PROFESSOR CAULKINS.
“In another column will be found a statement from the executive committee of the Freedmen’s Aid Society, concerning the episode in which Professor Caulkins and the Rev. B. H. Johnson were the principal participants. It will be seen that the executive committee acted in the case with great promptness and decision, the committee’s first action having been taken within four days after the first rumor of the case reached any member of the committee.
“The following extract from the minutes of the meeting of October 26th will show the precise action which was taken at that early day:
“‘Dr. Bayliss moved that the corresponding secretary be instructed to ascertain whether it be true that Professor Caulkins, of Chattanooga University, refused to shake hands with one of our pastors in Chattanooga because he was a Negro; and also in a series of articles made disparaging remarks, and used insulting language in reference to the colored people, and that if these rumors should prove true, the president shall lay the matter before the local board, and ask for his resignation. Carried.’
MEHARRY MEDICAL COLLEGE, NASHVILLE, TENN.
“If any one should be inclined to the opinion that the inquiry was not prosecuted as rapidly as it should have been, it must be considered that immediately after the sub-committee was appointed, Bishop Walden was necessarily in attendance at the meeting of the bishops; that Bishop Walden, Dr. Cranston, and the editor of this paper, all of whom are members of the executive committee, were necessarily at the meeting of the General Missionary Committee in New York, which was held just after the bishops’ meeting; that the president of the society was immediately afterward called to Philadelphia to the annual meeting of the Church Extension Committee, and that the annual meeting of the Freedmen’s Aid Society was held in Boston on the 23d of November, at which it was necessary for both the president and secretary of the society to be present. Thus the month of November was crowded full of travel and work, and it was next to impossible to have a meeting of the executive committee until December 1st, when a meeting was held. The general history of the inquiry is given in the ‘Statement,’ and need not be repeated here.
“We have reason to believe that the board of trustees of the university will act in the case without delay, and we are therefore not disposed at this time to enter upon any discussion of it. Our views are clear, and if it shall become necessary we shall have no hesitation in justifying them. Professor Caulkins’s moral character is not involved in the case. That he is a fine scholar and teacher, and that he means to be a gentleman, we fully believe. At the same time we also believe that his views and feelings upon what is known as the ‘color question,’ or the ‘Negro question,’ are such as to make him an improper person to hold a position as teacher in a school officially connected with the Freedmen’s Aid Society. We say this after having heard the case freely stated by Mr. Johnson, Professor Caulkins, and Dr. Carter, and after hearing the declarations of others who have knowledge of Professor Caulkins’s views. At this time, however, we do not think it necessary to discuss the statements which we have heard, and thus prove the justness of our conclusions. The trustees of the university have access to all the parties interested, and we prefer to leave the case in their hands for final adjudication, as they constitute the body which has the power to dismiss teachers. We only add that the Freedmen’s Aid Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church can not, and in our judgment will not, continue in its employ any person who is capable of showing disrespect, under any circumstances, to a colored person because he is colored. The Methodist Episcopal Church is the exponent of a nobler sentiment, and will not stultify herself by allowing one of her great benevolent societies to employ as a teacher in one of our schools, any man who stands for the views which the country has inherited from the institution of slavery; and in this the Freedmen’s Aid Society is in exact harmony with the views of the Church. The black man is a man, and the fact must be recognized.”
STATEMENT
FROM THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE FREEDMEN’S AID SOCIETY IN THE CASE OF PROFESSOR CAULKINS.
“It has been widely published that Professor Caulkins, of Chattanooga University, Tennessee, a school officially connected with the Freedmen’s Aid Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church, and built and supported for the most part by funds from its treasury, refused to shake hands with the Rev. B. H. Johnson, pastor of one of the Methodist Episcopal Churches of Chattanooga, and that he refused the proffered hand of Mr. Johnson because Mr. Johnson is a colored man. It has also been reported that Professor Caulkins, in conversation with the Rev. Dr. Carter, immediately after the alleged insult to Mr. Johnson, used words which indicated his personal prejudice against the Negro race.
