Chapter 9

The moral is plain. Get education. Be thrifty and economical. Get lands and money. Get character and personal culture. These qualities, united, pass as good coin in any state North or South. They go far to minimize the disadvantages of color everywhere. Without them no race is strong anywhere. They are potent in allaying the race feeling aggravated by too many of us, through voting under the leadership of scheming politicians who are opposed to the best interests of the masters of the Southern soil, and who have no use for black men except on election day. In the matter of suffrage, I would suggest that the black voter place himself in touch with his white neighbors. The interests of each are identical. It is of far greater importance to the Negro to have the friendship, respect and confidence of his next-door neighbor than who shall be President of the United States. It is of more moment to him who shall be sheriff or member of the state legislature and city council than who shall go to Congress. This suggests that the Negro use clear judgment in casting his ballot, and that he use that instrument to identify himself with the law-abiding and progressive forces about him. The Negro's natural home will ever be in the South. The careful exercise of suffrage in promoting the interests of that section, eliminating partisan bitterness and vengeful spirit, will be one of the most powerful agencies in maintaining and strengthening friendly relations between the races there.

Further, let the Negro make for himself a place in the business world. Let him develop hotels, groceries, stores and shops of all kinds, thus affording employment to our competent young men and women. Let him perfect himself in the useful arts; till the soil, and become an indispensable factor in the uplift of the community which he calls home. The farmer, the artisan, and industrious wage-earner form the backbone of racial progress, for they support the church, are patrons of the schools, and are steady conservers of public morals. From this firm center, a lever is furnished which holds up the house of the minister, the editor, the teacher, physician, the artist, the lawyer, and all of the so-called "polite" professions. Let the Negro build up his own social circle, and strive to perfect it through an exemplary home life. While a part of the general social system the Negro people can be to the Whites, as Booker T. Washington so well puts it, "separate as the fingers" in social contact, but "one as the hand" in all that tends to sustain and improve the State and Nation.

In short, let the white man be just, if he cannot be generous. Let him give the Negro what is due him. Weigh him honestly as to character and manly worth. Let the Negro be patient, persevering, philosophical, thrifty, self-respecting and far-seeing. Brains and energy will eventually win their legitimate place in the equation of civic virtue, and the forces of right will gravitate, the one towards the other, just as the flowering plant turns to the sunlight. In peaceful conditions, nurtured by mutual sympathy, mutual suffering and mutual triumphs, will be forged a bond that shall in due season draw the best in each of the great races of the South in closer and more friendly communion. Our beloved America shall throw off the shameful shackles of racial prejudice. Progress towards a sweeter civilization will be the watchword for all. Then, there shall be, indeed and in truth, for every class, color, condition and section in this land, "One God, one country, and one flag." There is hope ahead.

SECOND PAPER.

HOW CAN THE FRIENDLY RELATIONS NOW EXISTING BETWEEN THE TWO RACES IN THE SOUTH BE STRENGTHENED AND MAINTAINED?

BY REV. W. D. CHAPPELLE, D. D.

WILLIAM D. CHAPPELLE.

Rev. William D. Chappelle was born in Fairfield County, South Carolina, November 16, 1857. At twelve years of age, he was sent to the common schools of Winnsboro, S. C., to Northern teachers. So eager was he to learn that he cut light wood up at night and carried it to town on his head, using the money thus obtained to buy his first book. After finishing the common schools, he entered Fairfield Normal Institute, and there prepared himself for a teacher, which vocation he pursued for several years. After his conversion he felt called to the ministry. Accordingly, he joined the Columbia Annual Conference in 1881, and feeling his inability to effectually preach the Gospel of Christ, he entered Allen University, there taking a collegiate course, at the same time serving missions near Columbia.

With a wife and one child, he found that the mission work was inadequate for his support, having very often to cease his studies in school and go out and teach for two or three months to relieve the wants of his family. This was very discouraging to him, but he courageously worked on until Bishop Dickerson relieved him of some of his responsibilities by giving him a room in his back yard. This he gladly accepted that he might earn some money with which to buy books and thus sustain himself in his struggle for an education.

I know of my own personal knowledge that he had very often to walk sixteen miles on Sundays and preach twice, getting back home at 11 or 12 o'clock at night to be enabled to make recitations on Monday. Nevertheless, he struggled on and graduated at the head of his class in 1887.

