{"id":631,"date":"2026-03-26T16:09:03","date_gmt":"2026-03-26T16:09:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/hartfordlit.org\/?p=631"},"modified":"2026-03-26T18:38:58","modified_gmt":"2026-03-26T18:38:58","slug":"excerpts-from-a-text-book-on-the-origins-and-history-etc-of-the-colored-people","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/hartfordlit.org\/?p=631","title":{"rendered":"Excerpts from A Text Book on the Origins and History Etc. of the Colored People"},"content":{"rendered":"

A Text Book of the Origins and History Etc. of the Colored People<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/h2>\n

by James W.C. Pennington<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/span>CHAP. V.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Slavery on this continent did not originate in the condition of the Africans.\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

It is very commonly asserted that the Africans have been enslaved because they are fit only for slaves. This would prove to be a very summary and cheap way of\u00a0setting the south right, provided the above\u00a0assertion\u00a0were true, or that we should take\u00a0it without investigation.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

But is it true that the American colonists\u00a0did not think of instituting slavery until they saw in the condition of the\u00a0<\/span>Africans<\/span><\/i>, subjects fitted\u00a0<\/span>only<\/span><\/i>\u00a0for that state?<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Let us hear the voice of facts in\u00a0the\u00a0case. Slavery had its origin on this continent, in\u00a0the Spanish colonies in South America, not with Africans for slaves, but with the aborigines!\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Those colonies with their fertile soil and\u00a0extensive mines of gold and\u00a0silver,\u00a0were\u00a0crown\u00a0property. And Charles the Fifth,\u00a0who wore the Spanish crown at that time,\u00a0could not long withstand the temptation to reduce the aborigines to a state of vassalage, and compel them to work their own soil and dig in their own mines for his benefit. He did thus reduce them to\u00a0<\/span>slavery<\/span><\/i>.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Slavery had its\u00a0<\/span>origin<\/span><\/i>\u00a0simultaneously with the conquests of this continent, and\u00a0was invented by that same plundering, bloody and murderous spirit which\u00a0characterised\u00a0those conquests.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

In process of time an effort was made to effect the abolition of aboriginal slavery;\u00a0but Charles the Fifth was so elated with his royal patent of property in man, that when the abolition delegate plead the cause of the aborigines before him, he turned the damper of both ears, indicating that he had not the beginning of a notion to entertain\u00a0the\u00a0prayer.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

But when the bishop of\u00a0Chiapa\u00a0told him that the place of the suffering aborigines\u00a0could be supplied by a people on the coast of Africa, he entertained the project! Thus\u00a0the \u201chumane\u201d bishop of\u00a0Chiapa\u00a0pointed\u00a0Charles, who was not at all wanting in disposition to go, to a new field of plunder and blood.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

In 1532, three hundred and eight years since, the Africans took the place of the\u00a0aborigines in the institution of slavery, after it had been dedicated and sealed with blood, twenty or thirty years.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Christopher Columbus carried off some of the aborigines of Cuba to Spain in 1492.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Indians were stolen from the coast of New England, and sold at Malaga, 1614.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

This was five years before Africans were known in Virginia, viz. 1619, and twenty-four years before they were brought to New England, viz. 1638.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

In 1566, Sir John Hawkins carried African slaves to the West Indies; but this was\u00a0more than fifty years after the aborigines\u00a0had been enslaved.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

And yet, in the face of all this, it is pretended that the\u00a0<\/span>condition<\/span><\/i>\u00a0of the Africans first suggested the idea of slavery. And\u00a0now I shall claim the benefit of two\u00a0inferences\u00a0from these facts.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

1. The spirit of slavery was mature and fully in action before the Africans were slaves on this continent.<\/span><\/p>\n

Columbus\u00a0sounded\u00a0the news \u201ca new world,\u201d and a multitude of adventurers\u00a0soon\u00a0\u00a0flew\u00a0to make conquests. But to get gain for nought in\u00a0lands\u00a0was not sufficient for their purpose. They must have property in human flesh. They must have the\u00a0aborigines\u2019 lands for nought, and in addition to this they must have the aborigines\u00a0work it for nought. And when this\u00a0appeared to be\u00a0not so convenient, they must have a supply of Africans. This spirit\u00a0broke forth from the old world like a lion from his cage, pinched with hunger; and\u00a0see here\u00a0how desperately it figures about\u00a0the world to complete its measure of iniquity.\u00a0First\u00a0it pounces upon the aborigines,\u00a0head\u00a0and heels, and then away to Africa,\u00a0and there\u00a0is\u00a0blood,\u00a0blood\u00a0and blood only\u00a0in\u00a0its train.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

