Chapter III: Rejoinder

From the Anglo-African, October 26, 1861.

MR. EDITOR:

That it is the duty of every one advancing propositions for public adoption, inviting scrutiny and analysis, counseling a policy, to assign competent reasons, I am sensibly convinced; and that Mr. A. M. Green, in your issue of the 12th, was disposed to combat my ideas—I could only accept as a compliment—differing, no doubt, from what it was intended. It raises me in my own estimation to think that one like myself, of so feeble an intellect, of so little cultivation, should have provoked the notice of so able a man as my literary opponent. I therefore bow to it, and for the last time upon this subject, proceed to reiterate in substance my former sentiments, while I attempt to reply to my worthy antagonist, though co-worker, who has the advantage of me in assuming the leadership or acting the spokesman for our race in this country.

Mr. Green says:—

“But I think it just, once in a while, to speak out and let the world know where we stand on the great issues of the day, for it is only by this means that we can succeed in arousing our people from a mistaken policy of inactivity,” &c., &c.

The policy which he recommends, is certainly one which, if followed, must destroy every vestige of that power which by our united influence has so long troubled the plotters of our ruin and extinction to the detriment of their wily schemes.

If his sentiments are those of our people generally, I am heartily sorry, and must differ with them, though I stand alone, as the only advocate of the policy of peace measures or neutral action in the great struggle.

He also says, that “this inactivity that is advocated, is the principle that has ever had us left behind and will leave us again, unless we arouse from our lethargy and arm ourselves as men and patriots against the common enemy of God and man.”

I admit that there is less activity in the right direction than advisable or beneficial to our cause, but never have our people displayed more wisdom than the present in refraining from initiating or making demonstrations of war measures. In that particular, discretion has marked their action—I, for one, must give them credit. That grasping the sword will emancipate us from prejudice, from slavery, may be well enough to declaim, but will it bear questioning? He intimates that it will emancipate us from our now unhappy and heart-crushing disabilities, will take the manacles from our limbs, remove the obstacles that debar our elevation to the equality to which we aspire.

I have yet to learn that these are practical established facts; it may be clear to the mind of Mr. G., but he must make it appear so by something more than simple declamation.

Who accuses us of cowardice? No one, unless it be my honorable opponent. Can we purchase freedom and independence by the sacrifice of thousands of our unfortunate people, in belligerent opposition to those who have the prëeminence in position, power and influence; whose numerical strength is ten times that of our own? We may sell our lives dearly, carry havoc and destruction into the ranks of our enemies, but the numerical preponderance, the unlimited means at their control, must force us to succumb or cease to exist on this continent as a race. All reason and experience will decide that—look at it as you may. The history of the Aborigines of this country must satisfy you of the force of this mode of reasoning.

To contend against the government then with any hope of success, is vain and not worthy of the time we spend in discussing it.

Admitting, for mere argument, that the government would accept our services, how could we, more than the commander of the West, General Fremont, influence the policy of the administration to our liberation or emancipation from prejudice and slavery? No, my friends, your reason must answer, no!—no fighting will emancipate you from prejudice. Will any one tell me that to-day a poor man, of little or no intellectual cultivation, from the Independent Government of Hayti, will be more respected in this or any country than one of the native born of this country, of our color? Did they not wield both fire and sword fiercely, to desperation, for the liberties they now enjoy? But to command respect, wealth and education must do it—_they_ will do more towards destroying that prejudice which darkens our existence than all the fighting we can effect under the most favorable circumstances.

Mr. G. tells us that we should make ourselves felt. In that I agree with him; but may we not question the manner in which we can do it the more effectually.

I am told the object of the exhibitors at the Great Exhibition in London, the World’s Fair, in 1851, was to make themselves felt by the exhibition of their great advancement in Art and Science; the object of those nations contributing their quota by invitation, was the same. The Fair was, we are told, a complete success. That should satisfy us, that the cultivation of peace, of arts and science, will go equally as far as an unsuccessful war, to produce that high respect we are advised to fight for. I, for one, am satisfied that other means of making ourselves felt, at less sacrifice of existence and more beneficial to the desired end, than wielding the sword, can be found. That impression that awards us credit, and challenges not only competition as equals, but commands that respect which an array or force of arms, situated as we are, can never force upon this or any nation whose interests are immediately identified with the institution of slavery—and the safety of that depending to an extent upon the crushing despotism and deprivations visited upon those dangerous to its progress or stability—is what we want to make ourselves felt. No unarmed, ununiformed masses of colored men, parading through the streets, will ever produce or tend to produce such impression.

Mr. G. takes this stand: (I give his own language, word for word, as follows:) “Now I maintain that, for all practical purposes, whatever be the turn of the war, preparation on our part, by the most efficient knowledge of military art and discipline, is one of the most positive demands of the times.”