He was ordained deacon in Bethel A. M. E. Church, Columbia, S. C., March, 1883, by Bishop Dickerson, and ordained elder by Bishop James A. Shorter at Greenville, S. C., in 1885. He graduated from Allen University in 1887, in a class with six other young men--four preachers and two lawyers. In 1887 he was elected a delegate to the General Conference which met in Indianapolis, Ind., and he has been elected to each successive General Conference ever since. He served eight years as a pastor, holding three appointments, and ten years as a presiding elder. He was appointed to the Manning District in 1889, and after serving there four years he was appointed, by Bishop Salter, to the Orangeburg District, the largest district in the State, and served there five years. Bishop A. Grant appointed him to the Sumter District in 1898, which district he served until the General Conference met in Columbus, Ohio, 1900, where he was elected Corresponding Secretary and Editor of the Sunday School periodicals of the A. M. E. Church.

Dr. Chappelle also served two years as President of Allen University, his alma mater, being elected just ten years after his graduation from that institution.

He has had a successful career as teacher, as preacher and, now, as business manager and editor. He ranks, also, as one of the leaders of his race, as a scholar and writer of no mean ability. He is an able debater, having few superiors as an extemporaneous speaker. Acute in thought and incisive in speech, he is a fluent talker.

Unlike most men of a literary turn of mind, he combines fine business acumen with his intellectual ability, and has accumulated property, real and personal, to the amount of ten thousand dollars, situated in Columbia, S. C., and Nashville, Tenn.

The subject above assigned me is a momentous one and involves an issue which is not settled, nor will it be settled until the relation which now exists between the two races is based upon that moral "ought" growing out of the ethical rule given by God for the government of man. For it must be conceded that all friendly relations are based upon ethical treatment. A relation upon any other basis is forced, and, therefore, not genuine. The so-called Negro problem which is being agitated by the public press is forced upon us by fictitious sentiment, conceived in prejudice, and watered by opportunity, and a disregard for law, and truthfulness of statements made concerning the Negro as a citizen.

When a relation is fixed by such undue advantages, that relation is NOT, for it is ex-parte, and the party having the public ear creates the sentiment, and thus forces the party which is _not_ heard to terms, whether those terms be satisfactory or not. Then, it can be plainly seen that such relations are not real, for they are not based upon that law under which all men are created and governed.

Now, I lay down the following as a general proposition which I think will stand the test of critics, whether they be of the North or South. It is the rule of international law to have a friendly relation between nations, states and individuals, and that relation is made by representatives of all the parties concerned. The agreement must be mutual and that mutuality must be based upon righteousness--that righteousness which makes sacred the rights of all the contending parties.

If the friendly relationship existing between the two races in the South is mutual, then the development of the Negro will fasten and rivet such a relation. But if it is not mutual, and undue advantages have been taken of him, his development will make it impossible for such relations to be strengthened and maintained.

To perpetuate a relationship, it must first be based upon the principles of right, guaranteed by the force of all competent power, that power being common to all parties concerned. This is the sum maximum of all ethical science and is complete. To add to it, or take from it, would change the rule. Then, the solution to all ills must be measured by that sense of conscience unimpaired, emanating from that innate rule of human duty based upon moral obligation.

Now, there must be a standard of righteousness, not fixed by man, but by a superior power; for it is not man's will which he must obey, but the will of his Maker. This will can be shown in two ways only. First, by revelation, and, second, by example, both of which have been verified and demonstrated in the sacrifice made by Christ for the world of mankind. This relationship can and will be sustained, because Christ sought to know the nature and power of the second party. He enters into a covenant fixing that relationship forever, between the two. Now, if the so-called superior race, with the boasted power of all the heavy centuries of the past, has given to the inferior race in its undeveloped condition, that consideration which is necessary to sustain and maintain the relationship which now exists, then, the relationship is real and the education and development of the Negro along economic and commercial lines will but make this relationship stronger. And the future of the two races in the South, under such conditions, must be bright and glorious.

But, I fear we have been hasty in our conclusions when we measure the relationship which now exists in the South, by constitutional rights and enactments. The Constitution of these United States makes the people a compact, and therefore equals in immunities, privileges and rights, with a common flag as the symbol of our common protection. Every citizen, then, of these United States--let him be of any race variety--owes to that flag its protection, and, in return, that flag is to protect him. So that the relationship of all the citizens of the United States to the flag is the same; being the same to the flag, they are the same to each other from a civic point of view.