2. Slavery is an institution of the <\/span>dark\u00a0age<\/span><\/i>! Did the monarchs, patriarchs, and\u00a0prophets of the south ever think of this?\u00a0\u00a0Yes, slavery was bred, born and nurtured\u00a0in the will of Charles the Fifth of Spain, second only to Nero of Rome; this rebel\u00a0ghost who was capable of fulminating, and figuring in the darkest of the darkness of\u00a0the dark age; this great patron of the mother of abomination; this stoutest of the co-workers with the Pope of Rome, in his persecution of Luther and the reformers;\u00a0<\/span>he\u00a0was also the first patron and patriarch of the institution\u00a0which is so peculiar at the\u00a0south<\/span><\/i>. And who knows,\u00a0perhaps those\u00a0chivalrous patriarchs of the south have descended from Charles, and have\u00a0from him\u00a0inherited their patents? Have the apologists for slavery ever thought of this?\u00a0They\u00a0are apologizing for the dark age. Have\u00a0the ministers of the sacred office at the\u00a0south, who interpret the Bible in support of\u00a0slavery, ever thought that they are preaching a doctrine first invented by a bishop of the Romish church!?<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Let this point\u00a0then,\u00a0stand in bold\u00a0relief\u00a0\u00a0to\u00a0the view of the world. And let it be fairly understood that the American slaveholder and his apologists are patrons of\u00a0<\/span>Rome<\/span><\/i>\u00a0and the\u00a0<\/span>dark age<\/span><\/i>!\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Let it be particularly borne in mind by\u00a0ministers, churches, and deacons at the north, that American slavery, against which\u00a0we are now contending, is an invention of\u00a0the dark age.\u00a0Who\u00a0goes for it\u00a0then,\u00a0must\u00a0know that he goes for the dark age.\u00a0Who\u00a0apologizes for it apologizes for the dark. Can any wonder then, that the spirit of\u00a0slavery hides God and truth from the understanding, when it comes under the\u00a0damning and accumulated darkness of the\u00a0dark age.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\n


\nCHAP. VI.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Are colored\u00a0Americans ,\u00a0in point of intellect, inferior to white people?<\/span><\/i>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

This is a question of\u00a0great importance\u00a0for two reasons; first, the negative is resolutely assumed, and second, on account of the interests involved. If we are\u00a0inferior\u00a0we should be content to pass into the shade; but if not then we\u00a0protest against\u00a0the assumption of our opponents.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

My position is\u00a0<\/span>that the notion of\u00a0inferiority,\u00a0is not only false but absurd, and\u00a0therefore ought to be abandoned<\/span><\/i>.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

I shall now present a chain of facts to\u00a0prove the notion of our inferiority to\u00a0be\u00a0<\/span>false<\/span><\/i>, and then in a short dissertation I shall\u00a0endeavor\u00a0to show it to be\u00a0<\/span>absurd<\/span><\/i>.\u00a0In discussing the question, however, it is to be understood,\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. That in opposing this notion I do not intend to controvert the fact that we are inferior in attainment. If this was the question I should have to be content to yield it and go no further. <\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n
  2. I am not to be understood as denying the fact that some men are of less vigorous habits of study than others.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n
  3. Nor do I assert that the mind, under certain circumstances, does not lose both the habits of, and the taste for enlightened education. <\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n
  4. Nor yet do I mean to say that the human mind does not greatly vary in talents; talents I mean as distinguished from intellect.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n
  5. I do not know exactly what the advocates of this notion mean by inferiority, but from the popular sense of the word I shall take it for granted that they mean to hold that there is an <\/span>inferior order of intellect, and that those of this order are radically and constitutionally inferior, so that no means can change that constitution or raise them from that order.<\/span><\/i>\u00a0I do not know but that many of the advocates will object to this statement; but I presume enough up\u00a0on their modesty to believe that they do not mean more than I have stated for them; and if they mean less, the question is reduced to so small a compass as to be worth nothing to their purpose. Believing however, that their views are correctly embodied in my statement, I\u00a0proceed\u00a0to dispute\u00a0them.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    I. By facts and incidents from the history of our intellect.<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

