First: As far as my knowledge goes, the sum total of the considerations and discussions tending to show and set forth the moral turpitude of the Negro, leave out, if they do not ignore wholly, a most vital element. Any conclusion, therefore, reached, must eliminate the same, and in the degree that this element is important, the conclusion will be inconclusive and defective.

I contend, in the outset, that any just and charitable answer to this question must take into account the fact that the Negro is not unlike the other children of Adam, in that he is possessed of an inherent immoral tendency. Yet how many, speaking to this subject, reckon from this point? I think all sane people, at least, are agreed that since the fall, conformity to the moral standard, as set up by our Creator, is relative and not absolute. I think it would be a very light task to prove this assertion true, on the best authority known to man—the Bible. A single instance will suffice to put to silence all dissenters. David, "the man after God's own heart," gives us a life whose complexity at once presents the elements of passion, tenderness, generosity, and fierceness. From this life flowed a character blackened by adultery and murder. Rather checkered, measured by a perfect moral standard.

Grant that the Negro is a child of Adam, and I score one of the most important points on the side of my negative. Weighed in the balance of a perfect moral scale, "There is none good, but one, and that is God."

Second: When talking or writing on this subject, men seem to forget also that this inherent or natural immoral tendency in the Negro has had the impetus of the most debasing influences of a baser system of slavery, covering a period of two and a half centuries. This is not a defense, nor by any means an apology, for the shortcomings of the Negro, which are too many by far, but it is a plea for fairness in making up a verdict which is very far-reaching in its consequences.

In my humble opinion this thought is sufficient to temper, at least, the criticisms of the most rabid and reckless assailants of Negro morals. Let friends and foes alike think, if they can, what two hundred and fifty years of training means in a system whose principal tenet was that a Negro had no wish or will of his own—either morally or otherwise—a mere thing, acting only as it is acted upon. Under this system the next most natural thing would be and was the breaking down and beating back of every bar to the baser passions, except when its observance, perchance, contributed to the physical vigor and resistance of the Negro, thus rendering him more valuable and indispensable to his master. Add to this, if you please, the fact that there were few, if any, formal marriages; the "shanty" system instead of home; no responsibility in the training of boys and girls that naturally came to the so-called homes; no safeguard thrown around the morals of the tender years of boyhood and girlhood, but, on the other hand, everything most favorable and conducive to the development of bad morals. Out of this condition, unless the superior—the master—had a very high moral sense, which was highly improbable, if not impossible, under the existing circumstances, little could justly be expected of the inferior—the Negro. Yet, in spite of all this, the Negro gave the world a very few rapists of whom we hear so much nowadays, and on whose account we are so often called upon to defend him from the viewpoint of our question.

As regards this particular crime, I digress here to say that my faith is small. For this reason, there was a time when the commission of it was more opportune and easy than now. For example, during the Civil War, when it was scarcely, if ever, heard of. I have introduced this subject here simply to say this, that human nature is one and the same in mankind, and the argument that natural tendencies do not assert themselves alike in a slave and a freeman under like favorable conditions, is open to serious objections, if not in a degree fallacious. The pertinence of this reference will also appear when attention is drawn to the fact that the tendency of the rate to criminality, hence, to moral worthlessness, is more largely hypothecated upon this than upon any other single crime. By a similar process of reasoning it would not be difficult to show that all the races of the world are moral reprobates. For what escape would there be for any measured by its criminal class? I, therefore, contend, finally, that the standard by which the Negro is measured is seriously at fault, if not wholly wrong. Coming out of the most untoward circumstances, with less than a half century in which to outlive and unlearn the deadly doings of two hundred and fifty years, who can lay claim to more or to so much as the Negro? Measure him by the depths from which he came as well as by the heights which you would have him attain, when taking his moral pulse.

Third: I note the work of the press, which is largely in the hands of, and controlled by, those least friendly to the Negro's progress. Hence, a magnificent contribution is daily made from this quarter, to his moral impeachment. I think it is never, perhaps, properly considered, that the class generally held up by the press is one and the same with that already noticed under the preceding head—the criminal. Further, news gatherers are at great pains to ferret out and dole out to the public daily whatever serves to excite, and especially whatever shows the moral crookedness of the Negro, and that the years of freedom already enjoyed by him have simply brought forth a generation of vipers. Too often, from the lowest to the highest court, the records are so manipulated as to show the moral obliquity of the Negro. It is a potent fact that public opinion of the Negro is largely, if not wholly, based upon press reports, whether it pertains to religion, politics, morality, or otherwise. I hold, therefore, that it is largely misinformation that brings the Negro into bad odor in this regard, and earns for him the opinion that he is on the decline or "moral lapse," if you please. Then, too, the dying testimony of what is commonly called the worthless Negro, is given wider publicity and greater credence than the precept and example of ten thousand living, straightforward, upright Negroes. I say this because the opinion obtains so widely that the Negro is growing worse.

Fourth: That the Negro is not as morally depraved as he is generally reputed to be, and that those who are foremost to note and proclaim it do not believe it themselves, I place in evidence the following: 1st. A considerable number of Southern states has passed laws restrictive, if not prohibitive, of the removal of the Negro from his holy (?) confines, and this, too, where most is seen and known of him. What! Make it a misdemeanor to influence to emigrate or to deport a people whose presence is a standing menace to the good morals of those who enact measures and those who uphold them? Do not they make themselves liable to mild criticism? Other countries and sections of countries seek to rid themselves of all incubus of whatever kind. Of this we have numerous examples in the scum from Europe and other parts of the world unloaded upon our shores annually. 2d. Let the Negro with all his moral depravity initiate any movement looking toward his withdrawal even from one part of our country to another. The scene of such activities attracts special attention, and unsought advice is poured upon his "worthless" head; words of warning flow apace, and direct steps are taken to defeat the end in view. In view of this fact, the Negro is seldom allowed to organize, secretly, for mutual protection and helpfulness, in some sections; and, when organized, he is always looked upon with grave suspicions. That people should go so far out of the way to circumvent the legitimate endeavors of the undeserving, to my mind, is the most unnatural thing to be sure. "Consistency, thou art a jewel!"

Fifth: What people regard as a most discouraging sign touching the Negro of this country, I consider a most portentous and hopeful one. I refer to it here, because it bears decidedly upon my answer, and is strictly in line therewith. As shown by the census of 1890 and 1900, the increase of the Negro has suffered a positive check, if not back-set. In explanation of this, one theory and another has been advanced. Some have seen that he, like the American Indian, is on the road to a kindred fate—final and utter extinction. Others have consigned him to this or that destiny, according as they have felt kindly or unkindly towards him. True, he has increased less rapidly, but more surely, because of his stricter observance and growing regard for the proper and God-appointed channels to this end. His propagation by marriage, in which case one man is the husband of one woman, and one woman the wife of one man, would naturally lend to this.

I might record and add to what has already been said, a rich and varied experience, growing out of actual contact with, and work for, my people covering twenty-four years—a period in which no year has passed without leaving something done or suffered. But time and space will not permit.