I agree that there is such a thing as "State rights," but such rights must be local and subsidiary and must in no case conflict with, or counteract, the rights of a citizen growing out of a common Constitution whose jurisdiction holds the sisterhood of states together. To sustain and maintain such a sisterhood the compilers of the Constitution gave the general government the right to summons such states to protect her in the discharge of her duty. So that it is seen that the government is exercising a power that was given it by the sovereign people, acknowledging equal rights to all and special privileges to none. Among these are life, liberty and the peaceful pursuit of happiness. These are the rights which are guaranteed by the Constitution.

Now, an agreement entered into by the people of any part of these United States which does not conform to the stipulated rights mentioned above, is not a contract and can not be considered binding under the law. Therefore, a relationship based upon privileges of one and the denied rights of the other, cannot be friendly and must, sooner or later, be dissolved. I, for one, cannot concede that the relationship between the races in the South is friendly. It is, for the most part, peaceful, but that peace grows out of a fear of the law in the hands of an unfriendly and prejudiced people who feel that the Negro race has no rights which they are bound to respect. Accepting this position, the Negro quietly moves on, trying to make for himself and family a living, but he feels keenly the class legislation which proscribes him to the "Jim Crow" cars, to the rear seats in street cars, behind the doors in public restaurants, and a hundred other indignities heaped upon him. He is also denied the right to vote, which is the greatest evil done him and the only protection that the Constitution gives him.

Now, I ask, "Can there be friendly relations with such environments, and, if they are friendly, can they be sustained and maintained?" I assert that the infringement of any right is an unfriendly act, whether the one whose rights are infringed upon is conscious of the unfriendly act or not. If he is unconscious of it, it is all the more unfriendly. I assert further, that whenever existing conditions make it necessary for one race to suppress another, the suppression affects both races alike. The stronger race ceases to develop that strength which is necessary for the growth of a nation, and to prepare it to meet the great problems which are indispensable in the fostering of a government such as ours. And the weaker race is deprived of the opportunities which are necessary to cultivate those innate powers which are intended by God to be developed in the rounding out of good citizenship. In fact, the denial of freedom to any race, along any of the walks of life, has a tendency to teach that race irresponsibility; for responsibility must rest with the volition of the human family.

"The Nashville American," in a recent issue, admits that the Southern white people have made no progress in the great world of thought, because they had everything their way. The solid South practically destroyed its opportunities to develop thinkers in the political world, and the prejudice they entertain and foster by mere sentiment was not conducive to the production of strong men, or the development of great thinkers or leaders of distinguished constructive ability. In some sense the South has for some time lived in an eddy. There has not been that broad sweep of the current of thought which once made it strong and powerful. And the reason for this is assigned in their surroundings, their highest ambition being to suppress the Negro in the civil walks of life.

Now, we are confronted with a condition--call it a relation, if you please--in which the interest of the entire Southland is involved, and we, as the Negro race, are called upon to express ourselves as to the basis of this relationship and the perpetuity of the same. The facts above stated make it extremely difficult for one to conscientiously concede, first that the relations are friendly; and, second, that they can be sustained and maintained. As a matter of fact, the subject assigned me can be easily answered by saying that the friendly relations which now exist can be sustained and maintained by destroying the system of public instruction; by making no protest against the encroachments upon our liberty; by destroying the medium of the Christian religion, pulling down our altars, demolishing our churches and hanging crape on the door-knobs of all places of public instruction. This we are unwilling to do, and, as God gives us strength and light to see our plain duty, we shall work, watch and wait for that surrounding which shall be congenial to a healthful development of a Christian manhood, when the sphinx of this age shall have passed into the oblivious past; and mankind, transformed from brutish prejudice to that lordly prince, divested of all racial prejudice, shall stand upon that plain of reason where all are equals. We must see that our rights under the Constitution are one thing and the enjoyment of those rights quite another thing.

Now, then, shall we, because these rights are denied us, fail to teach our children that these rights are ours? And can it not be seen that for us to concede that the relationship, now existing between the two races in the South, is friendly, is an admission of the righteousness upon which such relation is based? And even this very book will be brought in evidence against us.