“In view of the wide circulation of these accusations, the executive committee of the Freedmen’s Aid Society makes the following statement of facts:
“The first report of the case was made to some members of the executive committee about the 22d of October, and the president of the society, Bishop Walden, did not hear of it until the 25th. On the 26th a meeting of the executive committee was held, the president of the society being in the chair, and at this meeting Dr. Rust, the corresponding secretary, was directed to ascertain the facts in the case, and, if the disparaging rumors concerning Professor Caulkins should prove to be true, Bishop Walden was directed to lay the matter before the board of trustees of the university, and ask for Professor Caulkins’s resignation. The vote of the committee upon this resolution was unanimous. Bishop Walden went immediately to New York to attend the bishops’ meeting and other annual meetings.
“Dr. Rust secured written statements from Dr. Carter, Mr. Johnson, and Professor Caulkins. At a meeting of the executive committee, December 1st, held on the bishop’s return from the East, the matter was called up, but no formal report was made, it being the wish of the committee that Bishop Walden should see the parties on the ground, and ascertain, so far as possible, all the facts bearing upon the case. He presented his report to the executive committee, Monday, December 20th, the earliest date practicable after he had secured a meeting of the parties in Chattanooga. Pending the consideration of the report, the committee adjourned to Thursday, December 23d.
“The annual meeting of the board of managers of the Freedmen’s Aid Society was held on the 21st of December, and this case was called up, and by resolution was left to the executive committee to take such action as the facts might require.
“Dr. Carter and Professor Caulkins being present on the 23d, each, by request of the committee, made a full statement. In view of these statements it was deemed best to have personal statements from other parties, and the committee requested the presence of Mr. Johnson, President Lewis, Dr. Manker, and Mr. J. H. Bowman at an adjourned meeting held Tuesday, December 28th. These were all present at this meeting except Mr. Bowman, and each made a statement before the committee.
“The committee spared neither time nor patient labor in investigating the case, and after mature deliberation, the entire committee being present, adopted the following:
“‘1. That we, the executive committee of the Freedmen’s Aid Society, strongly condemn an insult or discourtesy to a colored person on account of color or previous condition; that we hold that no person who entertains sentiments either inimical or prejudicial to the colored people, as such, should have a position of trust in any institution of our Church; that we do unqualifiedly condemn the refusal or failure of Professor Caulkins to shake hands with Rev. B. H. Johnson, and deplore the results of what Professor Caulkins claims to have been carelessness on his part.’
“‘2. That a majority of this executive committee is convinced that Professor Caulkins did intentionally refuse to shake hands with Rev. B. H. Johnson; that he does entertain sentiments that unfit him for a position in a school with which our Freedmen’s Aid Society is officially connected, and that he should be asked to resign at once.’
“‘3. That inasmuch as the power to dismiss teachers from the Chattanooga University is vested by the charter in its board of trustees, we, the executive committee of the Freedmen’s Aid Society, refer the foregoing statements and conclusions to said board of trustees, and respectfully request a speedy decision in the matter, and that the decision be placed before the Church at the earliest day practicable.’”
“‘Attest: J. M. Walden, President.’
“‘T. H. Pearne, Secretary.’”
When the foregoing action of the board of managers was communicated to the trustees, they refused to comply.
The following from the Western Christian Advocate has the right ring:
PROFESSOR CAULKINS’S CASE.
