The Negro and the elective franchise. A series of papers and a sermonGrimké, Archibald Henry
Philosophy
The Negro and the elective franchise. A series of papers and a sermon
Grimké, Archibald Henry
African Americans -- Suffrage
If the chief captain had understood the Hebrew language, and could have
followed the address of the apostle which was delivered on the steps of
the palace, he would have understood what the trouble was, without
attempting to resort to this brutal method of finding out; but evidently
he did not. Everything indicated, however, that it was something very
serious, judging from their treatment of him, and from the intense
excitement which his words produced upon them, and hence, he was all the
more anxious to find out. If the apostle was guilty of any offence
against the law, it was the duty of the chief captain to take cognizance
of it, and to punish him accordingly, but if he was innocent, if he had
in no way transgressed the law, it was his duty to release him. The law
also provided how the guilt or innocence of an accused person was to be
ascertained; and it was the duty of the chief captain to have followed
the course prescribed by the law; but it is clear from the narrative
that he had determined upon another course: the prisoner is ordered to
be scourged, instead of calling upon those who had assaulted him to make
their charges, and to substantiate them, and then giving the apostle an
opportunity of defending himself.
III. Attention is directed in the text to the fact, that the apostle
stood up manfully for his rights. After they had tied him up, as if
waiting to see just how far they would go, and just as the process of
scourging was about to begin, he challenged their right to proceed: he
said to the centurion, who was standing by, and who was there as the
representative of the chief captain, to see that the scourging was
properly done, and to make note of what he confessed,—he said to this
man: "Is it lawful for you to scourge a man that is a Roman, and
uncondemned?" The law expressly forbade the scourging of Roman citizens;
it was an indignity to which no Roman citizen was to be subjected. This
was what was known as the Porcian law, and took its name from Porcius,
the Tribune through whose influence its adoption was secured. And this
is the law to which the apostle here appeals, whose protection he
invokes. Paul, as a Roman citizen, not only knew what his rights were,
but he stood up for his rights. He insists here upon being treated, as
he was entitled to be treated, as a citizen of the empire. They are
about to scourge him, contrary to law, and he says to them, Stop; you
have no right to treat me in this way, intimating and they evidently
understood it, that if they did not desist, they would hear from him; he
would bring the matter to the attention of the emperor.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account