Historical Romance of the American Negro

by Charles Henry Fowler

I think we may safely claim that not only can we play and sing, but we can play and sing well, there arising from the great congregation a grand volume of music and song that reminds me of the "voice of many waters," mentioned in the Revelations—a volume of song rising from powerful lungs, and helped on by the warm feelings and enthusiasm of the race. And as our oppressed forefathers whiled away the long hours in the field, and lightened their labors by singing, so our people nowadays bring home the latest new hymn or fine anthem of praise, and sing them at home to brighten up their domestic cares, and find a vent for that joyous nature and devotional enthusiasm for which the colored race are famed over all the earth.

The greatest blot at the present time upon the fair fame and name of the internal and domestic doings of the United States, as it appears to me, is lynching. And this lynching is not confined to any particular race, or any particular crime, but we find, to a greater or less degree, all over the land, from the Lakes to the Gulf, a mob spirit among the people to take the law into their own hands, whenever any flagrant breach of law occurs, and hang their victim on the nearest tree. The mob is unwilling to leave the matter in the hands of the regularly constituted authorities, and proceeds to murder the supposed criminal in its own way. I say supposed criminal, because the man they are hunting after is often not the right man at all; an innocent man is put to death, and the guilty man escapes. It has also been proven beyond the shadow of a doubt, because we have "all seen the records of the same in the public papers at the time, that white men have been in the habit of blackening their faces when about to commit some heinous offence, and thus try to produce the impression that the guilty party was a colored man, and not a white man at all! Cases have thus occurred where innocent colored men have been lynched, and the real criminals made their escape by simply discoloring their faces. There is hardly a week passes but we find the hurrying mobs themselves discovering their own mistakes, sometimes in time to prevent the execution, but at other times too late. It is very true that on many occasions the really guilty party is taken, confesses his crime, and is duly executed by the wild and unruly mob of lynchers.

The chief fault, as it appears to my mind, is a lack of firmness on the part of the States, and I might also add of the central government at Washington. It is a perfect scandal to a duly constituted government to say that they are not able to carry out the law, or let the law take its course. Who would believe for a moment that England or Russia would allow any and every wild mob to take their victims out of the hands of the police, and, in fact, administer the law for them? Such a test of home authority would never run on for twenty-four hours in any foreign civilized land. If the Governors and the authorities would show a proper amount of firmness, and the central government at Washington would tighten up the screws a little all these lynchings would come to an end, and such a thing would be heard of no more. With regard to the Southern States, at least, where lynchings have been more common, the taunting question has been asked by foreign nations, "Are the Southern States fit for civilization, and ought they to be depended on to govern themselves?" Well, I think they are fit for self-government, but the screws ought to be tightened up considerably, and I think the sooner the better. If I had any power to advise the Houses at Washington, I would advise them to take the scandal of lynching by the wild mobs into their own hands, and put a stop to it in their own way. And let Congress see that all races and crimes are treated alike, and let the duly constituted authorities of the States administer the laws for which they are appointed and paid. Lynching is not only a breach of the law, but it is murder itself, and a horrible system of crime and public disorder that have brought this most shameful nation into great disrepute. Let us hope and pray that something may be done very soon to bring this national scandal to an end; and let public murder by infuriated mobs come to an end, and be heard of no more.

In the books which Fred. Douglass wrote of his life and times he always mentions the miserable and doleful processions of slaves who were driven, during the darkness of the night, from the pens into which they had been gathered in Baltimore to the vessels which were to sail with them to Georgia and other scenes of toil and exhaustion in the far-distant South. Alas, alas! The Sunny South had no joys for them, and as they passed through the streets of Baltimore, during the night, they wailed and lamented their hard fate. This leads me on to reflect, my dear reader, upon the gloriously-altered state of affairs that freedom has brought around, and which we can see all around about us at the present day. One of the grandest sights that delights our eyes now is the great array of Sunday-Schools in every State and county of the United States. I have always called the Sunday-School "the children's church," and it is the children's church, indeed, and a glorious church at that, too. Far and wide, spread over all this broad land, running all along the way from the wild Atlantic to the mild Pacific, and from the Lakes to the Gulf, young, well-dressed boys and girls in thousands and tens of thousands may be seen wending their happy way to their own dearly beloved "Children's Church"—I mean their Sunday-School. The great and powerful wide-spread Methodist, Baptist and other grand churches, organized and carried on by the colored race to the utmost limits of the American Union, deserve the utmost praise for pains and labors they have been at to make such splendid provision for the rising generation of boys and girls, who thus go forth upon the Sabbath-day to worship the Lord in their own youthful, sweet and attractive way, well taught by devoted men and women, who rear their tender vines, and watch over them, and tend them well, as the careful and skilful gardener tends and ripens his precious plants in the hot-house.

