they be consid¬
ered the builders of Carthage also? Why, the only
Y' ason in the way is that the poet Virgil by his imagina¬
tion created a Dido, who, he says, built it. But which
skill we take for the truth in the matter ? The side of
reason and common sense every time!
Put that the Carthaginians had large and frequent
intercourse with the Phoenicians seems to be clear be¬
yond a reasonable doubt. But it seems to have been
nothing more than commercial and treaty relationships,
such as she had with Sicily, Italy, Rome, etc. Why
n^ed it be more than that ? And what proof is there
that it ever was more, or other than that ?
Then, again, there is another thing that goes to show
the mythical character of the "Dido" theory of the es¬
tablishment of Carthage. It is that each one of the fol¬
lowing writers gives a different account of the matter:
Minander, Eusebius, Appian and Howel. Not one of
them agrees with the other about how and when the
city was established; so there is, then, this one thing of
which I will assure the reader, and that is, you will
lose nothing, either in argument or in fact, by taking
the view that the Africans themselves were the makers
and builders of both t!he city and kingdom of Car¬
thage ; but on the contrary, will have the only proper
view of it that is to be had.
FROM A NEW POINT Of4 VIEW. 107
We next turn our attention to the relationship which
Carthage bore to the settlement of Rome, Italy and La-
tium, for they were all one and the same country under
these different names, and at different times, and under
different circumstances. Rome, which was at first
but a very small city, afterwards so. grew and spread
as to include the whole province and, indeed, to become
the greatest of empires. But what people established it,
and how it was done, is the all-important question with
which we now want to deal. I want just here to make a
quotation from "The World: Historical and Actual,"
first, to show that Rome, Italy and Latium, included
one and the same territory; and secondly, to show that
the story told of the settlement of Rome, Italy and La¬
tium is pure fiction, without one spark of true history.
The quotation is as follows:
"Latium was the old term applied to a region bound¬
ed on the north by the Tiber, east by the Marsi and
Samnium, and southwest by the Tyrrhene Sea. Besides
Rome, it included Tivoli, Osta, Tusculum and' Alba
Longa, the latter being the parent city of Rome.
"Of Magna Graecia and the Italian islands known to
the Greeks, an account has already been given, and we
are now prepared to explain the archives of the Rome
of traditional kings.
"The story elaborated by Virgil of the founding of
what became the Roman state by a band of Trojan ref¬
ugees, may have some- truth in it. There was certainly
nothing improbable in the supposition, but it has no
place in actual history. The founding of Rome as a
city by Romulus and his brother Remus is hardly less
poetic and fanciful than the exploits of iEneas; but un¬
til a comparatively recent date it was supposed that a
veritable history of Rome existed from the birth of
those wolf-suckled twins to the extinguishment of the
Western Empire. The truth is, however, that for
about one-half of that period the history is legendary.
108
THE NATIONS
"The more notable persons and events in Roman his¬
tory have been so creditably investigated that there is
hardly the shadow of a shade of real fact left. It is
not until we come down to Scioio, midway between the
two ends, that we encounter a famous Roman
of whose actual life we have historic data. Karly Ro¬
man history has a deep interest, nevertheless, and an
inestimable value; for with all its untrustworthiness in
detail, it fairly represents the spirit of early Rome and
explains the phenomenal growth of a small town into
the most far-reaching empire the world ever saw. It
will not be our purpose to point out the probable his¬
tory, in distinction from romance, in the records of
those times, for it could not be done with any degree of
accuracy, and if done would be unsatisfactory. It is
enough to call attention to the general fact at the outset,
partly to guard against attaching too much importance
to details, and oartly as an explanation of the oroposed
disregard of all the details given of that period, except
those which possess value in throwing light upon the
Roman character.
"A pure fiction often has a positive and great im¬
portance in a historical point of view. The story of
William Tell, for example, may be, as now claimed, a
myth, but it none the less fairly represents the Swiss
struggle for liberty. Again, George Washington's
'little hatchet' never cut down a parental cherrv tree,
but the story none the less illustrates the truthfulness
of 'the Father of his Country.' "
"The subject of the iEneid is the settlement of the
Trojans in Italy. In the 'Iliad' iEneas is one of the
minor heroes of Troy, and Virgil represents him as
escaping with great difficulty from that city at the time
of the great conflagration, leading a small colony of
refugees to Italy. Their journey there was an eventful
one. The story of his stay at Carthage and the passion
of Queen Dido, the device by which he escaped, and
FROM A NEW POINtf Off VIEW. 109
her tragic end, are familiar to these at all familiar with
classic legends. He catered to the national prejudice
representing the Queen of Carthage as jilted by the
hero to whom it was pretended the descent of the Em¬
peror Augustus could be traced. The story has no his¬
torical foundation beyond the probability that some
fugitives from' Iroy may have found their way to It¬
aly and formed part of the stock of the Roma poeple."
The above-quoted writer says the story of Romulus
and Remus being nursed by the wolf teaches us what
was the character of the Romans at that time. I do not
see how it does unless it points to what would likely
be their future wolfish character. But my object in
using the quotation is to show that the story of the set¬
tlement of Rome and Italy is not in any sense history,
but simply a poetical myth, and does not prove anything
as to who, how or When either Rome or Italy was
founded. And as to the story of George Washington,
the little hatchet and cherry tree—instead of it teaching,
us of the truthfulness of the "Father of his Country,"'
it can and may serve to teach an entirely different les¬
son, and that is instead of his being so truthful, he may
have been very untruthful, and somebody may have
charged him with it at some public meeting or cam¬
paign gathering, and some one may have told the story
of the little hatchet and the cherry tree as his recollec¬
tion of the boyhood days of Washington.
Why , I can in my imagination now seem to hear that
old campaign war horse as he mounts the political
stump <yrid makes that tale as he exclaims, "Who un¬
truthful? Who tell a lie? George Washington? No,
never! never in the world! for I know him from a boy,
and I knew his father before him, and he would not
tell an untruth then!" And just here the story of the
hatchet and cherry tree can nicely come in and be told.
I repeat that the Story of Washington and the cherry
tree does not teach us that he was very truthful, but it
110
THE NATIONS
teaches that this is one of the many stories told of him;
it does positively teach that lesson and nothing more.
So I again assert that there is not one written line to be
found in all the earth to-day that can be pointed out as
any^proof whatever that there ever did live in this
world of ours any such person as -ZEneas of the city of
Troy. And so here let me quote again to sustain the
assertion just made (see Readers' Reference Book):
"/Eneas: A Trojan prince, son of Anchises and Ve¬
nus. He married Creusa, the daughter of Priam, and
they had a son named Ascanius. During the Trojan
war ^Eneas behaved with great valor in defense of
Troy. When the citv was in flames he is said to have
carried away his father, Anchises, on his shoulders,
leading his son Ascanius by the hand, his wife follow¬
ing them. Subsequently he built a fleet of twenty ships,
with which he set sail in quest of a settlement. He
was driven on the coast of Africa, and was kindly re¬
ceived by Dido, Queen of Carthage, who became enam¬
ored of him; but he left Carthage by the order of the
gods. After wandering about during several years,
encountering numerous difficulties, he at length arrived
in Italy, where he was hospitably received by Latinus,
king of the Latins. After the death of Latinus, TEneas
became king. He has been praised for his piety and his
submission to the will of the gods; the term "Pius" is
generally prefixed to his name. He is a hero of Ho¬
mer's Iliad and the great hero of Virgil's .ZEneid.' "
And this also, from Chamber's Encyclopaedia:
"TEneas, the hero of Virgil's ^neid, was, according to
Homer, the son of Anchises and Venus, and was
ranked next to Hector among the Trojan heroes. The
traditions of his adventures before and after the fall
of Troy are various and discordant." Virgil gives the
following version: "/Eneas, though warned by Priam
in the night to take his household goods and flee from
the city, remained in the contest until Priam fell, when,
FROM A NEW POINT OP VIEW. Ill
taking- with him his family, he escaped from the
Greeks, but in the confusion of his hasty flight, lost
his wife, Creusa. Having collected a fleet of twenty
vessels, he sailed to Thrace, where he began building
the city of ^nos, but was terrified by an unfavorable
omen, and abandoned his plan of a settlement here. A
mistaken interpretation of the oracle of Delphi now led
him to Crete.; but from that place he was driven by a
pestilence. Passing the promontory of Actium, he
came to Epirus and then continued his voyage to It¬
aly, and round Sicily to the promontory of Drepanum
on the west, where his father, Anchises, died. A storm
afterwards drove him to the coast of Africa, and land¬
ing near Carthage, he was hospitably received and en¬
tertained by Queen Dido. Hi$' marriage with Dido
was prevented by Jupiter, who sent Mercury with a
command that iEneas must return to Italy. Accord¬
ingly he sailed away, leaving the disappointed queen,
who committed suicide. During his stay in Sicily,
where he celebrated the funeral od^liis father, the wives
of his companions and seamen, weary of long voyages
without certaintv of finding a home, set fire to his
fleet. After building the city of Acesta he sailed for It¬
aly, leaving behind him the women and some of the
men belonging to his fleet. On landing in Italy, he
visited the sibyl at Cumae and received intimations of
his future destiny. Their sailing along the Tiber and
landing on the east side of the river, he found himself
in the country of Latinus, king of the Aborigines. La-
vinia, the daughter of Latinus, had been destined to
marry a stranger; but her mother had promised to give
her in marrige to Turnus, king of Rutuli. A war en¬
sued which terminated in the marriage of .^Eneas with
Lavinia. Their son, JEneas Sylvius, -as the ancestor of
the kings of Alba Longa, and also of Romulus and Re¬
mus, was regarded as the founder of the Roman Em-
112
THE NATIONS
pire. It is hardly necessary to add that all these state¬
ments are merely mythical, having no historical basis."
You see by the above quotations that the story of
Virgil as to ^Eneas and his descendants is a myth of
myths. Yes, I mean that it is a myth founded on -a
myth, for iEneas is a mythical personage created by
Homer as one of the great generals against whom the
Greeks had to fight at the siege of Troy. Now, as
Homer's story was a myth and nothing more, then
Virgil's could be nothing but a myth of myths. Yes,
the whole of Virgil's story of how Rome and Italy
were settled by and through the family of ^Eneas, is
only a new myth based upon an old one, and that is the
myth of Homer's siege of Troy, as told in his Ilaid,
which was in the year 1184 B. C., and Virgil was not
born until 70 B.C.,which was. 1114 years later. Yes, it
seems that Homer had been dead more than 1114 years
before Virgil tried to imitate him by making his myth¬
ical story—that is, if Homer ever lived; for it now
seems very probable that he never did. Certainly there
i» no real proof that he ever lived outside of the fact
that tradition ascribes to him, or says he was the author
of a Greek poetical work known to the literary world
as Iliad and Odyssey. But when you undertake to look
for other proofs there is absolutely none; for as many
as seven cities claim that he was born in them.
Now, it is evident that no one person can be born
in seven different cities at one and the same time; no,
not even Homer, though he might be born in an Hercu¬
lean age, when as it is said, the infant Hercules at only
eight months old. seized two great snakes sent by the
Goddess Juno to devour him, and crushed them to
cleath as though they were only, little, insignificant
worms. Now, does the reader ask what has all this to
do with the relationship that Carthage bore to the
colonization of Rome and Italy? My answer is, It
has much to do with It every way; because it goes to
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 113
show how improbable the story of Virgil is as to how
and by whom Rome was founded, because every line
that Virgil wrote about -#£neas and Latium, Italy,
Rome and Dido, is pu£e fiction based on; pure fiction.
So we are now prepared to consider the question' as to
the relation that Carthage bore to Rome from the tan¬
gible point of view. And it is the tangible point, be¬
cause it is the sensible point, and the only sensible
point; and it is the only sensible point, because it is
the only point of view that is based on reasons that
have a reasonable probability as to their possibility.
And that is to say, that the Carthaginians were the
colonizers of Rome.
And if it is asked what ,are the evidences which gc
to prove that to be the reasonable side of the matter,
the first proof is that the Carthaginians as a people
were great colonizers, and that she colonized in al¬
most every country then known.. Again, Carthage was
much older than Rome, from one hundred to two hita-
dred and twenty-five years older; and history every¬
where records that she had colonies in Sicib , Thessalv,
Spain, Gaul, etc. And I ask, why could she not have
been the settler of Rome also? and was she not? and
if not, why not. Is that not the probable fact, and the
only fact in the case? I firmly believe it so to be, for
the reasons given, and for many others I might give.
But I will not now carry the thought further, but
leave the reader to look into the matter, and see if this
is not the only reasonable view that can be taken of it,
since the poems of Homer and Virgil cannot be his¬
tory, for they are pure unadulterated fiction.
So, if Homer and Virgil is not history, then there is
no written history now in existence of how, when and
by whom Italy, Latium and Rome were founded. But
it is a positive fact that th&y were founded, because
they are in existence to-day; and it is another positive
fact that some people or other did it, because countries
8
114
-THE NATIONS.
and cities do not found and build themselves; arid be¬
cause of the facts I have already cited. The Cartha¬
ginians in Africa were the only available ones to have
done the work; so, here is another great historical star
in the crown of Africa's greatness as a country, and
a people, and with the question settled, certainly to
mv own satisfaction. I have completely shown in this
book, that the progenitors or descendants of Ham, the
second son of Noah, were the first colonizers of ever)'
habitable country on the globe.
CHAPTER XV.
THE HAMITE.
The Hamite has been a bone of contention from pre¬
historic times down to the present day. Even from
the days of Noah, when he uttered those memorable
words, "Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall
he be unto hip brethren." From that day to this there
has dwelt in the breasts of the other two branches of
the sons of Noah a deep-rooted hatred against the de¬
scendants of Ham; and if any one will follow the re¬
corded facts of history, he will see that from that very
Deriod God began to bless them with name and fame,
with power and influence, with civilization and reli¬
gion. All of this, I say, may be seen by simpy observ¬
ing the facts of history. For it Is a fact that the very
first government the world had after the flood was
formed by one of the sons of Ham, namely, Nimrod;
for the sacred historian tells us that he began to be a
mighty one in the earth, and that the beginning of his
kingdom was Babel and Erech,Accad and Calneh,f-our
cities. The same writer tells us that this, the first king¬
dom, which consisted of the four cities named abt>ve, was
set up in the land of Shinar, and that Nimrod was its
king. He tells us also that this was only the beginning
of his kingdom; so here in Shinar began the power of
ruling among the Hamites, and they spread almost all
over the then known world, as governors, kings and
rulers of the earth; for instance, Nimrod and Cush,
first in Shinar and then in Arabia; and Mizraim in
Egypt: and out of his seed came the Philistines; there-
J (US)
116
THE NATIONS
fore the great giant Goliath, of Gath, was a Hamite,
and also all that great Philistine host. Then Phut, the
third son of Ham, went to Africa, and there settled
the country called Libya; and Canaan, the youngest
son of Ham, settled the land of Canaan, and was the
father and progenitor of the Canaanites, and all those
"rites," "vites" and "ites," that multiplied and spread
abroad, as it were, over all the face of the earth.
Canaan was also the father of the Phoenicians, of
whom Cadmus was one, and he taught the Greeks to
read and write. He was also founder of the city of
Thebes.
It is sometimes made a question in history, whether
the Phoenicians taught the Egyptians letters or the
Egyptians taught the Phoenicians ; but to us as a race
question that makes no difference, as both the Phoeni¬
cians and Egyptians were of the descendants of Ham—
the Egyptians, through Mizraim, the second son of
Ham: the Phoenicians, through Canaan, the fourth son
of Ham. They were therefore both Hamitic people;
so the Greeks got their letters from a Hamite, whether
Phoenician or Egyptian, and the Hamites not only
taught the Greeks their letters, but the present govern-
in^ and prevailing mother languages of the earth are
Hamitic in their origin. I say they are Hamitic in
their origin, and not Shemitic, as is most universally
held, and one of my first proofs of that fact is the posi¬
tions that the different races occupied after the flood.
No historian, who is a standard author of to-day, de¬
nies that the first kingdom the world ever knew was
that one that was set up in the land of Shinar; and no
one will deny that Nimrod was the founder of it, and
was also its first king; and that he was a Hamite is not
denied by any.
Now, these statements being true, and no one deny¬
ing their truthfulness, what other legitimate and logi¬
cal conclusion can be reached than that Nimrod and
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 117
his coadjutors and descendants made and formu¬
lated the language that governed the people of his
kingdom; and to suppose anything else is unreason¬
able, for it is an unalterable fact that the race of people
that first :'ett1e and civilize a country also give to it its
language, and in the case under consideration there can
be no exception to the rule. And that the different
branches of civilization were for more than a thousand
years developed along the line of Ham, no one can
prove to the contrary.
One of the mother tongues is known to be what is
wrongly and unjustly called the "Hebrew"—unjust¬
ly so-called, because it is properly of Canaanitish ori¬
gin, and to call it Hebrew is to rob the Canaanites of
the honor properly due them of being the rightful orig¬
inators of one of the principal languages of the earth;
and to rob the Canaanites of this honor is to rob the
Hamites, and to rob the Hamites is to rob the colored
race of the same honor, because the colored race is
descended from Ham.
My first proof that what is now called Hebrew "is a
Canaanitish language, is to be found in the Bible it¬
self: Isaiah calls it the "language of Canaan" (see
chap. 19, verse 18). Again, the language of the He¬
brews was in its chief feature identical with that of
the Canaanites, and this came about by the Hebrews
learning the language of the Canaanites, and to sup¬
pose anything else is unreasonable, because Abraham,
who was by the Canaanites called the Hebrew, must
have given the name to his descendants (see Gen. 14:
13) ; and this is the first time that the word Hebrew
is used as .a name for Abraham, and it is now used by
a Canaanite, and not by Abraham himself or any of
his family; therefore, we argue that the very word He¬
brew is a Canaanitish word. And again, it is not rea¬
sonable to suppose that Abraham, who was only an
immigrant into Canaan, which was at that time ad-
118
THE NATIONS
vanced to a very high state of civilization, should
change the language of the people who had dwelt
there for ages into that of his own, any more than it
would be to suppose that a French or a Dutch colony
coming into this country at this late date could change
the language we now speak to that of their own. An¬
other strong vproof that the Jews learned and spoke
the language!of Canaan is to be seen in the fact that
the term "Hebrew language" is not seen in the Old
Testament at all, and neither Abraham nor Moses nor
any of the Old Testament writers spoke of the lan¬
guage they used as being Hebrew.
The Greek was also Hamitic, because this language
was taught the Greeks by Cadmus, who was a Hamite,
being, as he was, a descendant of Canaan, and Canaan
was the fourth son of Ham.
The basis of Latin language is also of Hamitic ori¬
gin, because the Greek is the basis of the Latin, and
they depend the one upon the other, on into the French,
German, Saxon, English; but all, all derived from a
Hamitic root, which was first planted in the land of
Shinar, under Nimrod, the first king of the world, who
was the grandson of Ham.
Yes, the Hamite has ever been active. He founded
the first government, built cities, established king¬
doms, built the first monument and pyramids, and
reared the first temples to the gods that men served.
So not only did civilization develop along the line of
Ham, but religion, and the religion of the true God at
that. This I draw from where it is first found, and it is
first found in its most advanced stages,where ? Show¬
ing itself along the line of Shem ? Not at all; but along
the line of Ham; for you look in vain in the word of
God for signs of the worship of the one only true God
among the descendants of Shem or himself until the
days of Abraham, and in his days the worship of the
true God had dwelt so long with the descendants of
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 119
Ham that it had become corrupt among them, and
Abraham was raised up for the express purpose of its
re-establishment; and so God called him out of the
midst of idolatry, and sent him into the land of Canaan,
to re-establish by him the worship of the true God that
had then become corrupt with Ham. I repeat, that
Abraham was raised up to become the new custodian
of true religion; and thus, when the Hamite failed to
serve God aright, He took away the privilege, and
gave it to the Shemites or Jews; and when they failed
to serve him aright, he took it away from the Jews, and
gave it to the Japhethites, or what is known as the
Gentiles.
Now, let us prove that the worship of the true God
was first with the posterity of Ham: You have only
to ask where it is found in its purest form, and the an¬
swer will be: in the land of Canaan, and Melchisedek
is found to be in possession of it,, for he is priest of the
Most High God, and I might say here that Melchis¬
edek is the first to apply that title; others worshipped
God as a god; and Melchisedek was a Canaanite, and
the Canaanites were Hamites, and Melchisedek was
God's first high priest; and so pure had he preserved
the word of God, that Abraham sacrifices to him, and
he is also the similitude after which the Son of God is
made. Then it was not only after Adam Christ was
formed, but also after the order of Melchisedek, that
is, in his priesthood; and Melchisedek was a Canaanite;
and the Canaanites were Hamites; therefore Christ was
made a priest after the order of a descendant of Ham.
If T am asked, Were not the posterity of Ham cursed
in the person of Canaan, thereby causing the past and
present degradation of the race of Ham? in the first
place, I would say that I do not see that the race of
Ham, as such, has ever had, nor has it now, a degra¬
dation. There are individual persons of the race, who
have in different ages of the world, as there are in all
120
THE NATIONS
other races, been mistreated and dragged down
to a very low level; but the race, as such, never.
I should be more than glad to have any one liv¬
ing point out to me in what the degradation of the race
of Ham has ever, in any stage of the world's history,
consisted. Was it, and is it to be found in the words
of Noa£, "Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants
shall he be unto his brethren?" In what sense, I
would like to know, could this curse of Noah on Ca¬
naan have any application to Cush, Mizraim and Phut,
the three older sons of Ham? You will remember
it was not Ham himself, nor either of the other three
of his sons who was cursed, but Canaan only. Now, I
ask therefore, could the curse of Noah have fallen upon
the whole race of Ham when only one-fourth part of
that great and world-renowned race had received a
curse, namely, Canaan ? And then, again, if Noah had
intended the curse for the whole posterity of Ham,
would he not have begun with Ham himself, so that
the curse might pass from father to son, down through
the third and fourth generations ? But here the curse
is at the last end of Ham's posterity, ana to say that
this is the curse of the race is like saying that a man
who wishes to destroy a tree cuts off one of the last
branches instead of cutting the root; for Canaan was
the last branch in the Hamitic family, being the young¬
est son.
Now, inasmuch as we see it to be unreasonable to
suppose that Noah meant the curse to apply to all of
the family of Ham, let us then notice the curse itself
as it rested upon Canaan: What is it ? It is an assign¬
ment of Canaan to the servitude of Shem and Ja-
phexh. Now, Canaan may have served both Shem and
Japheth during their lifetime, but if he did do so, it
does not appear, either in sacred or profane history,
and not only is there no Scripture bearing directly on
its fulfillment, but there is not even a passage that J
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 121
can find that has the remotest reference to its fulfill¬
ment ; and not only is there no proof of Canaan having
ever served Shem and Japheth as an individual, but
there is no proof that his descendants served them as
slaves. It cannot be said that they of Africa did so,
for the Africans are not the descendants of Canaan,
but of Cush, the first son of Ham, and they were not
cursed; yet Matthew Henry in his Commentary says
the curse was fulfilled with the inhabitants of Gibeon,
when the children of Israel entered the land of Ca¬
naan.
Now, let us see: The Gibeonites were Canaanites,
and were therefore a part of the nation which God had
commanded Joshua to utterly destroy. What I want
Mr. Henry, and others who take, his view of the
matter, to do, is to harmonize these two purposes of
God: one was, they tell us, to make the Canaanites per¬
petual bondsmen and slaves, because Ham told Shem
and Japheth that he had seen his father in the tent in
an intoxicated condition; and the other purpose we
know to be utter destruction, because God so com¬
manded Moses. I therefore ask, how could God de¬
sign the Canaanites by the curse of Noah to be com¬
manded to perpetual slavery under Shem and Japheth
and at the same time design them to be utterly de¬
stroyed from the face of the earth ? And we know that
had Joshua done what the Lord commanded him to do,
that is, destroy all the Canaanites, there would not
have been one on the earth.
And again, I do not see how the making of the Gib¬
eonites to hew wood and draw water can be construed
into a fulfillment of the perpetual bondage of the Ca¬
naanites to Shem and Taoheth, because the Gibeonites
were but a handful of the Canaanites, comparatively
sneaking, when there were millions upon millions of the
Canaanites, where the Gibeonites were onlv four cities;
and indeed, if you .will only take the trouble to exam-
122
THE NATIONS
ine the matter a little closely, you will find that the
curse was entirely gratuitous on the part of Joshua,
he not having inquired of the Lord about the matter.
(See Joshua 9:14, 15.)
Again, the servitude was partly self-imposed, for
the Gibeonites came a day's journey to the camp of
Israel, and said to the Israelites: "We will be your
Servants,"' preferring service to death, and, indeed,
service is to be preferred to idleness, much less death.
And then, again, the service itself was honorable, for
it was none other than to prepare material for the
house and altar of God. And if the servitude was. to
be perpetual, it was simply to be perpetually in the serv¬
ice of the Lord; and my daily prayer is: "Lord, give
us more and more of this kind of servitude." This
was the same kind of service that the Jews them¬
selves had performed from the time that the taber¬
nacle was set up in the camp of Israel, until now.
which was for over forty years; so if the same work in
and of itself was a disgrace to the Gibeonites, was it
not also to the Israelites, who had performed it for
forty years? If not, why?
Once more I ask, how could the enslavement of the
inhabitants of Gibeon be construed into the enslave¬
ment of the whole of the Canaanites, much less the
race of Ham, which consisted of four great branches
of the human family? And this is the only passage
that is ever quoted as a proof of the fulfillment of the
curse of Noah, and it has been nearly a thousand
years since its utterance, and Noah by his curse con¬
demned one branch of the posterity of Ham to servi¬
tude under Shem and Japheth, and yet the first serv¬
ants we read of are Shemites, and they were Abra¬
ham's. (See Gen. 11:5.)
Dr. Gill says the persons spoken of in that passage
were Abraham's servants; and not only that, but the
very first persons we read of suffering in slavery were
from a new point of view. 123
the Shemites, who were four hundred years in bondage
under the Hamites in Egypt. You read of others being
subdued and conquered in war, before this, but not en¬
slaved. Greek and Roman slavery did not have an
existence for many generations after, because the
Greeks and Romans did not exist. But it was among
them that the most cruel system of slavery, and the
most extensive that the world ever knew, was carried
on. They were the descendants of Japheth, both the
slaves themselves and the enslavers. I repeat that the
descendants of Japheth, or the white men, were the
verv first to enslave their own brethren; so the race
degradation is on the other side, for slavery existed
among the Greeks and Romans before the days of Ho¬
mer, and he lived a thousand years before Christ.
African slavery—so-called—did not begin for more
than a thousand years after Christ; and therefore
white slavery is over two thousand years older than
black slavery; or in other words, the white race were
slaves for more than two thousand years before the
colored race (see Chamber's Encyclopaedia, also En¬
cyclopaedia Britannica), and it is among this same peo¬
ple ycu will find all of the cruelties and barbarities that
human savagery can invent. And as to the numbers
of the colored and white slaves that have existed, I
wish to say, right here, that so far as records show,
the colored slaves are as nothing in comparsion. Then,
if to be enslaved is a degradation—and it is a very
great one—which of the races have been the most de¬
graded, I would ask, Shem, Ham or Japheth?
But the fact is, that the colored race in this and all
other slaveholding countries, have been made to feel
that it is the colored race alone that has been enslaved;
whereas, they have been so both last and least. I mean
to say that the bondage of the white man began first,
lasted lonp-er, and that he was enslaved in far greater-
numbers than the colored man ever was.
124
THE NATIONS
We b^ve been preached to by the white ministers of
this country from those passages in Paul's Epistles,
where the words "master" ynd "servant" are men¬
tioned. Nearly all the time 4he rule has been to make
them apply to us as a people, as though in those pas¬
sages the "master" was white and the "servant" col¬
ored, when the fact is that in every case both "master"
and "servant" were white. And that man whom Paul
sent back to Philemon, whose name was Onesimus,
was also a white slave. Now, while the passage in
question would apply to the colored race while in slav¬
ery. a just and fair interpretation of them would have
enabled that race to know that they were designed for
and written to white men, but could also be made to
apply to the colored. I tell you such would have had
a sfreat tendency to encourage the race to bear th«nr
afflictions and hope for a better day; and it would at
the same time have made the white man a fair and
truthful interpreter of the Scriptures, for no one
knows what a depressing effect the application of the
words "a servant of servants shall he be," have had on
us as a race, because the white man construed them to
mean our perpetual bondage; but we see now that the
passage did not mean that, because we are free and arf
in bondage to no man; and so, after the same shallow
way of reasoning has the white man brought himself
to feel his superiority, and the colored man to falsely
and foolishly acknowledge his inferiority. This is
done, of course, by confounding facts with fiction, and
condition with character. There is a vast difference
between race conditions and race characteristics, be¬
cause one enters into the state into which the race is
brought, and as.to how they got there; and the other
enters into the qualities that make up a race, not what is
their present and past conditions, but what are they
per se and inherently as a people. What are they
from a new point of view. 125
capable of being- made? Can they be civilized and chris¬
tianized? Can they be brought to a high state of cul¬
ture and refinement? My answer: Search history
and compare facts with facts both past and present,
and you have the solution of the problem.
I desire to say, at this point, that there is no one
thing within my knowledge and to the best of my be¬
lief j_th at is better calculated to lower the colored man
in the estimation o£ the white man, than the term "Ne¬
gro," because it is nothing more than an objectionable
misnomer; first, because of its origin, in that it is
neither ethnographical, ethnological nor anthropolog¬
ical, but is purely conventional in its origin, standing
as it does in the Spanish and Portuguese languages
as an adjective, and is only a noun by application, and
can only be properly applied when the object or objects
referred to are black and only black. A brown, gray,
blue or white object cannot be designated by the term,
because it means black, and only black; therefore, it is a
misnomer when designed to designate the colored race,
because it can describe only one complexion, and that
black, whereas the shades of the race are varied and
many; for instance, mulatto, quadroon and octoroon.
The word "Negro" does not describe either of these for
the simple reason that the term "Negro" means black,
and only black.
Now you need only consider how many of the race
belong to the three classes just named, to see how in¬
appropriate the name is, because so very inadequate
to embrace the whole colored race in all lands.
The term is not only a misnomer, and therefore ob¬
jectionable,'but it is too recent of origin to have any
race honor about it. It is therefore not calculated to
inspire race pride in us. Who are the Spanish people?
Why, they did not have a national existence until the
other day, comparatively speaking. They were the
subjects of the Moors in the northern part of Africa,
126
THE NATIONS
and they remained in a very mixed and tangled condi¬
tion, subject first to one power and then another, until
1492, only 400 years ago; and again, it was not until
the twelfth' century that they had a formulated lan¬
guage of their own, they having all before this time
spoken a mixture of languages, composed of African,
Arabic, Roman and others. I repeat, that their lan¬
guage, as a distinctive feature of their nationality, is
but of yesterday; whereas the colored race in its Hani-
itic descent through Phut, the third sen of Ham, can
trace itself backito the days of Noah and the ark. But
if you do not want to go back so far, let us trace this
same Phut into the country now called Africa, and
there you will find him founding the country called
Libya, the name by which it was called until after the
Carthaginian war with the Romans, and the Romans
gave the name of Africa to the part that they con¬
quered, which was round about Carthage. But Libya
was inhabited by the descendants of Phut, long before
the days of Abraham, Moses, Herodotus or Manetho;
or in other words, between three and four thousand
years ago, and the race in its different branches has
had many names, but its great generic term is Hamitic.
The best local term, however, for a race name, is "Col¬
ored," because it is sufficiently comprehensive in its
definition to embrace the whole race, wherever found
and of whatever shading of color.
We often hear it said, "Why not be proud of the
term 'Negro' as a race name? Are not the English,
Scotch, Irish, French, Spanish, Portuguese and Ital¬
ians proud of their national names?" But where do
they lead them ? The English to England, the Scotch
to Scotland, the Irish to Ireland, the French to France,
the Spanish to Spain, the Portuguese to Portugal, the
Italian to Italy. But where does the term Negro lead?
To whatever is black, whether cat, dog, horse, or what
not, just so it is black. Any one can readily see that
tfROM A NEW POINT* OF VIEW. 127
the term is not national, as are ffie ones enumerated
above, and therefore there is nothing in it of which to
be proud. Now, the term "Hamitic" leads one to all
the countries where the descendants of Ham have in
the past and do at present reside; therefore there is all
that we need in the name "Hamitic" of which to be
proud, as I have shown in speaking of the Hamite.
Why not, then, adopt this as a general race name?
Not only does the term "Negro" signify nothing
honorable from an etymological point ot view, but it
has always been used to degrade our race. And to con¬
firm the truthfulness of this statement, you have only-
to read some of the definitions the white man gives of
it. Webster says, "It is the Spanish word for black,
and is from the Latin word niger, or a descendant of
the black race of men in Africaand he says: "The
word is never applied to the tawny or olive-colored
inhabitant of the northern coast of Africa, but to the
more southern race of men who are quite black." This
is Webster's definition of the term; he says that the
tawny colored race in Africa itself are not covered by
it; then how can we, over here, use it with any sense
of propriety?
Now let us look at Worcester's definition: he says
"the word 'Negro' is Italian, Spanish and Portuguese
and is from the Latin word niger. That is "one of
the black, woolly-headed, flat-nosed and thick Lipped
race of men inhabiting Africa." That is what Worces¬
ter has to say about it. Is there anything very race-
inspiring in that definition, think you?—and he takes it
from the English Encyclopaedia. The American Stand¬
ard Dictionary says it is "a black man of Africa or his
descendants." You can turn to Chambers' Encyclo¬
paedia and read his description of the Negro; he says
the word "is Spanish, and is the name given to a con¬
siderable branch of the human family, possessing cer¬
tain physical characteristics which distinguish it in
128
THE NATIONS
a marked degree from the other branches of varieties
of mankind;" he says further: "the true Negro has
black skin, thick lips, woolly hair, depressed nose, and
is exceedingly small;" again: "the lower part of the
face is projecting, like a muzzle, with the skull long
and narrow, and a low, retreating forehead. Now,
this may be true of the white man's "Negro," but it is
not true of the Colored Race, of which we are a very
small part.
You can also see Blumenbach's Five-fold Division
of Mankind; also Pritchard and Latham; and Picker¬
ing on the "Races of Man."
I repeat that the term "Negro" when applied to a
race is a misnomer, in which there is nothing what¬
ever of which to be proud.
