Part 4

I think that I am quite safe in assuming that there is no scrap of history that can be brought by analogy to prove, “that we must either succumb to the numerical preponderance of power, which our enemies may bring to bear against us, or cease to exist on the continent.” I think the history of the aborigines of this country goes but a short distance in proof of this mode of reasoning; they sunk by thousands in the very pursuits under which our race have steadily increased. Besides, there are very many reasons why they have diminished, aside from the aggressive war of extermination forced upon them by the whites; while the sword among them has slain its thousands, the introduction of rum of the most poisonous character has slain its tens of thousands. Delirium tremens, mania a potu, and a thousand other hereditary diseases more fruitful of death and the entire destruction of the human family than the sword, through the wily craft of white men have been thrust among them—then what has followed? Internal dissensions among the different tribes, by which means the sword, in the hands of brethren, has done more for their extermination than enemies of the opposite race. But our people usually drink good whiskey, or the best of brandy, and I therefore do not exactly look for the same results to them in this direction; and, with their knowledge of the deceptive character of our oppressors, I cannot think we will ever be induced by them to slay each other indiscriminately, as the Indians have. My friend speaks of world’s fairs, agricultural pursuits, arts and sciences, etc., versus momentary admiration for exhibitions of well disciplined men, well drilled in military tactics, &c. He brings wealth, education, industry, &c., against efficient military drill, well contested battles, bravery and gallant exploits in active service, etc. But he evidently does not draw his conclusions from a very careful study of his subject and the nations to whom he refers. Great Britain first made herself free, then became the governess of her numerous colonies, then became mistress of the seas, before she turned her attention to these social and civil pursuits that my friend cites us to. France had pillaged the world by her superior perfection in artillery and infantry tactics, before she was satisfied to go to work at world’s fairs and what not. But the slaves of every nation are those who challenge competition in mechanics, agriculture, and the fine arts. Why then have they not been freed by this means without an appeal to arms? My friend refers to Hayti, and says, they are not more respected though “they wielded the sword to desperation, etc.” Thank God, they are at least free and independent. Besides this, the colored planters, though they were acknowledged the most wealthy, educated, industrious, and thrifty of the Haytians, challenging competition by their industry and wealth, and commanding respect by their education and refinement, yet they never were recognized or respected at home or abroad until they grasped the sword and taught their oppressors and the world a lesson of African chivalry, versus so much mock morality, peaceful submission, etc., in this stirring age of human progress. By this means the blacks of Hayti are felt in a way that world’s fairs, &c., &c., would not have made them felt for centuries yet to come. My friend inquires how we could influence the administration more than Gen. Fremont; and whether the States could thrust upon the war department persons whom interest or necessity might dictate they should reject; or whether they could accept the services of those who are legally disqualified? He then says, if this may not be constitutionally done, would not my policy environ the administration and force that cavil I would obviate? I think I fairly met these questions in my previous article. I will again, for the esteem I have for my friend, answer him as best I can. First, no one can tell how much Gen. Fremont has or can influence the war department; the fact that Mr. Cameron visited Fremont in person, and that Fremont has made no public protest against the ruling of the cabinet, looks very suspicious that they understood each other, and were only acting up to the necessity of keeping their own counsel. Fremont evidently wields an influence that would require but a very few men of his stamp to emancipate the entire South. He may yet be commander-in-chief under our present administration. Secondly, the States have and are doing every day all that we would require them to do; _i. e._, they are raising troops, preparing them by all available means for the time the government will need them; and may they not as readily prepare colored as white men? Would this not be a step in the direction of enfranchisement? And after all, is it not through this medium, the recognition of our rights by the people, that we may ever hope to reach the government? As to legal disqualification, and constitutional necessity being in our way, I would refer my friend to Mr. Lincoln’s speech at Independence Hall, in this city, when he said that “after all, decisions of the Supreme Court, and our constitutional and compromise obligations are not eternal principles, but must vary with the necessities of the times, etc.” A solution of these strange words are given in the Rev. H. H. Garnet’s passports by Mr. Seward; and Mr. Lincoln’s answer to the writ of habeas corpus issued by the highest judicial authority in the country. Garnet’s passport and the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus are the best of arguments against constitutional and legal restrictions, preventing the recognition of a hundred thousand men of the best muscle and determined bravery in the Federal ranks.