      \n
    1. The first general fact is that the arts and sciences had their origin with our ancestors, and from them have flown forth to the world. They gave them to Greece, Greece to Rome, and Rome to others.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      The question is not whether they gave\u00a0<\/span>perfect\u00a0<\/span><\/i>systems, nor whether those systems\u00a0might not have been discovered by others; but I am only now concerned with the fact of their\u00a0originating\u00a0the arts and sciences. Many will seek to evade this fact by saying that we are not of Egypt; but I have shown from Herodotus that the Egyptians were black people, and from other facts that they are one with the Ethiopians in the\u00a0great events\u00a0of history.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

        \n
      1. As to the state of the arts &c. among the native Africans, since the beginning of the slave trade, the reader is referred to such as Clarkson, Park, Wilson, Stedman, Lucas, Durand, Wadstroom, Falconhridge, Holben, Barbet, Dalrymple, Towne, and Borman. These have visited that country since it has began to be drenched with blood by the man stealer, and have seen the arts in a highly cultivated state. These have, also given accounts of their mien, their states, or kingdoms and resources, which cannot be abridged for a work like this. <\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        [\u2026]<\/span><\/p>\n

        My opponents of the Jefferson school always\u00a0pitifully reply to the argument when pressed with cases, by answering that they are\u00a0either\u00a0whites, or so intermixed as to have the benefit of white intellect.\u00a0<\/span>Thus\u00a0they\u00a0beg\u00a0the question<\/span><\/i>. They either do this, or\u00a0else immodestly\u00a0deny that to be intellectual worth, which is\u00a0admitted\u00a0to be\u00a0such by judges as\u00a0respectable as themselves. Thus\u00a0Mr. Jefferson says that the Dunciad are\u00a0divinities compared with the muse of Philis Wheatly! He also reproaches a respectable colored writer of London,\u00a0of\u00a0having\u00a0too much imagination! But\u00a0has\u00a0a horse any imagination?\u00a0They also make false issues to avoid the force of these cases.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

        [\u2026]<\/span><\/p>\n

        I have only to regret that Mr. Jefferson\u00a0has so plainly discovered to the world the adverse influence of slavery on his great mind. O that he had reflected for a moment that his opinions were destined to undergo\u00a0a rigid\u00a0scrutiny by an improved state\u00a0of intellect,\u00a0assisted\u00a0by the rising power of an unbiased spirit of benevolence. Had\u00a0he done this,\u00a0he\u00a0would, as a wise man, have\u00a0modified\u00a0that\u00a0ill judged\u00a0part of his work which relates to the colored people.\u00a0<\/span>The most unfortunate thing for the memory of this man is, that he seems to have committed himself against our claims. He makes a labored effort to conclude his proof against us, and reasons throughout as if he intended to claim the case, but his conclusion is a budget of confusion. After taking exception to the case of every educated colored person to which his attention was directed, and alleging that notwithstanding many had been taught the\u00a0handicraft arts, and that others might have improved by the conversation of their masters and mistresses, he submits it as an\u00a0<\/span>anomaly<\/span><\/i>\u00a0that\u00a0<\/span>he<\/span><\/i>\u00a0had never known of negro\u00a0intellect to rise above narration! As if\u00a0he did not know that slavery could produce\u00a0<\/span>anomalies<\/span><\/i>, and as if he expected a man to\u00a0learn as much from a tea table talk, by those who are studiously guarded in teaching even the Bible, lest too much light be seen, as from the lecture of a professor in his chair.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

        II. A dissertation on the main question of inferiority of intellect<\/span><\/i>.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

        In this I am to be understood\u00a0as\u00a0disputing the idea of our inferiority by a direct effort of my own reasoning powers. My\u00a0position\u00a0is,\u00a0<\/span>that intellect is identical in all human beings, and that the contrary opinion is an absurdity<\/span><\/i>. \u201cNO MAN IS ANYTHING MORE THAN A MAN, AND NO MAN LESS\u00a0THAN A MAN.\u201d\u00a0Intellect, is the grand distinguishing point between man and the\u00a0brute creation. Take intellect from man\u00a0and he is an animal only. But while this\u00a0remains\u00a0firmly in his constitution, as fixed\u00a0by the God of his nature,\u00a0man\u00a0cannot, by any\u00a0possible process\u00a0in creation, be converted into a\u00a0<\/span>mere<\/span><\/i>\u00a0animal.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