There is another thought to which I would like to
call attention; and that is the much-boasted superior¬
ity of the—so-called—Caucasian race, for it, like the
term "Negro," is purely a misnomer, from the very fact
that no such race has ever lived on the globe; and so
far as I have been able to find out, there has lived only
one man that has tried to establish the fact of the ex¬
istence of such a race, and he has utterly failed. But
there are others who have eagerly seized and adopted
that theoretical idea, and have built up a wide-spread
belief in said theory—for it is only a theory, and a
flimsy, weak one, at that. In order to see this, one has
but to look, at the theory itself. What is it ? Why, it
is nothing more, nor less than an attempt to" establish
the superiority of one branch", of the human race over
the other, which is an. impossibility, for the reason that
God has declared that he has "made of one blood, all
nations of men."
If all the nations of men are made of one blood,
then are all the nations as one man, and we all know
that it is an impossibility that the same man be superior
or inferior to himself. He certainly can only be equal
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 129
to himself; so the race of mankind being- only one, but
existing in different branches, cannot be superior the
one branch to the other.
Blumenbach, who is the author of the Caucasian
race theory, was a German phrenologist, born in 1752,
died in 1840; and these dates, so modern as they
are, make an additional reason why the claim and the¬
ory of Blumenbach are absurd. The idea of a race
who claims a history as -old as the ark of Noah itself,
to be proud of just having its race, name and affinity
settled here in the very last century in the world's his¬
tory! What were they in all those ages before they
became Caucasian? What element of character does
the Caucasian theory infuse into this same people that
they did not possess before?
Further objection may be urged against the exist¬
ence of such a race from the claim that Blumenbach
makes, that Mount Caucasus was the radiating point
out from which the human family went to repeople
the earth, and that the elevating influence of an hab¬
itation round about the mount had the tendency, and
did produce that race quality of manhood out of which
he forms his great Caucasian race. In the first place,
we know according to history and all trustworthy his¬
torians, Caucasus never was a dispersing ix>int of the
races of men. We find some of the races of mankind
early inhabiting those regions, but as a point from
which the earth was peopled, by no means. 'Nor do
we .find this or any other mountain to be the place
where the evidences of manhood and of character be¬
gan to develop, but rather in the valleys, and along
the river banks, such as the Tigris, Euphrates and Nile,
and the great Shinar valley, where the first kingdom
was formed, and the first king, Nimrod, the grandson
of Ham, reigned. Yes, it was here that man began to
distinguish himself in the arts and sciences of govern-
9
130
THE NATIONS
ment and architecture, by the building of the city and
tower of Babel. This is admitted by all.
The slenderness of Blumenbach's claim as a basis
for his Caucasian race theory forms the ground for
further objection to it, whether viewed geographically
or ethnologically. Every one knows that Caucasus and
its surroundings form but a speck of the habitable
part of the earth, and the ethnological basis is still
weaker from the fact it rests upon the single skull of a
Georgian woman; that is to say, that Blumenbach, in
the founding of his great Caucasian race theory, se¬
lected from a number of human skulls he had collected
in his travels, one of the many, and just simply de¬
clared that this was the type of the great race he had
in his mind; and in his mind it remained, and it has
never shown itself to this day.
And it will be remembered that this investigation is
the work, not of a council of ethnologists and philolo¬
gists, but that of one man; and who knows the faith¬
fulness of his statements? Men generally, when they
think that they are right, are glad to know that their
work is tested by others.
Now, I wish to say, just here, that the strongest and
most commendable thing about the whole theory is
that is has a woman's skull for a basis. Then the great
Caucasian race rests upon a single skull, does it?
Slender foundation, indeed!
And one can here see the unfairness of Blumenbach's
tests; he does not put his tests on a comparative or
average basis, but chooses the most beautiful specimen
in his collection. Now, who, except on the average
system, can tell what the whole of a thing is likely to
be? Does not his system rather argue against the
superiority which he aims to establish, than for it? For
if he has to take the very best skull for his type, in 01-
«w /e an average, his scale must go downward:
that, at any rate, is the way it appears to me.
from a new point of view. 131
Another thing that tends greatly to weaken Blumen-
bach's theory of a great Caucasian race, is that the
material with which he would construct it has no com¬
mon source of origin, whereas all of the great races of
the earth have a common source, and can trace their
origin back to a common root; but Blumenbach gets
his material from everywhere in general and nowhere
in particular; for it includes all of the inhabitants of
ancient and modern Europe; the Huns of Asia; the
Assyrians, Arabians, Jews, Phoenicians of Asia Minor,
and the inhabitants of Caucasus. And he even steps
across the line and goes into Africa; there he gets the
Egyptians, Abyssinians and Moors. In a word, he
claims that whoever has beauty of head a/nd features
and symmetry of form in bod.y and limbs, belongs to
his great Caucasian race. Then he comes back to
Georgia or Caucasus^ after this long ramble and wide
range; there he picks up a woman's skull and begins
to rear his structure, the future superior race of the
world.
Now, let us see who were the Georgians as a people,
that even their verv name should be considered suffi¬
cient to make all the world besides stand in awe of
them.
I quote from Chambers' Encyclopaedia: "That the
different tribes inhabiting the Caucasus, long believed
to be the purest type of the Indo-Eurooean family, are
now considered not. to belong to it at all, but to have
more affinitv with the Mongolian races. * * * The
present Christianity of the nominally Christian tribes
is more akin to heathenism than true Christianity. In
character they are distinguished for their valor and
love of freedom; but cruelty and treachery are also
amongst their marked traits. They carry on a little
agriculture, but live more by the care of herds and
flocks, and by hunting, and they are not averse to rob-
132
THE NATIONS
bery. The only manufacture that is carried on by them
is that of arms." The foregoing is the description
given of the Georgians by Chambers. The Encyclo¬
paedia Britannica, in giving the history of the same
says that they were subjected by Alexander the Great,
until 324 B. C., and that they afterwards became a
province of the Arabs. They were then ruled by the
Persians, and they are at the present time in a sub¬
jected state to Russia. Not only so, but as one ex¬
amines into the history of this people, among whom
Blumenbach found his ideal skull, from which he ar¬
gues the past and future greatness of his greatly su¬
perior race, he will find the same defects, failures and
weaknesses that are found with all other branches of
mankind, whether of body or mind, character or con¬
dition ; for, as one reads their sketch, he will see that
they have had their times of prosperity and adversity;
of peace and war; of freedom and bondage; of eleva¬
tion and degradation; of light and darkness; of learn¬
ing and ignorance; of savagery and civilization; of
heathenism and Christianity. And history tells us that
at the present day their Christianity is little better than
heathenism: so at the very time when Blumenbach's
superior people, from, whom he got his type of what
he and others are pleased to style the greatest race
on earth, should be showing themselves as such, we
find them in partial heathenism, without the ability to
establish and maintain themselves in a separate gov¬
ernment, but are a subjected province of Russia,
whose name is derived from it is not known what:
whose real and true history begins, it is not known
when; the origin of whose people is from, it is not
known where, and whose religion is almost anything
and any kind, or, in other words, it is like their origin
—it cannot be told what it is.
And indeed I would like to know, and I have been
trying hard tc find out, in what has this Caucasian type
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 133
of man so distinguished itself that it should be laying
claim to such high honors. Was it war? It is true
that they did maintain themselves for quite a time
against the Russians, but then they had been in sub¬
jection under three governments before that, viz.: the
Romans, Persians and Aribians; and as I before said,
are now under the Russians.
Again, I ask, what were the great distinguishing
characteristics of this people that there should be
claimed for them so much? Of their architecture it
simply- is said in history that there are a few ruins of
their former buildings and temples left visible, which
only go to show that they had attained some degree
of knowledge of the fine arts, but there is nothing
mentioned among them as very striking or rare; and
we know that whatever of this knowledge they
possessed was not original with them, but was de¬
rived—and was derived from the descendants of Ham.
Yes, was derived from that dreadfully cursed and
doomed race of Ham, because his descendants are
fully admitted by scholars of the present day to have
been the authors of the arts and sciences of architec¬
ture, sculpture, agriculture and literature, all having
their foundation and beginning with Ham, for there
is no true historical record of any people preceding
them in any of these things. Then even Blumenbach's
great Caucasian type derived their civilization and cul¬
ture. what of it they had, from the Hamites. Of ne¬
cessity, then, the ones from whom they got their civil¬
ization were higher up in the scale of improvement
than they themselves. But shall I argue from this fact
the race superiority of the Hamite to that of the Shem-
ite, Japhethite or the" Caucasian? No. not by any
means; but simply see that they (the Hamites), were
leaders, and pioneers in that which all .of the human
family were fully capable according to conditions and
circumstances, locations and situations in life, just as
134
THE NATIONS
these were favorable or unfavorable; and these are
wha'c have been in all ages of the world, and always wid
be, the formers and moulders of the life and character
of a people. Just as according to the state and condi¬
tion of the soil, so the grain will be; for you may take
the very finest of grain, and no matter what average,
either in size, quality or quantity, and place it in an un¬
favorable situation, and in poor, barren soil, I defy the
man to produce the same results. You observe that
the grain in both cases is just the same. No, the fault
was not in the grain, but in the conditions in which it
was placed,and it would be unfair and unjust to charge
the grain in the latter case with inferiority, because
it is the same grain, but is planted under different con¬
ditions. What I wish to say is, change the conditions,
and the grain will be the same as it formerly was,
because the grain of which we speak is from the same
seed, and therefore cannot be superior or inferior as
to its nature, tut may appear so because of condition?
and circumstances; and so it is with the race of man—
they are found in different places on the globe, and
in different stages of progress, development and im¬
provement, according to the many conditions with
which they are surrounded. If they are backward in
improvement, change the conditions, and you will have
-a changed people in manners, life, customs and appear¬
ances.
Allow me, now, to give another reason why the Cau¬
casian race theory is false, and therefore a misname:
It is the large number of tribes of the different na¬
tions and peoples that have from the very earliest times
dwelt about Caucasus. They seem to have migrated
into that region from all parts, until, as we are in¬
formed by historians, the number of different dia¬
lects there spoken ranged from one to three- hundred.
So we can readily see" that Blumenbach, in selecting
his single female skull, would be as likely to get hofd
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 135
of the head of one woman as another; and Chambers
says it was the "skull of a woman."
O how bewildered one gets when he sets out to find
the true name and real origin of this many-named,
world-renowned race; for it is at one time styled the
great Indo-European family, and then, again, the great
Aryan race. Again you will hear them boasting of their
Syro-Arabian origin; and then the great Caucasian
claim is made again; but most of all you hear the cry
"Anglo-Saxon blood" and "Anglo-Saxon civilization,"
which was little better than barbarism (see Hume's
History of England), and it remained so until the pe¬
riod when the name ceased to be Anglo-Saxon, and
became that of England. Then, and not until then,
does the true state of civilization begin. And as to the
Anglo-Saxon blood idea, it is as if you were to mix
up the blood of bulls, goats, wolves, tigers and bears;
and as many other different bloods as there are ani¬
mals in the forest, and then call this mixture lamb's
blood; you then have the true idea of what is "Anglo-
Saxon blood."
The term "Anglo-Saxon" is compounded from the
names of the Angles and the Saxons, two peoples who
migrated into the Island of Britain. Then, in order
to learn whether the preceding is an overdrawn picture
or not, we have only to ask who the Anglo-Saxons
were, and the answer will be that they were made up
of the inhabitants of the Island of Britain. And who
were these? Why, they were the Moors from Africa,
the Arabs of Arabia, the original Britons, the Angles,
Picts and Scots, the Saxons or Germans, and many
others which time and space fail me to name. So out of
these came the Anelo-Saxons—hence the source of the
much boasted Anglo-Saxon blood.
But the Hamites or the Colored Race claim but one
origin, and there is but one claimed for them; and
there are some who have at times tried to rule them
136
THE NATIONS.
out of that one, because they have endeavored to make
them believe that they had no origin at all. But the
Hamite is here, and here to stay; and will stand the
tests of time, whether Blumenbach's theories of a
"great Caucasian race" will, or not.
CHAPTER V.
the; question of race.
If it were not for the fact that I fear there are far
tco many of my own race, and a great many more.of
the white race, who will take the bold assertion of Mr.
Bruce to be historical facts and his propositions, argu¬
ments and conclusions for logical truths, I would not
attempt a word in refutation of them. But, knowing
as I do that they are conclusions jumped at,, and not
reached by proper syllogism, I therefore undertake to
show their fallacy in that respect, and also their his¬
torical inaccuracy and unfairness.
Indeed, the whole affair is nothing more nor less
than a bundle of abuse, slander, vituperation and mis¬
representation, cast and heaped upon a whole race of
people by an individual of another race.
I repeat, that I would not notice the matter, if it were
not for the fact that so many will believe the state¬
ments and arguments of Mr. Bruce to be true; and for
that other fact, that he will be lareelv quoted as au¬
thority on the past, present and probable future degra¬
dation of the colored race.
Let us notice some of Mr. Bruce's arguments and
statements, for they may be seen through at a glance
by fair-minded.persons.
We are to bear in mind that abuse is not argument;
nor is ridicule logic. This is a fact that Mr. Bruce
seems to have entirely lost sight of. He has taken his
own bold, dogmatic assertions for profound argu¬
ments, and his pitiable and contemptible ridicule of the
colored race for irrefutable logic.
138
THE NATIONS
Mr. Bruce makes the first ground of his race pre¬
judice to rest upon the physical distinctions that exist
between the colored and white races, which, he says,
consist of "woolly hair, receding forehead, flat nose,
thick lips and protruding iaw," including the "color."
This is the description Mr. Bruce gives of the colored
race; but he does not stop one minute to notice that the
existence of these differences found in the races is not
the same thing as proving superiority and inferiority of
race. Yet that is just the conclusion to which he has
jumped. He simply says that the differences exist,
and therefore the white race, he coolly and calmly con¬
cludes, is superior to the colored race. Any fool can
readily see that there are many physical differences of
appearance in any of the five races that divide the bulk
of mankind; but the same fool cannot so readily prove
that the simple existence" of these physical distinctions
is in any sense proof that the white race is superior
to the colored. If Mr. Bruce does not like the race,
or, rather, those of the race who are constructed by na¬
ture with different physical characteristics from him¬
self, that only proves a matter of taste and choice with
him, and not which is superior or inferior, in race
qualities.
If I were enough of a philosopher or a scientist, I
would declare the white man's color to be a disease, or
a strange freak of nature. But not being such, I do
not know what is is—whether a disease or a
very strange freak of nature. At any rate, it
is extra-natural, if not even anti-natural. And I
do say most emphatically, that it is an act of nature for
which the white man himself cannot account. And I
would inform Mr. Bruce that we are beginning seri¬
ously to investigate that matter; for we want to know
wbfre the handful of white people that inhabit this
globe came from, because thev were not made white at
the creation of man, for Sir Henry Rawlinson, one of
from a new point of view. 139
the greatest paleologists that ever lived, himself being
a white man, says that the word "Adam" means "dark
race." So that we have the best of authority for saying
that God never created man white, but created him
dark: and that the color of the white man is an un¬
known, and probably an unknowable act of nature.
No one ever has been able yet to trace the white man's
color to its origin. But the dark man's color is traced
to his creation. He was made so.
And, again, if Mr. Bruce means to take the matter
for granted, that the white man is superior to the col¬
ored, because he is to be found in the majority in this
country his proposition will prove too much for him,
for it will orove all that is needed to constitute superi¬
ority is to be the dominant class, or to be the ruling
class, by reason' of majorities. I say, if this is the stand
he takes, then he is well aware, as are all of us, that
there are large portions of the habitable globe in which
the darker portions of the races rule the lighter; for
example, in Arabia and India and Africa. What would
Mr.: Bruce liave us to conclude from these facts ?
Nothing, of course, but that in those countries, and
parts of countries, where the darker portions of man¬
kind are in rule, they are, therefore, superior. Very
well, then, he will fall very far short of establishing
his universal superiority of the whites, for a very large
portion of the world is governed and controlled by the
darker races.
Then, again, he fails to account for his prejudice
against the whole race, if the cause of his dislike^ for
them is because of the dark color, "the woolly hair, the
receding forehead, the thick lips and protruding jaw
for not more than one in ten, will anything like meet
the above description. I ask again, why does he ex¬
tend his hate and spite to all of the race because of a
few specimens in it, which he does not like? Is this
humane? Is it manly? Is it intelligent? No, it is
140
THE NATIONS
unusual, unreasonable, and discriminating; and, in¬
deed, such a disposition is only found in ^ the lqwer
strata of man, and never in the higher and intellectual
classes. It belongs to that class that believes that
might is right because it is might, and happens to be
in their possession; and that brute force is right sim¬
ply because it is force, and is a means to an end.
Let us notice another of Mr. Bruce's great and
weighty arguments in proof of the superiority of the
white to the colored race. We quote from his pam¬
phlet as follows: "But the lines of separation between
the negro and the white man are far from being purely
physical. Even if the personal characteristics, to which
we have alluded, were wanting, his origin, his history,
his present condition, and moral and intellectual idio¬
syncrasies of his would still impart to his individuality
an invidious relief."
A more bunglesome and tautological paragraph one
seldom meets with in public print, and certainly not
emanating from one who puts himself forth at once
as historian, biologist, and profound statesman. Mr.
Bruce says in the paragraph just quoted, that the ori¬
gin of the colored man is against him, so I have been
looking all through his pamphlet to find the place
where he proves his assertion, but I fail to find even
the slightest attempt to do so. Why is this ? Is it be¬
cause he did not know the origin of the colored race?
Then he had no right to make such an assertion. Or
was it that he feared the facts would contradict his
own statement? Then in that case he would prove
himself an unfaithful, unfair historian. No, we are
not ashamed either of our origin or history, for both
are so eminent and honorable that we are greatly-
proud of them. We are not afraid to have them
brought to the light. But Mr. Bruce and others of
his ilk are, as they have long been, at work, and have
{succeeded in establishing for the colored race a false
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 141
and ficticious origin and history, and we have found it
out; so we go behind the returning board to find the
true returns, and we find that the historical ballot-box
has been stuffed.
Indeed, so untrue and unfair is, and has been, the
white man's history-making, that we no longer accept
it as true, for the late discoveries have given the lie
to nearly all of it. But what is that to a man like
Bruce, who tacitly admits that he is a creature of race-
prejudice and race-hate? Yes, the white man' has for
ages artfully and systematically robbed the historical
safe deposit of its sacred treasures of truth, and has
deposited in their stead a lot of rubbish and trash that
is now being shelved all over the civilized world. My
proof for the statements just made is to be found in the
fact that the old theories so long held and taught by
the white man, are now admitted to be false. For
example, that thievish theory which taught that the
Egyptian', Hebrew, Chaldaic, Ethiopian and a number
of other existing languages belonged to what is known
as the Semitic family of languages*—that is, that
Shem, through his descendants brought them down to
us. I say this is a thievish theory, because it gives to
the descendants of Shem credit and honor that belong
to Ham, for the Egyptians and Ethiopians were the
inventors of written language. Then there arose an¬
other class, who looked with jealous eye upon the idea
of the Jew, or Shemite, being the inventor and trans¬
mitter of written language; so the Sanscrit theory was
then trumped up and put forth as the foster-mother
of all languages of the earth. But it changed and inter¬
changed its name so often one hardly knows at which
end to begin to reckon them up. At one time Sanscrit
is said to be the mother of all other languages, and
then again it is said to be independent of all others, or
in other words, to have an independent origin.
* See Dr. Philip Schaff's History.
142
THE NATIONS
But at one time it is known as the Indo-European,
then the Indo-Germanic, then the Indian itself is
brought in and made to do duty. Then it is known as
the Medo-Persian, or Grseco-Latin, or Germanic and
Gallo-Celtic family, and so on. But being content
with this, the Aryan theory is started, which is by one
writer made to appear the offspring of the Sanscrit,
and by another the mother of them all; and so on, until
one is made to stop and ask: Which is it? and What
does it all mean?
The answer is at hand: That a race of people, proud,
haughty and ambitious, finding themselves without na¬
tional honors, resolve, by a cunningly devised scheme,
to cheat another race out of his national and historical
rights, and to add them to their own stock, just af¬
ter the same manner as they have invaded this country,
to which they had no right whatever, and claimed it
as their own.
The white race, I say, has thus planned to beat the
descendants of Ham out of their legitimate and heav¬
en-born rights, and the instrument used in this in¬
stance is comparative philology. But Prof. Max Mul-
ler, in his search for name and fame, has by his recent
discoveries, knocked the bottom all out of that, for he
says, "There is no proof that the Aryan, Semitic and
Turanian families of language had independent begin¬
nings, and that the radicals existing in all the three can
be traced to> the common source," which, of course,
goes back to Noah and his family. So the theorist will
have to start off again, for Max Muller, in a very few
terse and pointed sentences, has stepped in and with a
cruel coolness hard to describe has broken up all those
dear linguistic families. What a pity! Yes, with one
fell stroke he has swept them all away. I wonder what
Mr. Bruce and his other "superior race" theorists will
do now. Gentlemen, my advice is that you had better
begin to look after your fences, or rather go back and
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 143
begin your historical lives over; and this time I would
advise you to begin fair, be honest, be just, be truthful;
for we, as a race, are watching your every step.
Take for instance the history and geopgraphy of Af¬
rica as it has come down to us from the "kith and kin"
of the white man and what have we? Simply a vast
array of misrepresentations and historical, geographical
and ethnological contradictions. First, we were in¬
formed that Africa, as a country, for the most part, was
a dry, barren, sterile desert of shifting sands. Nov/
Stanley comes out and informs us that Africa is the
richest of all the continents. Then again, we were
told by old geographers that it was largely unwatered.
But we are now told by later authorities that the same
country abounds with lakes and rivers, and that these
are among the largest in the world.
As for its people, we were told that they were sim-
plv a lot of dwarfs, abnormally constituted, with heads,
arms and feet peculiarly different from those of other
peoples. But now we are told with, as it were, bated
breath of astonishment, that there are men stalwart and
beautifully formed, brave and warlike, in Africa.
Which of these statements shall we receive as true?
And as for the language of the African, we are told
with a cool daring that would almost give one a chill,
that they had no language that was above the gabble of
the goose; but now Dr. Grattan Guinness says he has
found in the Congo and Soudan countries languages
having as many as forty tenses to the verb. Can that
people who have a language so richly embellished as to
enable them to express an idea in forty different ways,
be considered without a language? That is just what
the forty tenses to the verb means. Yes, it means
forty modes of expressing one's thoughts.
The foregoing are only a^few of the misrepresenta¬
tions. I repeat that I find nowhere in Mr. Bruce's paper
that he attempts to show anything concerning the ori-
144
THE NATIONS
gin of the colored race, so I will refer him to one his¬
torical, work, and it is the oldest history in existence,
and it is called The Book, or The Bible. I do not sup¬
pose that he has made a very thorough study of it ; or
if he has, he has not imbibed its spirit nor profited by
its teachings. If he had, he would have made known
that The Book i:ays that God "made of one blood all
nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth."
The other lesson is a commandment to Mr. Bruce that
he should "do unto others as he would that they should
do unto him." It does seem strange that one of such
apparently deep piety as he should not follow more
closely that very important command.
He says that the history of the colored man is also
against him, but he does not prove the assertion. And
yet the history of the three original branches of men
stands out clear and distinct, or rather that of two of
them, Ham and Shem. The history of Japheth is ob¬
scure. As Mr. Bruce does not seem to know, I would
inform him that the history o-f Japheth, except a, very
short portion of it, is entirely lost, there being no rec¬
ord whatever made of him after the short account to
which I have^ referred. I am well aware that k is
claimed that the race of Japheth is perpetuated through
the Medes and Persians, and Greeks and Romans, but
I want here to take on somewhat the manner of Mr.
Bruce in dealing with things, and make this bold asser¬
tion : The man does not live who can trace Japheth his¬
torically out of Asia or link him historically with the
Greeks; for they themselves say that they are the de¬
scendants of the gods, and we know that Japheth was
as far from, being a god as were any of his descendants,
though the so-called European branch of them often
tried to make gods of each ether, and at times set up
one of their number and worshipped him. But that did
not make him a god: it simply showed the vanity, igno¬
rance and superstition of the so-called European branch
from a new point of view. 145
of the Japhetic family. And even if Japheth could
be traced to the Greeks and Romans, what has the
white man in the early history of either of which he
may be proud and boastful ? In the case of the Greeks,
they lay hid away up there in that pent-up penin¬
sula, without government in any of its forms, neither
family, church nor state; for they were without all,
and were simply living huddled together, as so' many
wild beasts, feeding on roots and herbs, and wearing
for clothing—when they wore any—the skins of beasts.
And they remained in that low, degraded and pitiable
condition until Inachus, the Phoenician, arrived among
them about 1856 B. C., and founded the kingdom of
Argos, and formed for them a government, and gave
them laws for their family and state.
Later on, B. C. in 1556, Cecrops carried a colony ro
Greece and built the city of Cecropia (which was after¬
wards called Athens). But still they could not read or
write until Cadmus, another Phoenician, arrived in
1493 B. C. and taught them letters. I want now to in¬
form Mr. Bruce, as he dwelt long on race origin and
race history, that Inachus and Cadmus, being Phoeni¬
cians, were the descendants of Ham through Canaan,
who was his youngest son, and therefore were oT the
colored race and have in common the same history. I
also want to inform him that Cecrops, being an Egyp¬
tian, was a descendant of Ham through Mizraim, who
was Ham's second son. Thus the early history of the
Egyptians was also the history of the colored race, be¬
cause the Egyptians were Hamites, and the colored
race, it is agreed on all hands, were the descendants of
Ham; consequently his honors are ours.
There is another part of current history that stands
to the credit of the colored race. I call Mr. Bruce's
attention to it. It is that the first kingdom ever estab¬
lished on earth was Babylon, and the first king that
ever reigned on earth with the title of "king," was
10
146
THE NATIONS
Nimrod; and also that Nimrod was the grandson of
Ham: so the colored r!ace in their history have all the
honor. And I wish to inform him of another fact that
is not brought down in the current history, and that is
that we, as a race, know all this and intend to trans¬
mit the record as a legacy to our children forever.
I have already proved that the Egyptians belong to
the colored race that has the fullest and one of the most
that neither Greeks nor Romans ever learned to read
the hieroglyphics written on the monuments and tem¬
ples of Egypt ? I ask, has he ever thought of this, for
I nowhere find it made prominent in current history.
It has a very important bearing on the rise and progress
of the white and colored races in that it shows that here
is a matter that stands to the honor and credit of the
colored race, that he did not take into consideration
when he so confidently, and with such an air of tri¬
umph, affirmed that the history of the colored man was
against him.
Yes, it is a significant fact that here is a branch of
the colored race that has one of the fullest and most
complete histories of their government and nation that
the world has ever known, lying right before the white
man's eyes for thousands of years; yet all those years
produced no cne who could decipher that valuable
Egyptian hieroglyphic writing. But what did the
white man do in this case ? He did as he is still doing:
that which he cannot conquer he says is not worth hav¬
ing; and that which he cannot learn is not-worth know¬
ing. And so the oldest and finest history in the world,
except the Bible, was for thousands of years called
trash and rubbish by the white man, simply because he
did not have the ability to understand it; and for an¬
other important reason, which is prevalent in the white
man everywhere, and that is his lack of manliness and
moral fitness to acknowledge his inability to do. And
yet it is a patent fact that there'was not a man among
FROM A NEW POINT Of VIEW. 147
the Greeks, nor ?mong the Romans; neither among the
Saxons, nor among- the Anglo-Saxons, that could read
and learn the history of that great people, the Egyp¬
tians, until the year 1790, when Champollion, a French¬
man was born. He succeeded, before he died, in learn¬
ing enough of the Egyptian language to give a key to
it, but that is as yesterday, for he died in 1832, only
fifty-nine years ago. It seems to me that facts like
these ought to make Mr. Bruce and others like him
feel a great humiliation, and cause them to hesitate
before rushing into print with a wholesale condemna¬
tion and vilification of a peaceable, inoffensive people;
for the white man lives in a very thin glass house, and I
would advise him that he had better cease throwing
stones, and he had better do so now at once, for he is
no longer pulling the blind over the eyes of the colored
people, because we see through him like a man looking
through a thin piece of gauze, and we can certainly
read him with far more ease than he has ever been able
to read the hieroglyphics of Egypt.
But let us return to Japheth and the Romans. I
have already said that there is nothing in the origin and
early history either of Greeks or Romans, about which
the white man can legitimately boast and be proud,
even if he could trace them to Japheth; and I have in
another place shown that the early history of the
Greeks was disgraceful in the extreme, and that their
origin was very obscure and uncertain. But how about
the Romans? What is their origin and history? It
will be remembered that Mr. Bruce has called for a
comparison, and has attempted to make one between
the origin and historv of the colored and white races.
Now it is well known that the reputed origin of the
Romans is nothing more than a myth, and their history
is altogether fabulous. Examine into both and what
do vou find? Nothing but a huge bundle of fables,
and a colossal masg of misrepresentations,
148
THE NATIONS
How did they get up, into that little boot-shaped pen¬
insula called Italy? It is not known. When did they
go there? No one can tell. Did they come from Asia?
It is an unknown matter. Did they come into Italy at
a northern, southern, eastern or western point? It is
all dark and unknown. There is no record that has
yet been found, either above or under the ground, nor
written on parchment or paper, that answers the fore¬
going questions. Then where did they come from?
No one knows. The white man or Anglo-Saxon claims
to be the offspring of the Romans. Is there anything
in such an origin as that which I have just described
about which to be proud and haughty and boastful?
Yet of such an origin Mr. Bruce is proud, and asks
for a contrast of the colored and white. We take
great pleasure just here in giving it to him. "Where
did the colored race come from?" he asks, with a con¬
temptuous scoff. I very readily and gladly answer the
question, and say, They sprang from Ham, who was
the second son of Noah. And as to their historv, I
would inform him that it is a matter of public record,
and is found written on almost everything about the
city of ancient Babylon, and indeed the whole country
of Babylonia, and in the names of the bridges that span
its streams, and also on monuments and in grottoes
which are to be found on both sides of the rivers Ti¬
gris and Euphrates. It is also written on the long-buried
plates and slabs of the ancient city of Nineveh, that are
now being found and read. Another branch of the
colored race is to be found in the Egyptians, traced
through Mizraim, the second son of Ham; and through
Ham himself, for Egypt is often called the "Land of
Ham." Their history can be found written on their
temples, monuments and tombs, and in their grand
libraries of all kinds, and their display of arts and
sciences, the remains of which are found everywhere.
Can the Greeks or Romans or Britons show any such
from a new point of view. 149
record of their origin and early history? Not by any
means. Another branch of the colored race can be
traced in the descendants of Cush, who was the oldest
son of Ham, and who settled India, Arabia and Africa,
and founded the kingdom of Ethiopia in Africa, which
was such a strong and powerful empire that at times
she well nigh ruled the world.
And there is another noble branch of the colored
race, and cne which, perhaps, has the most remarkable
history of them all, because this is the branch of Ham's
descendants upon which that wonderful curse of Noah
was pronounced. It is that of Canaan, the youngest
son of Ham. Has Mr. Bruce ever read or heard of
him? Well, what is his history, and what has he done
for the world in which he and his descendants lived?
What record has he left? Why, he, like his brothers
Cush and Mizraim, settled countries, built cities and
advanced civilization everywhere throughout the land
of Canaan.
The Canaanites were the inventors of money, meas¬
ures and weights, and were also the first to establish a
scale for the measurement and valuation of land (see
Machpelah and the transaction that took place between
Abraham and Ephron in the land of Canaan). Ephron
was the son of Heth, and Heth was the second-bom
son of Canaan. Ephron valued the land which Abra¬
ham bought, at 400 shekels of silver, which is about
$250. It is also there called "current money."
The Canaanites also preserved and transmitted to
Abraham the knowledge of the true God, and Melchiz-
edek pronounced upon him the divine priestly bless¬
ing; and indeed it appears that the Land of Canaan
was the only country at this time on the earth where
none but the true God was worshiped.
The Canaanites in after years adopted and worshiped
idols, but not in Abraham's day, neither in the
days of Isaac and Jacob. The first idols we read of
150
the: nations
being in the Land of Canaan, were carried there from
Syria by Rachel, one of Jacob's wives. She took them
from Laban, her father. And I want to tell Mr. Bruce
another thing about the Canaanites while we are com¬
paring the histories of the white and colored races.
I am sure he has heard of the "Tribe of Judah;" the
chief Israelitish tribe, because from that tribe descended
the Saviour of the world. Well, I want to tell him that
the mother of that tribe belonged to the colored race,
because she was a daughter of Canaan, her father, was
a son of Ham; and the colored race descended from
Ham. The name of the mother of the tribe of Judah
was Tamar, and I repeat that she was a descendant of
Canaan, the son of Ham. We have in another place,
spoken of the origin of the Romans, but what of their
history? When does their history begin? Who can
tell ? How can we have a true history of the Romans
when there did not arise a man among them, who at¬
tempted to write their history, for six hundred years
after the foundation of the city of Rome?
We will take special notice here of the fact that this
people exists six hundred years before they do any¬
thing worth recording, or else they do not in all that
time produce a man who is able to write an account of
his nation—it is one or the other—in either case it tells
a very bad story for their descendants, the so-called
Caucasians of to-day, who boast so loudly of their
Roman origin and history. I have already said that
the whole matter was a myth; for Romulus and Remus,
the reputed founders of the city of Rome—and Rome
was the beginning of their state and government—
were twins, and were sons of a woman by the name
of Rhea Sylvia, and it is said she was the daughter
of Numitor, the king of the country. But the father
of the two boys, Romulus and Remus, was Mars and
Mars was the chief god of the country. Wonderful
heirship this, for Romulus and Remus! for according
from a new point of view. 151
to this account they were the grandsons of a king and
the sons of a god. No wonder the white man is so proud
of his origin and descent, when he, according to the
h;story made of himself, is the offspring of a kitlg and
a god; or, in other words, when he is half king, half
god. Truly, at that, he is a wonderful being!
But there is another important fact about this mat¬
ter, but it is neither the kingly nor the deistic side of
which I now speak, but the moral ; and that is, the re-
lationshio between the god Mars and Rhea Sylvia
was an illicit one. Is the white man also proud of that
side of the matter? I do not often hear of his men¬
tioning it, but that is the history of it.
But there is another remarkable fact about the his¬
tory of the white man that is brought down to us, and
that is: we learn who was the Romans foster-mother.