“We learn that the trustees of the Chattanooga University decline to comply with the request of the executive committee of the Freedmen’s Aid Society as to the removal of Professor Caulkins. We learn this with much regret, because one result will be a disturbance of the harmonious relations which should exist between the trustees and the executive committee. We do not see how the committee can possibly recede from its position. When the matter was sent back by the trustees for further consideration, and some new facts were submitted, it was the conviction of the committee that the new facts made the case against the professor stronger than before, and the request for his removal was more prompt and emphatic in the second instance than in the first. As we have already said, we are fully satisfied that Professor Caulkins means to be a gentleman; but a man who could, under any possible circumstances, say such things about the Negro as Professor Caulkins certainly has said, and act toward a colored minister as he did act toward Mr. Johnson, is not a proper person to occupy the position of teacher in a Freedmen’s Aid Society school, and the effort of the trustees to retain him can accomplish no desirable results. The professor ought to resign, and thus end the controversy over his case. That the five trustees who voted to retain him in the university are sincere in their motives we do not for one moment doubt, but they certainly do not see the case as the great mass of the members of the Methodist Episcopal Church see it, and their position is clearly untenable. Professor Caulkins should not be permitted to remain in that institution. If nothing else can be done, notice should at once be given to terminate the contract between the Freedmen’s Aid Society and the trustees, and at the earliest practicable moment a new administration should be inaugurated. One mission of the Methodist Episcopal Church in the South is to teach a better theory concerning the Negro than the South has heretofore held, and it is wholly incongruous for us to employ as teachers in the South men who hold upon this particular subject opinions which we are there to destroy. However pure the motives of the trustees may be, and we have no suspicion of them, their course is not wise, and if persisted in will lead to serious consequences. We hope they will reconsider their action before the evils are precipitated upon us which must otherwise inevitably result.
MIXED SCHOOLS—LET US BE WISE.
“It will be a very disastrous state of things if, while the Chattanooga University is under discussion, the collections for the Freedmen’s Aid Society shall be postponed. The society is in debt now, and funds must be supplied or its work will be crippled, and in the not distant future will have to be suspended. More money should be given this year than in any previous year.
“No change in the administration of the society has been inaugurated. The colored work and the white work are going on now just as they have done for years, only more successfully than ever before. There have never been any colored students in our white schools in the South, and the last General Conference knew this fact, and approved the administration of the Freedmen’s Aid Society. One of our contemporaries says that colored students can find a way into Grant Memorial University, at Athens, Tennessee; but that is certainly a mistake. We can not learn that one colored student has ever been in that school, nor do we believe that one would be admitted there. Our white schools in the South are for whites exclusively, and have been so from the beginning.
“We do not now discuss the main question at issue, but we do say that, in our judgment, those in charge of the Freedmen’s Aid Society have been administering the trust committed to them just as they administered it before the last General Conference, and as they understood the instructions given them by that General Conference. The Freedmen’s Aid Society has never excluded colored students from white schools. Certain colored persons who applied for admittance to Chattanooga University were refused by the local authorities, and only a few days ago the matter was referred to the officers of the Freedmen’s Aid Society, when a meeting of the board of managers was at once called to consider the question. So far as we know, this is the first action of the kind in the history of the society. What conclusion the board will reach we do not know, and do not now care to conjecture, although our own views upon the whole subject are entirely clear. We do not believe that under the action of the General Conference of 1884 those students can be rightfully refused admittance to the university, and whatever the results may be, the General Conference itself must bear the responsibility for them. We confess our profound conviction, and our painful fear, that if this view shall be adopted and acted upon, our entire educational work among the whites of the South will be imperiled. The prejudice against the introduction of colored students to our white schools in the South is more violent than it would be against the appointment of a colored man as pastor of Trinity Church, Chicago; or, if such a thing were possible, of Plymouth Church, Brooklyn. We do not believe that mixed schools in the South, generally, are yet possible, and this fact has influenced the action of the General Conference upon this whole subject. It is barely possible that if that body had fully appreciated the gravity of the situation, the resolution of May 28, 1884, setting forth the policy of the Church, would not have been adopted. However this may be, to us the action of the Conference admits of but one interpretation, and when a student knocks at the door of any one of our schools, the opening of the door must not depend upon the color of the applicant. Whether the action of the conference be wise or unwise is a very different question; but this is our interpretation of what it did.
“For the present, however, we are anxious that the regular collections for the society shall be taken, so that its growing and glorious work may not be crippled. If the collections cease, the colored work will be destroyed. Our white people in the South can do something on educational lines for themselves, but our colored people can do little, if anything; and when the people of the North fail to send in the money, the schools for the colored people must inevitably close. Let no angry criticism of the society result in robbery of Christ’s poor.
