Race Distinctions in American LawStephenson, Gilbert Thomas
History
Race Distinctions in American Law
Stephenson, Gilbert Thomas
African Americans -- Politics and government; Law -- United States -- History; United States -- Race relations
Representative Sims’s objection to the phrase “of the colored race”
precipitated a discussion throughout the country. The New York
_Tribune_[43] made a canvass of a great many prominent Negroes and white
persons to ascertain what they thought the Negro should be called. The
result of its inquiry is this: An average of eleven Negroes out of
twenty desired to be spoken of as Negroes. The other nine spurned the
word as “insulting,” “contemptuous,” “degrading,” “vulgar.” Two argued
for “Afro-American,” two for “Negro-American,” one for “black man,” and
one was indifferent so long as he was not called “Nigger.” Of the white
men interviewed, ten out of thirteen, on an average, preferred the word
“Negro.” The Negroes made a specially strong plea for capitalizing the
word “Negro,” saying that it was not fair to accord that distinction to
their dwarfish cousins, the Negritos in the Philippines, and to the many
savage tribes in Africa and deny it to the black man in America. They
were also strongly opposed to the word “Negress” as applied to the women
of their race. This, they asserted, is objectionable because of its
historical significance. For in times of slavery, “Negress” was the term
applied to a woman slave at an auction, in contradistinction to “buck,”
which referred to a male slave.
E. A. Johnson, Professor of Law in Shaw University, North Carolina,
said: “The term ‘Afro-American’ is suggestive of an attempt to disclaim
as far as possible our Negro descent, and casts a slur upon it. It
fosters the idea of the inferiority of the race, which is an incorrect
notion to instill into the Negro youth, whom we are trying to imbue with
self-esteem and self-respect.”
Rev. J. W. E. Bowen, to whom reference has already been made, said: “Let
the Negroes, instead of bemourning their lot and fretting because they
are Negroes and trying to escape themselves, rise up and wipe away the
stain from this word by glorious and resplendent achievements. Good
names are not given; they are made.”
Rev. H. H. Proctor, pastor of the First Congregational Church, Atlanta,
said: “What is needed is not to change the name of the people, but the
people of the name. Make the term so honorable that men will consider it
an honor to be called a Negro.”
Rev. Walter H. Brooks, pastor of the Nineteenth Street Baptist Church,
Washington, wrote: “The black people of America have but to augment
their efforts in lives of self-elevation and culture, and men will cease
to reproach us by any name whatever.”
Finally, Charles W. Anderson, Collector of Internal Revenue, New York,
said: “I am, therefore, inclined to favor the use of ‘Negro,’ partly
because to drop it would expose me to the charge of being ashamed of my
race (and I hate any man who is ashamed of the race from which he
sprung), and partly because I know that no name or term can confer or
withhold relative rank in this life. All races and men must win equality
of rating and status for themselves.”
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