She was a she-wolf, we are told, who heard the two
boys crying on the banks of the river Tiber, where
they had been cast by order of the king of the country
to die. This she-wolf came, we are seriously told, to
the banks of the river, day after diy, and nursed and
cared for these two wonderful, kingly boys. They
truly were of high and noble birth, being, ?s Roman
history tells us, the grandsens of a king, and the sons
of a god. Their foster-mother and father too, were of
very noble birth, being -none other than a she-wolf and
a woodpecker; for we are told by history, that the
wolf did the nursing, and the woodpecker brought
the boys whatever else they got to eat, which consisted,
we may well suppose, of worms and bugs plucked
from decaying trees.
But what was the final result of all this? It was
that all the Roman leaders, both men and women, for
manv years afterwards, were turned into gods and
goddesses. It is true that Romulus killed Remus, but
Romulus became a god after he died, or rather dis¬
appeared, and came back, and watched over, and
152
THE NATIONS
guarded and protected the Roman nation. I wish to
ask Mr. Bruce, was there ever superstition to surpass
that? I mean a superstition that could believe the
things to which I have just alluded, as true? And yet,
that is just what every white man does, when he boasts
so proudly of his Roman birth and descent. When' I
see the white man skipping from principle to policy,
and from one policy to another, yet seldom coming
back tb principle, I am vividly reminded of the wood¬
pecker as he skips from limb to limb in his native for¬
est. And when I see him scheming and planning as he
does, to get the advantage of his colored fellow-man,
I am simply reminded of the fact that history says his
foster-mother was a wolf. I refer to those things be¬
cause Mr. Bruce says the colored man's origin and his¬
tory are against him. And he set out in his pamphlet
to draw a comparison, but inasmuch as he failed to re¬
fer to any of those things, I thought I would do so, be¬
cause they form an important part of the white man's
history. He seems to take pride in relating the mode
and manner by which the African was introduced into
this country. He says all other than the colored man
came, and that he was brought. I will quote a para¬
graph of his, to show how he says it was done, and
the following is it:
"Captured by his own kith and kin, in Africa; sold
by his captors to the slave dealers; sold by the slave
dealers to the slave ship; transported by the slave ship
to our shores." I am glad Mr. Bruce unwittingly told
the true story of how the Africans were brought to
this country. He says they were captured by the Af¬
rican himself; sold to the slave dealer, which we ac¬
cept. Very well, then, he was not captured by the white
man going up into Africa, and fighting with, and con¬
quering him, and making him his slave. But as mean
and disgusting a business as making and dealing in
slaves as that would have been, I want him to remember
From a new point of view. 153
that the business is even robbed of that paltry honor,
because he says the African captured his own people
and sold them to the slave dealer. But he does not
tell them that they were captives of war. He would
leave the impression that at the time the slave trade was
carried on in Africa for the gain there was in it; where¬
as, the fact is, the slaves that were sold to the slave
ships were captives of war, and were sold by way of
disposing of prisoners in what was considered a more
humane manner than putting them to death.
No, the white man did not go up into Africa to cap¬
ture anybody, but stayed on his boat, and got what was
brought to him, because he dared not venture away
from the shore; he had neither courage nor manhood
to do so.
And Africa not only kept the slave ships out of her
territory, but has in a large degree, kept out all the na¬
tions for thousands of years. Neither the Greeks nor
the Romans were eyer able to penetrate into Africa
further than the narrow belt along the coast.
It is wonderfully interesting to note the many in¬
genious reasons that have been assigned from time to
time, for this and also for the lack of the knowledge
of the interior of the country and its people.
It is astonishing to see how the white man strives to
keep from acknowledging that he was not able to con¬
quer the people and take their country. Nevertheless,
it is a fact that Africa is the only country on the globe
to-day, that has not at some time in its history been con¬
quered by other nations; for, as I have said, the Greeks
and Romans were both closely confined to the northern
coast, and the Jews, even in Solomon's day, knew so
little about it that they could only say that the queen
of Sheba, when she came up to view Solomon's tem¬
ple, had come from the uttermost parts of the earth.
I am not rash enough to say that no part of Africa has
ever been taken, but I do, with great boldness, assert
154
THE NATIONS
that as a country, it had never been taken by any one
of the nations, or by all of them combined, even down
to the present day.
I am well aware that Mr. Bruce asserts that the
Christian and civilized nations of the earth have gone
into the country and divided it up 'among1 themselves,
with little or no regard for the wishes of the people
who own it. Well, what does that argue for the
"Christian nations," even if it were true? It simply
argues that the white man's Christianity does not at
all stand in the way when he sees his neighbor's goods
and covetst them.
Has Mr. Bruce ever stopped to consider how mis¬
leading are his statements, as to how thcfce "Christian
Nations," of which he speaks, got hold of Africa? Will,
he not at some time tell the public what those technical
terms, "sphere of German influence," "sphere of Eng¬
lish influence," and "sphere of French influence,"
mean? Do they not simply mean that these nations
came together and- agreed to divide up the country of
Africa, and after that manner call it their own, with¬
out being actually in. possession of it at all ? In other
words,- is not the possession of these nations simply
on charts and paper.? What I mean is, that it is one
thing to lay claim to foods, and quite another to have
them, turned over, or to come in possession of them.
I have already called attention to the ingenious man¬
ner, by which the white man has evaded giving the
true reasons as to why he had never been able to take
Africa, conquer its people, and own the country. Oh,
the many reasons given by writers, bookmakers, his¬
torians, and missionaries, why Africa was so little
known to the white man, and why he has been so slow
in making his home there! I must say, that in all
this, the white man makes himself appear to us more
ridiculous than he does the honest, impartial, faithful
historian.
from a new point of view. 155
First, it was said that the people were too cruel and
savage, and that they were nearly all cannibals and
would catch the white man and eat him. But now,
a missionary, writing in a late number of the Mission¬
ary Revieiv of the World, tells us that a white woman
missionary can go alone and unattended into the in¬
terior for hundreds of miles among tribes of ten mil¬
lions of so-called cannibals, and still be unmolested in
any way whatever. The next was, that it was too
deadly in climate for the white man to live there. The
story as told was that the whole country was not
much else than one vast, pestilential, miasmatic swamp
of death-dealing air and poisonous vapors; and that if
the white man came within reach of them he was done
for. But now the Germans, who are the princes of the
white progeny, are planning to colonize the same coun¬
try by thousands of their race, and we are also told
that the climate is not torrid at all, but temperate, like
that of Asia, and even the southern part of this coun¬
try. Now, what I want to know is, which of these lies
shall we believe.
There is another thing I would like Mr. Bruce and
his other "superior race" theorists to answer: Sup¬
pose all of the deadly climate conditions named for
Africa were true, and that the white man could not
live there, what would that prove, except the fact that
he finds himself living in a world to one-fourth of
which he is not adapted. Or, in other words, what
would it argue but his inadaptability to certain climates ?
And would not that prove a lack of that very important
quality found in man, known as physical endurance,
and, therefore, make him unequal to the endurance of
certain climates and, consequently, destroy his much-
loved doctrine of the "survival of the fittest?" And.
also, would it not destroy his hobby, the superiority of
the Anglo-Saxon, Caucasian, Syro-Arabian, Indo-
European, Anglo-Germanic and as -many-more-named
156
THE NATIONS
race? I mean that all these names belong to one peo¬
ple. They sometimes call themselves the one, and
sometimes the other, and I do not mean different
races.
Or does it not argue that the white man is not in all
things equal to the colored? For the colored man
can, and does live and prosper in every part of the
habitable globe. But now, since he has been permitted
to enter and quietly take up his abode there, and buy
things very cheap and to sell them very high, and thus
soon become rich, he declares Africa to be a most
charming country—that is, when he is writing from
a money and mercenary point of view. But still, when
he begins to write from the race point, Africa is an aw¬
fully desolate and dangerous place.
But,, as I have said, there must be other reasons giv¬
en than those I have named as to why the white man
has not gone into Africa before; so they are soon
found, and one of them is its inaccessibility because of
a great desert that is said to stretch clear across the
continent; but the bottom is effectually knocked out of
that by the statements of other white men that the des¬
ert is not more than a third as large as it has been
described to be.
Another reason given is, that but one river was
known to history, and yet we are told by Herodotus
that the king of Egypt, Necho by name, sent out an
expedition which circumnavigated Africa* and also
penetrated the interior, when its great lakes, rivers and
creeks were explored and made known to the world
thousands of years before either Parke, Livingstone,
Stanley, or any of the modern visitors to Africa were
born; and then with that other fact before the white
man's eye, that Africa is at this time inhabited by nearly
three hundred millions of people who are tilling the
country and making a living after their own ideas.
* See Cyclopaedia Britannica on Africa.
from a new point of view. 157
How can he, I ask, under such circumstances, talk
about Stanley having discovered Africa? Yes, it may
have been, and was, a discovery to Stanley and others,
just in the same light it is to every missionary that
goes there; and, indeed,-I see by the Missionary Re¬
view of the World that a certain missionary, named
Chambers, I believe, is set down as an "explorer and
discoverer."
Now, what these men see and find among the peo¬
ple of Africa is no more a discovery in the true sense
of that term than are the visits of any European tour¬
ist to the woods and forests of his or any other country
inhabited and cultivated by its natives. But what shall
I say more about Africa—for instance, of the men she
has and is still producing?
Mr. Bruce has given a long list of the men produced
by the whites. Will he listen while I shall give him a
few names of the men of Africa, whose lives and char¬
acters it will pay him to study ?
Has he ever heard of that great African general
named Hannibal, who was born in Africa, B. C. 247,
and that he was the son of a noble African named
Hamilcar, and that he had a brother named Asdrubal,
who was also a famous general? And has he ever
heard that these Africans made Rome howl for years
upon years, until they brought her almost to the brink
of desolation? And that they so weakened her that
she was never able fully to recover herself, and that
she continued to decline, decay and crumble, until she
tottered and fell, a mangled mass of wreck and ruin,
to rise no more forever? To-day she is a disgrace to
the name she once bore. And these same generals
made great conquests in Spain, and subdued nearly all
of Sicily.
I want also to inform Mr. Bruce of Augustine, the
great, of Tertullian and Cyprian. These were born at
or near Carthage, and I hold that they were Africans.
158
THE NATIONS
And I would also name Novatian, Donatus and No-
vatus. These were all noble sons of Africa, and known
as the Latin Fathers, and outside of the Church itself
were the greatest lights the Christian Church has
ever produced since the days of Christ and his apos¬
tles. These were all writers of Christian literature. So
we see that the first and best Christian literature we
have, was produced not only by Africa's great writers,
but in Africa, and upon African soil.
As to the men and women of the present day, we
have examples of ability and genius too numerous to
mention by name. They are here and here to stay, and
still they come: scientists, artists, artisans, professors,
ministers of church and ministers of state, lawyers,
doctors of divinity and doctors of physics, authors re¬
ligious and authors secular. And we have laborers,
too, and they are none the less honorable for being
such, although Mr. Bruce would have it so.
He has brought the Anglo-Saxon race in particular
contrast with the colored race, as well as the white man
in general; and surely he has given a bright and beau¬
tiful picture of them. But there are two sides to all
questions. Let us, then, take a look at the other side:
Who are the Anglo-Saxons? What is their ori¬
gin and early history? Is it honorable or is it other¬
wise? These are a few' of the plain questions that
pushed to the front and demanded an answer, but Mr.
Bruce failed to answer them, though they stood be¬
fore him, looking him squarely in the face demanding
an answer. But instead of answering them, he soars
away on the height of his imagination and gets com¬
pletely lost in the mazes of his own delights.
And what a beautiful, intelligent, brave, warlike,
energetic, enterprising and business-like white race ris¬
es up out of the sea of his surmises, and stands before
him in all of its grandeur and glory. But what are
the facts about this great and mighty Anglo-Saxon
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 159
race ? Let us see: The first thing we must do is to
have Mr. Bruce define his terms. What does he
mean when he speaks of the Anglo-Saxon race?
Is he talking by the etymology of the term "Anglo-
Saxon?" If he is talking from an etymological point
of view, "Anglo-Saxon Race" sounds very musi¬
cal. But if he is talking from an historical point,
we must ask the liberty to carry him back a little to
the words "Britain" and "the Britonsnot "Great
Britain," but plain "Britain;" for it will be remem¬
bered that it did not become great for many, many
years. And as to the territory of the island, it is known
to be but a speck of the earth, in comparative geogra¬
phy. Now, what does history say about the inhabit¬
ants of that little island ? The first we hear of it or its
people is about fifty years before the Christian era.
They then lay there hid away, wild savages, poor, and
without government, without clothes, save the un¬
dressed skins of beasts, which only consisted of straps
and strings wound , about the loins, and so on, with the
rest of the body painted and stained with a mixture of
clay and berries picked from the bushes found in the
swamps, just after the same manner as have done all
savage nations. The whole country abounded with
forests and swamps and the natives made no attempt
to improve the swamps or clear the forests. They
were without roads or bridges; nor did they know
how to make the one or build the other. They had
no houses, but lived in the ground., for the most part,
with some few mud huts, and where these existed,
they were absolutely without design in their arrange¬
ment, for they had no streets, but just squatted and
dotted the earth, here* and there and everywhere, with¬
out plan and without purpose.
This is only a faint picture of the early stages in the
life and history of the Anglo-Saxons. I say that it is
only a faint picture, for they were without letters
160
THE NATIONS
and without learning and, apparently, without ability
or disposition to learn. But still they are, to Mr. Bruce,
wonderfully superior. Superior to what, and to
whom, I should like to know? There they are, lying
in this isolated island, ignorant, lazy, superstitious, sav¬
age and thriftless; yet, they are the "great superior
race." If they are the direct descendants of Japheth,
where is the knowledge of civilization he left them?
They were too worthless to keep it in memory. And
they had but a speck of earth there on that island to
look after, and they were actually too lazy to improve
it in any way whatever for centuries, and yet they
were very "superior." Another thing I would like
Mr. Bruce to tell me: Why is it that this superior race
could remain for four hundred years under the Rom¬
ans, and then learn so little of civilization and make
so little of progress along the ways of true life?
I have said they were superstitious. Were they
not, when they believed in the power of charms, wor¬
shipped serpents as gods, and believed in the enchant¬
ments of a magician's wand? And they also believed
in the sacrifice of human beings to the serpent god.
Yes, and they were cruel and bloodthirsty, for they
burnt alive those whom they suspected of any crime.
And I wish to say that this is a trait of the "superior"
Anglo-Saxon race, that has not left them yet; but it
will be noticed that the practice is still kept up after the
same manner as of old—that is, they still lay cruel and
wicked hands on the helpless few or on the one, as the
case may be, and ruthlessly take away life, and then
brag and boast of their bravery and manhood.
Mr. Bruce makes reference to the docility with which
the colored people bore the yoke of slavery in this
country. Not more so than have other races, the
Anglo-Saxon,, for instance, who were made prisoners
of war and sold into slavery. We do not read of any
efforts on their part to free themselves from bondage.
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. ltyl
The fighting that went on was tribal and racial—that
is, the Scots fought the Picts, and the Picts fought the
Saxons, and the Saxons fought the Britons; but it was
all done for greed of gain, and to dislodge each othei
from certain territory. But nowhere do we read -of
the slaves, as such, uprising at any time, in anv of the
before-named tribes, to deliver themselves from bond¬
age and slavery. And the same is equally true of all
white slaves, wherever they have existed, whether
among the Saxons, Picts, Britons, Greeks or Romans ;
and we are told by F. W. Farrar, in his "Early Days of
Christianity," that there were not less than sixty mil¬
lions of white slaves in the Roman province alone! Six¬
ty million, mark you! Can Mr. Bruce place his finger
on a single page of history that treats of an uprising
among them? No, he cannot; and the same writer to
whom I have just referred, says that "they were will¬
ing to serve anybody as masters, simply for what they
could get to eat and to wear." And then, again, there
were those other slaves in Athens and Corinth and
other Grecian cities. They were also white, and Dr.
Gill tells us in his exposition of Deuteronomy 28:68,
that "thirty sold for one penny in Rome." Did Mr.
Bruce ever read of an uprising among them, as slaves,
and on account of their bondage attempting to free
themselves? However, I believe one of them did try
to escape, but the Apostle Paul sent him back home
again to his master, whose name was Philemon; the
slave's name was Onesimus. Could a people make
less effort to free themselves than the classes of whites
to which I have referred?
I want to inform Mr. Bruce that the white slaves
in the world have exceeded the colored by the million:
As was just shown, there were sixty millions in the
Roman province; and, on investigation, it will be found
there were equally as many in Greece, which will make
one hundred and twenty millions. This added to the
11
162
THIS NATIONS
two millions of Jews who were slaves in Egypt, would
make the enormous number of one hundred and twen¬
ty-two millions of white slaves that have existed in the
three countries above named, namely, Greece, Egypt
and Rome.
But the largest number that was ever brought from
Africa, those in the West India Islands and including
all in this country, did not exceed ten millions. Now,
deduct this from one hundred and twenty-two mil¬
lions, and it will leave a balance against the whites
who were enslaved, of one hundred and twelve mil
lions.
But, is it true, as Mr. Bruce asserts, that the colored
people of this country never made any attempt to free
themselves? If he thinks so, let him read "The Un¬
derground Railroad," a book written by Mr. William
Still. And is it possible that he has forgotten the
name of Nat Turner, of Virginia, and the date of Au¬
gust, 1831, and the sixty whites who fell under his
hand in that mighty stroke be made for his own lib-
berty and that of his fellows? And has he forgotten
the dates of 1710, 1740, 1814?—these dates all tell of
uprisings of the colored people of this country, who
either struck, or planned to strike for liberty. And has
he forgotten those who died with John Brown at Har¬
per's Ferry? or the two hundred thousand brave sol¬
dier boys who willingly and gladly offered their lives
for their freedom in the late Rebellion? If so, I kindly
remind him of these facts.
He says "the white race is pre-eminently the race of
reforms." Well, I very readily grant that, but take
the liberty to assert that their reforms have been, for
the most part, worse than the evils complained of, and
have seldom accomplished more than to disturb peace
and destroy harmony.
And this has been true of the white man from the
middle ages down to the present day4. This is true
from a new point of view. 163
with Family, Church and State. Can any white man
mention the term "middle age," with its state and con¬
dition, without a blush ? For one has only to mention
this term in order to call up all the superstition, ignor¬
ance, misery, bloodshed and death that occurred in that
peri6d. Is Mr. Bruce and the other white men proud-
of this also? Yes, simply because the white man did
it, and therefore it was right, and the very best thing
that could have happened to the world and mankind,
for he magnifies his very weakness into strength, his
ignorance into profound knowledge, his wickedness
and cruelty into bravery, his evil into good, and his
white color is to him the very synonym for "Ruler of
the World." Oh! the vanity, the brass, the gush that
is innate and inherent in the white man!
Mr. Bruce takes the liberty to make a thrust at the
chastity of our women. I think he might have spared
the virtue of our wives and daughters; but he has
failed to do so. Well, we can afford to grant him a
monopoly of that kind of business. But when he
comes to speak of the morality that he says there is
lacking among the colored race, I simply have this to
say (if he speaks of honesty in dealing and fidelity to
trust reposed in us) : that we have not robbed many
banks as yet; that we have no representatives in Cana¬
da who are fugitives from justice on account of rob¬
beries, forgeries and embezzlements; neither have we
seven defaulting treasurers who, in seven different
states of the Union, have robbed the State treasuries
of between two and three millions of dollars; neither
have we wrecked the homes of thousands of widows
and orphan children by foolish, wild cat, hair-brained
speculations. But has not the white man done this,
and is he not doing it every day ?
And if Mr. Bruce wishes to contrast morals from the
side of virtue and purity of life in the home and fam¬
ily circle, I would say that we have not many Marvins,
164
THE NATIONS
who married no less than fifteen wives. Neither have
we many Brigham Youngs among us. We have not
established a Salt Lake Citv nor an Oneida commu¬
nity. Neither have we any such thing as a Mormon
question' to settle, for there is not a colored Mormon in
all this broad land, although the white man sought for
two hundred and fifty years to make us such through
his reform institutions—Slavery, for instance. And
neither have we had a London Pall Mall Gazette ex¬
posure of the extensive corruption and sale of young
girls to profligates. But all this is too true of the white
man.
I would say to Mr. Bruce that the Scriptural injunc¬
tion is, "Let him that is without sin cast the first stone."
And if we, as a race, have not sense enough to know
who Wiljiam Lloyd Garrison was, as he implies by a
quotation^of what he has heard, there are some other
things which we do know, and therefore take great
pleasure in calling his attention to them.
CHAPTER VI.
the white man's so-called scientific and his¬
toric "negro."
There are many reasons why I do not accept the
term "Negro" as a proper race designation of the col¬
ored man. I want to say that you may rest assured
that there is no honor in the term "Negro," from the
simple fact, that no white man, up to the present time,
has contested our sole right to it. That is, I mean that
no white man has come forward and said that it was
not a proper race-name. But he, having stuck it on to
us, has let us rest serenely in possession of our peculiar
and strange cognomen. Now, whatever we may have,
and the white man does not try to dispute our right
to it, we may rest assured that he does not consider
that there is anything in it that is worth his having.
I have used as the topic for this article, "The White
Man's So-called Scientific and Historic Negro," be¬
cause his definition and description is considered scien¬
tific ; and that there is a history of the term "Negro,"
all will admit—yes, a long and painful one. Such a
history as all of us might well be ashamed. We, be¬
cause of the degrading and debasing effect had on us
as a race; and the white man, that he has so long
palmed off on a credulous and confiding public, in the
name of science, such an undisguised fraud; and the
public ought to be ashamed that it ever accepted it as
a proper term by which to distinguish a people.
Now, for the benefit of my own people especially, I
will here insert what Encyclopaedia Britannica brings
down to us, the scientific "Negro:"
' 165*
166
THE NATIONS
"Negro (Spanish and Italian Negfo, from Latin Ni¬
ger, black), in anthropology designates the distinctly
dark, as -opposed to the fair, yellow and brown vari¬
eties of mankind. In this, its widest sense, embraces all
the dark races, whose original homes are the inter-trop¬
ical and sub-tropical regions of the Eastern Hemis¬
phere, stretching roughly from Senegambia, West Af¬
rica, to the Fiji Archipelago, Pacific Ocean, west and
east, and lying north and south between the extreme
parallels of the Philippines and Tasmania. ***** But
wherever found, in a comparatively pure state, as on the
coast of Guinea in the Gaboon, along the lower Zam¬
besi, and in the Beuna and Sahara Basins the African
aborigines present almost a greater uniformity of phy¬
sical and moral type than any of the other great di¬
visions of mankind. By the nearly unanimous con¬
sent of anthropologists this type occupies at the same
time the lowest position in the evolutionary scale, thus
affording the best material for the comparative study
of the highest anthropoids and the human species.
The chief points in which the Negro either approaches
the Quadrumana or differ most from his own con-
genus are: (i) abnormal length of the arm, which in
the erect position sometimes reaches the knee-pan, and
which on an average exceeds that of the Caucasian by
almost two inches; (2) prognathism, or projection of
the jaws (index number of facial angle about 70, as
compared, with the Caucasian, 82); (3) weight of
brain as indicating cranial capacity, 35 ounces (high¬
est gorilla 20, average European 45) ; (4) full black
eye, with black iris and yellowish and sclerotic coat, a
very marked feature; (5) short, flat, snub nose, deeply
depressed at the base, or frontal suture, broad at ex¬
tremity, with dilated nostrils and concave ridge; (6)
thick, protruding lips, plainly showing the inner red
surface; (7) very large zygomatic arches—high and
prominent cheek bones; (8) exceedingly thick crani-
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 167
um, enabling the Negro to butt with the head and re¬
sist blows which would inevitably break any ordinary
European's skull; (9) correspondingly weak lower
limbs, terminating in a broad, flat foot with low instep,
divergent and somewhat prehensible great toe, and
heel projecting backwards ("lark heel"); (10) com¬
plexion deep brown or blackish, and in some cases even
distinctly black, due not to any special pigment, as is oif-
ten supposed, but merely to the greater abundance of
the colouring matter in the Malpighian mucous mem¬
brane between the inner or true skin and the epidermis
or scarf skin; (nj short, black hair, eccentrical¬
ly elliptical or almost flat in section and distinctly
woolly, not merely frizzly as Prichard supposed on in¬
sufficient evidence; (12) thick epidermis, cool, soft
arid velvety to the touch, mostly hairless, and emitting
a peculiar rancid odor, compared by Pruner Bey to
that of the buck goat; (15) frame of medium height,
thrown somewhat out of the perpendicular by the
shape of the pelvis, the spine, the backward projection
of the head, and the whole anatomical structure; (14)
the cranial sutures, which close much earlier in the ne¬
gro than in other races. To this premature ossification
of the skull, preventing all further development of the
brain, many pathologists have attributed the inherent
mental inferiority of the blacks, an inferiority which
is eyen more marked than their physical differences.
Nearly all observers admit that the Negro child is on
the whole quite as intelligent as these of other human
varieties, but that on arriving at puberty all further
progress seems" to be arrested, No one has more care¬
fully studied this point than Filippo Manetta, who,
during: a long residence on the plantations of the
Southern States of America, noted that "the Negro
children were sharp, intelligent and full of vivacity,
but on aooroachiner the adult period, a gradual change
set m. The intellect seemed to become clouded, ani-
168
THE NATIONS
mation giving place to lethargy, briskness yielding to
indolence. We must necessarily suppose that the de¬
velopment of the Negro and the white proceeds on dif¬
ferent lines. It must at the same time be confessed
that the question of the mental temperament of the
Negro has been greatly complicated by the partisan¬
ship of interested advocates on either side. But for
this disturbing element, it would perhaps be readily
admitted that the mental are, at least, as marked as
the physical differences between the dark and other
races, and as both are the gradual outcome of external
conditions, fixed by heredity, it follows that the attempt
to suddenly transform the Negro mind by foreign cul¬
ture must be, as it has proved to be, as futile as the
attempt would be to suddenly transform his physical
type. On his moral status, even when removed from the
old associations and brought directly under more fav¬
orable influences, a lurid light is cast by the report of
the Rev. Dr. Tucker at the American Church Congress
for 1883, on the present condition of the black com¬
munities in the Southern States * * * No full-blood
Negro has ever been distinguished as a man of science,
a poet, or an artist, and the fundamental equality
claimed for him by ignorant philanthropists is belied
by the whole history of the race throughout the his¬
toric period."
I have, in the above quotation given you a small
sketch of what is known as the scientific "Negro," or
rather, the white man's idea and description of what a
"Negro" is; and there are colored men who claim that
they are Negroes, and are proud that they are the off¬
spring of that abnormally constituted creature, which
the white man, by reason of his race prejudice and
hate, has seen fit, with pen and ink, to construct for
us, and we have eagerly and ignorantly seized it, and
have been wonderfully proud of it, regardless of the
fact that the white man has used all the degrading
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 169
terms he could find, in all the languages of the earth,
with which to construct his "Negro."
But let us again revert to what the white man has to
say of the scientific "Negro" in the American Cyclopae¬
dia." It can there be seen at a glance, and also in
"Britannica" and "Chamber's," that these writers go
into Africa and divide up its people, and attempt to
show that only a very small portion of the inhabitants
are "Negroes." So that ought to be sufficient to make
every colored man drop the use of the word. The fol¬
lowing is what the "American Cyclopaedia" has to say
on the subject:
"Negro, a name properly applied to the races inhab¬
iting the African continent, principally between latitude
io degrees North, and 20 degrees South, and to their
descendants in the old and new world; it does not in¬
clude the Northern Africans (like the Egyptians, Ber¬
bers, Abyssinians, Nubians, etc.), though in popular
language, especially in the older writings, it comprises
these and other dark-skinned nations, who are not
however, characterized by the crisp hair of the true
negro; in some of his border countries there has been
considerable intermixture of negro blood and dialects.
The Hottentots in the South do not belong to the ne¬
gro race. The term negro, therefore, is not synonymous
with African, and is not a national appellation, but
denotes an ideal type constituted by certain physical
characters, such as are seen in the people of the coast
of Guinea, viz.: black skin, woolly hair, flat nose, thick
everted lips, and a prognathous form of skull. -Ne¬
groes occupy about one-half of Africa, excluding, the
northern and southern extremities, but including its
most fertile portions. Out of Africa, negroes are
found in the United States, the West Indies, Brazil,
Peru, the Cape Verde Islands and Arabia. * * * Ne¬
groes were nearly unknown to the Hebrews and the
Homeric Greeks; the Egyptians, however, about 2,500
170
THE NATIONS
B. C., became acquainted with negroes through the
conquests of their rulers, and represented them on
their monuments as early as 1600 B. C.; for nearly 35
centuries the type has remained unchanged in Egypt.
Negroes were unknown to the Greeks until the 7th cen¬
tury, B; C., their Ethiopians being merely any people
darker than the Hellenic, like the Arabs, Egyptians,
Libyans, or Carthaginians, none of which are Negroes.
The typical Negroes of the Guinea Gold and Slave
Coasts are generally rude and nearly naked savages,
of a deep black color and ugly features; in the interior,
many of the tribes, like the Fan and others visited with¬
in the last five years by Mr. Du Chaillu, and described
in his work (New York, 1861) are fierce cannibals,
but fine-lcoking, war-like, ingenious and skillful in the
working of iron. Those on the slave coast are the
most degraded, selling their neighbors to slave deal¬
ers.
"In the vast region explored by Barth, Livingstone,
Du Chaillu and other recent travelers, there are many
tribes, more or less savage, for an account of which, the
reader is referred to their works. The Caffres of
South-Africa may also be classed among negroes, as
well as the fine and ferocious races of Mozambique and
the East Coast of Africa. The skin of the Negro is soft
and silky, dull cherry-red in the infant, and growing
black very soon; it differs from that of the whites prin¬
cipally in the greater amount of pigment cells in the
reto Malphighii (the epidermis being uncolored), and
in the greater number of cutaneous glands. The hair,
though called wool, does not present the characters
of the latter, especially the" imbricated projecting
scales, and differs but little from' that of the other
races, except in color and in its curled and twisted
form; it is harsh and wiry, and, according to some
microscopists more or less flattened, grooved longitudi¬
nally lying perpendicularly in the dermis and piercing
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 171
the cuticle in this direction,, the coloring matter being
diffused throughout its substance, and, in a few in¬
stances, so imbricated, as to be capable of felting like
wool. The skull is long and narrow, with a depressed
forehead, prominent occiput and jaws, a facial angle of
70 to 65 degrees, and an internal capacity of about 82
cubic inches; a peculiarity of some negro crania, though
by no means constant, is that the sphenoid does not
reach the parietal bones, the coronal suture joining the
margin of the temporals; the skull is very thick and
solid, as would be indicated by the Negro's favorite
mode of fighting, both sexes butting like rams, and so
flat that burdens are easily carried upon it. The stat¬
ure of the Negro is seldom 6 feet, and rarely below 5
1-2; some of their figures are fine, especially the torso,
and have been taken by Chantrey and other sculptors
as models; in the female the development is so rapid
that it is common to see childhood's grace combined
with the prominent characters of maturity. Seen
from behind, the spine usually appears depressed, ow¬
ing to the greater curvature of the ribs; * * *
Beside the characters already mentioned, mav be
noticed the projecting upper edge of orbit; broad re¬
treating chin; great development of lower part of face;
small eyes, in which but little of the yellowish white
ball is seen; small, thick ears, standing off from the
head, with a small lobe and a general stunted look;
black iris; very wide zygomatic arches, giving large
space for the muscles of the lower jaw; large and
transverse opening of the nasal cavity. The pelvis is
long and narrow, its average circumference being from
26 to 28 inches, instead of 30 to 36 as in the whites;
this shape in the female, according to Violik and Weber,
corresponds to the characteristic shape of the Negro
head; those writer? consider it a type of degradation,
as it approaches that of the quadrumana in the more
vertical direction of the iliac bones and their less width,
172
THE NATIONS
in the smaller breadth of sacrum, and in the conse¬
quent less extent of the hips. The bones of the leg
are bent forward and outward, the tibia and fibula be¬
ing more convex than in Europeans; the calves are
very high; the feet and hands are flatter; the heel bone
instead of being arched, is continued in a straight line
with the other bones of the foot, causing it to project
more behind; in consequence of the longer lever thus
obtained, less muscular force is necessary in the
movements of the feet, and the muscles of the calf are
consequently less developed; the shoulder blades are
shorter and broader," etc.
Will colored men still cling to the white man's ideal
Negro, after reading the above description he has given
of him?
THE RELATION OF THE WORD "NIGER" TO THE WORD
"NEGRO."
But before we consider that relation, let us notice
some few of the peculiar characteristics of the so-
not black he is not a Negro.
First.. He has got to be black; not dark-brown, or
yellow, but black; for that is the very first pre-requis-
ite characteristic to his being a "Negro," for if he is
not black he is nota Negro.
Secondly. He must have woolly hair, for only the
white, man's scientific necro has woolly hair; and if he
does not have woolly hair, he is not a Negro.
Thirdly. He must have a peculiar smooth, oily skin,
sending forth a rancid, unpleasant smell, or else he
cannot be a scientific Negro.
Fourthly. His head must be flat, his forehead
must be of a retreating set; jaw-bones large; cheek
bones unusually high; nose flat and spreading well
across the face, stub at end, turning up, and so dilating
or opening the nostrils that the red inside lining must
be plainly visible.
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 173
Fifthly. His face must shoot forth like the muzzle
of a clog.
Sixthly. The arms must be considerably longer
than the white man's; when hung at his side, they
must extend below the kneepan.
Seventhly. He must lean forward, and not stand
erect, like the white man; and must move with a shuf¬
fling gait, something like the ape; and he must also
have a projecting pelvis.
Eighthly. The scientific "Negro" 'must be small and
short-set—nothing like the size of the ordinary white
man, but altogether another creature—another species
entirely.
Yes, the description I have just given is the
wlhite man's historical and scentific "Negro." Now
let us see if there is an etymological possibility of mak¬
ing that one word "niger" produce that wonderful be¬
ing just described. No, it cannot be done, for accord¬
ing to the white man's own definition of the word
"niger" as it stands in the Latin language, its only
meaning is "black." Then, again, the white man is
all at sea in producing his scientific Negro; their defi¬
nitions do not agree as to the meaning of the word; for
while to the Latins the word means "black," to the
Africans, through whose country the Niger flows, it
means "river," or "the great river." So the white
man's scientific Negro is not scientific after all, for
there are those who hold that the word is derived from
the French "negre" and not from the Latin. Now which
is true? Can the white man tell us? Certainly not,
for there are three different definitions, neither of
which agrees with the other. Now, without there is
an agreement there is no definite knowledge; and when
there is no definite knowledge there can be no science,
for science is knowledge or what one knows; and a
thing is scientific when it works according to definite
knowledge, and not when there is a disagreement as to
174
THE NATIONS
the knowledge; and whenever there is uncertainty and
irregularity as to any certain matter, and the knowledge
of it, the science of it is destroyed.