“We trust the Church will see the case just as it is, and not rush to a conclusion which will endanger our hitherto prosperous work in the South. The board of managers of the society can be trusted to do what is right and wise. Let the collections be taken as usual, and send the money in promptly, and wait in patience for a deliverance from the board of managers. We do not need angry passion just now, but coolness, deliberation, wisdom, and the fear and love of God. Let these virtues prevail, and no disaster will befall us.”
The trustees of Chattanooga University having refused to ask Professor Caulkins to resign his position in the institution, the Western Christian Advocate reported, editorially and otherwise, the following, which we insert in full, because the editor was present during all the deliberations of the body, and was chairman of the sub-committee which prepared the statements and resolutions which were considered, amended, and adopted:
“The action of the board of managers of the Freedmen’s Aid Society will be found in another column, and will be read very widely and with much care. The editor of the Western was present during all the deliberations of the body, and was chairman of the sub-committee which prepared the statements and resolutions which were considered, amended, and adopted. He is, therefore, in a position to know how the board reached its conclusions, and the spirit of all the discussions. The work was done prayerfully and carefully, and with profound appreciation of the principles involved and of the possible results of the action taken. The board understood that it was dealing, directly or indirectly, with the entire work of our Church in the South; for, as matter of fact, the fate of our Churches in that part of the country is more closely related to the fate of our schools than most persons think. It took a broad view of the whole subject, and after many hours of deliberation on three successive days, adopted the deliverance which is now laid before the Church. What its statements and resolutions are, the reader will learn by personal examination of them. They are easily understood. No adroit play is attempted upon the word ‘policy,’ nor is the resolution of May 28, 1884, treated as a ‘barren ideality,’ The board adopted the view of the whole question which was set forth editorially in these columns some weeks ago. That the General Conference intended to continue separate schools for the two races is entirely clear to us, and that it also intended that those schools should not be absolutely exclusive as to either race, is equally clear. This is the view taken by the board of managers, and seems to us wholly correct.
“We believe it will harmonize with the thought of the Church. We do not believe there is a general disposition to destroy, or even to cripple, our work among the whites of the South; on the contrary, the remarkable success of that work is a cause of joy to the great majority of our people, and they are ready to aid and extend it. But there is a conviction that the last General Conference intended to utter a practical protest against that caste spirit which has so long trampled upon the Negro race; and there is also a conviction that the age is outgrowing that prejudice, and that in this advance toward ideal gospel fraternity the Church should lead the age. The board shared this conviction, and voiced its opinion in an interpretation of the action of the General Conference which none can misunderstand. What the effect will be upon our work in the South no one can foretell. It is possible that our schools in that section may all become schools of colored people; for it is just possible that if colored students shall be admitted to what are now called white schools, all the white students will be foolish enough to leave them. This is prophesied and desired by some who wish us evil, and is feared by some who wish us well, and some of our enemies are already standing ready to laugh at our confusion.
“We hope for better things. We have no idea that large numbers of colored students will apply for admittance to these schools; for while they do not enjoy being excluded from them by law, they prefer the schools which are attended mostly by their own people, and which, as matter of fact, are among the best in the South. We do not believe that they will purposely embarrass the work among the whites by insisting upon their rights under the action of the General Conference as interpreted by the board of managers. We are free to say that we hope they will not do it. Whatever the result is to be, however, the General Conference took the action which the board has now interpreted, and which, in our judgment, it could not consistently interpret in any other way.
“We believe the Church will approve what the board has done, not only by words but by increased contributions to the cause. The society is heavily in debt, and while it has a very large amount of property, and is in no sense bankrupt, it ought to have an annual income of two hundred and fifty thousand dollars.
“The action of the board shows how unjust much of the criticism of the society has been. This is the first and only time in its history when it has been called upon to interpret General Conference action upon this subject, and it speaks promptly and clearly. We never had any doubt as to what it would say when an opportunity for utterance should be given, and we prophesied editorially what the result would be. That time has come; the voice of the society has been heard; and it is now in order for hostile critics to confess how they have wronged a society which ran to the help of the freedman before the roar of the battle which made him free had died away, and has done more since, with the amount of money at its command, than any other benevolent society in the world.