        However\u00a0near a brute may approach to\u00a0a man in bodily\u00a0<\/span>form and instinct<\/span><\/i>, yet the grand point cannot be passed. A\u00a0<\/span>mere<\/span><\/i>\u00a0animal is not\u00a0<\/span>a man<\/span><\/i>\u00a0because\u00a0<\/span>it has no intellect<\/span><\/i>, and it never can be identical with man\u00a0because it cannot be, by any\u00a0possible process, supplied with intellect; and man cannot become a\u00a0<\/span>mere<\/span><\/i>\u00a0animal because he cannot be divested of intellect. If I\u00a0am required to\u00a0say what I intend by intellect, I reply, I mean those powers of the human soul, as distinct from mere instinct, which alone enable man to reason and reflect.\u00a0<\/span>Now if the absence of intellectual intelligence in the brute\u00a0constitutes\u00a0the difference\u00a0between man and brute, then intellectual intelligence cannot be predicable of a brute or mere animal in any\u00a0possible degree.\u00a0<\/span>And if the possession of intellectual intelligence be that thing which raises man above the brute or mere animal, this must be the dividing line; nor can we conceive of more\u00a0than one such line. To talk about another dividing line is to talk about a species between man and brute, which is false and absurd.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

        If man be thus qualified then by the possession of intellectual intelligence, as distinguished from brute instinct, then man is\u00a0totally distinct\u00a0from every species of mere animal, is he not?\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

        If this\u00a0be\u00a0just, then our question has a fair and distinct boundary, below which it is not honorable to descend. He who in discussing the nature of man, can stoop to talk about\u00a0monkies, apes, and\u00a0ourang\u00a0outangs, offers insult to the majesty of his own\u00a0nature, for which he might to be ashamed.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

        The rational consideration to which I appeal for the truth of my position that human intellect is identical,\u00a0are\u00a0that it has\u00a0been\u00a0<\/span>produced<\/span><\/i>,\u00a0<\/span>improved<\/span><\/i>\u00a0and\u00a0<\/span>perfected<\/span><\/i>\u00a0in\u00a0identically the same way.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

          \n
        1. Intellect in all human beings <\/span>has been produced in the same way, and therefore it is inconceivable that there should be inferior orders of intellect radically so considered<\/span><\/i>.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

          \u201cAnd the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0Gen. ii. 7. Here is the production of the human soul, and\u00a0consequently\u00a0of all that we understand by mind and intellect. To\u00a0this\u00a0we may also add the text Acts xvii. 26. \u201cAnd hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell\u00a0on the face of the earth.\u201d\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

          This creature of God so produced, was destined to propagate his kind, and it is said of his son that he was \u201cin his own likeness, and after his own image.\u201d\u00a0Hence\u00a0propagation does not involve power to produce any change in the intellect. But if this\u00a0be\u00a0true of the first father, it is no less so\u00a0of the second, and so on down to the present time. I think it\u00a0likely\u00a0I may be reproached for introducing this sentence, and I would not be ready to avail myself of the bad example of my opponents, concerning indelicate paragraphs in\u00a0<\/span>their<\/span><\/i>\u00a0writings, but I may be permitted to say, in anticipation, that they are very copious with their indelicacies.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

          God is not only the all-glorious author, then, of the black man\u2019s mind as well as of that of the white man, but he has produced it in the <\/span>same way identically<\/span><\/i>. That wonderful thing in each\u00a0called\u00a0<\/span>mind<\/span><\/i>\u00a0or\u00a0<\/span>soul<\/span><\/i>, is nothing less in its nature, than the breath of the Almighty God. The author of their being is the author of ours also, and the father of their spirits is the father of ours also. We sustain those important relations in the same sense and\u00a0in\u00a0the same\u00a0degree, since\u00a0they were constituted by the same act on his part.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

          The design of God in that action was to produce intelligence, and at the same time to constitute a relation between himself and that intelligence.\u00a0That was an\u00a0action in itself.\u00a0It was an Almighty action. And the effect of that action corresponded to the design of the Almighty actor.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