As an off-set to that position, I here take my stand: That the encouragement of every pursuit of industry and education, aside from war matters, are deserving and should (more especially at this time while the usurpers of our rights and liberties are engaged in desperate conflict) meet our most vigorous and undivided cöoperation! That that policy, adopted, realized, and perfected, alone can produce the requisite means to establish our claim to the respect we need; to open the many avenues of wealth, prominence, political and civil equality, without which, no display of military drill, of hordes of unarmed or armed men, ignorant of every other necessary qualification as serviceable citizens, will command.

Momentary admiration for exhibitions of well drilled men and military tactics, which I believe would follow, would create sensation among the sight-lovers who swarm in all thickly populated districts; but that indelible impression, mighty to move the hearts of men to action, but when moved, calls forth imperishable convictions, lasting as time itself, must emanate from something deeper, more reliable, than brute force or the chance life of military campaigning, of soldiers ungarnished by the more essential qualities that make the man the citizen. As to military displays creating respect by efficient drill, especially among us, I have my doubts. The most ignorant, unprincipled desperado, or tyrant, or usurper, that disgraces humanity by his villainy, may be the most perfectly disciplined soldier, may be daring, regardless of danger either to limb or life—his daring may create admiration, but his infamous character, as a man of dishonorable proclivities, dissipation and barbarity, will blast his reputation, however bravely won on the field of battle.

Mr. G. says: “Had every State in the Union taken active steps in the direction of forming regiments of color, we should now, instead of numbering eight regiments, of about eight thousand five hundred men, have numbered seventy-five thousand, besides awakening an interest, at home and abroad, that no vacillating policy of the half-hearted semi-secessionists of the North could have suppressed. It would have relieved the administration of so much room for cavil on the slavery question, and colored men’s right to bear arms,” &c., &c.

Permit me to ask of any candid thinker, who, perhaps, is better informed than myself on this matter, whether the States can independently force any number of men upon the General Government contrary to the wish or will of the constituted authorities, who I suppose have the power of either accepting or rejecting white or colored men, as prudence, interest, or necessity dictates, or who were disqualified by legal restrictions?

If the States cannot constitutionally do this, would not then the encouragement of raising those regiments environ the administration in complications, and force that cavil which friend G. would obviate?

Mr. Green also informs us that “the evidences of God’s demands upon our patriotism as warriors, are so strong, that none need mistake them.” I have yet to see the evidences of God’s will or demands upon us in that direction, to take up arms for our own destruction, to destroy our bond brother, or to assist those who are contending in spirit against His righteous mandates, the principle of which is “Love thy neighbor as thyself.” If, then, the result of that policy advocated by Mr. G. cannot effect the desired end he would have, we must, if ever entertaining it, abandon it at once, and pursue that policy which reason teaches is not only the safest but the wisest.

I am satisfied, that recruiting, drilling or fighting, will never break this innate prejudice imbedded in the hearts of this nation.

The admiration we might win by bravery, &c., when brought into action as soldiers, might easily be overshadowed by one act or false accusation, brought against us by those jealous of our gallant exploits when in active service.

With all respect for Mr. Green’s literary accomplishments and scholar-like production, he is still in the dark, and may with propriety cry out, as one in times gone by, “Lord! that I may receive my sight.”

Supposing that we, with one accord, enter upon that fallacious policy of raising regiments for the war, could we do it without it becoming a public feature, noticeable by foes as well as friends?

With Southern emissaries thronging our hotels, thoroughfares, stores, &c., would not the Confederates be likely to gain this important information with equal facility as they obtain other news that enables them to counterbalance every move made by the national forces? If we admit this, why may we not, from the knowledge we have of their (the Southerners’) disposition, believe that, as a direful retaliation, they would arm their free and enslaved colored men, and compel them to fight against us on the field of battle, while such patriots as A. M. G., who we could not well afford to lose, would have the unpleasant duty assigned to him and his associates in arms of destroying those whom he might now benefit by adopting a policy contrary to the misguided suicidal course he so eloquently advocates. If I have the honor to be termed “one of those unfortunates who are willing to wait and see the salvation of God,” by Mr. G., I accept the conferred honor with many thanks.

The wisdom of the course I advocate, and that advocated by A. M. G., time alone will decide. Patiently, however, I abide time, clinging to my avowed policy, humbly trusting in Him who I have every reason to think has taken the cause of the oppressed of our people in this land out of our weak hands, and has or is about to answer our many appeals in His own glorious way, while we continue to lift our hearts, our hands, in praise and thanksgiving to His holy name.

R. H. V.