“We trust that those who are particularly interested in our work among the whites of the South will not lose heart. A better day is dawning. It would be a poor tribute to our work during the last quarter of a century if the introduction of a few colored students into our schools for whites should break the institutions down. Have we really made so little progress that six colored students at Chattanooga would drive out two hundred white students? We can hardly believe it. When three chase a hundred, the three must be very strong or the hundred very weak. We believe our white work will go on, and that this action of the board will strengthen the society and increase its success.”
ACTION OF THE BOARD OF MANAGERS
OF THE FREEDMEN’S AID SOCIETY OF THE METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH.
“The board of managers of the Freedmen’s Aid Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church, at the call of its executive committee, convened at its office in Cincinnati, Ohio, February 22, 1887, the following members being present: J. M. Walden, Amos Shinkle, M. B. Hagans, R. S. Rust, J. C. Hartzell, T. H. Pearne, Earl Cranston, W. L. Hypes, D. J. Starr, H. Liebhart, W. F. Boyd, J. H. Bayliss, W. P. Stowe, Joseph Courtney, Isaac W. Joyce, Bidwell Lane, J. M. Shumpert, E. W. S. Hammond, J. W. Dale, J. D. Shutt, F. S. Hoyt, J. Krehbiel—two members being absent, namely: F. C. Holliday, through personal illness, and Edward Sargent, on account of affliction in his family.
“The following was submitted for consideration:
EXTRACT FROM MINUTES OF EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF CHATTANOOGA UNIVERSITY.
“‘Whereas, At the opening of the Chattanooga University, September 15, 1886, certain colored persons applied to the faculty for admission as students in the institution; and
“‘Whereas, Certain other colored persons residing in Athens, Tennessee, have applied for admission at the opening of the second term, now about to commence; and
“‘Whereas, It has been again and again definitely and clearly stated by the proper authorities of the Church, and from the beginning has been well understood by all concerned, that the Chattanooga University was designed for the education of white pupils, and was not intended to be a mixed school; and
“‘Whereas, It is well known that first-class institutions, well equipped and provided by the Church especially for the education of people of color, are within easy reach of all such persons who really desire to avail themselves of their benefits, so that they are in no proper sense dependent on this institution for education; and
“‘Whereas, We are confident that, in the present state of society in the South, the admission of colored students to the Chattanooga University would, on the one hand, be fatal to the prosperity of the institution, and defeat the very object proposed by the Church in the establishment of the school; and, on the other hand, would not only be unproductive of good results to the colored students so admitted, but would excite prejudice and passion, alienate the races, and prove especially detrimental to the interests of the colored people; and
“‘Whereas, This very question of mixed schools has, by the General Conference itself, been declared to be “one of expediency, which is to be left to the choice and administration of those on the ground and more immediately concerned;” therefore, be it
“‘Resolved, That we deem it inexpedient to admit colored students to the university, and that the faculty be instructed to administer accordingly.
“‘Adopted January 4, 1887.’”
“In view of this action, and after full consideration of the whole subject, the board of managers adopts the following statements and resolutions:
“1. The last General Conference authorized the Freedmen’s Aid Society to aid in the maintenance and establishment of separate schools among the white members of our Church in the South. It did this by recognizing the separate white schools then existing in the South as entitled to aid; by directing the Freedmen’s Aid Society to co-operate in maintaining and establishing such schools; by approving the aid this society had already extended to these schools; and by directing the pastors when taking collections for the Freedmen’s Aid Society to ‘state plainly that the educational work of the society is among both white and colored people.’ There can, therefore, be no doubt that it was the intention to continue separate schools in connection with the Freedmen’s Aid Society; yet, in the judgment of this board of managers, it is in harmony with the prevailing sentiment of the last General Conference to interpret its action as being designed to forbid the exclusion of any student ‘from instruction in any and every school under the supervision of the Church because of race, color, or previous condition of servitude;’ and we hereby declare that no pupil should be excluded on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude, from instruction in the schools under the control of this Freedmen’s Aid Society or aided by its funds, under the authority of the last General Conference.