          [\u2026]<\/span><\/p>\n

          Take the common school system. Now the inquiry is this, is this an intellectual system? Does it develop\u00a0intellect\u00a0and do\u00a0all who master this system experience this\u00a0effect?\u00a0If this is an intellectual\u00a0system\u00a0it is\u00a0an evidence\u00a0of\u00a0intellect\u00a0to master it.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

          But if it\u00a0be\u00a0an evidence\u00a0of intellect to master this system, then all who master it must have their minds improved in that\u00a0<\/span>identical way<\/span><\/i>\u00a0and degree which this system\u00a0is adapted to. Hence,\u00a0so far as\u00a0this system\u00a0is concerned, all minds, then, are improved\u00a0by the same method. And they\u00a0are\u00a0improved to the same degree. The common school system is the first educational measure by which\u00a0the intellectual\u00a0powers are tried. It is called the elementary, or primary system, because it is the foundation of all\u00a0acquirement. It is the first\u00a0gate way\u00a0to the temple of knowledge.\u00a0he\u00a0who\u00a0can not\u00a0lay this stone cannot build. He who does not enter this gate cannot ascend to the interior of the temple. But who lays this stone in a masterly manner, can surely lay another on the top of it, another on the top of that, and so onward, can\u00a0he not?<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>Whoever sees his way through this gate, may pass through the second and then the third, until he finds the gorgeous interior.\u00a0<\/span>But this is the way our intellects are improved. A man who did not need process, was never\u00a0known. Adam, though created\u00a0an adult, was not without the need\u00a0of\u00a0maturity. These men talk, however, as if they had never\u00a0<\/span>had to learn<\/span><\/i>\u00a0to say, a, b, c, and\u00a0bla, and baker. As if they never had to\u00a0learn\u00a0how many 2 and 3 make, and what the amount of 5 and 5 is when added\u00a0together !\u00a01 mean of course those men who claim an order of intellect superior to that of the writer. Let them remember the rock whence they have been hewn and the hole of the pit whence they were\u00a0digged.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

          \u00a0[<\/span>\u2026]<\/span><\/p>\n

          Who then, is the idolater?\u00a0Who is the blasphemer?\u00a0Who is the Sabbath breaker?\u00a0Who is the murderer?\u00a0Does it matter in the sight of God and in His dispensation of rewards and punishments, whether he is of Africa, Asia,\u00a0Europe\u00a0or America?\u00a0Does God slacken\u00a0his hand upon the idolatrous colored\u00a0man?\u00a0Does the sword of justice fall more lightly upon him for his sin of idolatry than upon the European, or upon the American?\u00a0<\/span>Nay his\u00a0law\u00a0\u201cis truth,\u201d Psalm cxix. 142, and\u00a0\u201cthe Judge of all the earth does right.\u201d Gen. xviii. 25.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

          God cannot be accused of injustice in the providential administration of his law over all nations of people with an equally rigid hand. In this department of his holy work, God is continually\u00a0working with men, among them, and over them. He works with men by making instruments of them, or so\u00a0controling\u00a0their conduct as to make them subserve his purposes. He\u00a0brings one man from infancy and\u00a0moulds\u00a0him every step till he gets him on the stage. He appears to let another find his way up, and then he just picks him up from among others and makes\u00a0his use\u00a0of him. One man comes upon the stage of action and appears to create himself the circumstances by which he is to be made prominent.\u00a0Another comes forward and finds\u00a0all of\u00a0his materials at hand waiting for him.\u00a0One man\u00a0dawns into life, and his course seems to lay by the nearest cut through the world. His work is soon done and he is gone. If he brings a blessing to his\u00a0species\u00a0it is\u00a0short and sweet. If he brings a curse, it is short and severe. Another man\u2019s course seems to stretch from the eastern to the western horizon. If this man brings a\u00a0curse\u00a0it is the curse of ages; if he brings a blessing, he is a welcome\u00a0visiter\u00a0to generations.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

          \u00a0[…]<\/span><\/p>\n

          \n


          \nCHAP. VII.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

          American prejudice against color\u00a0examined,\u00a0its nature, its\u00a0tendency\u00a0and its cure.\u00a0<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

          I. Its nature. What is it? In order to avoid saying what has already been well said by many, I shall not make an argument of the fact that it is hating the image of God, nor of that, it is founded in a will to tread down the weak and poor. But pass on and say, <\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