What a glorious change for the better, my dear reader, has come over this Federal Union of ours in our own day! Well did the Jubilee Minstrels sing before the royal family of England, "No more Auction Blocks for Me!" For at the present day, instead of auction blocks and wronged and oppressed slaves being conveyed (in a fugitive way, under cover of the darkness of the night) from their pens to the ships, wailing and lamenting their sad fate, in the self-same city of Baltimore, at the present time thousands and tens of thousands of children, and men and women, wend their peaceful way to Sunday-school and church, walking the streets of the city in love and peace, on their pilgrimage to Jerusalem, the city of the Great King. And yet if anybody had told the slave-holder only fifty years ago that his darling "peculiar institution" was on its last legs, he would probably there and then have caused us to be lynched for our rashness of speech! As I have mentioned already in this book, preachers in the South in those days had even the audacity to preach sermons in the defence of slavery, and they were so bold as to select for their text: "This" (meaning slavery) "is the Lord's doings; and it is wonderful in our eyes." Very wonderful, indeed, I should say. And the war for the extinction of slavery was the Lord's doing, too, I suppose! And it also was wonderful in our eyes, indeed! If those miserable slave-traders were to rise from their graves to-day; were to hear colored minstrels singing in the courts of Europe, "No More Auction Blocks for Me!" and then were to see millions of colored children, youths and maidens wending their way to the happy Sunday-schools on the day of rest—even they also would be compelled to admire the great changes for the better, and to exclaim in a different sense, "Truly these are the Lord's doings, and they are wonderful in our eyes!"

It has always been a matter of personal interest and importance for men to take a hand in voting and the ruling of their native State. Universal history shows us plainly that this has always been the case, unless, indeed, the nation was a monarchy, and therefore subject to the unlimited will and pleasure of one man as despot in chief, and those who served under him, and did as they were commanded. But in those lands where freedom ruled in the days of old, and all countries to-day where constitutional government prevails, men have always voted in one form or another, and they still lend a hand at elections, and this without regard to race, color or any such thing. Neither has there ever been any friction or trouble in legislative assemblies, and there is none now in foreign nations, where men of different races, colors, and even creeds, take their seats side by side, and proceed to work together for the good of all the citizens. We all know how it was in the South in the early years of Reconstruction after the close of the war, when the State legislatures were composed of white and colored men, who ruled the States together. We thought at the time that this thing would go on and that all parties had settled down in peace and harmony, for every man to vote as he pleased, and to send such men, black or white, to represent them in their legislatures, as were returned by the largest number of voters at the elections, conducted according to the constitution of the nation. But the white man of the South had almost always been accustomed to his own selfish, despotic way and sway in the days of slavery. The South had not only the rule of colored men, but even over white men in the halls of Congress! Unless that section of the Union could have her own dictatorial way there was no peace whatever in the House!

The North therefore felt herself often obliged to give way, which encouraged the South to take a mile the next time when we gave her an ell.

I have shown the reader of these pages how the Ku-Klux-Klan arose; how the new shot-gun policy brought the Republican governments of Secessia to an end, and how the very amendments to the Constitution, including the bare privilege of casting one's own vote, were all brought to an end—nay, more than that—the reader knows by this time how an immense number of colored men, women and children tore up stakes, and left the States of the South where they were born, and sought new homes in Northern and Western States, where the shot-gun policy of the late rebels did not prevail!

But where are representatives in Congress to-day, and where are the colored Senators and others in the legislative halls of the Southern States? For the present they have been wiped out, and so far Uncle Sam has given way, and backed down once more to the violent South for the sake of keeping peace in the house. It may be argued that coming but recently out of slavery, as we did, we were unfitted for the full privilege of freemen and voters. Perhaps there is some reason in that view of the question. As a nation we certainly could not be expected to be college-bred in 1865. But that is over thirty years ago, and both we ourselves and our children have been to almost all the schools, seminaries and colleges in the land since then. If we were ignorant in 1865, sure we cannot as a race be called ignorant now. In my own opinion, I think it is about time that the last three amendments to the Constitution were now carried out to the fullest extent, and that we should be no longer contented merely to vote for the white man, but vote for colored men, too, who run for office.

As the South has been so violent over the matter of ruling her own States to the exclusion of the colored man, the grand hue and cry among some of our own people has been raised, "Let politics alone, and attend to your own business, and let the white man rule!" So far as I can see there is neither sense nor justice in such a cry as that. If the white man has a right to vote, so has the colored man. To stuff the ballot-boxes with manufactured votes, or to throw out those that colored men have voted, is simply breaking the law, and the central government should punish it as such. If an ambitious young colored man desires to represent his country in the field of politics, it stands neither in law nor reason for any white man to presume to stop him. If he be a man of great talent, like Frederick Douglass, or John M. Langston, or Blanche K. Bruce, that is just so much more the reason why he should go to Congress, or represent his own country and State at home. The colored man must receive every fair play at the elections: his vote must not be tampered with any more than the white man's vote. By all means let him have his vote, for he will never be satisfied with anything less. Let every infringement of the law be pushed to the utmost extent; let a few examples be made, and tampering with other men's votes will come to an end. For the very life of me I can see no reason why colored men should abstain from politics any more than white men. There is no reason why they should do so if they wish to enter into political life. We can also attend to other business at home, like the rest of the population. To discharge our duties at the polls, indeed, is one of the very first duties of every citizen, and we have a perfect right to vote under the law of the land.