“In the above interpretation of the action of the last General Conference touching this general principle of equality, it is the judgment of this board that it was not the expectation of the General Conference that any advantage would be taken of its deliverance on this subject by persons or parties interested in embarrassing the work of our Church, or of this society; and, therefore, we trust that the parties directly interested in its practical application will so act as to promote good-will and insure the usefulness of all the schools under the care of this society. We also call attention to, and emphasize, the following action of the last General Conference, viz.:
“‘The establishment of schools for the benefit of our white membership in the South we believe to have been a wise and necessary measure. Their success has been gratifying. The beneficial results have not been confined to those immediately interested, but their liberalizing effects upon public sentiment have greatly redounded to the advantage of our colored people. We regret that for so great and important a work so little has been done by the Church, and we desire most emphatically to give expression to our conviction that the time has come when this portion of our educational work should be strengthened and placed upon a strong and permanent basis, as its importance certainly demands.’
“2. Whereas, It appears from the above action of the Chattanooga University that certain students were denied admission to that institution for the sole reason that they were persons of African descent; and
“Whereas, In the judgment of this board there is neither in the charter of the Chattanooga University, nor in the contract between said university and the Freedmen’s Aid Society, anything authorizing the exclusion of students from instruction in said institution on account of color or race; and as the General Conference, on May 28, 1884, did, as its last utterance on this question, declare ‘the policy of the Methodist Episcopal Church to be, that ... no student shall be excluded from instruction in any and every school under the supervision of the Church because of race, color, or previous condition of servitude;’ therefore,
“Resolved, That we disapprove the exclusion of those students for the reason assigned; and hereby instruct our executive committee to use all proper means at its command to induce the trustees of the Chattanooga University to rescind the order by which those students were refused instruction in that institution.
“3. Whereas, The executive committee of the Chattanooga University has declined to ask for the resignation of Professor Wilford Caulkins as a member of the faculty of that institution, although such action has been twice requested by the executive committee of this board; therefore,
“Resolved, By the board of managers of the Freedmen’s Aid Society, that we approve the course of our executive committee in seeking to secure the resignation of Professor Caulkins; and, while carefully and respectfully considering the reasons urged by the executive committee of the Chattanooga University for his retention, it is our conviction that the best interests of the society and the Church demand his removal.
“4. Whereas, Harmony between this board and the Chattanooga University is essential to the effective working of the said university; therefore,
“Resolved, That if the Chattanooga University fail to secure the resignation of Professor Wilford Caulkins, to take effect at a date not later than the close of the present school term, and so to modify its action as not to exclude from instruction in that institution students on account of race or color; i.e., if the said university fail in either of these particulars, we hereby instruct our executive committee to secure by agreement, if possible, with the trustees of said university, the immediate termination of the contract between the Chattanooga University and the Freedmen’s Aid Society; and, in case a termination of said contract be not secured by mutual agreement, in either of the contingencies named above, to notify the trustees of the Chattanooga University, within sixty days from this 24th day of February, 1887, of the termination of the contract as provided in the same.
“Done by the Board of Managers of the Freedmen’s Aid Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church, at its office in Cincinnati, Ohio, this 24th day of February, A. D. 1887.
“J. M. Walden, President.
“Attest: T. H. Pearne, Secretary.”
CHAPTER XIII
THEORY AND PRACTICE—A GENERAL DISCUSSION.
While the board of managers was in session, as well as before and afterward, a general discussion, pro and con, was going on. We give but a few of the many expressions of opinion on the subject; enough, however, for one to form an intelligent opinion touching the real intention of the Church. If it should appear to any one that the actions taken by the last General Conference were ambiguous, not to say plainly contradictory, not only with themselves but the past record of the Church, it will occasion no surprise. The Central Christian Advocate, at St. Louis, spoke editorially, March 2d, as follows: