Negroes and Negro "Slavery:" the first an inferior race: the latter its normal condition.Van Evrie, John H.
History
Negroes and Negro "Slavery:" the first an inferior race: the latter its normal condition.
Van Evrie, John H.
African Americans; Slavery -- Justification; Slavery -- United States
But this drawback on American progress—this clinging to the habitudes of
the Old World, which kept the Spanish and French colonies in abject
submission to the mother country, and which England, at a later period,
sought to force on her colonies—was not the sole embarrassment in the
progress of the colonists. They were confronted by wild and ferocious
savages, who disputed every step of the white European; and though,
previous to the independence of the colonies, the mother country united
with the latter against the former, from the breaking out of hostilities
in 1776 to the close of the War of 1812 the interests of monarchy and
savagism may be said to have been inseparable, and to have formed a
common barrier against the march of republicanism. Indeed, it is a
truth, attested by the whole history of the past, and equally so by the
circumstances of the present, that the subordinate races of this
continent—the Indian, Negro, Mongrel, etc.—constitute the material, the
very stock in trade, of European monarchists, to embarrass the progress
of American institutions; and in every instance where we have been
engaged in Indian wars, that portion of our people who, in their
ignorance and blindness, have condemned the course of their own
government, have been the unconscious instruments of the enemies of
their country, and in their sickly sentimentality and folly, they have
sought to obstruct the progress of American civilization. Monarchy
consists in artificial distinctions of kings, nobles, peasants, etc., or
it may be defined as the rule of classes of the same race, and, from the
inherent necessities of its organization, it is forced to make war on
the natural distinction of races. Prior to the breaking out of the
American Revolution, there was no necessity for calling in the aid of
the Negro or the Indian to crush out the liberty of the white man. The
colonists, as has been observed, were practical republicans, and
substantially governed themselves; but they had not questioned the
European system or theory of monarchism. When they did this, however, in
that grand Declaration of Mr. Jefferson, that all men (meaning, of
course, his own race) were created free and equal, the British
monarchists instinctively and, indeed necessarily, resorted to the means
at hand—to the subordinate races of America—to demoralize and break down
this immortal truth. An English judge, anticipating the coming rebellion
of the Americans, had already ruled that “slavery,” or social
subordination of the negro to the white man, was a result of municipal
law—a creature of the _lex loci_; and though this was in language that
led vast numbers of people into error, its technical as well as absolute
falsehood is apparent, when we remember that no such “law” has ever
existed, either now or at any other time, in American history, from the
Canadian Lakes to Cape Horn. But it served as a foundation and
stand-point for that wide-spread imposture and world-wide delusion which
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account