Let us quote what Dr. Barth says: The word "niger"
is derived from a native word— a native African word
—not Latin, but African, and the word from which it
is derived is "Nighirren." He also says "It means
simply 'the river.'" See "Niger" in Chambers.
I make these quotations to show that the word "ni¬
ger" is of African origin, not Latin; and that among
the Africans themselves the word does not mean
"black," but river; and I call attention to another fact,
that there were no black people among the Latins to
whom the niame would be appropriate; therefore, it is
t>roof positive that the Latins did not construct the
word to designate a people, but a color that is black;
so it is simply a Latin adjective and not a noun.
The word "Negro" in Spanish means "black," and
so cannot be used to construct the white man's scien¬
tific "Neero," because it does not include the other pe¬
culiar characteristics that belong to his ideal "Negro;"
not only so, but they have no relationship with it what¬
ever.
Well, what shall we say about it further that will
throw some light on this very dark and obscure sub¬
ject ? The English Encyclopedia says "negro" is from
the French "negre," and that "nigger" is better Eng¬
lish for it than "negro." Dr. Barth says "niger" is
derived from an African word, as I have shown, and
means "river" or "the river." Again I ask, will the
white man stick to his "negro" construction and call
it scientific? I will here insert the words of a native
African who is very recently from the Congo Valley.
This is what he says:
"The word Negro is not used in Africa by the Afri¬
cans, for its scandalous meaning, and whoever applies
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 175
it to anybody, has to pay for consequences. The word
'Negro' is as offensive as the word Burnan-gundo is
offensive to a European who knows its meaning."
CHAPTER VII.
OUR STATUS: WHAT IS IT IN THIS COUNTRY ?
One is ever and anon pained by hearing it'stated
and restated that the colored race has no real claim
or right to this country as a home. And this is
the more painful because such utterances are often
heard from our own pulpits and platforms from
men who stand high in the race's esteem and confi¬
dence. The colored press, too, that great uplifter
and developer of the race—is also often found to
indulge in the same illogical, unreasonable and unhis-
torical kind of sentiment. This is a. great pity, for it
has a tendency to discourage and dishearten many of
the race, and to embolden the holder of a white man's
government and a white man's country idea. Then,
again, it is all contrary to the facts in the case.
First, what are the historical facts as to our pre¬
emption and occupation of this country? Why, they
are these: The first Africans, it is historically stated,
were brought to the West Indies in 1503, which was
only eleven years after Columbus got lost and hap¬
pened to land on this continent, which was in 1492.
Yes, his coming to this country at that time was a pure
accident, and no discovery about it; for he thought he
was in India, which is in Asia, but, behold! he was on
the great Western continent, which was inhabited by
a people who had discovered it thousands of years
before Columbus was born. The people were and
are the descendants of Ham, as all the dark races of
he earth are his descendants. So, not only do we
have a right to this country by the accession of our
(176)
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 177
forefathers to it only eleven years after the coming of
Columbus, but a branch of the descendants of Ham
were here thousands of years before the white man even
knew that there was such a continent on the globe.
Thus, when the Portuguese brought the first colony of
Africans to this continent, which was in 1503, they
did not land them among white men, but colored
men who were simply another branch of our own race.
John Pym Carter, in his "Elements of General His¬
tory," page 173, says the Portuguese brought the first.
The Spanish, according to Carter, did not bring their
first until 15n, eight years later.
But there is another version of our pre-emption and
occupancv of this Western Continent which goes to
prove that not only was there an unknown branch of
Ham's descendants here centuries before Columbus;
but it is more than probable that members of the Afri¬
can branch of the race were on the continent long be¬
fore Columbus came. At any rate, we now call on the
white man to prove the assertion untrue.
J. K. Ingram, LL. D., Librarian of Trinity College,
Dublin, says that the Spanish government made
Ovando Governor of Hi^paniola, West India Islands,
and sent him out in 1502, and when he arrived he found
Africans already there, and he does not seem to* know
how long they had been there (see Encyclopaedia Brit-
annica, page 137).
Now, let us note the difference in the two versions,
and their significance. Carter's History, published in
1872, says on page 173 that the Portuguese were the
first to import Africans into the West Indies, in 1503,
and the Spanish, not until 1511. But J. K. Ingram,
LL. D., says Ovando went as Governor in 1502, and
that he found Africans then there; and he quotes as
proof of it that Ovando makes the statement in corre¬
spondence with the home governmen in 1503. So we
have documentary proof that representatives of the Af-
72
178
THE NATIONS
rican race were here long before the dates were given
by Carter, and many other historians. But how long
we do not know. It may have been before Columbus
came. What real, authentic proof has the white man
that this is not the fact in the case? for it will be re¬
membered that the first date given in history that any
of the inhabitants of Africa were removed from its
soil into any country to be made slaves of, was in A. D.
1442, just fifty years before Columbus got lost, and
found himself in this country, which was just 453 years
ago.
The shippers were the Portuguese, and the first coun¬
try to which they were shipped was, according to the
best authority, Portugal, and out of Portugal into
Spain, and from Spain to other parts of the West¬
ern Continent; but not a new one, but a very old one,
as the governments of Mexico and other islands and
countries will show, as well as the recent findings of
the many exploration and excavation companies now
at work in the country. The current writers, speakers
and historians falsely refer to this as a new continent, a
new world, a new country, etc., whereas, the pointings
are that it was inhabited long before Europe was, for
we have a more or less reliable form of data showing
when, how and bv whom nearly all Europe was settled;
and by the best information now in possession of ex¬
perts in antiquity we are not carried back to an age
much beyond what is known as the "stone age," that is,
when men used stone to make implements of war and
industry.
Whereas, we have in this country evidence by means
of fossil discoveries, and also documentary, by way
of hieroglyphic inscriptions on monuments, tombs,
caves, etc., carrying us back thousands of years be¬
yond the "stone age." Agassiz, for example, going
back ten thousand years, and Dr. Dowler fifty thou¬
sand years; for he savs that in certain sedimentarv de-
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 179
posits found deep down beneath the earth, near New
Orleans, in which the remains of men are found, show
that age; and indeed this country is so old that the
evidences point to a race, both of men and animals, that
lived here and then disappeared entirely, or, in other
words, died out, and another one arose or came on
the stage of action, which Columbus found when he
came. (See Encyclopaedia Britannica>, page 691.)
I do not attempt to say how valuable or important
any of the above is as evidence, for it is based on the
theories and doctrines of Geology, and Geology is very
young and uncertain as a science at best, but I quote
in support of the statement I made, that the pointings
were that this country is much older than Europe.
But let us again refer to the fact of our pre-emption
of this continent, for it is a fact undeniably that Afri¬
ca's sons and daughters were not only in the Indies at
a very early date, but were here in the first colony only
thirteen years after it was formed; the colony having
been planted in 1607 in Virginia, and we were brought
in 1620.
' New York was settled in 1614, which was six years
before we came—Massachusetts in 1620. So there
were only two colonies which had laid their corner¬
stones before we were on the ground. New Hamp¬
shire was settled in 1623, which was three years after
we were here; New Jersev in 1624, which is four years
after us; Delaware in 1627, but we were here seven
years before; Maine in 1630, but we were here ten
years before Maine was settled; Maryland was formed
in 1634, but we were here fourteen years before; Con¬
necticut comes next, in 1635, but we were here fifteen
years before that; Rhode Island began in 1636, but
that is sixteen years after we were here; North Car¬
olina in 1660, which is forty years after we were here;
South Carolina in 1670, which is fifty years after our
coming—yes, a whole half century later; then comes
180
THE NATIONS
Pennsylvania, 1681, which is sixty-one years after us;
lastly comes Georgia, in 1733, which is one hundred
and thirteen years later.
Yes, we had been here one hundred and thirteen
vears in what is now the United States; we were here
felling its forests, tilling its soil and helping to make
its borders like the Garden of the Lord.
It will be seen, therefore, that there are only two
states in the Union whose cornerstones were laid
before we were in the limits of the colonial territory,
and those two were the colonies of Virginia and New
York. All the rest were behind us excepting Massa¬
chusetts, in 1620, the same year of our coming. But
it will be remembered that we were on the continent in
the West Indies in 1503, which was one hundred and
five years before the Virginia colony, which was the
first colony,
There is another very important fact in history, go¬
ing to establish the ground I take, and that is the rec¬
ommendation of Columbus and a Catholic priest by the
name of De Las Casas. The priest was a missionary
to the West Indies. Now, what I want to know is,
how could Columbus and the priest have that informa¬
tion and knowledge necessary for them to have, in or¬
der to make the recommendation; for it will be re¬
membered that Columbus and the priest De Las Casas
based their recommendation for the transportation of
Africans into the West Indies on the fact, as they said,
that the Africans were much more hardy than the oth¬
er inhabitants of the Islands, and that they could
stand the hard labor of mining and farming much bet¬
ter than the so-called Indians. Strict attention will be
paid right here to the fact that it is said that the very
first Africans that came were brought by the Spanish
and Portuguese, was on the recommendation of Colum¬
bus and the priest. Now, how could they make the
hardiness, strength and durability of the African a con-
FROM A NEW POINT OP VIEW.
181
tfast to the weakness and unfitness of the Indians if
there were no Africans there, and enough of them, too,
with which to make the experiment and time enough
to have proof of the test?
The only proper conclusion I can draw is that Co¬
lumbus and the priest found Africans on the islands
when he and the priest arrived, just as Ovando, who
was appointed governor of the West Indies by the
Spanish government, says he found Africans when he
came, and does not know how long they had been
there.
What fact is it that presents itself just here? It is
that we have conclusive proof that Africans were here
and settled in this country long before the Spanish,
Portuguese, English, French, Dutch, Irish, or any
other of the white nations. Now let us have the proof
of the assertion.
It is this: Columbus, the priest and Ovando were all
officers of the same government, the Spanish govern¬
ment. Columbus went to the islands in' 1492, and the
priest went with him on the second or third trip, and
Ovando, the governor, went in 1502. This same year
Columbus made his fourth and last voyage to this con¬
tinent. Hence here is Columbus, the priest and Ovando
on the islands, or in this country, at the same time; and
Ovando writes back to his government that there are
Africans already here, and that he does not know how
long they had been here, and yet he himself came in
1502, and the first Africans are said to have been
brought in 1503, one year after Ovando came; and if
they, as is stated in history, came one year after he got
there, could he have written to his government that
they were here when he came, and that he did not know
how they had been here? And again, if Colum¬
bus and his priest knew when the first Africans came,
would they not have told Ovando, the governor? Of
course, the conclusion is they would have told him if
182
THE NATIONS
they had known; that he would have known himself,
because he was there on the island one year before the
first reputed, Africans were brought.
Here, then, is a discrepancy between the history that
has been made of the matter and brought down to us,
and the report of Ovando, made to his government in
Spain, as to the state and condition of the Island.
Which shall we accept as evidence in this case: the
original state document now on file in the archives
of the Spanish government, or the manufactured, ma¬
nipulated history ^making? I say, take the original
Spanish state document every time.
Then there are our acquirements of real estate and
finance, which give us a right here in this country,
for the white man does not own all of either, as is so
repeatedly said by some of our own leaders; and I do
not know of better proof than to quote just here from
an article published in the Chicago Inter-Ocean:
"In the North Atlantic States there are 5,508 farms
and homes owned by colored people, free from mort¬
gage, and 3,Q2i that are mortgaged. In the South At¬
lantic States there are 108,084 homes and farms owned
by colored people, free from incumbrance, and 7,608
that are mortgaged. In the South Central States there
are 100,581 homes and farms owned by colored
people free from incumbrance and 8,607 are mort¬
gaged. In the Western States there are 1,304 homes
and farms owned free by colored people and 289 that
are mortgaged. In the whole country there are 233,747
homes and farms owned by colored people, free from
all incumbrance, and 29,641 that are mortgaged. In
the South the percentage of home-owners is larger
than of those who have homes in cities' and villages.
With the white race the condition is just the opposite;
the larger percentage of owners having homes in cities
and villages rather than farms. If the same growth
that has been made in the last ten years continues for
FJROM A NEW POINT OP VIEW. 183
another decade, the colored people will be the most in¬
dependent farmers in the country. From the above
statement of facts no better evidence can be produced
bv any other race in the United States."
The colored people of the District* of Columbia
alone pay taxes on $11,000,000 worth of property
Can the white man, then, be said to own the District
of Columbia, when the colored people own $11,000,000
worth of it?
In speaking of our educational status I will not stay
to mention the many institutions of learning, and of
different grades, too, which we, as a race, are establish¬
ing and maintaining; and not only so, but I find we
are very largely self-supporting in those established by
others for our benefit. In proof of this I will just
here insert the words of Rev. C. C. Smith, Secretary
of the Board of Education of the "Disciples' Church
"All the church schools for colored people in the
South are crowded with students; and they are pay
students; for of the 28,000 scholars in' these schools,
25,000 of them pay an average of $100 a year for their
education, and only 300 are free scholarships."
Again, for further proof, President J. H. Johnson,
of the Virginia Normal and Collegiate Institute, says
the students of that school pay to the state of Virginia
$10,000 a year for their education. Yes, and an equally
good showing could be made if statistics could be taken
the whole country over.
Now, let us note our constitutional and legal status,
for both in the original constitution and by the Four¬
teenth and Fifteenth Amendments we have a stand¬
ing: right in this country as a home.
I quote from Article Fourth of the Constitution,
Section Second, and first clause: "The citizens of
each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and
immunities of citizens in the several States." The
fourth clause gives us equal interTState privileges and
184
THIS NATIONS
immunities, with all other citizens, because we are
citizens; and we are citizens because the Fourteenth
Article of the Constitution says so, in that we were
born here. It is as follows:
"All persons born or naturalized in the United
States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are cit¬
izens of the United States, and of the State wherein
they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law
which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of
citizens of the United States; nor shall any State de
prive any person of life, liberty or property without
due process of law, nor deny any person within its
jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
And I wish to say also that we, as a race, hold the
National Government equally responsible with the
State Governments for our citizen rights and privileges.
Yes, and more so', for the Constitution, as just quoted,
grants us equal protection of the laws in that it says:
"No State shall deny any citizen within its jurisdiction
the equal protection of the laws," and the whole world
knows that the Southern States, do> not grant us "equal
protection." So we hold the Nation's Government re¬
sponsible, because we and all other persons who are
citizens of the United States are so* in a pre-eminent
sense, in that they become citizens of the United States
before they do or can of any State ; for no one can be¬
come a citizen of a State until he has first become a
citizen of the United States. And, again, persons
become citizens of the United States by a different
process than that of the State. The first is by birth
or naturalization, and the other is simply by taking
up a residence within the bounds of any State.
But citizenship does not follow the taking up of such a
residence until he has first become a citizen of the
United States. So the States are dependent on th«
United States for their citizens. But by becoming a
citizen of a State one does not lose his United
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 185
States citizenship; and hence he holds a twofold citi¬
zenship—that of State and United States, and both are
bound by constitutional enactment to afford him pro¬
tection to "life, limb and property."
But if the State does not protect her citizens, then
the United States must do so, or violate its own Consti¬
tution, for in the 14th Article it says: "No State shall
make or enforce any law that will abridge the privi¬
leges or immunities of citizens of the United States."
Now this Article of the Constitution gives the United
States supervising power over the several States, as to
what laws they make for the government of citizens of
the United States. It says more than that, for it says
that the States shall not make any unjust laws, and if
they do, it says they shall not enforce them, and all
this is said for the simple reason that all persons who
are citizens of the several States were citizens of the
United States first, and that they do not lose their
United States citizenship by becoming citizens of the
several States, and that the United States does not re¬
linquish its right to look after and protect its citizens
simply because they happen to become citizens of some
State.
But the United States says that the States shall in
no wise oppress her citizens; and yet how shamefully
the general Government stood by and allowed the
States to make unjust laws and enforce them; and
more than that, the general Government has stood
still, yes, "stock still," and seen the meanest' kind of
Customs grow into practice, and take the place of
properly enacted laws, regardless of the fact that the
Constitution says no one shall be denied equal protec¬
tion of the laws, on the flimsy pretext that the United
States allows the States to exercise their own police
regulations; and it is absolutely true that the general
Government does that effectually, but only where its
colored citizens are concerned.
186
THE NATIONS
Yes, this is our home, and let us resolve to live in it,
cultivate it, and niever cease our efforts until it is civ¬
ilized and purely Christianized.
I will not lengthen this subject by staying to speak
of cur right to the country because of our patriotic de¬
fence of it in times of war and rebellion, both national
and international, but will leave that for the future.
Then there is another very important thing connected
with the white man and his occupancy of this country,
and that is, he is not where he is and what he is
to-day, as to the success he has made, whatever of it
there is, by the exercise of wise and deliberate plans,
laid and carried out; but he has reached his present
status through haps and mishaps of all kinds, and all
manner of chance work. Take for example the coming
of Columbus to this country, which is blazed abroad
by the white man as a great and wonderful feat of
genius, whereas, it was a pure accident, and Columbus
died, poor fellow, thin kino- he had discovered a
new and nearer route to India, and it was a blunder tc
begin with, and from that day down to the present
time, the white man has been making equally egre¬
gious blunders, mistakes and failures, but has claimed
them to be great achievements.
The next fraudulent step was to call the coming oi
Columbus a discovery of a new country, when, as 1
have shown it was inhabited by millions of people
, who had lived in it and cultivated the soil for thou¬
sands of years.
The next mistake was the naming of the people
Indians, whereas, ihe proper name for them was and
is, "Western Continentors." But this mistake grew
as I have said, out of the fact that Columbus was lost
and thought he was in India. This so-called discov¬
ery has done and is doing great violence to general
history, and especially to the ethnographical branch
of it.
The next was the introduction of slavery on this
from a new point of view. 187
continent, which was not done when those twenty
slaves are said to have been sold at Jamestown, Va.
But Columbus enslaved a shipload of the inhabitants
of the islands—five hundred in nupiber—and sent them
to his home in Spain. So the African was not the first
to be enslaved on this continent. But not only so, he
was not the first to be enslaved in the colonies, for
white women were sold to the colonies in Virginia the
same year with the colored, and in larger numbers,
too, for while there were twenty colored, there were
one hundred whites; and Lossing's history of the
United States says they were dissolute and vagabond
(white) women, and other white convicts at different
times were sent. Lossing also says that the womien
sold to the colonies were called "jail-birds," and were
let out on condition they came over here and became
wives for the colonists.
Again, the white man declared that his deliberate
purpose in' migrating as to establish religious liberty
and freedom of conscience in all that was religious,
and yet they had not gotten out of a colonial state be¬
fore several persons were burned alive for their reli¬
gious opinions in Salem, Mass.; and a large number of
others were banished from the colony for the same
cause (see Dr. Backus' History). And the white man
is now at this time persecuting the Seventh Day Bap¬
tists in this State on account of their religious faith as
regards the keeping of the Sabbath day. So there has
been at no time since the establishment of the Colonies,
till now, true religious liberty; so on this attempt also
—at doing something worthy of humanity—will have
to be written "failure." And I might continue this
list of mistakes and blunders without limit.
CHAPTER VIII.
RACE INTERMINGLING.
While it is a fact that the different races have come
down to us with their distinctive characteristics—thar
is, with their own languages, colors, physical make-up
and habits, yet there has, in all ages of man's history,
been an intermingling, more or less, going on among
them. It began in the antediluvian world, or before
the flood, and is kept up to the present day. The first
incident of this kind was that of the descendants of
Cain marrying the daughters of Seth, mentioned in the
fourth chapter of the book of Genesis, and from that
day to this, all races have married and intermarried,
mingled and intermingled, until at times they have
either become so mixed that it could not be told which
was which, or until the one was swallowed up or ab¬
sorbed in the other, as was the case with the ten tribes
of Joktan, who'was one of the sons of Shem: they are
supposed to have been so completely merged into the
Arabians that there was nothing left of them.
It is perpetually being asserted that the descendants
of Ham and those of the so-called Caucasian races
never mixed. Our ourpose is to examine into this
matter and state the facts. So let us begin with Abra¬
ham, and we find that he took for his wife, by the re¬
quest of Sarah, Hagar, who was an Egyptian, and the
Egyptians were the descendants of Ham, because they
are the offspring of Mizraim, who was the second son
of Ham. So here a Shemite in the person of Abraham
marries a -Hamite in the person of Hagar. Now, the
son of Abraham by Hagar, his Hamite wife, was Ish-
(188)
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 189
m&ej. This is the first son he ever had. And here is
an intermixture, for Ishmael is half Hamite and
half Shemite, because his father was a son of Shem
and his mother a daughter of Ham.
Now, let us see what became of the sons of Ishmael.
Why, they went into Arabia, then married and inter¬
married with the descendants pf Cush; and it is well
known that Cush was the oldest son of Ham—no one
ever denies that—and indeed, the truth is that the his¬
torical and geographical situation of the descendants
of Ishmael is such as to make it almost impossible that
they could have married any but the descendants of
Ham, because they were surrounded on every side by
Canaanites and Cushites, who were Hamites.
We have been showing who the sons of Ishmael
married; but whom did Ishmael himself marry? He
is said to have married an Egyptian: (see Encyclopae¬
dia Britannica on Ishmael). Then if Ishmael married
an Egyptian wife, which is more than likely, because
his mother, who was Hagar, was an Egyptian—so we
see that Ishmael himself was a half Hamite, because
his mother was a Hamite and his father a Shemite.
Then if Ishmael was half Hamite and he married an
Egyptian wife, who was a whole Hamite, then his
children would be three-fourths Hamite; but the main
proof of intermingling in this case is to be found in the
fact that Abraham was a Shemite and Hagar a Ham¬
ite, and that they had a sqn who was Ishmael, whose
name mean's, "God will hear."
The next case we will notice is that of Joseph, who
married the daughter of an Egyptian priest. Her
name w'as Asenath (see Gen. 41st chapter, 45th verse).
She had two sons by Joseph, whose names were
Ephraim and Manasseh. So the sons of Joseph were
half Hamites and half Shemites, because his father
was a Shemite and his mother a Hamite, because she
was an Egyptian, and the Egyptians were Hamites
through Mizraim, who settled and peopled Egypt.
190
THE NATIONS
And he was the second son of Ham. Is not this inter¬
mixture by marriage? and, not only that, but these two
half-Hamite boys took their places among the twelve
tribes of Israel, and, indeed, without them the twelve
tribes could not have been complete, for there were
only ten sons of Jacob, and he adopted these two sons
of Joseph, and so the list of twelve sons was complete.
There, is no proof that I know of, eithfer in or out of
the Scripture, that goes to show, that the descendants
of Joseph did not continue to intermarry with the Egyp¬
tians ; reason and logic both go to prove that they did,
for it is not at all likely that the sons of Joseph would
be against marrying ampng their mother's people; but
it is more than likely they would be delighted to do so.
Now, let us examine into the marriage of Moses,
and we find that he married Ziporah, the daughter of
a man who was an inhabitant of the country of Midian,
his name v/as Ruel or Jethro. He had seven daugh¬
ters, and he was also a priest. . Let us now inquire of
what race was the wife of Moses? Why, she was of
the race of Ham; and to substantiate this assertion
I will quote Num. 12:1: "And Miriam and Aaron
spake against Moses because of the Ethiopian woman
whom he had married: for he had married an Ethio¬
pian woman." Not only do we here learn to what race
the wife of Moses belonged, but also to what race her
father, Reuel or Tethro belonged; and that is the
Hamite race, because the Ethiopians were Hamites.
None. I believe, deny that, and my very proof that
Reuel, the father of Ziporah, was an Ethiopian, is that
she herself was one, and, of course, she could not be
an Ethiopian unless her father was; and if she was.
then he must be also; and that she was an Ethiopian
the Scripture positively states.
That Jethro or Reuel, Moses' father-in-law, being an
Ethiopian, is found off here in the country of Mid¬
ian, can be easily accounted for art the same ground
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 191
that Abraham, having been born in Ur, of the Chal-
dtcs, yet his future home is in Canaan. Of course,
Abraham migrated into Canaan; so could Jethro mi¬
grate into Midian from Ethiopia, and there become a
great man and a priest, which he was.
Moses had two sons, their names were Gershom and
and Eliezer. They were half Hamite and half Shem-
ite. because their mother was a Hamite and their father
a Shemite.
Now into the history of Esau let us examine. He
was a twin brother with Jacob, and grandson of Abra¬
ham. His first two wives were of the daughters of
Canaan. I quote here from Genesis 36:2: "Esau took
his wives of the daughters of Canaan; Adah the
daughter of Elon the Hittite, and Aholibamah the Hi-
vite." Esau also married wives of the daughters of
Ishmael, and Ishmael's mother was Hagar, and she
was an Egyptian, and the Egyptians were, as we have
already seen, Hamites. And then we are told that Ish¬
mael himself also married an Egyptian wife. So, then,
the children of Esau, bv his Ishmaelitish wives, were
three-fourths Hamite blood. Would you not call
that pretty well mixed? And the children of Esau,
by his Canaanitish wives, were half Hamite and half
Shemite, because Canaan, who was the father of the
Canaanites, and whose daughter Esau married, was
the youngest son of Ham, and Esau was the son of
Isaac, who was a Shemite because he was a descend¬
ant of Shem through Abraham. Now, Esau was the
father of the Edomites. Who, then, were the Edom-
ites ? They were a mixed race of Hamites and Shem-
ites, with more* of Hamite than Shemite blood in their
veins.
Then there is Salmon, a prince of the tribe of Tudah.
He married Rahab of Jericho, who received the spies
that Moses sent to spy out the land of Canaan. Now,
Rahab was a descendant of Canaan, and Salmon' was
192
THE NATIONS
the son of Nahshon, who was a famous prince in Ju-
dah; so here is another Shemite marrying a Hamite;
and yet one can see it in print, and hear it said almost
any t,ime, that the descendants of Shem and Japheth
never mixed with those of Ham, when the truth is that
almost every prominent leader of the Hebrew race
married and intermarried with the children of Ham.
And not only that, but through this marriage of Rahab
with Salmon—Rahab, a daughter of Canaan, and Sal¬
mon, a son of? Judah—the descendants of Ham fall in
line with the -Saviour's birth, and thus a Hamite be¬
comes a descendant of Judah and therefore belongs to
the royal family of David. And so David had th^
blood of Ham in his veins.*
Now,, you will remember that when I say that the
Saviour sprang from Rahab, I mean that she, by her
marriage to Salmon, who was a descendant of Judah,
came into the line of descent with Judah and that
she became the mother of one of the generations down
through whom the Saviour came. For example, she
was the mother of Boaz, and Obed was the son of
Boaz; and Jesse was the son of Obed; and David, the
king, was the son of Jesse; or in other words, David
was the double grandson, or the great, great-grandson
of Rahab. So we see that Rahab was the great, great-
grandmother of David, the king. And here we see
also that instead of God recognizing and accepting
and carrying out the curse of Noah, which he' pro¬
nounced upon Canaan, he not only gave his descend¬
ants the blessed land in which the Saviour was to be
born, but gave him a place directly in line with the
birth of Christ—that is, caused one of his descendants,
namely, Rahab, to become the mother of one of the
families through whom he came.
May I be permitted to ask, what greater honor could
Cod have put upon Canaan than to give him a home in
* See Dr. Gill on Matthew 1:5.
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 193
the land that was afterwards to become the birthplace
of the Saviour of the world? And not only so, but
caused the Saviour to be born through one of his race.
I ask again, Is not this a mixing of the Hamite and
Shemite ?
We will next see who did Judah marry. Read Gen.
38:2, and we find the following: "And Judah saw there
a daughter of a certain Canaanite, whose name was
Shuah; and he took her, and went in unto herso here
is Judah, the leader of the twelve tribes of Israel, who
marries a Canaanite! And Judah also had a son by an¬
other Canaanitish woman, and her name was T'amar,
and the name of the son was Phares.
Turning now to Matthew, first chapter and third
verse, we find that this same Phares is there mentioned,
and one in the line of the Saviour's birth; and it is also
here plainly shown that the tribe of Judah, was half
Hamitfe and half Shemite, because the wife of Judah
was a Hamite,. and he himself a Shemite.
But there is another case we might mention. It is
that of Lot, the nephew of Abraham. Who Lot him¬
self married it is not said, but we are told whom some
of his daughters married. They were men of Sodom.
Genesis 19th chapter and 14th verse says: "And Lot
went out and spake unto his sons in law, which mar¬
ried his daughters." We see by this that-Lot's daugh¬
ters intermarried with the inhabitants of Sodom, who
were Canaanites, and were therefore Hamites or the
descendants of Ham, because their forefather, Canaan,
was the youngest son of Ham.
Now, turning to the fourteenth chapter of Judges,
we find that. Samson, a Jew, married a Philistine wife,
and the Jews were Shemites, and the Philistines were
Hamites. The Jews were Shemites through Abraham,
and the Philistines were Hamites through Philistim,
and Philistim was a descendant of Mizraim.* And so
* Genesis 10:13-14.
13
194
THE NATIONS
here we have another intermarriage; and we see
that the Philistines were of the descendants of Ham.
Your attention is now called to the intermarriage ot
Solomcn with the Egyptians; and Solomon, in many
respects, was the greatest king the Israelites ever had,
and yet he could not resist the temptation of marrying
a Hamite wife. He married Pharaoh's daughter.
I will here mention the fact that the effort has often
been made to prove that Joseph and the other Israelites
did not serve under the original Egyptian kings, who
were the descendants of Ham through Mizraim, his
second son. But it is said that at some time or other
there came into Egypt a nation of people known as
Shepherds. Now, it is a well known fact that the only
people that can be defined and historically traced into
Egypt, until many, many years after the Israelites were
expelled from Egypt, were the Israelites themselves.
And I would state further that the whole matter rests
not on historical facts, but on hypothetical supposition.
And it is therefore but a very weak theory at best, for
the whole of it rests upon the rendering of two Egyp¬
tian words, and then making a compound word of
them; and that word is "Hykshos." The two words
from which this compound word is* derived are "Hyk,"
which means "captive," and "Shos" which means "a
shepherd." Therefore the word means "a captive
shepherd." But those, who first invented the hypothet¬
ical theory before mentioned have translated it to mean
"shepherd kings," but the unreasonableness of the idea
is readily seen from the fact that it is a nation that is
said to have invaded and taken charge of Egypt—a
whole nation, mind you.
Now, whoever heard of a whole nation of kings? If
the whole nation were kings, where were the subjects?
Over whom did this nation of kings reign? Then
again the theory falls to the ground when we consider
the discrepancy in dates, as to the time this nation of
kings entered and began to rule in Egypt; and as to
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 195
how long they ruled, and as to just what did happen un¬
der their reign. One says this nation of kings entered
Egypt B. C. 1842; another, 1639; another, 1445. Now^
I ask in the name of all that is called historical truth,
which of these dates is correct ? And when we come to
the length of time they remained in Egypt, we are not
helped in the least. One writer puts it at 259 years, and
another at 511, and another at 103. I ask again, which
was it? But what is to be gained as a proof that Jo¬
seph and his brethren did not serve under the descend¬
ants of Ham? But if the dates mentioned were true;
and suppose a nation of "shepherd kings" did rule
Egypt, what then? The auestion immediately turns
on, who were the "shepherd kings ?" One writer says
thev were Phoenicians.. Well, then, they were Hamites
still, for the Phoenicians were of the descendants of
Canaan, who was the son of Ham, the Noah-cursed,
so nothing would be gained by that, for that would
still be Ham ruling Shem. But others say the nation
of "shepherd kings" were the Ishmaelites. Well, sup¬
pose they were; that would not help the matter any, for
the Ishmaelites were the descendants of Ham and
Shem, but more of Ham than of Shem, from the fact
that Ishmael himself was only half Shemite, through
his father, who was Abraham; but Hagar, his mother,
was a Hamite, being an Egyptian. Then we are told
that Ishmael married an Egyptian wife, so his children,
who were the Ishmaelites, were three-fourths Hamite
and one-fourth Shemite only, which would make them
legally all Hamite.
We now ask, "then, into what race did Solomon
marry? Evidently it was the race of Ham.
But there is another case I might mention. It is the
marriage of Ahab, king of Israel, to Jezebel, daughter
of Ethbaal, king of Tyre and Sidon. Now, it will be
remembered that the Tyrians and Sidonians were
Hamites, for they were the descendants of Sidon,
196
THE NATIONS.
who was the first-born son of Canaan. So here a
of Shem marries a princess of Ham. .
And to verify the fact that this marrying an ir* er
marrying is still going on, we have only to look about
us and see the different types and shades among us.
CHAPTER IX.
THE "SOCIAL EQUALITY" IDEA.
Was there ever an image floating- in the white man's
brain that gave him so much mental pain and worry as
the "social equality" idea he has! It seems to keep
him in mental agony year in and year out, and from
early morning until late at night. Yes, it is the sub-
1*ect of his dreams while he slumbers, and the terror of
his social imaginations by day. The point of anxiety
with him is "social equality." Well, what is "social
equality"—or rather, what is meant by it? The white
man pays great attention to cognomenology, but very
little to etymology and derivation. In other words,
he is wonderful in making and using terms, but as to
their real sense and meaning he pays but little attention.
After studying the white man from my earliest rec¬
ollections to the present, I find that he is not disposed
to deal with realities; not with facts as they are, but
fancies and fictions, fables and myths. And ais I go
back in history I find this quality an innate prin¬
ciple with him, whether he has studied as an Aryan, a
Greek, a Roman, or Anglo-Saxon or American ; the
same thing is found to be true of him. So it need not
seem strange to us that he misuses and abuses the term
"social equality," for history shows that his whole life
or existence has been an irascible, competitive one; not
civil in its early stages, but barbarous and degraded;
and from that on up through several intermediate steps
to a hyper-semi-civilizatiQn which in turn becomes
nothing more nor less than a refined barbarism; and
the principle with him is not to co-operate and as-
(197)
198
THE NATIONS
sociate, but compete on the principle of the "survival
of the fittest," regardless of what becomes of his iel-
low and brother. So I say we need not think his pres¬
ent course strange, for it is just like him in all the
ages of his existence.
