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.