As to what southern emissaries may do, by throwing information into the hands of the Rebels, of our movements, etc., I have only to say that it is an abstract question that should have no weight with men willing to do their duty in a great crisis like the present; follow this rule of reasoning and we should have no army, no President, no freemen, no free-soil, nor aught else to defend. Seven years ago the serfs of Russia were hopeless slaves; the nobility had frustrated the efforts of every cabinet for the amelioration of their condition. At length a war broke out between Russia, Turkey, France and England. The Czar, driven to an extremity, proposed to place in the field 250,000 serfs. The nobility protested against it, fearing the result to themselves. The serfs opposed it because they could see no issue in the war favorable to their interest; they believed England and France to be far more favorable to their freedom than Russia. The war raged, and finally Alexander, over the heads of nobility and serfs, drafted 75,000 serfs and sent them off to the Crimea, and in less than three years from that time, nearly thirty millions of slaves are freed by the result of that policy. There was no way to dispossess these people of the influence they swayed by that one stroke of war policy; but to emancipate them was inevitable. Is not our condition analogous to theirs in many respects, and may we not by the same policy expect a similar result? I must thank my friend for two considerations of kindness toward his old, misguided, suicidal friend; first, for his anxiety “that I might receive my sight;” second; for his anxiety lest I should be lost while performing an unpleasant duty. There are two kinds of blindness mentioned in scripture, an unfortunate blindness and a wilful one; as my friend has placed me among the first class, by Moses’ law, Leviticus 19: 14, I am entitled to commiseration, and by the same law, Deut. 27: 18, he should be sorely punished for trying to lead me to wander out of the way, etc. I am somewhat fearful that my friend may be of the opposite class mentioned in the ¶ from the 37th to the 52d verse of the 12th chapter of John. If so, a solution to his unfortunate state may be found in Matthew, 15: 14.

A. M. GREEN.

POPULAR LECTURES.

Associations and Lecture Committees will do well, when making engagements for a course, or for single Lectures, to remember that =PROF. A. M. GREEN= is prepared to deliver either of the following VERY POPULAR AND INSTRUCTIVE LECTURES, on the most reasonable terms:

LECTURE I.

SUBJECT—_Lessons in the School of Mythology_.

LECTURE II.

SUBJECT—_Slavery, Rebellion, Emancipation_.

LECTURE III.

SUBJECT—_The Terrific Power of Intemperance when it Becomes a Master Passion_.

LECTURE IV.

SUBJECT—_The Beauty and Power of a Christian Education; or, Pagan and Christian Literature Contrasted_.

LECTURE V.

SUBJECT—_The Destiny of the Colored People of the American Continent_.

LECTURE VI.

SUBJECT—_The Past, Present, and Future—a Poem on the Great Rebellion_.

LECTURE VII.

SUBJECT—_The World’s Reputed Heroes, and what We should Learn from Them_.

LECTURE VIII.

SUBJECT—_Captain John Brown—the Model Hero, and the Noblest Roman of them all_.

=PROF. GREEN= is also prepared to exhibit his beautiful =ETHIOPIAN PAGODA= of Astronomy, Natural Science and History, including some of the most interesting scenes of the Rebellion, &c. Having Lectured before several of the most prominent Literary Associations, both white and colored, and having the highest and most satisfactory testimonials of success, wherever heard, he offers these Lectures to the favorable consideration of his friends—willing to serve them at any time when properly notified, and on the most reasonable terms.

Letters will receive immediate attention.

A. M. GREEN, _906 Catharine St., Philadelphia, Penn’a._

Or they may be addressed to him, care of REV. A. R. GREEN, Box 1608, _Detroit, Mich._