In order to show how the white man deals with
fancies and not with facts, take the words "social equal¬
ity" for example. What is "social equality" and what
does the white man mean when he cries out, "No social
equality!" Is he sincere or is he only gambling with
words and terms ? For it simply means to be .civil and
civilized. Does the white man think that he is not
civilized, and therefore not prepared for civil inter¬
course with colored men?
Here is Worcester's definition of "social:"
"i. Relating to general or public interests; relating
to society."
"2. Inclined to associate or have converse with
others."
Worcester also says under synonym to "social:"
"Those who are formed for society are social." Does
not the white man know that the colored man in this
country largely constitutes the social compact or the
society which constitutes the organic whole? And does
not the white man know that he is talking folly, ac¬
cording to Worcester's definition of the word "social,"
when he stands on a public platform and introduces a
colored man as speaker of the occasion, and then gets
up himself and says the idea of social equality is not to
be thought of, much less'practiced ? What is the white
man doing every day but practicing social equality with
the colored man, for social or society intercourse is all
there is of it. Now, in order that this may be seen to
be true, let us see the word "equality." Worcester un¬
der the second head of his definition, says this •
"The same degree of dignity or claims, as the equal¬
ity of men in the scale of being; the equality of rights "
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 199
Now the white man has declared in that instrument
by which he says he is governed, that "all men are cre¬
ated equalhence his own declaration that colore<l
men are his equals in being, and it is fundamental, too,
he says, and not conventional, for he says he is created
equal. He also says in that same "Declaration," that
the colored man has the same endowments as the white
man, for he says in the "Declaration of Independence,"
"all men"—not all white men, but all men. And he
says the Creator has given them endowment, and that
the endowment consists of certain inalienable rights.
Now, I think I have shown clearly by Worcester and
the "Declaration of Independence" that the white man's
own standards declare us to be his social equal. And
when colored men say, "We do not want social equal¬
ity," they are saying, "We do not want the common,
daily intercourse with the white man, and tjhey are
therefore saying that we do not want a thing that it is
impossible to avoid, unless we go somewhere in this
country and form a separate community, where we will
have no communication with the whites; or unless they
mean that we want to live in a competitive, hostile and
uncivilized attitude toward them; and this I am sure
they do not mean, so I hope they will tell us what they
do mean, or-quit using the expression that-"we do not
want social equality," for social equality is ours by cre¬
ation, and the white man himself has said so. So, as
I have first shown, we are the white man's social equal,
because he is a convivial creature, and so are we.
Now, if we mean we do not want family or home
intercourse with the whites, let us say so, for we have
no need to want that; we have homes of our own that
are just as pure and sacred as theirs, and just as or¬
derly and well managed. What is there about the
white man or the manner and way he has governed his
home, that makes it such a model of perfection that we
shall pine and crave after it; and why should we so de¬
port .ourselves as to make him feel that the greatest ob-
200
THE NATIONS
ject of our lives is to get access to that abode of his, by
way of intermixture and intermarriage? There is no
kind of reason for it, and neither do we want it; for
it is only here and there that the foolish predilections
of the colored man goes out after a white woman as a
companion and wife, or as a partner in life's battles,
for to the colored man life is real and practical, and
not sham, froth, pretense: and colored men know this,
and so do colored women, for all of their education and
training have been along that line. But on the con¬
trary, the white woman has been, and is still being
taught that she is simply to be considered a thing of
beauty to her husband, and not of help at all; but sim¬
ply a kind of toy fixture to the house, a thing to be
looked at only and admired. Not so with a cc/ored
woman; she looks at life as it is, and knows it. reali¬
ties ; and when she enters wedlock as partner for life
with her husband, she considers that all the cares and
burdens that are his are hers also, to be borne equally
by them; and so is a real support and a real comfort
and comforter to him,-which the colored man knows
the white woman will not be, and cannot be, because
her whole life's training, as I have said, has unfitted
her for it.
And, again, we know the home life of the white man;
in many cases we have the entire management of his
affairs from garret to cellar; not only so, but we know
his inner and outer life in his home; and in many cases
we could tell a tale that would make the very hair on
the white man's head stand on end; but we do not do it,
because we do not think it a kind thing to do to thus
expose his weakness. But if he only knew how often
we sit down and laugh over his shams and pretenses in
home, church and State, he would not be half so quick
to jump up in public meetings and through the public
press, and otherwise, and draw contrasts as to the great
sacredness and purity of his home and family, and the
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 201
degradation and impurity of ours. As a proof that the
white man's home is not nearly so sacred and dear to
him as he would have the world believe, one has only
to turn to the records of court trials and follow up
the awful testimony given in the many divorce cases
perpetually occurring there. And this state of affairs
is not onlv found to be true in what the white m'an is
pleased to call the lower strata of life; in many cases
the higher up in life the more frequent the occurrence.
Then, again, there is another thing we know about the
white man and his home life, and that is, the world over
he has two standards of morality; and in the southern
part of this country he has three. In the North and
other parts of the world he has one standard for the
woman and another for the man; he demands that the
woman be virtuous and pure, while the man can do
about as he pleases as to the same. But in the southern
part of this country the standards are three—one for the
women, another for the men, and another for the col¬
ored people; and I might add, they have one standard
of theory and another of practice. How, then, can the
white man's home life be a model guide for us as a
race, with double, triple and quadruple standards of
morality ? What- of good do they set up for us to fol¬
low? And yet there is a class—but I am thankful to
say, a very small class—who are now down on their
"social" knees at the white man's "social" door, with
his quadruple standards, begging and fawning for ad¬
mission, while the white mian is spitting in their faces
and telling them to go to their own people, which this
class is loath to do because of the purblind idea that
there is something peculiarly good, great and grand in
the white man's "social circle." that can be found no¬
where else. In order to show that this is a false impres¬
sion, I a note from current issues of the daily papers
what white men and women themselves are bound to
admit. Thev are the words of members of the Ameri¬
can Purity Congress, which is now in session in Balti-
202
THE NATIONS
more. The president said: "They discriminate against
girlhood in favor of impure men," thus speaking of the
laws of the cities and States of the country. Another
speaker said the law of legalizing had never checked
vice, but had rather protected and spread it. The sys¬
tem shields the men and guards them from discovery."
Is this not proof of a double standard of morality?
Then thus began Mrs. Leavitt, another speaker:
"It is the wine and undress of young women at balls
which excites the young men, and they rush from the
ballroom to the brothel to satisfy their passion.
"Now, when we come to think of it, does it not seem
horrible when we contemplate that in this countrv there
are regularly organized companies that deal in human
flesh? They procure young girls to lead lives of
shame."
And still another speaker in reading a paper entitled,
"The Traffic in Girlhood," asserted that of the 230,000
erring girls in the country, over half had been snared
and bought and sold into their lives of shame. "Their
average life is. five years," she added. "Forty-six
thousand are carted out to the potter's field every year.
Over a hundred American homes have to be desolated
every day to recruit the ranks of shame." This state
of affairs is not something new, or something that has
just.begun; but it has existed among the whites for
generations. But they have simply winked at it, and
habitually set themselves up as the models and ex¬
amples of human society, regardless of their unfitness
as a model.
The fact is, they have just now been aroused to a
sense of their danger; but I am much afraid that they
like their sister, Rome, have deferred the matter too
long for hope of remedy. Hear what Rev. F. W.
Farrar has to say on this subject:
"Family life among the Romans had once been a
sacred thing, and for 520 years, divorce had been un-
from a new point of view. 203
known among them. Under the Empire marriap-e had
come to be regarded with disfavor and disdain. Wom¬
en, as Seneca says, 'married in order to be divorced,
and were divorced in order to marry; and noble Ro¬
man matrons counted the years not by the consuls, but
by their discarded or divorced husbands.'* * * * *
"Literature and art were infected with the prevalent
degradation. Poetry sank in great measure into exag¬
gerated satire, hollow declamation, or frivolous epi¬
grams. Art was partly corrupted by the fondness for
glare, expensiveness, and size, and partly sank into
miserable triviality, or immoral prettiness, such as
those which decorated the walls of Pompeii in the first
century. * * * * *
"Two phrases sum up the characteristics of Roman
civilization in the days of the Empire—heartless cruelty
and unfathomable corruption. If there had been a
refuge anywhere for the sentiments of outraged virtue
and outraged humanity, we might have hoped to find it
in the Senate, the members of which were heirs of so
many noble and austere traditions. But even in the
days of Tiberius the Senate, as Tacitus tells us, had
rushed headlong into the most servile flattery, and this
would not have been possible if its members had not
been tainted by the prevalent deterioration. *****
■ "A dark spirit was walking in the house of the Cae¬
sars,—a spirit of lust and blood which destroyed every
family in succession with which they had allied." *****
Now, I have this to sav in closing this article: that
v/hen a people descends so low in the scale of moral
being, to find it not an unusual thing for women to
appear as they have been doing in what is known as
living pictures "for public exhibition as an entertain¬
ment of depraved men and women, I think that the
time has come when that race should cease to set them¬
selves up as a standard for the colored race. I also
think that every member of the white race, ought to
204
THE NATIONS
cover their face with shame whenever the words^ "no
social equality with Negroes is to be thought of" are
used. For example of what I have just spoken you
have only to turn to the cities of Chicago, New York
and others.
So the time has come for me to advise my people to
shun the white man's so-called "social circle," and to
be very careful how he copies the example of his so-
called model homes of education and refinement, for in
manv of them there is education, but where is the re¬
finement? Echo answers, "Where?"
Yes, I say, be carefulfor there is no vice under
Heaven that the white man is not heir to, and a prac-
ticer of; and that, too, by the so-called cultured and re¬
fined of that race; so I again warn my race to be
careful how they follow their examples. Only think of
the following state of affairs as they exist here in Balti¬
more. Thev are the words of a white man, as to the
state of civil society here. Now, as there is an insepa¬
rable relationship between civil and social life, or the
home and the state, it can easily be judged by the fol¬
lowing clipping, what the real family life must be. He
calls it a "traffic in immorality," yes, and it is a system¬
atic traffic, too, for they are called up, and fined as it
seems once a year, and this answers as a license for
one year:
"The traffic in immorality in this city, is sickening
to an honest man, and yet the law is as plain as the
Bible. Those people, I learn are indicted once a year,
and this practice acts as a system of license. Yet, we
Christian people allow it to continue!"
The above clipping refers to disorderly houses.
Again I ask, in all earnestness and sincerity: Is the
white man a fit example for us to follow, in Church,
or State, social or civil life.
There is another thing to which I would like to call
especial attention, while we are dealing with this moral
from a new point of view. 205
and social-fitness question, and that is, in addition to
the white man's two, three, yes four-fold standards of
morality, he has, beside that, a division of the
moral status of the individual. That is to say, they
have laid down the proposition as to principle, and act
upon it, that a white man may be purely corrupt in
morals, when it relates to chastity and uniting home
life, but may be perfectly honest and upright in busi¬
ness matters and political life. Just think of the idea,
will you? How corrupting! How demoralizing and
debasing such a proposition and such a sentiment! It
is, nevertheless, true of the white man all over the
country.
This idea of a dividing the moral status or standing
of men, and making them out to be true and faithful
in one thing and dishonest in another, was according to
the best of my knowledge openly declared for the first
time in this country during the campaign of 1884, when
the charge of gross immorality was brought against the
Democratic candidate for President. It was then and
there declared, that while he was considered and con¬
ceded to be corrupt in morals, he was pure in politics,
and honest in business. But that is a thing I cannot
conceive of; for to me, when a man is corrupt in
morals, he is corrupt in everything; for the moral life
runs through everything with which a man has to do.
Now, what was the result of this position taken by the
white man? Why, it is, that no candidate is now asked
about his chastity of life; nor has the question been
raised in the case of any candidate for any office what¬
ever, to- my knowledge, from that day to this. No, it
is no longer a question in the white man's campaign.
Thus has morality and virtue been completely elimi¬
nated from politics and business. So here may be found
one of the main causes of the many great and growing
evils that are now springing up in our land and country.
Not only so, but this startling statement was made
206
THE NATIONS
while the above mentioned campaign was going on:
that "if all the voters in the State of New York who
were at that time guilty o>f violating the fourteenth
commandment of the Bible, were to vote for the candi¬
date, against whom the charges were brought, he
would be elected by over two hundred thousand ma¬
jority;" and he was elected by an overwhelming vote.
This statement was made by no less person than the late
Rev. Henry Ward Beecher; and no one to my knowl¬
edge, has called the assertion in question, nor contra¬
dicted it, in an)' way whatever.
But let me ask in all earnestness, is there anything in
the whole catalogue of crimes, in which the white race
is not adept? If there is, what is it? If you want to
get a true insight into some of the things it is capable
of, just read the following. It is published in the
Baltimore American of February 29, 1896:
"San Francisco, February 28.—The Rev. Dr. Brown,
after two months silence, has given his defense to the
public. The story is the most startling which has yet
been told in the scandal. It was related as a confession
of the ecclesiastical court last night, by Miss Martha
Overman, who is the first in the sensational case to
confess herself a blackmailer. Miss Overman's manner
was striking. She spoke so quietly that even the mem¬
bers of the council were forced to draw forward until
their chairs formed a small semi-circle on the platform.
The woman spoke deliberately, weaving a remarkable
story, logically and clearly. She confessed that she
was a blackmailer, and tried to be a thief, and she gave
the information with a smile. She confessed that she
plotted the destruction of the man whose hospitality
she now enjoys. She declared that to save herself from
work and the possible hardships of poverty, she con¬
spired with Mrs. Mary A. Davidson to ruin the char¬
acter of the Rev. Dr. Brown and to blacken her own.
She asserted that she approached the representatives
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 207
of a morning paper with a hope of tempting them to
blackmail the accused pastor. She drew her recital
to dramatic climax by asserting, with the smile that
never left her face, that she wrote the letters which
picture her own moral and physical ruin and placed the
cause of her deep distress at the door of the Rev. Dr.
Brown. Asserting all this, she denied that there had
ever been the slightest impropriety in her relations
with the man against whom she plotted so shrewdly."
The reader will see that further comment is unneces¬
sary.
CHAPTER X.
THE WHITE MAN CARRIED BACK TO HIS BEGINNINGS.
Take the white man back, first, to his origin as a
people. This is a matter of vital importance both to
us, as a race and also to the white man, because it will
serve as a looking-glass to the white man, in which
he can see the "rock" from whence he was "hewn,"
and the "hole of the pit whence he was digged," and
thus enable him to see that he was not always what
he is to-day; and that he is not to-day all he ought to
be. It will also give us a chance to see that the white
man's beginnings were not what his every-day proud
and haughty actions would have the world of man¬
kind believe they were. The fact of it is, when we
take the white man back, we find that he does not
know what is the origin of his race, as a people; nei¬
ther does he know the origin of his color, or in other
words, he does not know when or how he came to be
a race or nation of people—that is, I mean to say,
that the white man cannot trace the present white peo¬
ple of to-day to any connection whatever with Noah
and his descendants. I know he claims his connection
with Japheth, the third or youngest son of Noah; but
history fails to trace him there—fails to show that any
one of Japheth's descendants ever reached Europe.
But, you say, does not history show that the white
man is in Europe? Yes, but history does not show
that the white man that is in Europe or any other
part of the world is the son or descendant of Japheth.
What history does show is that Noah had three sons,
and one of them was named Japheth. But history
(208)
THE NATIONS.
209
does not show whatever became of him; neither does
it show that he was white; so, in order to show that
the present white races are the descendants of Japheth,
the son of Noah, they must first show that Japheth and
his descendants were white, which they cannot do. The
most they can do by history is to show that there is
a very small handful of people in the world who are
known as white people; but as to how they got into
the world, and where they began to exist as a race or
natiou, and when and how they got their color,.history
is absolutely silent.
We are now beginning to hunt for the links by
which the attempt is made to hook the white man on to
Japheth as his ancestor. Geikie, in his "Hours with the
Bible," page 181, says, "Gomer, the son of Japheth,
was the same as the Cimbrians r of antiquity, or the
Cimbri of the Roman times." But Cyclopaedia Bri-
tannica on the same subject, uses these words which
completely upset Geikie's statement: ''Cimbri or Cim¬
brians, an ancient nation of unknown affinity, which
was one of the most formidable enemies of the Roman
power, and has proved one of the most difficult sub¬
jects for the historical investigator."
Cyclopaedia Britannica says: "The Cimbrians are of
unknown affinity," so we see they do not show any re¬
lationship with Japheth. But in order that it may be
seen to what straits the historian is put in hunting
material or real evidence that Japheth and the Cimbri
or Cimbrians, Greeks and Romans, and the present
white races of the earth are one and the same people,
I will here insert a paragraph from the writings of one
of them:
Dr. Geikie, in his book, "Hours with the Bible," in
speaking of the distribution and settlement of the vari¬
ous tribes of the Eastern Country, as to what parts of
the globe they went after the Flood, says, "The distri¬
bution of the'Various nations and tribes to the respec-
14
210
THE NATIONS
tive sons of Noah, has been thought by some to be
based on the three great distinctions of color, Shem be¬
ing assumed to stand for the red or brown races; Ham
for the dark or black races, and Japheth for the fair
or white. Others, however, regard the list as drawn
up in reference to the geographical positions of the dif¬
ferent nations or tribes. But it is certain that mere
geographical relations do not explain all the character¬
istics of the list, for while the classification by distinct
origin may not in every instance be capable of proof, it
is indisputable in the case of many." And speaking fur¬
ther, he says: "Beginning with Japheth, the Bible
opens with the name of Gomer, the Cimbrians of an¬
tiquity their original seat in the farthest north
known to the Hebrews or Greeks, is alluded to in the
'Odyssey.' "
Here we see again to what straits the white man
is put in order to make out a historical descent from
Japheth, the son of Noah. Geikie here makes a leap
from Gomer to Homer, and from the Bible to the
"Odyssey." He is, indeed, in a close corner. From
Gomer's day (see Gen. chapter 10) to Homer's day is
1,497 years. The Bible chronology of Gomer is that
his day was 2,347 years B. C. Herodotus says Homer
lived about 850 B. C. Thus is seen the difference in
date as shown above. Rev. Geikie, D. D., where was
Japheth or his son Gomer, or any of Japheth's de¬
scendants all those 1,497 years? What were they do¬
ing? What mark did they leave behind them, either
above or under ground, to show that they ever lived
and acted a part of life's history? What town did they
lay out ? What city did Japheth, Gomer and their de¬
scendants build! What kingdom did they establish?
What monuments did they erect to perpetuate their
names on the earth during that 1,497 years—that is,
from 2347 B. C. to 850 B. C. I answer that it is a
total blank.
from a new point of view. 211
Yes, I repeat that here is a period of 1,997 years
that Dr. Geikie says not a word about, but just jumps
to the conclusion that Homer, in one stanza of his
poem, the Odyssey, must refer to Japheth and his de¬
scendants. Let me here insert the lines of Homer, and
I will leave you to decide how much proof there is in
them that he refers to Japheth or how far those liv.cs
go to prove that the Greeks, the Romans or that the
whites of to-day are the offspring's of Japheth:
"The shores of deep Oceanus:
Of the Cimmerian men the race and town
Were there, in mist and cloud enwrapped; the sun
Never looks down upon them with its rays;
Nor when it marches up the starry skies,
Nor when from heaven it turns again to earth,
But over wretched men sad night is spread."
Oh! what a dark and dismal picture to be drawn of
any people! Could it be worse? But what proof is
there in these lines that Homer here refers to> Japheth
or any of his descendants ? There is nothing said about
Japheth nor Gomer. But he speaks of the Cimme¬
rians, who, Dr. Geike, nor does any other writer prove
that the Cimmerians or Cimbrains, were Japhethites;
but they simply assert that it must be so. Why must
it be so? Because the white man needs it to
prove that he did descend from a known race of
people? This is all the reason I can' see why it
must be so. The "must be" certainly does not rest on
historical data, but it rests on the white man's simple
desire for something as proof of his common origin
with that of the rest of mankind. But I repeat, that
when we take him back to hunt for it, he gets com¬
pletely lost. And the day is gone by, and gone for¬
ever, when the white man's simple, bold and ground¬
less assertions can stand for historical facts and data.
Now, inasmuch as there are no traces of Japheth and
his descendants left in "history, then let us reason
212
THE NATIONS
awhile as to what may have become of him and his
posterity.
He might have been driven by the Hamites,. who
had charge of the whole.country of Babylonia, up into
the cold, barren north region, and there starved and
frozen to death; or he might have been drowned in
trying to cross the Euphrates; or he might have staid
about Babel and been absorbed by the great Ham-
itic family of eighteen nations (and Gomer only oro-
duced seven) ; so it would be a very small matter for
eighteen nations to absorb seven. But be that as it
may, it is a fact that the few passages found in the
book of Genesis is all the history that k known of Ja-
pheth.
Yes, take the white man back, and as you walk,
ask him from which of the three sons of Noah did
he spring, and he cannot tell you, for he cannot tell
you what color Japheth was. Knobel says the wor-1
"Japheth" is derived from "Yaphah, to be beautiful,"
so he makes beautiful and white to mean the same
thing. The same writer says: "Shem means a name of
renown, and that Ham means "hot." But think of the
idea of making white and beautiful mean the same!
And Dr. Geikie says Knobel makes the word "beauti¬
ful" mean "white," because that is thought to be the
most beautiful color. "Thought to be," mind you!
Not resting on any tangible or scientific proof, but sim¬
ply on Knobel's thought of the matter. And why does
he think white the most beautiful color? Because
Knobel himself is of the color which is called white.
But, are all things that are beautiful for that reason,
white? for I have seen many "beautiful" black horses
and other animals. Are those black animals also
white? According to the argument of Knobel they
are. because they are beautiful, for he says "beautiful"
and "white" are one and the same thing.
I repeat that the white man of to-day cannot tell
when his race began to be known as the white race, or
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 213
how it came about that they are so known; neither does
he know when the first white people began to exist in
the world.
Secondly, take the white man back to his Greek
origin and growth, and what do we find? We will see:
We have already taken him back to the very fountain
head of the human family, and asked him to iden¬
tify himself with it, and to show his connection with
them. We do not mean that we have asked him to
show that he is a human' being, and that he, as such,
has a common origin with mankind; but that he show
that he ever existed in the family of Noah as "the
white man,'' or a "white race," and as the "white peo¬
ple," or, as Noah's "white" children, and they have
completely failed. So, we want to see what he can
show as to his Greek origin. What does history say
about it? Yes, take the white man back to his begin¬
ning, and you will find that he is everywhere a very
much mixed up creature, for he does not know his
origin in any of these different branches, although he,
in his high-strung pride, tries hard to point to a very
splendid and magnificent beginning, but it is all in his
mind, and not in facts; nor is it on paper, parchments,
monuments or documents of any kind. So, when the
white man talks about what his racial ancestors were in
their greatness and grandeur, he is simply talking in
the air; for the fact is, that in no case, positively in no
case, did any of them have either greatness or gran¬
deur in their beginnings, but on the contrary, they were
in every case the most humble and degrading imag¬
inable, for the Greeks, with whom we are now dealing,
struggled into existence, it is not known how, where
nor when, for their early history, such as it was, begins
with Homer. So, of him, and also of them and their
historv. we will now have something to say, for that is
one object, in taking him back, that we give him a
chance to defend himself as a Greek.
214
THE NATIONS
Now we ask, What is Greek history, as made by
Homer, the first Greek historian? Was Homer a com¬
petent historian ? for it will be remembered that he was
a blind poet only; and is a blind man competent to
write history? Could he have seen the incidents of
which he wrote? And if he did not see them himself
—which he could not do if he were blind—he then had
to write what was told him, and hence his history was
but tradition. But suppose Homer could see, then
could his words be proper or real history? for it will
be remembered that both the Iliad and Odyssey were
poetry, and poetry cannot be true history, because po¬
etry is the production of the mind; that is, it is the
work of the imagination, whereas history, real history,
is a simple record of facts, and nothing but facts. Po¬
etry—I do not mean revealed, or divine poetry, such as
the Bible contains, but purely human productions—is
never the record of facts, but a record of the poet's
thoughts. But, vou may say that poetry may have facts
for its basis. Yes, it may, or it may not; but simply to
have the basis of facts can never be true history, for
true history is a record of the facts themselves.
Then, again, if Homer lived at the reputed time of
the siege and destruction of Troy, he lived before writ¬
ing was known among the Greeks. So he could not
have committed the Iliad and Odyssey to writing; and
if he did not commit them to writing, they could not
constitute history, for history is, ^according to popular
definition, a record of past events, and a written re¬
cord, too, mind you. Now, how could Homer's ballad
songs be history, when he did not write them down?
Herodotus, who is called the "Father of History," says
Homer did not live until about 850 B. C., but the fortn-
er date of birth and life is given to him—that is, the
eleventh century before Christ. So, accordingly,
Homer did not live to sing the history of Greece un¬
til 250 years after the things about which he sung had
from a new point of view. 215
happened; and so, if he hajd not been blind it threw
him too far away from the scenes of action to make
it trustworthy history. The truth of it is, the so-
called Greek History, which is said to have been sung
by Homer, was nothing- more nor less than a number
of love songs which the old blind Greek ballad singer
is said .to have sung while wandering, homeless and
friendless, over the hills and dales of Greece.
But after granting that the conception of the Iliad
and Odyssey are of themselves the work of a genius,
then, what about the subject matter of which they are
composed? Is there anything honorable in them?
They cannot set forth the real greatness of a nation in
battle, because they are pure fables from beginning to
end. But even if they had ever been proven to have
been founded on facts—which they have not—the fact
would still remain, that the whole work is poetry from
beginning to end; and so, if there was a fact underly¬
ing it, it would still be true that the whole structure
would be only imagination, which is an image in the
mind, or a fancy, or a plot.
Now, let us see what was the image and plot that
was in Homer's mind. Was there ever such treachery
and treason, such malice and hatred, s-uch sensual and
immoral scenes presented to the mind of any human
being? for it is only the merest bits of it, compara¬
tively, that is fit to reach the eye of man. The simple
truth is, that the whole affair is a disgrace to be set
to the account of any people.
Let us now look at the plot: What is it? It is a
device to. have an eloping woman returned to her in¬
furiated and enraged husband. It seems that Paris,the
son of the King of Troy—wherever that was—took
it into his head that he was tired of living a single life,
and so, set out from his country to find a bride for him¬
self; and it seems when he found himself, he was in
the country of Greece. And it also seems that the only
216
THE NATIONS
woman in all Greece, who could please his fastidious,
princely fancy, was the wife of the King of Greece.
She was all ready to go with him; so on back to the
city of Troy they went, and he landed his bride (an¬
other man's wife) within the walls of his city, In
order to avenge this insult, and bring back the runaway
wife, Helen, war is declared, an army is raised, and
Troy is besieged ten years—all for the sake of getting
a woman who left her husband and went off with an¬
other man!
But did they get her? Oh, yes! pray let us see; for
the city of Troy was surrounded with high, broad and
mighty walls. Did the Grecians succeed in scaling
them? No. Well, did they batter them down? No.
How, then, did they capture the runaway wife? Oh,
it was by the display of a piece of profound wisdom,
for which the Greek character is so very noted. Listen,
will you! Here it is: The Greeks were all disheart¬
ened, and had given up and were going home, when
Mars, their war-god, came to the rescue, and told them
to make a wooden horse, and hide five of their braves
in it and leave it near the walls of the city and with¬
draw, as though they had gone home. And the god
told them the Trojans would come out and carry this
wonderful sight inside the walls; and so it is said they
did. Then in the night, when all were sound asleep,
these brave and mighty Greeks stepped out of the horse
and opened the gates of Troy; and one of the men ran
after the Greeks and told them of the great achieve¬
ment. The Greeks returned, entered, and slew nearly
all of the inhabitants, and burned up the city. Just
think of that for the white man's history and history
making! Why, it is not a whit better than the most
trashy dime novel of to-day! But think of the cause
of the war! the blood Homer makes his characters
shed! the vast amount of treasure spent! Away from
their homes for ten years, and everything gone to
from a new point of view. 217
wreck and ruin! Besides, all the immorality that is
mixed up in it, is enough to make a body turn away
with horror, disgust, and disdain. Not only so, but
from the reputed siege of Troy, until the country went
down, it was at no time any better.
I do not think I can do better than to insert here
what Joseph E. Worcester, LL. D., the author of
the dictionary which bears his name, has to say of the
History of Greece. This is what he says:
"The history of Greece may be distinguished into
two general divisions * * * * * The first period, accord¬
ing to the most generally received chronology, reck¬
oning from the foundation of Sicyon, the most ancient
kingdom of Greece,* comprises the space of about
1600 years. This long succession of ages is involved
in obscurity and fable. There are no records relating
to it that really deserve the name of history; and the
accounts which have been given of its events were
drawn up bv writers who lived long after the transac¬
tions of which they treat, and who possessed few ma¬
terials for authentic history.
"This period may be distinguished into' four sub¬
divisions, which are marked by some peculiar histor¬
ical features: The first reaching from the earliest ac¬
counts of Greece to the Trojan war, B. C. 1184, a peri¬
od, which may be termed, by way of eminence, the fab¬
ulous age; the second extending from the earliest ac¬
tion. against Troy to the death of Homer, a period
p-enerallv called the heroic age, of which the only
history is contained in the poems O'f the Iliad and
Odyssey * * * *"
We will also here insert for the white man's benefit
and information, what Belden, the author of "Belden's
Guide" gives as a reason the white man clings to this
Greek trash and rubbish for true history; yes, and in
spite of the fact that he admits that there is not one
* Others say Ar^u* is the oldest.
218
THE NATIONS
line of true history distinguishable on it from begin-,
ning to end. This is what Belden says:
"The early history of the Greeks, like that of most
other nations, is pure fable. But there is this differ¬
ence between their fabulous annals and those of other
countries, that they were made so beautiful and inter¬
esting by the genius and taste of the people as to be
read and enjoyed wherever they became known.
Hence, educated persons, hearing them, always accom¬
panied by literature of a high class, have been unwill¬
ing to disbelieve them; and hence, too, it has become
very difficult to say what part of the older history is
fable and what is true. Great efforts have been made
in examining such histories as that of the Trojan war,
to separate the truth from the falsehood, but all in
vain; because the only accounts we have of things
that may be true are intimately connected with those
which are known to> be impossible. Some late writers^
however, have adopted the practice of giving at full
length the early fabulous, or, as it is termed, mythical
history of Greece, without attempting to separate what
is true from what is false. They assign as their reason
for this, that the whole was implicitly received by the
Greeks when they were at the height of their intellec¬
tual greatness, and that it is of importance to preserve
what so refined, acute and industrious a people be¬
lieved, even though we, living in a later age, should
discredit it."
I will now call attention to what Worcester in his his¬
tory, and Belden in his "Guide," have to say of Greek
history. Worcester says: "The period of the war against
Troy, which lasted ten years, is called the heroic age."
"Is calledyes, and that is all there is of it: "called!"
And why called heroic ? Simply because the white
man wants to make it appear that he is the descendant
of a race of heroes,- when the fact is, he is in all cases,
and in all of his branches, a descendant of a race of
from a new point of view. 219
savages, and that of the lowest grade. In order to
prove this assertion true, one needs only to take him
back in each case to his beginning. The whole truth
is, every thing you touch in the white man's early
history is fictitious; yes, more; it is a fiction—a myth—
a nothing worth the time and attention of men; thut
is, if one is seeking the real true facts and deeds of
men, that he may have something real of the past, by
which to direct his future course; because, as I said
before, he does not know when he has got a real inci¬
dent, a real fact, a real man or set of men—whether
Ihey be described as acting on land or sea, at home
or abroad, in peace or in war, it is all a myth, a mock¬
ery, a shame, a farce. Nor can one with anything
like certainty place his finger on the real time or place
of the happening of the things said to have taken
place, bv the date given, for it is all guesswork, reck¬
oning and conjecture. Yet this is what the white man
has been and is forever quoting as the examples of the
past for our future guidance.
But just think of it! Belden says that this whole
fabric was implicitly received by the Greeks as true,
when they were at the very height of their intellectual
greatness! Now, if they were that ignorant and su¬
perstitious when at the height of their greatness, what
must have been the denseness of the ignorance further
back in the ages? I repeat, if you want to show the
white man that he was not always what he is to-day,
take him back.
Thirdly, take the white man back, and let him call
up some of his men of Greek and Roman times, and
ask them to give an account of themselves. We now,
for a while, examine the record, and see what the reply
will be. Where shall we begin, or with whom? Shall
we begin with Uranus. If so, what about him? for
he is one of the first who is said to have had a hand in
bringing light to the darkened and benighted Greeks.
220
THE NATIONS
Here are just a few of the different tales that are told
of him in books called "Histories of Greece." Yes, I
say, called Histories. These things are also contained
in other works which have reference to these.
The word Uranus, means "Sky," or "Heaven." He
was the oldest of the gods. According to others he
was an Egyptian prince, landed in Greece and became
father of a family called Titans; and these Titans were
all great and mighty giants. Then the writers make
all his sons rebel against their father and kill him, or
expel him from the country; and hundreds of other
like wonders are told of him. But his son Saturn, who
reigned in his stead, also had sons, and he did not in¬
tend to suffer the fate of his father, so he had all of
his boys killed as soon as they were born. His sons
were Jupiter, Neptune, Pluto, etc:
You must bear in mind that Saturn is represented to
be a man and reigning king over the Greeks, and at
the same time he is made to be a god of the Greeks.
At one and the same time he is a god and their king.
But there is another story told how he got rid of his
sons, to keep them from rebelling against him: He
just ate them up as soon as they were born. But his
wife Rhea got tired of that sort of thing and made
uo ber mind that she would put a stop to it. So
when other children were born, and he demanded
them, she would wrap up stones in rags, and give them
to him to eat instead of the children, and thus they
were saved alive. And it seems that this Greek hero
and god, for he was both, did not have sense enough
to know the difference between stones and rags and
that of flesh of his children. A wonderfully wise god
that! A wise king, too! and an heroic hero!
Now, let us see what became of this great man:
Whv. he was dethroned by Jupiter, one of the sons
Avhich he did not eat up, and he fled to Italy and was
kindly received by Janus, the king, who divided with
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIKW. 221
him his own royal power. You see, he has fled out of
his own country, Greece, and gone into Italy; or in
other words, he has left the Greeks and gone to live
among the Romans. And this same god-king, who
did not have sense enough to tell the difference be¬
tween children and stones when given him by his wife
to eat, is said to have taught the inhabitants of Italy
civilization, arts and sciences; and we may well judge
what kind of civilization one is prepared to give who
eats up his own children.