            \n
          1. It is supreme selfishness. <\/span><\/i>It seeks no glory for God, nor good for man, but is pointedly opposed to both. To this as including that, and to that as inseparable from this. And if this does not give it the character of selfishness, then selfishness is\u00a0<\/span>yet without proper definition<\/span><\/i>.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

            If in any act under the sun a man shows himself to be selfish, it is in that of despising his fellow worm of the dust.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

            Selfishness is seen in two ways; it may consist simply in\u00a0<\/span>neglecting<\/span><\/i>\u00a0the interest of our fellow beings while we are miserly attached to our own. And again, it consists\u00a0in\u00a0despising, suppressing, and wickedly opposing the interests of others. This last is capping the climax. It is the thing\u00a0supremely. But all this, yes all of it I charge on American prejudice against color.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

            If God, therefore, is to be glorified in the\u00a0fulfilment of that law by which he enforces\u00a0upon man a regard to the interests of his fellow man, there is no glory for God in this prejudice. If that law condemns selfishness, it condemns this prejudice.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

              \n
            1. It is emphatically <\/span>ill will<\/span><\/i>. Let no man be deceived here. Many who are guilty of this prejudice, may be ignorant of its true nature, and so may many who see its operations. But let the world be assured that it is ill will. Mere aversion does not pursue a man like \u201can old shadow.\u201d It is ill will that does it. Mere aversion does not abuse and insult a man in the public street, in the stage, in the rail car, in the steam boat, and in the church. It is ill will that does this. Mere aversion would be satisfied to let the victim pass unmolested, but ill will is always known by its perseverance in seeking the injury of its victim. Ill will leaves no place for its victim to be at peace. And so with this prejudice. Ill will is aggressive, and so is this prejudice. If any who are filled with this prejudice should deny this, it only proves that they do not know what is in their hearts.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

              The history of Cain shows that it is not\u00a0so difficult a matter for a man to fill his heart with ill will to his fellow man, and thence to pursue him even to blood itself. If they had a better knowledge of the depravity\u00a0of human nature, and were more humbly affected in view of that part of it which they have inherited, they would not trifle with their guilt by pretending that their hearts are only filled with aversion to so\u00a0and\u00a0so, and so forth, when their fruit is the fruit of\u00a0<\/span>ill will<\/span><\/i>.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

              II. Its tendency<\/span><\/i>.\u00a0<\/span>1st. Insubordination, bloodshed, and murder, are its legitimate aim. It needs only to be resisted\u00a0in\u00a0a rightful degree even, and it can soon show that neither law nor human blood are sacred in its way. If any man disputes this, I appeal to the annals of the bloody riots of days gone by not far. What kind of\u00a0a spirit\u00a0was that which besieged our houses with brickbats, stones, and deadly weapons, broke up the Canterbury school, put a rope around Garrison\u2019s neck, burnt Pennsylvania Hall, and shot Lovejoy? Was there no insubordination, no bloodshed\u00a0nor\u00a0murder in all this?\u00a0And what if that\u00a0spirit should have\u00a0been moderately resisted in all\u00a0this?\u00a0Why\u00a0no one can\u00a0even guess at the extent to which it tended.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

              2d. It tends to\u00a0<\/span>blindness of\u00a0mind<\/span><\/i>. Who\u00a0can be blinder than he who abuses all\u00a0relation\u00a0and\u00a0obligation, and\u00a0argues that he is\u00a0doing no wrong!\u00a0And let any man say\u00a0whether this prejudice against which I am now handling my pen, does regard the sacred relations and obligations of\u00a0moral agents.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

              3d. It\u00a0establishes\u00a0in the whites a character for injustice. Injustice is the subversion of rights. It is prejudice itself to the rights of those on whom it is brought to bear. This prejudice, however, is not a single act of injustice, but a series of acts.\u00a0Hence, we\u00a0have only\u00a0to see that a minister, a judge, a teacher, or a church is prejudiced against our interests, and we are hopeless for justice from such.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

              4th. Dishonesty is a fruit of prejudice.\u00a0<\/span>When I say this prejudice tends to dishonesty, I intend that form of dishonesty by which a man uses his neighbor\u2019s dues by stealth of fraud. Now what is that which induces those who are actuated by this prejudice, to use colored people at\u00a0<\/span>any time<\/span><\/i>\u00a0and in\u00a0<\/span>any way<\/span><\/i>\u00a0when the whole can be\u00a0turned to their own account?\u00a0Is it not\u00a0dishonesty? If a colored man has skill, talents, property, or\u00a0any thing\u00a0conducive to their interests, and they can get the benefit of it, without\u00a0acknowledging him to be a man, they will take it. And this is not done by accident, but they are studiously dishonest.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

