FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217  
218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   >>   >|  
groes should vote with white men, he did not believe that they could even live in the same free community. Yet since Sumner's absurd fallacy has a certain historical importance through the influence it exerted on Northern opinion, it may be well to point out where it lay. The Declaration of Independence lays down three general principles fundamental to Democracy. One is that all men are equal in respect of their natural rights. The second is that the safeguarding of men's natural rights is the object of government. The third that the basis of government is contractual--its "just powers" being derived from the consent of the governed to an implied contract. The application of the first of these principles to the Negro is plain enough. Whatever else he was, the Negro was a man, and, as such, had an equal title with other men to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. But neither Jefferson nor any other sane thinker ever included the electoral suffrage among the _natural_ rights of men. Voting is part of the machinery of government in particular States. It is, in such communities, an acquired right depending according to the philosophy of the Declaration of Independence on an implied contract. Now if such a contract did really underlie American, as all human society, nothing can be more certain than that the Negro had neither part nor lot in it. When Douglas pretended that the black race was not included in the expression "all men" he was talking sophistry, but when he said that the American Republic had been made "by white men for white men" he was stating, as Lincoln readily acknowledged, an indisputable historical fact. The Negro was a man and had the natural rights of a man; but he could have no claim to the special privileges of an American citizen because he was not and never had been an American citizen. He had not come to America as a citizen; no one would ever have dreamed of bringing him or even admitting him if it had been supposed that he was to be a citizen. He was brought and admitted as a slave. The fact that the servile relationship was condemned by the democratic creed could not make the actual relationship of the two races something wholly other than what it plainly was. A parallel might be found in the case of a man who, having entered into an intrigue with a woman, wholly animal and mercenary in its character, comes under the influence of a philosophy which condemns such a connection as sinful
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217  
218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

rights

 

American

 

citizen

 
natural
 

government

 
contract
 

implied

 

wholly

 

relationship

 
included

principles

 

philosophy

 

historical

 

Declaration

 

Independence

 

influence

 

special

 
connection
 
readily
 
acknowledged

indisputable

 

privileges

 
America
 

condemns

 

Lincoln

 

stating

 

expression

 
talking
 

sophistry

 

Douglas


pretended

 

community

 

Republic

 

sinful

 

dreamed

 

parallel

 

plainly

 
character
 

animal

 
intrigue

entered

 

supposed

 

brought

 

admitting

 

bringing

 

admitted

 

actual

 

democratic

 

condemned

 

servile