But that is not all. His reign over the Romans Is
said to have been so very prosperous, that it is called
the "Golden Age." He is represented as an old man
with a rod in his hand, and a serpent at the top of it
with its own tail in its mouth biting it; and this is said
to be an emblem of Eternity. But just how a serpent,
biting his tail, can be an emblem of Eternity, I cannot
tell. As I said, this was called the "Golden Age,"
and so he wore a golden crown, golden slippers, and
sat on a golden throne. This was truly a golden age!
When we come to speak of Jupiter, we get a vivid
illustration of what was meant when I said in the
study of the so-called Greek and Roman history one
does not know when he has anything like a real person,
or real thing—a real time, place or date. For differ¬
ent writers have so mixed these myths that it cannot
be told with certainty just what myth one is dealing
with, or about which a writer may be "writing, for
he runs the one into the other, and ascribes to him
deeds and acts that belong to another, and also to
other times and places than those given, and so one
is often made to think that a certain scene was enacted
in Rome, when the center of it is Greece. And this is
true in the case of Jupiter, and the same things are
true of the white man's history-making, and have been,
in all ages. Eor instance, Jupiter is represented in
Latin literature after such a manner as to make him
222
THE NATIONS
half a Greek and half a Roman god, and the writers
take the legends and stories told of him and make
them represent Roman incidents, when they are wholly
Greek. Oh, well, that is just like the white man's
wav of doing things. What he has not in reality, he
will make up in form, sham and pretense.
Now the stories about Jupiter did not originate with
him, but with Zeus, the principal Greek god, whose
name is sometimes made to mean "the sky," and at
other times "Heaven." He is at one time made to be
a great hero, conquering and subduing all things in
heaven and earth; and then he is the father of all the
gods; then the king of his country; then a great and
mighty giant; and then he becomes a great, big bull!
then a serpent, a little ant, etc. He induces his wife
to become a fly, or rather, to take the shape of one, and
then he swallowed her. A good way that, to get rid
of a bad wife, was it not?
And this mythical trash, is what Belden calls the
beautiful conception of the Greek mind; and says that
their ideas were highly intellectual and refined; that
intelligent and educated people of the present day re¬
fuse to give them up, though they know them to be
myths and nothing but myths. And thus, the white
man is allowed to perpetuate from generation to gen¬
eration what he- knows and admits to be a fraud on its
very face. And why is he thus permitted to do so?
Simply and only because it is the white man about
whom the myths treat. And yet, there is another
thing about this matter that is grave and vital to the
white man, and that is, if the fable and myth in his
history are left out, he will have absolutely no history
whatever for nearly or quite two thousand years of
his accredited existence.
Yes, take the white man back, and let him see him¬
self in his true light. I think it will cure him of many
of his overdrawn estimations of himself and race.
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 223
Let us call up Amphion, another great Greek per¬
sonage. He is the one whoi performed so skillfully
on his wonderful instrument, that he had power to
build a wall around the city of Thebes in Greece, by
the simple power and sweetness o>f the music produced
on his harp. The stones, it is said, shaped themselves
into proper form and size, and then placed themselves
one upon another in proper order on the wall until
it was finished, just by the playing of Amphion's
harp. This example gives an illustration of the Greek
musical talent.
And there is still another we would call on to an¬
swer for himself and his race, and that is Orpheus.
This is another wonderfully skilled artist. He is
brought down to us as a poet, musician and inventor.
He, we are told, played so very sweetly on his lyre
that all nature stood still to listen whenever he played.
Not only so, but when his wife died, he went down to
Hades and he so charmed the keeper of the lower
regions, that they let her out and she came back home
again.
But, from what the poets tell us, Orpheus himself
had bad hick in the end. It seemed that he attended
a feast of the god Bacchus, and by some means or
other offended three of the women at the feast, and
they got hold of him, and tore him into pieces. This
was, indeed, too bad a fate for so great a man!
We next notice Mercury. But he is too great a
Greek for mortal tongue to describe! He is repre¬
sented as flying through the air, and he has little wings
on his heels, and wings fastened to his cap, and a rod,
and two serpents in his hands—a royal and kingly out¬
fit, this!
I might continue these descriptions indefinitely, but
time and the purpose of the writing will not allow fur¬
ther protraction.
224
THE NATIONS
Fourthly, take the white man back, and what do we
find his relationship to have been to the state as a
man and citizen in the countries where he has lived?
Why it has been largely that of a slave and menial
up until these later years; and indeed, so true is this
of the white man that he may truthfully be said to
have been a race of slaves. And this we shall provs
from his own books and words. To begin with, I will
quote from the "History of the Working People," by
Hon. C. Osborne Ward, translator and librarian
United States Department of Labor. He says he is
here describing the Aryan or white race, and this is
what he says of the beginning of their enslavement
and bondage (see pp. 48 and 49) ; and this, he also
says, was the beginning of slavery in the world. Hear
it, please; I now quote him: "It appears, from all the
evidences, that the first form of Society was that of
Master and Slaves. The extreme lowliness of the la¬
boring man's condition at that remote period can easily
be imagined when we consider that all the children of
the aristocratic household, except the oldest son, born
of the real wife and legal mother, were totally unrec¬
ognized by law—all except this heir were originally
slaves. In fact, this was the origin of slavery."
The same writer (page 49) says the original Aryan,
or white working-man, was not even a citizen. He
further speaks as follows:
"The enormous growth of slavery just before the
beginning of the Christian' era was the cause of several
of the most gigantic and bloody uprisings the world has
ever known. Those convulsive episodes invariably
arose from maltreatment of workingmen and women.
Dr. Bucher, whose delineations we so often quote,•shows
that the necessary workmen for supplying slave mate¬
rial to man the great estates which the Roman lords
about this time were grasping from the original culti¬
vators who farmed the government lands or shares,
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 225
thus turning them out of house and home, were bought
and sold, as common goods at ridiculously low prices.
"In B.C. 103 there were at Rome scarcely 2,000 per¬
sons owning property considered taxable, such was the
ehormous monopoly of the public lands and of other
property by a few. These few property owners were pro¬
portionally richer, and their management of the army
and of the legislature for suppressing uprisings of the
outcasts and the enslaved proletaries was so much the
more unlimited. The freedmen, who had many or¬
ganizations for protection which for centuries they
had enjoyed when slaves were comparatively few,
now found their unions, their business, their homes
and freedom un'dermined and supplanted by countless
hordes of slaves as prisoners of war, victims of the
prodigious slave trade going on between Rome and
foreign markets. When Tarentum was captured,
B. C. 209 there were sold 30,000 war prisoners. In
B. C. 207, after the battle of Metaurus, 5,400 were
c-iptured and sold. In B. C. 200 at least 15,000 were
seized ?nd sold. In B. C. 137, the event of the return
of Tiberius Gnecchus from Sardinia, the fact that 80,-
000 men, women and children had been either killed
or sold into perpetual slavery, was brought to light.
Because Grrecchus, whose grand nature, though a
military commander, revolted against such atrocities
and sought reform, he was set upon by a mob of infu¬
riated legislators and wealth-owners and murdered in
the streets of Rome. Such was the enormous mass of
the Sardinian slaves that prices fell to a ridiculously
low ebb, becoming a laughing stock, and the proverb
got abroad, "Cheap as a Sardinian." After the siege
of Perseus there were 70 cities destroyed, and 150,000
peo^V s^ld a,t the different slave markets.
"This fearful condition of human slavery set into
Greece Still earlier. By a similar monopoly of land
and of othef property by the few, it came to pass that
15
226
THE NATIONS
in the great city of Athens, of 515,000 souls, only 9,-
000 (B. C. 300) could be allowed political rights
graded and franchised by family and property. Other
mention puts it at 21,000 souls or citizens. At the
same time, when there were 21,000 propertied or
blooded citizens and 10,000 strangers under protection
of the city, there were 400,000 slaves. But as Athens
at that time (B. C. 309) counted 515,000 persons, we
come into a knowledge of the fact that the remaining
84,000 were the plebian or freedmen population.
"The great city of Corinth, whose census, B. C. 300,
gave only 40,000 souls, had a slave population of 640,-
000, who, of course, according to Plato and other
aristocrats, could not possess souls, because too mean
to be honored by the gods with a thing so noble; and
this accounts for their not being enumerated in the
census of the city. They appear to have been too
lowly to belong to the numbers of mankind."
Have I not proven by the white man's own book and
word that his race has been a race of slaves? Read
the above over carefully and compare figures, and it
will be found that the greater portion of this race were
slaves of the most abject kind. As proof of this, wo
wijl quote what F. W. Farrar, D. D., has to say on the
subject. The following is it, and this was not at the
time of what is called the darker early days of Greek
and Roman life, but when Christ was born, and after:
"At the lowest extreme of the social scale were "mil¬
lions of slaves, without family, without religion, with¬
out possessions, who had no recognized rights, and to¬
ward whom none had any recognized duties, passing
normally from a childhood of degradation to a man¬
hood of hardship and an old age of unpitied neglect.
Only a little above the slaves stood the lower classes,
who formed t^e vast majority of the free-born inhabit¬
ants of the Roman empire. They were, for the most
part, 'beggars and idlers,, familiar with the grossest in-
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 227
dignities of an unscrupulous dependence. Despising a
life of honest industry, they asked only for bread and
the games of the circus, and were ready to support any
Government, even the most despotic, if it would supply
these needs. They spent their mornings in lounging
about the Forum, or in dancing attendance at the
levees of patrons, for a share in whose largesses they
daily struggled. They spent their afternoons and
evenings in gossiping at the Public Baths, in listlessly
enjoying the polluted plays of the theatre, or looking
with fierce thrills o>f delighted horror at the bloody
sports of the arena. At night they crept up to their
miserable garrets in the sixth and seventh stories of
the huge insnlae—the lodging houses of Rome—into
which, as into the low lodging houses of the poorer
quarters of London, there drifted all that was most
wretched and most vile. Their life, as it is described
for us by their contemporaries, was largely made up of
squalor, misery and vice."
CHAPTER XI.
SOME FACTS ABOUT ANCIENT GREECE.
The real facts about Ancient Greece are rarely ever
brought out so as to be seen in their true light This
is especially true with the school and other histories of
to-clay. The object of this sketch is to point them out
as they are, for Greece has a history which is both
real and fictitious. We have in another place dealt
with the fictitious; so here we want to deal with the
real.
The first fact is that there is a country on the East¬
ern Continent known to the rest of the world as Greece,
which has had and has now, as many other names as
there are colors in the rainbow.
Let us here insert a paragraph from Whelpley's
Compend of History, to which I want to call especial
attention. The paragraph is this:
"Before the arrival of Cecrops, Danaus, Cadmus,
and other adventurers in Greece, its inhabitants were
savage, barbarous and unconnected, living entirely in
a state of nature, without laws,civilization, or any forms
of social order. Bu,t those enterprising chiefs, coming
from more enlightened regions, and bringing with
them the rudiments of science, were able by policy or
arms to establish their authority among those rude
tribes and sivage clans. They collected them together,
built cities and founded many useful institutions, tend¬
ing to ameliorate their barbarous state."
In order that Whelpley's statement may be sup¬
ported as true, see Rollins' Ancient History: "The
Greeks."
(228)
THE NATIONS.
229
The second fact is that the first civilization the
Greeks knew or had was given to them by the descend¬
ants of Ham—yes, and that very son of Noah whom
the white man has written in all of his-histories was
so awfully cursed by his father that he was forever
doomed to slavery, degradation and shame.
Now let us see the first one to carry these darkened,
degraded and benighted Greeks the light of civiliza¬
tion. According to current history, it was Inachus,.
a Phoenician emigrant, who migrated out of Phoenicia
into Greece in 1856 (B. C.) and founded the kingdom
of Argos, the first and oldest kingdom of Greece. The
Phoenicians, it will be remembered, were Canaanites,
and the Canaanites the descendants of Ham. It will
also be remembered that the kingdom of Argos was
formed with the colony Inachus brought with him, and
not out of the Greeks whom he found there, for they
were totally barbarous and not fit material to form
anything—not even a simple, single family, much less
a kingdom. They must first be taught by precept and
example what was meant by family and family life.
In 1556 (B. C.) three hundred years after Inachus
came into Greece, Cecrops came with a colony from
Egypt, and built the city of Cecropia—naming it so,
in honor 6f himself. But the Greeks changed the
name to Athens, in honor of Athena., a goddess brought
by Cecrops from Egypt. The Egyptians were also
Hamites or the descendants of Ham.
In 1493 (B. C.) Cadmus, from Phoenicia, brought a
colony, built a city and called it Thebes. He is also
a Hamite, being a Phoenician* and the Phoenicians
were Hamites* as has already been said. Then came,
in 1520 B. C., Lelex, another Egyptian; he also
brought a colony and with it founded Laconia, which
is also known in history as Sparta and Lacedemonia.
Lelex was also a Hamite.
230
THE NATIONS
It is said that Corinth was also established by the
Phoenicians, so we have named seven of the principal
cities and countries of Greece, that were established by
the descendants of Ham, and thes.e were all in their
turn the earliest cities that Greece had, or in other
words, they were the foundation work of the civiliza¬
tion of Greece, and they were the descendants of Ham
who laid these foundations.
A third fact I note: We have been speaking of
Greece and the Greeks; but why call the country
Greece or the people Greeks? for both are very mis¬
leading. They leave the impression that the present
Greeks were a homogeneous people; whereas the fact
is, they were the most heterogeneous people known to
history, for they cannot be traced to any particular
race or stock under any circumstances whatever, and
far less under the name of Greeks than any one of the
many by which they were formerly known, for the
term Greeks is not ethnical, and so is not racial, or
does not etymologically mean a race—it is simply ar¬
bitrarily so used.
The inhabitants of the country of the present time
do not know it as Greece, but Hellas. The Romans
gave it the name of Greece, and this was not done un¬
til the time of Aristotle, B. C. 384. But the people of
the country had been known since 1856 B. C., which
was 1572 years before Aristotle's day, or before it took
the name of Greece.
A fourth fact to which I want to call attention is
that the seven Hamite colonies mentioned above, who
migrated into, the country, built cities, founded king¬
doms and civilized the people, also married and inter¬
married with the people of the land.
Fact Fifth: Were not the Egyptians and Phoeni¬
cians the first to inhabit Greece? This is a thought
that has often presented itself to my mind. What
violence would be done to historical truth if such a
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 231
proposition were made and maintained? None what¬
ever that I can see. Anyhow, the Egyptians and Phoe¬
nicians were so very early on the ground; the history
we get makes the inhabitants of such a low grade and
state that the Egyptians and Phoenicians may be said
to have settled the country, for they certainly did give
form and motion to their governments and spirit and
energy to the people. But I believe if the truth, the
whole truth, could be known, it would be found that
the Hamite was the first to settle even what is now
known as Greece. Do not get horrified now, but go
and look the question up. The view I take is that the
Hamites—that is, Egyptians and Phoenicians—first
settled the country, and the white tribes came in and
settled afterwards. Or it may be that the Egyptians
and Phoenicians who migrated into the country in af¬
ter yCars, developed into what is now known as
white races. I think this is far the most probable
way that Greece became inhabited by that race, for I
have shown conclusively that the idea of Japheth hav¬
ing done so is so impossible that I consider it out of
the question.
Then, again, nearly all writers agree that there were
other peoples in the country, who were not considered
of the Greek races, long before the days of Hellas or
the Ionians—the first inhabitants of the country of
Troy, for instance, in which the city oif Troy is said to
have been built.
To further sustain my opinion on this whole sub¬
ject, I will here insert a paragraph from "Biblia," a
monthly journal of Oriental Research, which shows
that even the Eleusis festivals were established in
Greece by the Egyptians; yes, established by them,
and not modeled only after them—all this Egyptian
bric-a-brac and jewelry mentioned in the quoted para¬
graph below. This discovery is just made in 1895.
This makes eight countries and cities established in
232
THE} NATIONS
Greece by the Egyptians and Phoenicians, with the
seven I have before mentioned. The following is the
paragraph from "Biblia
"The excavations that are being- carried out by the
Greek Archaeological Society on the site of Ancient
Eleusis, a few miles from Athens, have just yielded
some results of exceptional importance. In a very an¬
cient and well preserved tomb, there have been found,
in addition to the skeleton of a woman, a number of
articles, including earrings of fine gold, silver -and
bronze, several finger rings, sixty-eight small vases of
various shapes in terra cotta, two tripods, three Egyp¬
tian scarabees and a small statuette of the goddess.
Isis in porcelain. These discoveries leave no doubt of
the fact that the celebrated mysteries of Eleusis were
of Egyptian origin and were borrowed from the re¬
ligious rites of the ancient Egyptians. These impor¬
tant relics have been deposited in the National Mu¬
seum."
I repeat that the preceding paragraph shows that
the Egyptians established Eleusis, and not that the
Greeks borrowed religious rites and ceremonies frt>m
them.
Now in order to strengthen the view I have already
advanced, of the probability that the Egyptians
founded. Eleusis also, I will here quote from the Clas¬
sical Rez iew as follows:
"In attributing the origin of the Eleusian mysteries
to Egyptian sources, M. Foucart revives a theory more
fashionable at the time of Herodotus than at the pres¬
ent day. The conclusions at which he arrives are,
briefly, as follows: About the sixteenth or seventeenth
century B. C., colonists or fugitives from Egypt
brought the cult of Isis and Osiris to Argos and At¬
tica. The indigenous Pelasgi probably worshipped
the Earth, among- other natural objects, but only in a
rude and impersonal way. The Pelasgic Earth-god-
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 233
dess was absorbed by Isis, who w!as not only a
chthonic deity, but also the giver of agriculture and
civilization. As Osiris was closely associated with
Isis, the oldest form of the Eleusinian cult included a
god as well as a goddess; and in historic times this
god, who was at first known by the simple title of
Theos, continued to exist as Zeus Eubuleus, Pluto,
and Dionysus. Originally the worship of the Eleusin¬
ian Demeter was merely a form of the general wor¬
ship of Isis-Demeter or Demeter Thesmophoros, which
was adopted by all the Hellenic tribes before the Do¬
rian invasion. But before the eleventh century the
goddess Kore had been abstracted from the primitive
Demeter. Such was the development of the cult at
Eleusis down to the seventh century, at which period
the Greeks became better acquainted with Egypt, and
borrowed the doctrine of a future life, as taught in
the religion of Isis and Osiris. This idea of ai happy
state, reserved for the initiated after death was not
a natural outcome of the old worship of Demeter Kar-
pophoros and Thesmophoros, but was thus a laiter edi¬
tion to the original debt.
"M. Eoucart argues his case with all the learning
and all the lucidity that might be expected in the work
of so distinguished a scholar and archseologist. Yet,
as far as the early history of the Eleusinia is con¬
cerned, the theorv, in spite of M. Eoucart's brilliant
advocacy, is not likely to> win general approval, unless
it is supported bv more evidence than is at present
forthcoming: To begin with, the theory is unneces¬
sary, for no suDposition of Egyptian influence is re¬
quired to explain the presence of mysteries on Greek
soil. This is not the place to quote savage analogies
to the Eleusinia and Thesmophoria; it is sufficient to
remind the reader that such mysteries are world-wide,
and are the . product, not of a high civilization, like the
Egvptian, but of a very primitive stage of society.
234
THE NATIONS
The Eleusinia and Thesmophoria arose from, agrarian
ritual; and M. Foucart will hardly contend that agrk
culture in general was introduced into Greece by the
Egyptians. He states, it is true, that wheat and bar¬
ley were not indigenous in Greece, but were imported
from the region of the Euphrates; but it. may be
pointed out that the Euphrates is not the Nile, and
Demeter was something more than the mere giver of
wheat and barley. But the theory (as far as we can at
present judge) is not only unnecessary, but improba¬
ble. For it has yet to be proved that the Egyptians
had any direct intercourse with the Greeks on the main¬
land from the seventeenth to the thirteenth century
B. C., the period mentioned by M. Foucart as the date
of an Egyptian maritime supremacy in the islands of
the iEgean. It is known that these islands-were for
some time subjject to the Egyptians; but their empire
was probably Maintained through the agency of the
Phoenicians. Atad with regard to Greece proper, there
is no evidence \of any relations between the early
Greeks and the Egyptians, except through the medium
of Phoenician traders or colonists. This, view is held by
the most recent historians. M. Foucart asks why we
should reject the myth of Danaus when we accept the
myth of Cadmus as the embodiment of historical fact.
To this objection it may be replied that the- myth of
Cadmus would not be admitted as historical if the
Phoenician influence in Greece were not proved by
further evidence of a conclusive character. But as
such corroborative testimony is lacking in the case of
the Egyptians, we are not justified in reading actual
"history from an isolated myth. Or, if we are deter¬
mined to extract a historical kernel from the legend,,
we must be content to follow E. Meyer, who sees in it
a faded reminiscence of the Egyptian empire in the
Greek islands during;the fifteenth century.
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW.
235
"Very probably the author is right in reckoning
Egyptian influence as a force which, exerted itself upon
the later developments of the Eleusinian mysteries.
Whether this influence was direct or indirect, is a point
more difficult to decide. According to Lenormant and
other scholars, certain elements of the mysteries were
borrowed from Egypt, notably, the conception of Di¬
onysus Zagreus; but these elements were transmitted
through the medium of Orphism. M. Foucart, on the
other hand, disbelieves in the theory that the recon¬
struction of the Eleusinia was due to the Orphic sect.
"The Orphic doctrines were similar to the Eleusinian
because they were in both cases borrowed from Egyp¬
tian sources. Perhaps the most striking part of M.
Foucart's argument is his explanation of the secret
formulas spoken by the hierophant. In these mys¬
terious sayings he sees the Eleusinian counterpart of
the Book of the Dead. The only difference was that
while the Book of the Dead was buried with the
mummy, to guide the soul on its last journey, the
formulas spoken at Eleusis were (he believes) learnt
by heart, so that there was no need to commit them to
writing. The Orphics, on the other hand, closely fol¬
lowed the Egyptian practice. M. Foucart quotes the
interesting- series of Orphic inscriptions in Greek hex¬
ameters, from the tombs of Petelia, Thurii, and Eleu-
thera (Crete) in which the soul is directed on its way
'to the sacred meadows and groves of Persephone.' "
There is another fact to which I would call attention,
and that is, we often see in print and hear said that
the Helots of Greece were not in a real and true sense
slaves, or that the slavery of Greece was not absolute
bondage, such as existed in America. Now, for the
purpose of settling-that question beyond all doubt and
dispute, and to show that the colored people in this
country never at any time experienced more absolute
236
THE NATIONS
bondage than they, I will now quote Greek history on
the subject as follows:
"In Lacedsemon the slaves were the property of the
state, and were distributed with the land among the
free inhabitants of Laconia, nearly in the same manner
as transported convicts are portioned out among
the free settlers in some modern colonies.
"The Spartan slaves consisted of the descendants
of the original inhabitants of Laconia, and were called
Helots, from the name of a town, Helo>s, the inhabit¬
ants of which had made a very obstinate resistance to
the Dorian invaders of the Peloponnesus.
"To the Helots Lycurgus assigned the labors of
agriculture and the mechanical arts. They were re¬
quired to follow their masters in time of war, and
formed a numerous light-armed force in every Lace¬
daemonian army. They likewise officiated as domestic
servants and in every other menial capacity.
"Yet, although the Helots were the most truly use¬
ful members of the Spartan community, they were
treated by their haughty masters in the most cruel and
contumelious manner, and often put to death out of
mere whim or sport. They were obliged to appear in
a dress betokening their bondage, a bonnet of dog¬
skin ard a sheepskin vest. They were prohibited to
teach their children any accomplishments which might
equalize them with their lords.
"A Lacedaemonian might flog his slaves once a day,
merely to remind them that they were slaves. They
were sometimes compelled to drink till they were
drunk, and to perform extravagant and indecent
dances, for the purpose of showing the young Spar¬
tans the disgusting conditions to which men are re¬
duced by intoxicating liquors.
"The murder of a slave was not punishable by law,
and once a year it was customary for the young Spar-
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 237
tans to disperse themselves over the country in small
parties, and waylay and assassinate the stoutest and
best-looking Helots they could find, by way of exer¬
cising their prowess!"
CHAPTER XII.
the; white man a failure in government.
The white man is almost entirely sentimental in gov¬
ernment, and this causes irregularity, confusion, injus¬
tice, and, therefore, failure. He is not deliberate, nor
careful and painstaking, but hasty, rash and thought¬
less. So true is this of him that it seems he goes into
the halls of State and makes laws simply to have them
broken or overruled by the courts and construed to be
defective, unconstitutional or otherwise inappropriate
and out of order. This is the case not in one State
alone, but in every State of the Union and in every
county, district, township or city, and more especially
is it true pf the national government when operating in
congressional capacity. I repeat, that there is this
looseness of enactment to be found everywhere. Take
the white man in any stage of the. world in which he
has acted a part, and he will show up as a lawbreaker
and a disturber of the general peace. He is not dis¬
posed to be at peiace. He is never content nor satisfied.
He is everywhere in history creating a confusion a tur¬
moil, a rebellion. He is against law and order. He is,
as a race, cruel, heartless and bloodthirsty. With him it
is rule cr ruin. This is true of him whether in ancient,
middle or modern times, whether in Greek, Roman or
Anglo-Saxon mythology, or in real, historical acts—
he is seen in the same jight and plight.
Let me here insert a set of resolutions adopted at a
mass meeting held in Haverhill, Mass., October 28,
1895, to protest against lynching and other outrages
and lawlessness now going on in the South and other
parts of the countrv. I insert these resolutions to prove
(238) ' ^
THE NATIONS.
239
that the laws and constitution are not enforced nor
obeyed. The resolutions are in the following- words:
"Whereas, We believe that the prosperity and well-
being- of any country depend upon the treatment of its
subjects; and,
"Whereas, The constitution of these United States
gives to every American citizen civil and political rights
and a trial by a jury of his peers.; and,
"Whereas, We believe that man has been endowed by
the Almighty God with certain inalienable rights,
among them life, liberty and the pursuits of happiness;
and,
"Whereas, There are American citizens of African
descent who are denied the privileges guaranteed to
every American citizen without regard to race, color
or previous condition of servitude upon the pretext
that they have no rights which the white man is bound
to respect.
"We believe the negro to be a law-abiding citizen,
that he has never raised his hand to traduce or disinte¬
grate- the union formed by the fathers of this great re¬
public ; but, on the other hand, his blood has been
spilled in three wars for her preservation.
"We believe they are entitled to all the rights of citi¬
zenship, and the- man or set of men who deprives-men
of their constitutional rights are traitors to the cause
of good government.
'•'We believe, further,-that the South owes the negro
a. debt of-gratitude for his 250 years of unrequited toil.
"We believe, that with proper treatment, the South;
which- is the home of the negro, would reap a hundred¬
fold greater blessing than she has ever before wit¬
nessed } that prosperity would overflow her valleys
and crown her mountain- tops with greater rapidity
than ever before known.
"After 250 years of the most inhuman slavery the
world has ever known, when it was a crime to teach
the negro the arts of civilization, he has emerged from
240
THE NATIONS
this mcst degrading position and proven beyond a
reasonable doubt that he has brain and intellect capable
of the highest improvement.
"We believe, further, that God has created all men of
one flesh and blood to dwell upon the earth, and that
no one should be deprived of his God-given rights ;
therefore,
"Resolved, That civilization and progress is impeded
by mob law, and that, like others, it is contagious and
threatens the very foundation principles of this repub¬
lic;
"Resolved, That the frequent lynching of American
citizens in the South is an attack upon the free institu¬
tions for which loyal subjects have'bled and died;
"Resolved,' That these murderings surpass anything
in cold-blooded barbarity that has come down to us
from the dark ages of the world;
"Resolved, That we invoke the Christian- Church to
awake and use her God-given rights to stop these atro¬
cious cruelties that are rolling a tide of woe to our
doors that we cannot overlook;
"Resolved, That it is the sense of this meeting that
every church and pulpit owes it to God and humanity
to use every means in their power to stop these mid¬
night murderers and bring them to justice.
"Resolved, That while we believe in States' rights,
we also believe that the constitution and its amend¬
ments are sacred, and that no State has a paramount
right to violate that sacred instrument, and the State
that allows the flagrant abuse of that instrument is an
enemy to the common union of States;
"Resolved, That we request our representatives in
both bouses of Congress of these United States to in¬
troduce such resolves as will secure to eyery American
citizen, without regard to race, color t»r previous con¬
dition of servitude, equal civil and political rights;
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 241
"Resolved, That we request all papers to publish
these resolutions that the world may know that we be¬
lieve in the rights of man."
These facts lead one to ask the question, Is the white
man capable of independent self-government, or what
is known as popular government, or government by
the people? Are the rights of the people safe in the
white man's hands ? These questions may be better
answered by asking another: Has he, in any stage of
the world's history in which he has had control, proved
that he could give the people that rest, that happiness,
that peace of body and mind so much desired, longed
for and sought after by every civilized community ? If
he ever has, in what age of the world did it happen?
Certainly not in the time of the so-called Greek and
Roman republics and Anglo-Saxon States or town¬
ships, for in all of these there was little more than the
"idea and form." But after that, the populist idea, as
in everv case in the past and present, was soon lost
sight of, and the community has in each and every in¬
stance, without a single exception, given up and given
away its rights, privileges and immunities as a com¬
munity and commonwealth, and has settled down into
an aristocracy or an oligarchy, which means the few
and not the people; it means the nobility, the gentry,
and, finally, into anarchy, which means confused gov¬
ernment, or without order in government, and an an¬
archist is one who attempts to introduce disorder or
confusion into a country. Government means control,
rule, orderly constraint and proper management, and
not form only. This leads me to assert that this is
just the state and condition of this country to-dav. It
h^S the form, and plenty of it, but no government iti
anv part or department of it.
Take the police deoartment of the country, for ex¬
ample, and what do we find? Why, lawlessness, blood¬
shed and riot everywhere with no power anywhere to
16
242
THE NATIONS
check it. Arid why ? Because of the fatal doctrine of
State independence, and it is fatal, because when car¬
ried to its legitimate results, it creates national depend¬
ence on the States as to what it can do, or cannot do
and say as to the management of the affairs of the
country. And yet the general government is charged
with the solemn duty of observing peace and order,
both national and international. Still, any State, in its
independence, may make a breach of the peace, or, in
common parlance, "kick up a fuss" with any other
nation and leave the national government to settle it as
best it cafi by way of large indemnities and other diplo¬
matic negotiations and great cost to the people.
Not only so, but a city—any city in any State—may
entail great international burdens upon the general
government which the whole people of the nation have
to pay, as, for instance, the slaughtering of the Italians
in New Orleans a few years ago. It cost the govern¬
ment an indemnitv of $25,000, besides all other costs
and expenses, which were verv great. And yet the
ereneral government was and is still powerless, under
t1?e conditions of States' rights, to help herself in any
way whatever, either ap-ainst Italy or the city of New
Orleans. Moreover, that act came near plunging the
nation into a bloody and devastating war. This is what
I consider one of the organic weaknesses of the na¬
tional government. And another very great weakness
in the government is that the constitution does not ore-
vent individuals from selling out the country to other
nations, and the result is that both the wealth and ter¬
ritory of this country is largely, yes, very largely, in
the hands and ownership of foreign powers. Do you
ask, "Can this be true?" Yes, it is true, and I, for one.
have not many tears to shed over the fact, either, be¬
cause instead of the whites of this country busying
themselves over matters of infernal improvements, the
development and progress of the nation and its fortifi-
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 243
cation against a foreign power, they have spent their
best powers,, energies and intellects in devising ways
and means to prevent what he is pleased to call "Negro
domination." I mean to sav, that while the white man
of this country has had his eyes steadfastly fixed on us,
as a race, with a view to keeping us down, others out¬
side have been busy buying up and otherwise coming
into possession of the land and other wealth of the
country. In order to prove these assertions, let us
quote some figures on the subject—see what they say:
That English aristocrats should rule large dominions
in the United States, and rule them from London, is at
first a difficult thing to grasp; for, until it is borne in
mind that peers and peeresses of Great Britain are
larere landed proprietors in our country—Viscount Scul¬
ly alone owns 3,000,000 acres in Illinois, Iowa and Ne¬
braska—does the significance of absenteeism in land¬
lords become apparent. But now the matter will be
brought home to Americans more directly than it has
•ever been brought home yet, for there is shortly to be
a union in London of the American land-owning in¬
terests, and a series of drastic measures are scheduled
which, it is believed, will not onlv increase the annual
rentals of the vast domain involved, but which will
greatlv affect the destiny of the hundreds of thousands
who dwell upon it.
First of all, a list of the members of the aristocracy
who own the lands in question will not be without in¬
terest. Such a list has never been given before in full.
The greatest of the English holdings and the persons
interested are these:
Alexander Grant, London (in Kansas)—35,000
acres.
Syndicate No. 1—50,000 acres. This is a Scotch
concern and its land is in Florida.
English Land Company (in California)—50,000
acres.
244
THE NATIONS
English Land Company (in Arkansas)—50,000
acres.
Lord Houghton (in Florida)—60,000 acres.
Lord Dunraven (in Colorado)—60,000 acres.
Benjamin Newgas, Liverpool—100,000 acres.
Syndicate No. 6—110,000 acres. This syndicate in¬
cludes the Earl of Vimlam and the Earl of Lankeville.
The land is in Wisconsin.
Lord Dunmore—120.000 acres.
The Duke of Sutherland—125,000 acres. This is
the actress-loving, champagne-bidding and rack-rent
nobleman of police-court fame.
William Whaley—210,000 acres. Mr. Whaley is
the squire of Peterboro, England.
Robert Tennant—2^0,000 acres. This is all farming
land. Mr. Tennant lives in London.
Dundee Land Company - 24,700 acres.
The Missouri Land Company—300,000 acres. This
operates a Missouri dominion, and has headquarters at
Edinburgh.
The British Land Company—320,000 acres. This
land is all in Kansas.
M. Eifenhauser of Halifax—600,000 acres. The
land is in West Virginia.
Bryan H. Evans—700,000 acres. Mr. Evans resides
in London. His lands are in Mississippi.
The Angle-American. Syndicate, London—750,000
acres. The funds of widowed peeresses are largely in¬
vested here. The lands are in the South and West.
Phillips, Marshall & Co., London—1,300,000 acres.
This firm has the whole peerage for their clients.
Marquis of Tweedale—1,750,000 acres. The Mar¬
quis is, William Montague Hay, famed all over Scot¬
land a£- the rack-rent landlord.