A friendly relation grows out of real friendship, so that it is necessary here to explain friendship. Mr. Webster gives the meaning of friendship as a state of being friends; a friendly relation or attachment, to a person, or between persons; affection arising from mutual esteem and good will; friendliness; amity; good will.

"There is little friendship in the world," says Bacon. There can be no friendship without confidence, and no confidence without integrity.

Dryden says, "Aptness to unite; conformity; affinity; harmony and correspondence are the signs of friendship." These grow out of that soil and are the forerunners of that friendship out of which a relation must be had to be called friendly.

Now let us analyze this term "friendship." "Amity"--from the Latin, amare to love, or friendship in a general way between individuals, societies or nations. "Goodwill"--I wish you well, peace and prosperity. "Integrity"--moral soundness; completeness; honesty; rectitude.

We have given some of the terms which Mr. Webster used in the explanation of the word friendship. Our purpose for so doing is to see if it is possible to base the relationship which now exists between the two races in the South, upon all the synonyms or any one of them. I confess with candor that I cannot see (nor can any lover of liberty who holds sacred the rights of the human family, regardless of race, color or previous condition of servitude) even a semblance of amity in the treatment which the Negro gets at the hands of the dominant race, in fact, it is just the opposite, the relationship is forced and also one sided.

The seemingly friendly relation is forced from the Negro; that is, he must show up friendly or be lynched by the first angry mob who becomes thirsty for Negro blood.

If we sustain a friendly relation based upon the integrity of the Southern whites, there could be no lynching; the friendship of the white man would cause it to cease at once.

Would to God that they would interpret our actions in the light in which they are rendered and not make us suffer for what somebody else has done, simply because we are weak and unable to protect ourselves against the insanity of the prejudice.

The Southern white people, in their haste, are making an unenviable history at which they will blush in the years to come.

Three innocent people in the State of Mississippi have just been taken from the officers and lynched, two of whom were women. Can a race of people said to be friendly towards another race reach such hasty conclusions? Would not friendship suggest an investigation in order that the facts in the case may be had? But we are living in the midst of a people whose civilization is christianized, thus having in it that friendship which characterised Christ in taking the sins of mankind upon himself. "Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you" (Bible). This text makes friendship conditional and reciprocal; that is, there can be no friendship without mutuality; so that the relation which now exists is not based upon friendship, for the relation which is made to exist is not in accordance with that moral rule given for the government of man, therefore things are not what they seem to be in the Southland.

I tell you that the Negro is not satisfied with his condition and the more he learns of the common rights of the human family, the more he sees the great wrongs "perpetrated" upon him and the reasons for the same. You cannot educate a people and crush them, history does not narrate an instance.

THIRD PAPER.

HOW CAN THE FRIENDLY RELATIONS NOW EXISTING BETWEEN THE TWO RACES IN THE SOUTH BE STRENGTHENED AND MAINTAINED?

BY REV. S. N. BROWN.

REV. STERLING N. BROWN, A. M., B. D.

Rev. Sterling N. Brown was born in Roane County, East Tennessee, November 21, 1857. He attended the first free school ever taught in his county. He entered Fisk University (Nashville, Tenn.) in 1875, and for some years, during his terms of vacation, taught school to provide the means with which to pursue his studies. He was converted when quite a boy and has been able since, almost continuously, to lead men to Christ. He began to preach early after his conversion, and many revivals have followed his ministry. The first great awakening where, under God, he was the instrument, was at Kingston, Tenn., where every child in school, of over one hundred in number, became Christians, and when the whole town was stirred as never before. Many hardened sinners were brought to Christ in the meeting. Several of the converts are now actively engaged in the ministry. Mr. Brown's acceptance as a preacher made it possible for him to spend the entire vacations of his last years at college in supplying the pulpits of his denomination in different parts of the South.

He graduated from the college course of Fisk University in 1885, and took the degree of A. M. in 1891. He is also a graduate from the Oberlin Theological Seminary with the degree of B. D. He was called, June 1, 1885, to the Mount Zion Congregational Church, Cleveland, Ohio, and was by that Church ordained to the gospel ministry. This church was composed of a few faithful but discouraged members. They worshipped in a small frame chapel without either attraction or convenience.