Syndicate No. 4—1,800,000 acres. This syndicate
has all its holdings in Mississippi. It includes the
Marquis of Dalhousie, George Henry Howard Choi-
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 245
mondeley (Viscount Cholmondeley), Georgiana, Vis¬
countess Cross; Hon. Lady Hamilton Gordon and
Hon. Lady Biddulph.
Sir Edward Reid—2,900,000 acres. This is a syndi¬
cate which owns lands in Florida only. It includes the
present Duchess of Marlborough, Lady Randolph
Churchill and Lady Lister Kaye.
Viscount Scully—3,000,000 acres. His lordship
maintains an elaborate system of bailiffs.
The Texas Land Union (Syndicate No. 3)—3,000,-
000 acres. Interested peers—Baroness Burdett-Coutts,
Earl Cadogan, H. C. Fitzroy Somerset (this is the
Duke of Beaufort), William Alexander Lochiel Ste¬
phen Douglass Hamilton, Duke of Deaudon; the Duke
of Rutland, Ughtaed J. Kay Shuttleworth and Eand
Ethel Cadogan (maid in waiting to the Queen). This
syndicate holds whole counties in Texas, and tens of
thousands of persons pay its rentals.
It is claimed that fully 20,000,000 acres of American
lands are thus owned by great landowners in England
and Scotland. This does not include the Holland Syn¬
dicate, which owns 5,000.000 acres of grazing lands in
Western States, nor the German syndicate, owning
2,000,000 acres in various States. For some time past
it has been evident to the foreign landowners that con¬
certed action cn their part was essential to their inter¬
ests. It is well known to those who have even casually
looked into the matter that foreign landowning has
much impeded the development of the Western Com¬
monwealths. These great land owners positively refuse
to sell. They prefer to establish a system of bailiffs,
with the results that verv serious complications have
resulted. The State legislatures have done their best
to deal with the question, but heretofore with only in¬
different success. Viscount Scully is, rightly or
wrongly, made the scapegoat of this whole business.
He has for some years been a thorn in the path of
246
THE NATIONS
one State administration after another, and his shrewd¬
ness in evading' every provision of law directed against
him has extorted the admiration of thousands. Thus,
Scully practically owns in Illinois the best part of the
counties of Logan, Livingston- and Tazewell. The State
in 1877 passed an alien land law, directed solely against
Scully. To evade it he insisted beforehand upon a
clause in all his leases stipulating that the lessee should
pay all taxes accruing against the property leased. The
result was the creation of a large and solid body of
voters in the Scully counties, as they are called, opposed
to propositions of public improvement by taxation.
The war against Scully in Illinois threw the other
British landowners into- a panic, and as fast as leases
have fallen in tbev have been renewed under heavier
and heavier conditions. Alien land laws have occupied
the attention of legislatures, and in Kansas and Ne¬
braska the struggle for a time had a serious effect upon
land securities of all kinds.
Finally matters came'to such a deplorable stage that
a committee of the American tenantry was appointed
to present a memorial to the London landowners, set¬
ting forth the ruin that stared the Western farmers in
the face as the result of the rack-renting system that
had been evolved out of the chaos. This memorial had
a marked effect on Baroness Burdett-Coutts, who in¬
sisted upon no more evictions of American farmers. It
only aggravated the Duke of Sutherland, who was then
in sore need of funds, and he cabled his agents to col¬
lect the rents and send them over at all hazards.
Finding that mild measures availed nothing, the ten¬
antry resorted to a more radical expedient. An associ¬
ation has been formed in Illinois, Nebraska, Iowa and
Kansas to resist to the utmost the demands of the Eng¬
lish landlords. The organization is a lively one, and is
the first really agrarian agitation in American history.
The association works more secretly than the Holy
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 247
Vehm Gefichte, but it has already influenced legislation
in a marked manner.
This is the development in the situation which, more
than anything- else, caused the English landowners to
form an alliance among themselves. The movement
was first proposed in the interest of the Scully estate.
It is intended to have an agent in attendance at the
meetings of legislatures of all the States involved this
winter. The matter was brought to the attention of
Sir Julian Pauncefcte this autumn when he visited the
London Foreign Office. What he is to do in the mat¬
ter, no one cares to say.
The above quotations are from the Ottawa Journal.
And the "Little Giant Cyclopaedia" points out Euro¬
pean holdings of land in this country to the amount of
nearly 25,000,000 acres.
Let us quote a little further, this time from the Petv-
insula Farmer:-
" 'Is it true,' I asked a great thinker, 'that England
alone holds $ 500,000,000 of United (States) securi¬
ties, bearing interest, including exchange, of 6 per
cent., payable in gold?"
" 'Yes, according- to the public statements of Lon¬
don statisticians. The Secretary of the Treasury says
there is no public record in this country showing the
amount of foreign investments. We must, therefore,
go to Europe to learn, not only how much we are in
debt to Great Britain, but that at least $500,000,000
additional of United States investments are held in
France and Germany. This makes a total in three
countries of $3,000,000,000, imposing an interest
charge, including exchanges, of $180,000,000 per an¬
num. A nice state of serfdom, isn't it ?' " _
Yes, foreign powers can call a halt on this country,
no matter what project she may have in view. Take,
for example, the action of the land monopolies I have
just been quoting, and the Behring Sea fishery matter,
248
THE NATIONS
and the Nicaragua episode, and American interests at
Venezuela, and the English holdings, and the read-
juster matters in Virginia. Well, what about them, do
you say? I say they prove that the United States is
tied hand and foot by foreign powers and cannot
help herself. And the "Monroe Doctrine" is no longer
the Monroe Doctrine; or, in other words, if it ever did
mean anything, it does not now, for it seems that the
weakest of the foreign countries, even little Spain, can
come into Cuba and do about as she pleases, and the
United States, through her press, cries out with a loud
and plaintive voice for the enforcement of the "Monroe
Doctrine," but no enforcing is done. And why is the
Monroe Doctrine, in such cases as I have just men¬
tioned, not enforced? Simply because, as I have said,
this country is powerless in the matter. And she is
powerless because of bad government, and the bad gov¬
ernment is by reason of poor and incompetent states¬
manship, for, instead of the State and the general gov¬
ernment studying the best good of the people—the
whole people—they are almost entirely engaged in
making and unmaking laws to establish white su¬
premacy and to prevent what they are pleased to call
"Negro domination."
Again I ask, with all sincerity, Is the white man com¬
petent of either national, State or local self-govern¬
ment? If so, in what has it been proven ? Just here
I cannot do better than to quote what another of their
own witnesses has to say on the subject. The person
is Governor Altgeld, of Illinois, who said in his public
address delivered at Chattanooga:
"Instead of an armed force that we can meet on the
field, there is to-day an enemy that is invisible, but
everywhere at work, destroying our institution*. That
enemy is corruption. It seeks to direct official action,
it dictates legislation and endeavors to control the con¬
struction of the laws. It seeks to control the press, to
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 249
set fashion and shape public sentiment; it has emascu¬
lated American politics and places it on the low plane
°f jugglery. The tendency is now for political parties
to drop principle arid follow expediency, and their plat¬
forms are often drawn to evade or straddle every live
issue. The idea is now to cajole rather than convince,
to ignore great wrongs and wink at abuses, to court the
support of conflicting interests, though it involves the
deception of one or both. We are substituting office-
seeking and office-holding in place of real achievement,
and instead of great careers in public life we are facing
a harvest of slippery, blear-eyed and empty mediocrity,
which glides into oblivion without the assistance of
death.
"To be an eligible candidate for office now often
means to stand for nothing- in particular, and to repre¬
sent no definite principle; but to be all things to all men,
and in the end be coptemptible. Thirty-four years ago
the call was for men to fight an open enemy in the
field. To-dav our countrv is calling for men who will
be true to republican institutions at home. Never be¬
fore did this republic call so loudly as it does to-day
for a strong, sturdv manhood that will stand up defi¬
antly and dare to do right. For more than a decade
the tendency in this country has been toward a color¬
less and negative dilettanteism, having the countenance
of the Pharisee with the greed of the wolf, and drawing
all its inspirations from the altar of concentrating and
corrupting wealth. The flag has been' praised at
champagne dinners, while the very pole from which it
floated was being eaten off by corruption, and repub¬
lican institutions were being stabbed to the vitals. A
new gospel has come among us, according to which 'it
is mean to rob a henroost of a hen, but plundering
thousands make us gentlemen.' My friends, the men
of the past did their duty. Shall we do ours? They
were asked to face death. You may have to face
250
THE NATIONS
calumny and obloquy. No man ever saved his coun¬
try without being vilified, for all who make profit of
injustice will be your enemies. But as sure as the
heavens are high and justice is eternal you will triumph
in the end."
Indeed, the fact is, that foreign powers have either
formed protectorates over most of the Southern,
Central ancf North American States, or they have
formed such other treaty relations with them as to
make the "spheres of influence" of almost every foreign
nation such as to nullify almost entirely the "Monroe
Doctrine/,' until, as I said before, the Monroe Doc¬
trine means virtually nothing but an empty declara¬
tion for the entire East, beside treaty and protectorate
rights and interests, have many other unknown and, at
the present, unknowable material rights and holdings
in this country, consisting of lands, mining interests,
stocks, bonds, etc. So if this country were to attempt
the real rigid enforcement of the so-called "Monroe
Doctrine in the case of any one of them, all the other
powers of the East would come to their rescue, because
of their own interests that are over here.
If further proof of the white man's unfitness for self-
government, which means self-control, were needed,
one has only to call up his unseemly acts and conduct
on the floor of the House of Representatives at almost
every session of the Congress that has met since the
Declaration of Independence was made in 1776. Then,
again, for the least pretext, and on the slightest provo¬
cation, he will set the regularly constituted authorities
ruthlessly aside and take the law in his own hand, and
commit bloodshed and murder, and that, too, without
any compunction of conscience whatever. Here are a
set of resolutions offered and unanimously passed at a
Boston mass meeting, which shows that my picture
is not overdrawn:
FROM A NSW POINT OF VIEW.
251
strong resolutions adopted at a boston mass
meeting.
"Boston, November 12.—Nearly 3,000 people attend¬
ed a mass meeting in Eaneuil Hall to-night, to pro¬
test against the practice of lynching and burning ne¬
groes in Southern and other States. The meeting was
held under the auspices of the various colored societies
of Boston and vicinity.
"The speeches were by both white and colored men,
and were vigorously applauded. Mayor Edwin U.
Curtis presided, and among the speakers were Con¬
gressman Elijah A. Morse, Judge Edward Walker and
Father Scully. At the conclusion of the speeches Hon.
George T. Downing presented the following resolu¬
tion, which was adopted unanimously:
"We condemn-without any reservation the lynching,
the mutilating, the roasting alive of men and women,
now commonly • practiced in parts of our country—so
ccmmonlv practiced as to arrest the attention of the
world. We condemn this God-defying heartlessness
with most indignant feelings, as civilized beings, as cit¬
izens, as Christians.
"We are, as human civilized beings, as proud Ameri¬
cans, made to hold our heads down in shame because
of the almost daily reports which reach us of beings
born in the image of God thrust into consuming fires,
with all the consequent agonies, with the outraged pit-
eously entreating their heartless tormentors for mercy,
protesting their innocence even while in the very jaws
of death, while gazing imploringly—that is, if their eyes
have not been gouged out—upon men, women and
children, assembled from miles around to witness and
gloat over God's image scoffed at while writhing in
agony.
"We emphatically state that we would not stand in
the way of a just and full punishment of all crimes, but
252
THE NATIONS
the law of the land must be respected in meting out
such punishment ; all the persons charged with crime
are entitled to a fair trial before a jury oif their.peers.
"The heartless, bloodthirsty disregard of the su¬
preme law of the land must cease. Massachusetts de¬
clares it; she calls upon all lovers of law and order all
over the nation to rise in their might and majesty, and
say Amen to the declaration. She takes no part in the
falsehood that the Negro race is more immoral than
are other races; that they are rapists. It is her firm con¬
viction that the charge is false; that it is manufactured
to appeal to sentiment calculated to cover up and pal¬
liate to a great extent the burning alive of black men,
the real design being concealed, which is to crush the
lawful-growing aspirations manifesting itself among
black men.
"We invoke the uncompromising spirit of Garrison,
of Phillips, of Sumner, of Andrew, and in their names
to these defiers of God and humanity, cry out, Stop this
brutality which darkens our nation's fair name, adding
that, if it be not stopped, the impetuous spirit of Cris-
pus Attucks, of John Brown, which is still marching
on, will in its march, haunt into action."
Now, if there was ever a time in the white man's his¬
tory when he had opportunity to prove himself capable
of independent self-government, it was when he under¬
took to establish a republic on the Western Continent.
But the fact is that from the very incipiency of the idea
down to the present time his acts have been one long,
perpetual, eternal list of egregious blunders and mis-
lakes, and now, after a lapse of over four hundred years
since he first came on these shores, he finds himself
in such a national, international, economical, financial,
state and interstate, moral and religious tangle and be¬
wilderment as would make any other race on the face
of the globe but the white man forever ashamed to lift
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 253
its head and claim that it had ever had any part what¬
ever to do with such a dismal failure.
Only look at the state of the country to-day. A dead¬
lock almost everywhere, so that we can hardly move a
wheel toward real, true and lasting' progress; and cor¬
ruption everywhere so thick that, figuratively speak¬
ing1, it can be felt with the hand and seen in the air. If
such a condition of affairs is success in government,
pray, tell me what would be a failure? With a million
of men out of employment, families starving to death,
the countrv billions of dollars in debt at home and
abroad, the countrv flooded with millions upon millionss
of paper bonds to be redeemed in gold, and no gold pro¬
duction, comparativelv, to pay it, and the country being
drained week after week of the little that is left, in or¬
der to keep the ship of State afloat—who, I ask, with
all this and a thousand times more, can call this gov¬
ernment under the white man's rule a success, with
hundreds upon hundreds of the banks into which the
peoole were induced to put their hard-earned savings
gone down with millions of their money, and with
hundreds of thousands of them burdened with heavy
mortgages, and the European evicting officer standing
at their door ready to set them out, and this govern¬
ment powerless to help them by. reason of bad manage¬
ment and poor statesmanship!
The inability of proper and good government is seen
in the fact that this people came together and formed
the colonies into a federal compact, or union, and in one
article of the federation declared it to be a compact,
or union, and in another actually declared themselves
to be separate and independent of said compact and
that sowed the seeds of secession and disunion, and
hence the early secession of South Carolina, and finally
the great rebellion. These same all-wise white men at¬
tempted another great impossibility, and thev are just
now beginning to see it. and thousands of them do not
254
THE NATIONS
see it yet, and that is, they tried to establish and main¬
tain a free and slave country at one and the same time;
for they positively and deliberately declared, both in
the Declaration of Independence and Constitution, that
"all men are free and equal" for the fundamental rea¬
son that they were "created so," and then set right
about to make millions of men slaves. And I here and
now feel like exclaiming: O fools! how slow of heart
you were and are, to see and believe the impossibility of
your task!
Another proof that the white man is not yet fitted for
self-government is that he rebelled and split the Union
which he himself had made for himself. He then asked
to be admitted to return to the compact under an
amended constitution, which still more clearly declared
the oneness of the whole peoole, and yet he is, this pres¬
ent moment, busilv eng.a^ed in trying to debar ten mil¬
lions of citizens from their constitutional rights without
the alteration of one single word in the national Consti¬
tution so that he might do so by law. Thus he shows
himself not only whollv unfitted to mold and frame
laws, but, as it seems, innately incapable of even being
law-abiding- citizens.
We might point out another source of weakness in
the nation's government. It is the judiciary, with its
powers, discretions and privileges, which are so great
that it might appropriately be called the organized aris¬
tocracy of the country, or a "government within the
government," with powers far exceeding those of the
other or eeneral government. At a casual glance, this
assertion may seem absurd; but on careful examination
it will be found to be too true; for in many respects it is
an absolute power, differing very little from an abso¬
lute monarchy, and every member is a monocrat, with
more or less absolute powers and functions of office.
And not onlv so, but the Supreme bench of the judi¬
ciary is infallible, for in the eyes and light of the Con-
from a new point of view. 255
stitution it never makes a mistake, neither can its acts
be reviewed, no matter how obnoxious the people may
consider them and know them to be. And this makes
the Supreme Court of the nation superior to the na¬
tion, for, as I have said, the nation itself cannot call in
question any decision the court makes. The people,
the whole people, may, through the Congress, enact
any law they choose, and they may desire it to p"o into
effect ever so much after it is enacted, but if the Su¬
preme Court does not like it, the people cannot have it,
no matter how much they may want it.
Now, what is the fact just here made plain? It is
that nine men have the constitutional right conferred
upcn them to turn down the will of sixty-five millions
of people, and they are absolutely powerless to> help
themselves. And yet this nation calls itself an inde¬
pendent, sovereign people. But where is the sovereignty
of, in, by or among the people, when the people have
bv constitutional enactment given it away, or conferred
supremacy upon nine men of its number called a court ?
No, there is no independence or sovereignty with the
people, for they are irrevocably tied hand and foot by
anv and every act of the Supreme Court, and. indeed,
so broad and unlimited are the powers and functions of
the court that it is the real lawmaking power in this
country after all, for it has both the power of construc¬
tion and destruction, and it is unlimited and unreview¬
able, so they can enlarge or restrict any and every law
that Congress makes, and thus r^ake the law another
law, or no lnw at all. and this lact is done simply by the
use of one phrase, ?nd that phrase is that "This law is
unconstitutional." When that is said, all that pertained
to that law. though it contained the best brain work in
the land, all is "done for"—it is "knocked out" and
counts for naught, and that forever, so far as the peo¬
ple's power to remedy it is concerned.
256
THE NATIONS
But I now want to advance this important thought:
The President is constitutionally made the head or the
chief of the nation. Is that not. so? Then he is chief,
or in other words, he is the head of the nation. Yet if
he vetoes any acts passed by Congress for whatever
reasons he may give, and no matter how cogent his rea¬
sons may be, the Congress can pass it over hb veto; it
then becomes thelaw of the land. This makes the peo¬
ple sovereign, and if it were otherwise the President
would be sovereign through the veto power. This is
also what I call an outlet for the pe.ople. Why not, then,
let the people have seme relief in some way from what
has become to be the awful dicta of the SupremeCourt?
The relief might be brought about by making, it pos¬
sible by constitutional enactment that certain cases,
under certain conditions, could come back to the peo¬
ple, although the court had rendered an adverse deci¬
sion. The people then could vote to sustain the decision
of the court, or pass it over their decision, just as
Congress does with the President's veto. A proper
case for an act of this kind would be such a case as that
of the income-tax bill, which, after all the hard work
done on it, and as much as the people wanted it, the
court turned it down, and that, too, against the protest
of thousands of the people. So I hold that, in such
cases the people are not free to make and have such laws
as thev want so long as their power is delegated abso¬
lutely to nine men, and that without any condition of
remedy whatever in cases of gross error. I repeat that
this is a very great weakness to a popular form of gov¬
ernment.
The Dred Scott case was another that ought to have
come back to the people for their decision, for Tudge
Taney certainly did err when he declared in his de¬
cision a colored man, or a "Negro," had no rights that
the white man was bound to respect. This decision was
wholly erroneous, for the colored man had all the eth-
from a new point of view. 257
nic rights of a man granted him by nature, and when
the confederation of colonies was made, which confed¬
eration was formed into what is now the United States,
we, as a people, were included in it. So we had con¬
federate rights; therefore, the white man was in duty
bound to respect, or else be false to the articles of the
confederation.
Then, again, we had the rights of all other men in¬
cluded in the Declaration o>f Independence, for that
Declaration said and still says that all men are created
equal by their Creator; so we had the right granted us
by the Creator, which the white man was bound to re¬
spect. Then again, there were our constitutional rights,
which were in no sense abridged, neither in the origi¬
nal document, nor by the amendments that were of¬
fered when the Constitution was adopted, nor when
the next two were made. So, then, we had full consti¬
tutional rights, equal with the white man, which he
was bound to respect. Yes, we had all this when the
learned judge, by reason of his great race prejudice, de¬
cided that we had "no rights that the white man was
bound to respect." And this unjust, unholy, unright¬
eous, ungodly decision was concurred in by the associ¬
ate justices, and thus they inserted into the body poli¬
tic a -false and pernicious principle which has worked
untold harm and. injury, not to the colored race alone,
but to the whole nation; . and, indeed, to humanity
everywhere, and it has been an untold source of evil to
the white people of this country, for it has completely
unhumanized and made them more like savages to us
than a, civilized, cultivated people, and so the very
great slaughter of my people without judge or jury.
May God, the God of the nation, have mercy on them,
change their hearts of stone, iron and brass, and give
them hearts of flesh!
The excuse for the formation and continuance of the
Supreme Court was that the purpose of the framers of
17
258
THE NATIONS
the Constitution would have a body of judicature that
was non-partisan and non-political, to. whom! the nation
might refer all matter of State and persons, and; have
them finally and impartially settled. This, it is said, was
the purnose of the founders of the government, and yet
from Judge Roger B. Taney, of Dred Scott fame, and
the first, for it was in that case he ruled him out of his
constitutional and confederated rights, for he had both,
and he was also included in the Declaration of Inde¬
pendence; and all the chief justices down to the pres¬
ent time have, with hardly a single exception, been
party politicians of the most pronounced kind. I have
said that the real legislative body in this country is the
Supreme Court. The Congress is not much more than
a committee to formulate matters and present them in
shape for the Supreme Court to say whether they shall
become laws of the land. Let us refer to the Dred
Scott decision again for example. I have shown that
all the rights, privileges and immunities of men and
citizens had been granted us, and yet Judge Taney sets
them all aside, or declares them all to be null and void
by the following strange, monstrous, and inhuman de¬
cision, that for more than a century before the Declara¬
tion of Independence "negroes" had been reearded as
beings of an inferior order, altogether unfit to associate
with the white race, either in sccial or political rela¬
tions : and so far inferior that they had no right3 which
the white man was bound to respect, and that the "ne¬
gro" might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery
"for his own benefit."
Tndsre Taney savs the colored man had been thus re¬
garded for more than a whole century before the Dec¬
laration of Indepenence, and yet not one word of it is
mentioned or even hinted at in the Declaration but
on the contrary, the colored man is declared in'that
document to be created the eaual of the white man nd
that fact is what makes the decision a nionstro
from a new point of view. 259
version of truth as well as of human and divine law.
He reversed the legislation of Congress by declaring
the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional, and so
opened up Missouri as a slave State regardless of the
fact that Congress had made it a free State, and the
President had signed the act.
Now, all that I have said goes to show the white man
in this country to be an unfit repository for the rights
of the whole people, because he is too prejudiced in
mind, biased in judgment, and envious of heart, to do
justice to his own race and people, and so is totally un¬
fitted to even concede the rights and privileges of other
races. That he is envious and treacherous one has only
to call to memory, as proof, the many schemes, plans,
deals and bargains made in presidential nominations
down to a spittoon-cleaner in the most petty office
within his gift. I repeat, all is done by bargain, trade,
barter, deal, etc., in a little mean, contemptible, petty,
underhanded way, that is below the dignity and man¬
hood of all that is called manly and statesmanlike. And
I here warn and beseech my people who are just now in
a formative state and condition, not to copy their ex¬
ample. Senator Sherman in his ucent book has con¬
firmed me in this conviction which I have held for
years. He just opened wide the mouth of the political
bag, and the pent-up and for a long time hushed-up
and smothered stifled "cat" springs forth, labeled with
all I have s^id in plain letters—yes, all may be read,
and more, too—far more—in the Senator's book.
The truth of it is, this country had its birth in a sharp
scheme and whirlwind, and I very much fear that it
will die in' a great storm.
In order to further snow the falsity and unconstitu¬
tionality of Judge Taney when he declared that the
"nepro had no' rights that the white man was bound to
respect," and also to further show that the colored men
were already in the full possession of all rights of
260
THE NATIONS
American citizens for a year Or more before the de¬
cision of the so-called learned judge, I will here quote
from "Justice and Jurisprudence," a very elaborate
work issued by J. B. L,ippincott & Co. in 1899 (see
page 528). It reads as follows :
"In early times free colored persons exercised the
right of suffrage in New Hampshire, Massachusetts,
New York, New Jersey and North Carolina, and this
was the case in New Hampshire and Massachusetts in
1856, and colored aliens could be naturalized. It is not
true that the Constitution was made exclusively for
and bv the white race; it was established by 'the people
of the United States' for themselves and their posterity,
and, as free colored people were then citizens of at least
five States, and in every sense part of the people of the
United States, they were among those for whom and
for whose posterity the Constitution was established."
What more do I need to say to prove that the white
.man is self-governing in theory only, and is for that
reason, in every practical sense unfitted to have in his
keeping the rights of the people?
Let me refer to the Monroe Doctrine again for the
purpose of inserting a paragraph from the current issue
of the Baltimore American, contained in its editorial,
and to point out by contrast the difference of views on
the Monroe Doctrine as held by the President of the
United States, and as expressed in his annual message
to Congress, and that of the above-mentioned editor
and, as he says, probablv bv a large majority of the
peoole of the country. The President restricts the ac¬
quirement of territory on this continent by European
powers to the phrase "by force;" that is, he construes
the Monroe Doctrine thus to mean,, but the following
paragraph t^kes a far wider scope of view:
"The construction now given to the Monroe Doc¬
trine by manv—nrohably a large majority—of the
American people, is that no European government shall
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 261
be permitted to acquire territory on the American conti¬
nent by force, treaty or purchase, or in any other way."
All the editorial says in the paragraph may be true,
but it is nevertheless a fact that large quantities of this
continent are now being acquired by all the ways it is
so confidently affirmed they cannot be obtained—yes,
by millions upon millions of acres.
The "cat" is out of the white man's business manage¬
ment "bag" again, and the following editorial from the
Baltimore American, December 12, 1896, tells'what she
is labeled with. Every colored hi an, woman and child
ought to read and ponder it well, and then stop quoting
and aping the white man as an example of success in
great business enterprises, and no longer make futile
attempts to succeed with plans and management that
he, in so many cases, has utterly failed, as cited in this
editorial:
"We observe with interest that the Baltimore visitors
who recentlv returned from Atlanta, and who are talk¬
ing wildly about the success of the Exposition, carefully
refrain from mentioning the fact that the citizens had
to get together the other day- andv raise $100,000 to
save the show from bankruptcy. In order to secure this
sum one gentleman contributed $50,000. The cold, un¬
varnished truth is that the Atlanta Exposition will wind
up its existence this month at a loss. The attendance
has not come up to the expectations of its projectors,
and the business men of Atlanta—the merchants and
the manufacturers—will be glad when it is over. The
verv fact that Maryland Day was the largest of the Ex¬
position ought to have shown the Marylanders the true
condition of the enterprise. * * * Granting that the
Exposition could be organized and opened in time,
the fact still remains that financially it would not oav
and that it would not help' the city. One of the men
who did as much .as any one else to get the World's Fair
to Chicago, and to whom was offered the director-gen-
262
the; nations
eralship of the enterprise, told us in Chicago that the
Exposition was doing the city great injury, and was
costing the business men hundreds of thousands of
dollars. His prediction of a collapse was dismally ful¬
filled, and this was the greatest of our fairs. The Cen¬
tennial left Philadelphia in a condition of reaction that
lasted several-years and cost that city millions of dol¬
lars. New York's Exposition, forty years ago was not
more successful. The Exposition in New Orleans was
a failure, and in San Francisco the Midwinter Fair
pulled through only because of the generosity of the
city's rich men.
«* * * And yet, in spite of this record, Baltimore
city is asked to give $500,000, the State of Maryland
$500,000, the national government $2,000,000—all on
the uncertain basis of $ coo,000 in popular subscriptions,
obtained largelv by 'professional canvassing. We are
filled with great plans for a $5,000,000 show, and Balti¬
more is advertised to the country in this manner. It is
not right that the city should be misrepresented or
belittled in this manner."
Again I ask, will the colored race still set the white
man up as their family, church, State and business
model ? And if so, how much longer ? And why is it
that we would rather fail, following in the white man'*
false and deceptive wake than to plan and succeed for
ourselves on surer, though it be on a slower basis?
I demand an answer to these questions. Give it, or
give up the problem altogether.
I here cite another example of the white man's "wild¬
cat" business exploits, and this time it is the words of
Mr. Chauncey Deoew of New York. And it will also
show that there is a natural and fictitious growth in
business as in other things:
"I went through a city recently in the South, which
was an example of boom as against natural growth.
There were streets and broad avenues, blocks of con-
PROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW.
263
structed business buildings, large plants built for the
manufacturer to take possession of, streets of comforta¬
ble and cozy dwelling houses, public squares and
parks, a belt railway and a trolley line already con¬
structed, and yet beyond the capitalists who invested
their money, and the workmen while the construction
was going on, the place had never had an inhabitant,
and never will. It was built upon air and fancy.
Yes, it was built upon air and fancy, and upon air and
fancy alone."
The above-quoted facts show too clearly the truth¬
fulness of the proposition with which I started out,
namely that the white man did not sit down and delib¬
erate and count the cost, and then act upon the result of
the knowledge gained by such a course; but, to quote
from the editorial first mentioned, he acts entirely upon
the ground of haphazard and chance, for it says:
"And yet. in spite of this record, Baltimore city is
asked to give $500,000, the State of Maryland $500,-
000, the national government $2,000,000—and all on
the uncertain basis of $500,000 in popular subscrip¬
tions obtained largely by professional canvassing."
And I wish to say, this editorial shows that it is not
one or two little isolated, petty cases of which it speaks,
but of world-wide and universal range and scope. Yes,
the most gigantic affairs of which the white man is ca¬
pable, going back, as it does, forty years, and bringing
down all before it to the present day, and writes on it
all. "Failure! total failure!"
Since I have written what I have to say about the
Monroe Doctrine as it affects the relationship of other
nations to this country, certain negotiations which were
at that time pending between this country and Great
Britain have come fo the surface in the form of an act
of Congress calling for all correspondence of this gov¬
ernment with England on that subject. The Secretary
of State transmitted to Congress the desired informa-
264
THE NATIONS
tion, and along with it the President sent a special mes¬
sage on the same subject, and the correspondence be¬
tween the two governments, especially that of Eng¬
land, goes to show that what I had written was true,
and that the Monroe Doctrine was no doctrine, or that
it did not mean anything to foreign powers, from the
very fact, as I have said, foreign powers have been ac¬
quiring territory on this continent from the time Presi¬
dent Monroe uttered it—which was in 1823—to the
present time—until, as I have shown by abundant
proof, that this government has not the slightest idea
how much of the continent is owned by outside powers.
And it shows another thing, and that is that the Mon¬
roe Doctrine has never at any time since it was laid
down to the present been sufficiently enforced to test
the matter as to whether it would be accepted as good
international law. And so another mistake and mis¬
management of the white man in the government of
this country. Listen to the comments of the English
press on the subject:
"London, December 17—All of the morning papers
to-morrow will devote more or less of their editorial
space to the discussion of President Cleveland's mes¬
sage on the Venezuelan question and to the merits of
that question itself.
"The Daily Telegraph (Liberal) will publish an edi¬
torial contending that America has no concern in the
Venezuelan dispute. The editorial goes on to say:
" 'In truth, this invocation of the Monroe Doctrine
seems, on this side of the water, to be irrelevant, be¬
cause there is no question of territorial greed or the
imposition of an European system. It is absurd, be¬
cause a statement of an American policy can hardly
claim to attain the rank of a principle of international
law. By what right does the Washington government
demand the arbitration of this matter when the very
theory which guides their interference has absolutely
from a new point of view. 265
nothing to do with the points in dispute ? What nation
has ever agreed to the Monroe Doctrine? How often
has the Washington government itself ventured to ad¬
vance it?
"'We say nothing of the process of twisting the
lion's tail, generally resorted to at times of electoral
excitement. Yet, if it be true that all this zealous sup¬
port of Venezuela originated in partisan intrigues,
there is still less reason why we should submit to what,
from the British standpoint, is a wholly perverse and
inadmissible claim.'
" 'The Times says in its.editorial on the situation:
" 'It is impossible to discuss the gravity of the diffi¬
culties that have arisen between Great Britain and the
United States. President Cleveland's message and its
reception on both sides of the Senate give additional
importance to the dispatches between Washington and
London. The details of the boundary dispute are in¬
significant in comparison with the far-reaching claims
advanced by Mr. Olney's dispatch and emphasized in
President Cleveland's message.
" 'Convinced as we are that a rupture between the
two great English-speaking communities would be a
calamity, not only to themselves, but to the civilized
world, we are nevertheless driven to the conclusion
that the concessions this country is so imperiously sum¬
moned to make are such as no self-respecting nation,
least of all one ruling an empire that has its roots ill
every quarter of the globe could possibly submit to.
The United States themselves would never for a mo¬
ment dream of yielding to this kind of dictation. We
are of the same blood, and shall not be less careful of
our national honor.
" 'We can hardly believe that the course threatened
by President Cleveland will be seriously adopted by
the American government; but, if so, it will be incum¬
bent upon us, without entering upon any aggressive
266
THE NATIONS
measures to protect our imperial interests and to stand
up for our rights under international law.'
"The Times then proceeds to argue that the Monroe
Doctrine has never been recognized as international
law, and it quotes Lord Salisbury's admission that, any
disturbance of the existing territorial distribution in the
western hemisphere by any European State would be
highly inexpedient, and then continues:
" 'But the recognition of this expediency does not
cover the preposterous deductions which Mr. Olney's
dispatch advances and which President Cleveland
makes the basis of the most astounding proposal that
has perhaps ever been advanced by any government
in times of peace since the days of Napoleon.
" 'We desire to speak with all proper reserve, but
we confidently predict that Great Britain will not ad¬
mit the pretensions put forward by President Cleve¬
land. No commission appointed, by a power which is
not a party to a dispute will be recognized by us as
having a title of any sort to pronounce upon a bound¬
ary question. It will receive no assistance from the
British authorities. Its decision will be null and void
from the-outset, even if its origin did not taint it with
partiality. We shall be very much astonished if there
is any disagreement among the organs of public opin¬
ion in this country as to the manner in which such a
claim should be confronted.'
"The Times contends further that England is bound
to resist the extended claim of Monroeism, and says:
" 'A power which has command of the sea does not
regard 3,000 miles of intervening ocean as severing it
from its subjects.'"
Now, let me point out a few things concerning the
Monroe Doctrine that present themselves to me as
worthy of more than a passing notice.
In the first place, I wish to say it is well named when
called the Monroe Doctrine, for that is what it justly
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 267
and truthfully is—the "Monroe Doctrine" and nothing
more, for it is not a Rational doctrine, because the na¬
tion has never enacted it into a national law. It was a
simple suggestion of President Monroe made to Con¬
gress, in 1823, when he presented his annual message
to that body, as to what he believed to be the attitude
this country should take and hold as to foreign powers
acquiring territory on this continent. His opinion was
that foreign nations should cease to establish colonies
on the Western Continent, and that even to seek to
do so would be considered a sign of unfriendliness on
the part of said foreign powers towards this nation.
But Congress did not by any means, or in any way
whatever, enact it into a law—that is, they did not
make it a national "doctrine;" and so it still remains a
"Monroe Doctrine," because only those parts of the
President's message become law or the rule of this
government that Congress sees fit to take up and act
upon, and there was no action whatever taken on this
special suggestion of the President, nor has there been
up to the present time. But there is a move now on
foot, I believe, in Congress, looking to the making of
the "Monroe Doctrine" a national "doctrine;" but this
is January, 1896, and the suggestion was made by
President Monroe in 1823, just seventy-three years
ago—quite a late day. is it not, to just begin to look
after a matter so vitally important to the nation as now
seems this one. And yet the "most superior" govern¬
ing race on earth has suffered this neglect to go on for
seventy-three years.
In the second place, I wish to call attention to the
fact that not only^did this same superior race that is so
cautious and painstaking in looking after the nation's
affairs, neglect to see that President Monroe's sugges¬
tion be acted upon and somehow put into practical
force, but they also totally failed to look after the in¬
ternational part; for they should have without delay
268
THE NATIONS
submitted the matter to all of those foreign nations to
whom the "doctrine" was to apply to see if they would
be willing to accept it as good international polity.
But this was not done; nor was anything else looking
to the establishment of this matter as a principle upon
which operations might proceed with reference to this
grave question. Just here let me insert the sentences
that include the "Monroe Doctrine:"
"President Monroe's annual messag'e to Congress in
1823 contained the following sentences: 'We owe it to
candor and tc the amicable relations existing between
the United States and the-allied powers to declare that
we should consider any attempt on their part to extend
their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dan¬
gerous to our peace and safety. With the existing
colonies or dependencies of any European, power we
have not interfered, and shall not interfere; but with
the governments which have declared their independ¬
ence and maintained it, and whose independence we
have on great consideration and just principles ac¬
knowledged, we could not view an interposition for
oppressing them or controlling' in any other manner
their destiny by any European power in any other
light than as a manifestation of an: unfriendly disposi¬
tion towards the United States.' Also, 'The Ameri¬
can continents should no longer be subjects for any
new European colonial settlement.'"
But the Monroe Doctrine does not Say that Euro¬
pean powers which already have relationship with
other governments and colonies on this continent shall
not make other and further treaties and relationships
with them, nor does it say how far these relations may
g-o. Not only so, but "foreign powers" can acquire
every foot of land on this continent that is not owned
by this government. This can be done by purchase
through the individuals who own it, or by syndicate
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 269
combination, and there is nothing in the Constitution
to prevent it, much less the "Monroe Doctrine."
Aeain I ask, Is the white man a safe custodian of
the rights of the people?
We constantly hear the white mail saying: "We
want no Negro rule in this country," and "No Negro
domination." But I ask, in all earnestness and sin¬
cerity, could he possibly rule worse than tihe white
man has, or could he dominate to greater disadvantage
of the nation? For the nation is almost bankrupt, and
the country is almost, if not quite, mortgaged and
bonded and syndicated out to other nations, with mil¬
lions of the inhabitants, without a means .of making a
living-, and the natural producers without a foreign
market for their products, and with what commerce
that remains stagnant and almost at a standstill both
at home and abroad, and with other nations in com¬
mand of the seas and turning from this country to oth¬
ers for their staple supplies. And now, with all these
things a livinsr, sterling fact, in what sense could we,
as a race, if in rule, do> it with less success than the
"greatest" and "most superior" race on earth has
done? That the nations are turning from us to oth¬
ers for their grain and other supplies, you have only to
read the following report. We hear much in these days
about the bad legislation of the days of "carpet-bag
rule;" but let me ask was there a worse ruling at that
time than we now have? If so, when and where?
"England increased her imports of wheat in 1894
bv 9.800,000 bushels ov°r her 1802 imoorts, but bought
17,000.000 bushels less from the United States, and in¬
creased her purchases from Russia by 23,000,000
bushels, from Argentine by 18,000,coo bushels, ?>nd
from Australasia by 3,500,000 bushels. In 1894 she
bought less wheat from Chili, Turkey, Roumania,
Egypt, India and Canada.
270
THE NATIONS
"France grew more of her own wheat supply in
1894 than in 1892, buying less from all countries ex¬
cept Russia and Northern Africa. She bought upward
of 2,500,000 bushels less from the United States, prac¬
tically the total amount of her diminished imports.
Germany also bought about 8,000,000 bushels less
wheat in 1894 than in 1892, taking 12,000,000 bushels
less from the United States, but buying considerably
more from Roumania, Russia and Argentina, her pur¬
chases from Argentina increasing by nearly the same
quantity that her purchases from the United States de¬
creased."
Just here I want to give an illustration of the com¬
plicated character and the contradictory nature of the
working of or carrying out the provisions of the na¬
tional and State Constitutions—the one is the basis of
the other; that is to say, the State Constitutions are
modeled after the order of the National Constitution.
The example is this:
In the city of New York the Court of Appeals ren¬
dered a decision that "no saloon should be established
within two hundred feet of any church or school-
house," which in itself was nothing but a farce and
child's plav, for what protection to the character of the
youth of the country in any school is the space of "two
hundred" feet? This two hundred feet, it will be re¬
membered are to> protect the morals of our youth—
that is, to keep them from having access to the saloons.
But the conflict is this: Just after the aforesaid deci¬
sion was passed an act was introduced in the State
Legislature of New York thlat all widows or the chil¬
dren of deceased fathers, or the agents of the same, be
exempt from the operation of the law. Now, the con¬
flict' is that the highest court of the State makes a de¬
cision of general and universal operation, but the leg¬
islature has a risrht to step in and vitiate and nullify
the decision to the extent of a quarter or one-half. But
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 271
the conflict does not stop here, for another case can
come into the courts on the constitutionality of the act
of the legislature, or on some other, and most any other
technicality, constitutional or otherwise, until the
whole matter may come into the Congress of the United
States, and stay there, and be tangled more and more;
but finally some action of some sort may be had. No
one knows what it may be or what kind it may be, and
it does not matter much, for the whole thing must
finally go to the Supreme Court of the land, which, af¬
ter all is said and done, is the real governing and legis¬
lative body of the country, for they can enlarge, dimin¬
ish or destroy altogether all that has been done up to
this point, or they need not make any decision at all if
they do not want to do so, and there is nothing in the
original constitution itself nor the amendments thereto
to compel them to do otherwise; and yet the white man
declares that document (the Constitution) to be the
most profound piece of brain work that it was ever the
function, duty and privilege for the cogitating human
briain to bring forth for the use of mankind.
But have I not shown a mixture, a conflict, a tangle,
a jumble of affairs ? And yet this is a part of the work,
and only a p^irt of the work, of the "greatest" nation
and race on the earth, for he, the white man, himself
says so.
And now as to the Constitution itself, if I am at liber¬
ty to speak of th&t instrument, and I know of no reason
why I may not, because it is that by which the citizens
are supposed to be governed, whether it is so in fact .or
not—now, the Constitution, when carefullv examined,
presents more the aopearance of the patchwork on a
crazy-quilt than anything else I can now think of, for
it has already had fifteen oatches put on to it, by way
of amendments, and all of different kinds and for dif¬
ferent objects, and it now looks as if it will take about
fifteen more to make anything like a proper, safe in-
272
the; nations
strument for the national government, for the Supreme
Court, with its ruthless and heartless hand, at whose
mercy the Constitution and its construing—and, yes,
destroying, too,—has been so wisely or otherwise
placed, has laid hold of a number of the most impor¬
tant of the fifteen patches and torn them off, and so
leaves the already weak and unfinished Constitution
looking worse and in a worse condition than it was
before. And the patches, or amendments, that have
been so violently torn away are the ones that gave pro¬
tection to the ten millions of the citizens of the United
States in the unmolested enjoyment of their citizen
rights; and so I said that the act that did this was both
ruthless and heartless, and is it not? If not, why not?
Since reading the morning papers of January 29,
1896, I now have a good illustration of the white man's
own self-confession to the charge I make against him
of bad, loose and reckless legislation, for, in the open¬
ing of this chapter, I use the following words: "He—
the white man—is not deliberate, nor careful and
painstaking. So true is this of him that it seems he
goes into the halls of State and makes laws simply to
have them broken or overruled by the courts and con¬
strued to be defective, unconstitutional, or otherwise
inappropriate and out of order." The quotations I
here make are from an address of Senator Randall,
State Senator of Maryland, giving his reasons for
offering a bill in1 the Senate for relief from this loose,
reckless and ruinous white man's legislation. Who
clamors and strives so ardently for white man's rule in
government, white supremacy, and who has such aw¬
ful fears of what he is pleased to call "Negro domi¬
nation ?"
The address asserts that six hundred and sixty-five
new laws were passed at the meeting of the legislature
in 1894, which was only one-half of those introduced,
which was 1,330. Think of it, citizens, and colored cit-
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 273
izens especially, for it is you whom the white man
bends all of his energies to prove incompetent to man¬
age the affairs of state. The address confesses that
the legislation was had—part of it, to delude the public
—the white public, of course—and that the fact of
their becoming laws shows that the white public were
and are easy dupes to be deluded. It also shows that
part of these useless laws , were passed for private pur¬
poses, under the head and title of "general laws," which
shows the rascality and unfitness of the white man for
a proper and safe legislator of the people; and to make
the matter worse, it says that a large portion of this
miserable, trashy and harmful legislation is done under
cover, without the people who sent them there to do
business for them knowing anything whatever about
it.
Ah, does this not present and make known an awful
state of affairs in the white man's boasted republic?
The address also states that a good part of this vile
and corrupt legislation is for the express purpose of
plugging or blocking the way of certain corporations.
This is another bold and open confession that nothing
virtually is done on the ground of principle and states¬
manship, but all on the basis of tricks, bargains and
sharp dealings.
Again I ask, in all earnestness and sincerity, is the
white man fit to govern , a people, a nation, a State, a
district, county, city, town, ward, precinct, his own
home or individual self. If he is, what, when and
how has he shown it to be so?
The following is the address to which I have re¬
ferred *
"Senator Randall to-day introduced a bill designed
to simplify and expedite future legislation. In speak¬
ing of the measure, Senator Randall said:
18
274
THE NATIONS
" 'The object of the bill is to introduce improvements
into the methods of legislation. It is in line with simi¬
lar attempts that have been made in other States of the
Union. Maryland is far behind many of her sister
States in this respect, for nothing has been done since
the Constitution of 1867, and that Constitution added
very few safeguards, if any, to those imposed by pre¬
vious constitutions on legislative methods of proce¬
dure. As matters are at present, a flood of bills is
poured into the legislature at each session, many of
them so carelessly drawn and ill-considered as to be
almost unintelligible. If they are intended to become
general laws they are either killed or somewhat mould¬
ed into shape by the standing committees and in their
passage through the two houses. If they are bills
amending the local codes of the city of Baltimore or
of the counties they are referred to special committees,
the members of which take .the word of the member
who introduced them th^t 'it is all right,' and unite in
the favorable report which shoves them along. If it is
a private bill, creating or amending the charter of a
corporation, for example, very little notice is taken of
it, unless some antagonistic interest happens to hear of
it, or the newspaper correspondents call attention to it.
" 'There is an immense amount of really unnecessary
legislation. There are a great many bills introduced
under the garb of a general law, but really meant to
meet some special case or to further some private end.
In years gone by there were a great many bills intro¬
duced for the simple purpose of blackmailing or 'plug¬
ging^ corporations. I have known the sime section of
the code to be amended three times at one session' of
the general assembly, and repeals by implication are
frequent. It is impossible for any committee or for any
member to carry in memory th£ subjects of all bills in¬
troduced at a session, to say nothing of their contents.
People and communities injuriously affected by gen-
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 275
eral measures, local measures .and private measures
introduced frequently hear nothing of them until they
have become laws and it is too late to protest.
" 'It is to meet all such cases that this bill was pre¬
pared. It is baised upon the recommendations of the
report made to the New York legislature a few days
ago by the Saxton Committee, appointed a year ago to
investigate this very subject. The States of Rhode
Island, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, North Carolina,
Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Texas, Arkansas, Missouri
and Louisiana have constitutional provisions on the
subject of publishing notice of intention to apply for
certain bills before they can be considered by the legis¬
lature. That is one of the requirements of this particu¬
lar bill as to proposed local or private laws. It would
be better if we would get those provisions into the Con¬
stitution as the States mentioned have done, but as that
is a protracted mode of accomplishing the object, this
bill undertakes to deail with it as Massachusetts, Maine
and Vermont have done—that is, by statute. Virginia
attains somewhat similar ends by the rules of its house
of delegates, which require petitions and published
notice where the proposed law relates to a local interest
or to a private interest or corporation.
" 'This bill requires copies of such proposed laws to
be filed with the Secretary of State at least thirty days
before they are introduced; that a petition, signed by
twenty persons, shall be filed at the same time, setting
forth the object and need of the law proposed; that
such laws shall be printed at the expense of the pro¬
moters, and that certain notices by publication shall be
given of them and direct service of notice also on cor¬
porations or officials affected by them.
" 'It also provides for committees of revision in the
two houses to point out inaccuracies in the text and
references contained in all laws and other considera¬
tions affecting the form of or necessity for the law.
276
THE NATIONS
Those committees and the members generally are to
have the assistance of a law clerk, who is to be a counr-
selor of at least ten years' standing, and who is to assist
members and committees in drafting and perfecting
statutes, examining and in passing upon the proposed
laws, petitions for laws, affidavits of notices, etc., filed
with the Secretary of State.
" 'Another advantage to be secured by the bill will be
the saving of expense to the State in the matter of en¬
grossing and printing; the expenses of those matters
will be refunded to the State by the promoters of bills
of that class, and thousands of dollars will be covered
into the treasury at every session in consequence of its
passage.
" 'One of the consequences of the present system of
legislation is that the first month of the session is usu¬
ally barren of actual laws. The first month, or one-
third of the present session, has nearly expired, and yet
not a single bill has been passed by both houses. This
is because bills, with very few exceptions, are prepared,
engrossed and printed after the legislature convenes,
and those processes take time. The result is frequent
long recesses during the first month of the session, and
a feverish rush and tumble on the part of the members
to get their measures advanced as finial adjournment
approaches. Now, if this bill becomes a law, the legis¬
lature will find a. month's work already cut out for it
When it convenes, as many bills are already engrossed
and on their printed files, with their pros and cons set
forth in their accompanying petitions and answers.
" 'I think the bill will be found to be in the right
directionrat any rate. At the session of 1894 there were
six hundred and sixty-five laws passed bv the legisla¬
ture of Maryland. This was about one-half of the num¬
ber introduced, and yet only four hundred and seventy-
two were printed before their passage. This alone
shows the impossibility of carefully considering the
PROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 277
twelve hundred and more introduced. The cacoettus
leges ferendi, against which Lord Coke inveighed, is
being treated and controlled in all civilized commu¬
nities, and the time, labor and brain of legislators con¬
centrated on matters of real importance."
But there is still another department of the white
man's greatest and best system of government, on earth
to which I caill your attention, and that is the jury sys¬
tem, or the much-boasted-of idea of trial by jury.
Now, I wish to say that the said jury system is sim¬
ply a sure and easy means for certain rich and other¬
wise influential parties to escape the justice of the law
when confronted and charged with the committal of
any crime. Yes, I say, other influential persons, for
there are any number of persons who are very far from
being rich, or even in comfortable circumstances of
life, who, for other obvious reasons, are greatly influen¬
tial with the powers that be, for political, social and fi¬
nancial reasons, etc. These and other reasons without
number make the system an awfully dangerous one for
the proper and just and rightful government of a peo¬
ple, because under it, almost invariably, the innocent
are punished and the guilty go out free. It is also a
most effectual system for the covering of crime. First,
beginning with the coroner's jury; then the grand in¬
quest ; then the petit jury. They are places of refuge
for the criminal classes of any city, county or State in
this country. But oh! when one comes to consider the
real origin of the custom of trial by jury, of the origin
of the jury as a mode of trial, what a jumble mixture,
mire and muck, there is of idea and no idea, thought
and no thought, as to when, where and how the system
ever came into use, for there are over twenty different
sources of origin and circumstances given as to how it
came about. But there is some evidence that it might
have arisen in the more dark, ignorant and inexpe¬
rienced age of the white man's effort of trying to gov-
278
THE NATIONS
ern and to be the governor of everything but himself;
and so the present system may have arisen out of his
custom of trying the beasts and animals of the field and
the insects of the ground, such as flies, mice, snails,
etc.
Now, I do think those wise and judicious solons
might have let the poor snail off, on the ground that he
could hardly have traveled fast enough to have gotten
to the place of his alleged crime; but it seems that noth¬
ing in time passed the great and mighty white man's
ignorance and hate, and it is not much better in many
respects,to-day.
But do not lose sight of the thought which suggested
that the system of trial by jury might have grown out
of the custom of trial, conviction and punishment of
the lesser animals. The following quotation will serve
as evidence to point out its possibility:
"In the Middle Ages the lower animals were fre¬
quently tried, convicted and punished for various of¬
fenses. Mr. Baring-Gould has collected some curious
cases of this kind. In 1266 a pig was burnt at Fon-
taney-aux-Roses, near Paris, for having eaten a child.
In 1386 a judge of Falaise condemned a sow to be miu-
tiliated and hanged for a similar offense. Three years
later a horse was similarly tried before the magistrate
and condemned to death for having killed a man. Dur¬
ing the fourteenth century oxen and cows might be
legally killed whenever taken in the act of marauding:
and asses, for a first offense, had one ear cropped; for
a second offense, the other ear, and if after this they
were asses enough to commit a third offense their lives
became forfeit to the Crown.
" 'Criminal' animals frequently expiated their of¬
fenses like other malefactors on the gallows, but sub¬
sequently. they were summarily killed without trial and
their owner mulcted in heavy damages. In the fif¬
teenth century it w'as popularly believed that cocks
FROM A NEW POINT OF VlW. 279
were intimately associated with witches, and they were
somewhat credited with the power of laying accursed
egg's from which sprang winged serpents. In 1474, at
Bale, a cock was publicly accused of having laid one of
these dreadful eggs. He was tried, sentenced to death,
and, together with the egg, was burned by the execu¬
tioner in the market-place amid a greiat concourse of
peopfe. In 1694, during the witch prosecution in New
Eneland, a dog exhibited such strange symptoms of
affliction that he was believed to have been ridden by
a warlock, and he was accordingly hanged.
"Snails, flies, mice, ants, caterpillars and other ob¬
noxious creatures have been similarly proceeded
against and condemned to various punishments,
mostlv in ecclesiastical courts. And, stranger still, in¬
animate objects have suffered the same fate. In 1685,
when the Protestant chapel at Rochelle Was condemned
to be demolished, the bell thereof was publicly whipped
for having assisted heretics with its tongue. After be¬
ing whipped it was catechised, compelled to recant and
then baptized and hung up in a Roman Catholic place
of worship,
"Probably similar absurdities may have been perpe¬
trated in our own country, for it must be remembered
that only in the present reign was the law repealed
which made a dartwheel, a tree or a beast which had
killed a man forfeit to the State for the benefit of the
poor. It had been said that punishment is not likely
to be efficacious unless it swiftly follows the offense.
This was improved on by a Barblary Turk, who, when¬
ever he bought a fresh Christian slave, had him hung
up by the heels and bastinadoed, on the principle, it is
supposed—though the application is decidely singular
—that prevention is better than cure." *
* This quotation is from "All the Year Round."
280
THE NATIONS
I will be more than glad to have the white man point
out any branch of the. colored race whose ignorance
w&s ever so dense as that, and it will be remembered
that some of these things, according to this author,
happened as late as the fourteenth and sixteenth cen¬
turies. But just think of it! Why, twenty persons
were put to death on the simple—yes, foolish—super¬
stitious charge of witchcraft in Massachusetts as late
as the year 1692. (See Emery E. Child's "History of
United States," page 18.) You see that was only 204
years ago. And not only so, but there was a time
when the white man taught it as a science, which the
following words of J. Richardson will show:
"It is not a hundred years since the conjuration of
witches, demons and fairies was commonly practiced
and taught in London by Lilly and others."
But stop! The white man of to-day would have the
world believe that it is only the colored race that ever
believed in any of the above named things, when the
facts are they have been transmitted by them as a
precious legacy from generation to generation, down
to the present time. But let us go back to the Monroe
Doctrine and that Venezuelan and arbitration matter
again, for I want to make some further quotations and
statements that will go to show that the white man on
this side of the water is not nearly so shrewd, wise and
sagacious as he has thought and proclaimed himself to
be, for we repeat that in State and interstate, national
and international affairs he has let things run at fear¬
fully loose and odd ends, and the whites of this country
have not yet gotten their eyes fully open to those facts,
for if they had they would not be perpetually boast¬
ing of the independence of this nation to all oth¬
ers, but would remember that there is an interdepend¬
ence to which the whole human race is heir. To show
more clearly that the United States has no good and
reasonable ground for continuously crying in that silly,
from a new point of view. 281
selfish and meaningless phrase, "America for Ameri¬
cans," I will simply call attention to the fact that five
other nations own 3,455,396 more square miles of ter¬
ritory on this continent than the United States do,
for the holdings of the five nations are the enormous
stim of 7,058,386 and according to an editorial in the
Baltimore Evening World of Saturday, February 22,
1896, the United States owns only 3,602,990 square
miles of this continent. See editorial of the World,
which I shall quote. The fivfe countries to which I
have reference are England, Brazil, France, Spain and
Holland. I here quote the editorial:
"The scheme proposed in the London Times for the
settlement of the Venezuelan boundary question has
many good points. It seems, however, that the plan
originated in Washington, and is not an English idea.
Mr. Smalley's dispatch suggested that two United
States and two English arbitrators should determinate
the Venezuelan frontier, and if these four were unable
to agree, a fifth neutral member should be called in.
Considering the territorial possessions of England on
the American continent, she has a right to a voice in
settling the boundary dispute by arbitration. Her pos¬
sessions cover 3,634,782 square miles. The United
States have 3,602,990 square miles, and Brazil comes
next with 3,218,166 square miles. No other state on
this continent has one-quarter as much ground as any
one of these. Viewing the arbitration question from
the above standpoint, there is some reasonableness in
the proposal made at Washington."
But take the white man in any branch of life's affairs,
and he will be found not disposed to co-operate on a
fair and even way with his fellow-man, but his disposi¬
tion is to compete and contest, and he does not even do
that on rational, racial and humane principles, but
rather on that low, groveling, animal basis, which, far
better befits the animal than the man. Just take him
282
THE NATIONS
in a business point of view and study him in a mercan¬
tile light, and the most that can be said of him in truth
and fairness is that he is a regular gambler in the
staples and means of human life and livelihood. And
not only so, but the very terms he uses to designate his
stock-gambling tricks are barbarous in the extreme.
Take, for example, the terms "bulls" and "bears"—two
of the most greedy and ferocious beasts of the field and
forest. And then' the office to be filled by the piarties
representing these terms is low and degrading in the
extreme, for one is to represent the bear in nature, to
pull man down and destroy him by squeezing him. to
death, and the other is to represent the maddened bull
whose nature it is to toss man up on his horns and
then gore him to death. Now, when we think of the
fact that these practices have been the food that the
white mian's nature has fed on since 1775, can it be
any wonder that we find the business world in the state
it is to-day—all demoralized, panic-stricken and un¬
trustworthy ?
But, in order to substantiate what I have been say¬
ing, I now quote from the American Cyclopaedia" as
follows:
"Bears and bulls, terms first applied in the London
Exchange to speculators in stocks. Two parties hav¬
ing contracted, the one to deliver, and the other to take
stocks, at a future time, at a specified price, it is the
interest of the delivering party, in the intervening time,
to depress stocks, and of the receiving party to raise
them. The former is called a bear, in allusion to the
habit of that animal to pull down with his paws, and
the latter a bull, from the custom of that beast to throw
up his horns. There is ordinlarily no exchange of
stocks, but when the time of delivery arrives the losing
partv pays the difference between the price of stocks
then and at the time the contract was made. The
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 283
terms are now recognized in the exchanges of the
largest cities of England and America."
Now just read the following dispatch from New
York to the Baltimore Evening World (December 21,
1896), for the great Master has said, "Out of thine
own mouth will I judge thee." Yes, read it, and
read it again, and then ponder over it, and think over
it as an object-lesson of the true principles upon which
the business of this country is carried on.
And, again, it will be seen on examination that while
at Washington the District of Columbia is the proper
place for the government center, according to constitu¬
tional enactment, nevertheless, it seems that New
York is the real place after all. I will just here insert
the dispatch; it is as follows—but notice how very
striking are the headlines to this most significant dis¬
patch :
WALL STREET ROBBERY.
THE PANIC A MALICIOUS DESIGN UNPARALLELED IN
HISTORY.
Collision Between Bears and Foreign Trading Houses.
How It Was Worked.
"New York, December 21.—Wall Street witnessed
another exciting scene this- morning when the stock
exchange opened. Long before the hour large crowds
had massed themselves in the circular galleries, stand¬
ing- in rows of two and three deep. The operating
brokers, looking grim and worried, were about early
discussing with much Animation the critical situation.
Hopes for a brighter outlook to-day were numerously
expressed. The bulls and bears were common in their
declaration to try and steady the market.
284
THE NATIONS
"Immediately after the chairman's gavel announced
the opening of the market there was a repetition of yes¬
terday's wild scenes. The various posts were at once
surrounded by tumultuous crowds, and operations be¬
gun with an exciting scramble. The confidence antici¬
pated did not manifest itself. There was a smashing
of stock all around, and as price after price went lower
a feverish feeling began quickly to spread among the
operators. Call money opened at 25 to 50 per cent.,
but there was no business at these rates.
"As the morning wore along commission houses
were in the receipt of investment orders, and under
this buying the strictly gilt-edged issues took on a
steadier tone. Money on call was also offered down
to 10 per cent., and this had some influence on the
market. When the hands of the big clock in the board
pointed to the noon hour and the chairman announced
the close of business a great shout of relief went up
from the floor which almost shook the famous build¬
ing.
"New York, December 21.—The failure of Hatch
Bros., was announced at the New York Stock Ex¬
change at 11 :i5 a. m., and at 1130 the failure of H. K.
Burras & Co. was announced. Mr. Burras has been a
member since December, 1876.
"New York, December 21.—The Times prints the-
following about the day in Wall Street: 'Collisions be¬
tween bear operators in stock and foreign trading
houses smashed prices in Wall Street, ran money rates
up to 90 per cent., withdrew $3,400,000 from the gold
reserve and caused several financial failures. Declines
affected the entire trading list. Losses ran as high as
ten points at one time in several substantial securities.
" 'Accustomed as is the financial district to wicked
work in the security market, yesterday's performance
surpassed in malicious design and manipulative cun¬
ning and boldness anything ever before attempted. Its
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 285
success was complete, and that it should have been so,
was amazing, since those Well informed knew how it
had been brought about. Men who engineered the de¬
cline used the Venezuela incident as a pretext. They
had been in high feather since the President's fnessage
came out, and issued from the beginning the most
gloomy predictions of its financial results. The worst
apprehensions had not expressed fear of anything ap¬
proaching the happenings in intensity or scope. Since
operators usually read London quotations the first
thing in the morning, in the last few days special
significance has attached to them because of rumors
of English intention regarding American securities.
Casual observers might have supposed that yesterday's
London quotations reflected a wholesale overthrow of
American securities there. From best available sources
of information it appeared that London sales did not
exceed 50,000 shares of stock.
" 'Since there was danger of a failure of the bear plot
through this inadequate agency alone, even with Lon¬
don a present source of financial anxiety, plans were
laid to supplement attack through London quotations
by pushing up rates for money here. Houses that
handle foreign loans became tools in this scheme. They
called loans rapidly at the opening of business and
money jumped from 2 per cent to 7 per cent at once.
The combined influence of London quotations and
high money caused the sale of 240,000 shares of stock
in the first hour. Money advanced by leaps. The
leaders apparently hlaid been frightened and refused to
put it out again. An excited demand for it resulted,
and before two o'clock the rate touched 90 per cent.
The sudden withdrawal of $5,000,000 of loans by for¬
eign houses, including Canadian banking agencies, did
the business, especially as that money was kept out of
the market."
286
THE NATIONS
"London, December 21.—Stock-exchange market
opened panicky. American railroad stocks were de¬
moralized, notwithstanding the fact in the first hours
of the session the prices were better than at the close
yesterday. The fluctuations were rapid and some-
wh'at violent. Many stocks were unsalable.
"Philadelphia, December 21.—L. H. Taylor & Co.,
bankers and brokers, failed this morning—one of the
oldest firms on the street.
"Boston, December 21.—Price & Co., Congress
street stock brokers have failed. The announcement
made on the stock exchange this morning."
"The White Mian in Government" is the subject of
this chapter, and my purpose is to review his manage¬
ment of the affairs of the people under the different
aspects in which he is called upon to act for them, and
we are now asking the very important question, How
has he managed and dealt with their interests? Has
he guarded, protected and improved them to the peo¬
ple's advantage and betterment? But the sad answer
must emphatically be, "No, not by any means." But, on
the contrary, it must be said that the people's
means and moneys have been woefully wasted, their
interests shamefully slighted and neglected and the
profits turned to the personal gains and ends of those
who have had them in charge. And, indeed, it seems
that everything the white man puts his hand to flies
up, like a skvrccket does, into the air, then quivers,
sparkles, solntters, and makes a great display, then ex¬
plodes, and the shattered; torn and wasted remains fall
lifelessly to the ground again.
But there is a case just now before the public that
pre-eminently goes to show the white man's unfitness
and inability to properly and economically manage the
people's matters, whether it be private, State or na¬
tional concerns. It is the failure of the Baltimore &
Ohio Railroad, which is the very first railroad enter-
FROM A NEW POINT OF VIEW. 287
prise the white man ever undertook to construct and
manage in this country, and now that has largely-
proved a failure, so far as the largest part of the share¬
holders are concerned. Of course the holders of pre¬
ferred stock are not at all injured by the failure, but it
is the common holder, the common people—yes, the
many—who have shares of stock that will suffer. Then,
again, there were five years that the road, on account
of bad management, reckless expenditure, wasteful and
useless changes, falsely called "improvements," only 3
per cent dividends were declared; two years 2^ ; one
yeiar only 2, and for nine years none at all. Neither
have the common stockholders received a dollar on
their investment since 1894, and I wish to say that it
does not help the matter any to state that the affairs of
the company have only "gone into the hands of re¬
ceivers," for I consider that only a more pleasant way
of announcing a failure, and it also means that the
common stockholders are to> be deprived of their divi¬
dends in order that the receivers may be paid, and that
the preferred stocks may earn dividends. Not only so,
but in the case now before us the white man has had
every advantage to show himself a success, for he
not only had the aid of the State, but of the national
government also; and the aid was important and mate¬
rial by way of government and State investments and
legislative enactments, judicial decisions, the exemp¬
tion of the entire property from taxation; etc. Yet the
white man, under such favorable circumstances as
these, could not keep that important enterprise afloat.
And now I ask again, Where are the grounds for his
much-boasted superior .business capacity? In what
has it shown itself?
But if I were in need_ of other evidence to prove the
white man's unfitness and incapacity to legislate for
the people I have it here before me now in the form
of a "special" to the Baltimore American of the present
288
THE NATIONS
date (March 5, 1896) under the caption, "Legislators
in a Row," and the "row" was in the Virginia legisla¬
ture a,t Richmond, and the quotation will show why it
arose; and the incident will also give us an insight
into the white man's modern' and improved methods" of
legislation, and that is, when he finds his opponent's
head so hard that "it will not or cannot quite take in his
arguments, takes a big club and uses that on it a while
and see if he cannot soften it a little and make it more
susceptible to a proper conception of such weighty and
ponderous matters and arguments as he is advancing
and advocating.
The special dispatch also says a plot has been dis¬
covered that was on foot to steal the bill that is before
the legislature, and the author of it had to take it from
the senate chamber and carry it to the governor's man¬
sion and get him to lock it up in his combination safe
to keep it from being stolen before it could be massed
upon by the legislature. Then' may it not well be seri¬
ously and earnestly asked, What is this government of
ours, with such a condition of affairs, coming to? And
what may we expect will.be the end?
"A eood deal of excitement exists here in regard to
a personal attack in the senate chamber this morning
on Senator W. M. Flannagan, the Republican member
from Powhatan county, by Senator H. D. Flood, the
Democratic member of Appomattox. The weapon
used was a walking-stick, and the blow was above the
ear, and made a cut several inches long, down to the
bone, and had to be sewed up. Flannagan's friends
claim, that Flood struck him without warning, and
Flood's friends indignantly deny this. Delegate Coles,
the Republican member from Northumberland, swore
out a warrant for Flood, but before it was served
Flood surrendered himself to the police, and was bailed
for $2500 to await developments in Flannagan's con¬
dition. Flannagan was the leader of the minority
THE NATIONS.
289
party in the senate, and his aggressive contests over
election matters brought forth many personalities in
debate, and at different times Flood was very cutting
in his remarks. These, Flannagan returned in kind,
and last Thursday characterized one of Flood's state¬
ments as being not true.- One newspaper quoted the
words used as "entirely untrue," and another quoted
him as saying "utterly false." These last words Flanna¬
gan acknowledged in an interview yesterday as being
his words, and the fight this morning was the result.
Flannagan was badly nauseated all day from the effects
of the blow. He was reported worse to-night, and
his mind is said to be flighty. * * *
"Mr. Maupin, the author of the anti-race track gam¬
bling bill, this evening confirmed the rumor that there
was a plot on hand to steal the Maupin bill while it was
pending in the senate, the idea being to duplicate the
Indiana coup worked by the gamblers on the legisla¬
ture of thiat State, and prevent it reaching Governor
O'Ferrall's hands until it was too late to put through
another bill. Mr. Maupin was warned of the plot by
a person whose identity he will not disclose. He noti¬
fied the clerk of the senate of the plot, and with his
own hands took the bill to the governor, and it was
locked in the safe of the executive office until needed
in the senate."
19