              The writer was\u00a0once while\u00a0teaching a colored school, earnestly\u00a0solicited\u00a0to go into a\u00a0white family evenings, and give their children lessons.\u00a0But,\u00a0O!\u00a0it\u00a0would not do to let this be known, nor for those children to go to his school.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

              5th.\u00a0<\/span>Hypocrisy is copiously gendered by\u00a0this prejudice.<\/span><\/i> When those who are actuated by this prejudice wish to get a good colored coachman, or waiter, or cook, they can completely change the color of their own faces. They like colored people best. They do not like white servants, and as for the poor Irish, O! they can\u2019t \u201cbear them about the house.\u201d Now what do they mean by all this? The intention is deep. It is hypocritical; and we can easily see it.<\/span><\/p>\n

              6th.\u00a0<\/span>Brutish and uncivil manners<\/span><\/i>,\u00a0are the fruit of this prejudice. It is pretended that those who crow, and whine, and bellow about the streets after colored people, are neither\u00a0numerous\u00a0nor respectable; but we are better informed on the subject. Many of their ladies are addicted to very silly behavior. On the public streets they act like\u00a0perfect mimic mistresses. I have seen them prance and scud for the sake of walking\u00a0<\/span>before<\/span><\/i>\u00a0a colored person on the\u00a0side walk! I have seen them poise their parasol, with\u00a0evident\u00a0intention to rake my hat in passing!\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

              7th. The tendency of this prejudice is to\u00a0<\/span>sacraligion<\/span><\/i>: abuse of sacred things. Are not those sacrilegious who carry this mean feeling into the house of God? Who has authorized the division of the church of God into\u00a0<\/span>white<\/span><\/i>\u00a0and\u00a0<\/span>black<\/span><\/i>\u00a0divisions?\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

              Not long since, I stepped into the conference room of a church on\u00a0Main street\u00a0in this city, while the bell was ringing for prayer meeting, thinking I should like to know whether they had any prospect of a\u00a0revival. But\u00a0I soon found that\u00a0<\/span>something\u00a0was\u00a0reviving<\/span><\/i>, whether it was religion or not, I did not stop to\u00a0see. I\u00a0saw\u00a0nestling and\u00a0sneering, and\u00a0left.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

              8th. The tendency of this prejudice is to\u00a0<\/span>blasphemy<\/span><\/i>. If blasphemy consists in indignity offered to God, I am at a loss to\u00a0conceive who does this more emphatically than those who are actuated by this foul prejudice. Who is a blasphemer if not he\u00a0who says that God is the author of American slavery?\u00a0Who is a blasphemer but he who wrests the holy word of the Holy God from its proper meaning, and makes it to sanction iniquity?\u00a0Woe unto him who does not only rebel against God, but tries to make it appear, by false arguments, that God stands with him instead of against him in his sin.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

              9th.\u00a0<\/span>This prejudice hates the truth.<\/span><\/i>\u00a0And this is not all, but it hates to be pushed\u00a0with\u00a0the truth. And still more it hates those who dare to push it with the truth. It is itself opposition to the truth. It is opposed to truth religiously, morally, and politically, nor\u00a0will\u00a0hear truth. And hence, the more you show the\u00a0truth\u00a0the more objectionable and obnoxious you are. The more you\u00a0exhibit\u00a0the\u00a0truth\u00a0the more hateful you are. But why is this if not that this prejudice hates the truth and those who tell it?\u00a0Why are abolitionists hated and abused?\u00a0For telling the truth. They are even accounted\u00a0<\/span>enemies<\/span><\/i>\u00a0because they tell the nation it is in danger of the judgments of God for the sin of oppression.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

              10th.\u00a0<\/span>Finally\u00a0it is carrying the total nation down to a state of refined heathenism<\/span><\/i>. If I am asked to say what I mean by this, I answer, I mean that the fear of the living God is not before the eyes of this nation in all these things. Now who is a heathen but him who acts as if the God of heaven did not hear, see, and govern him?\u00a0<\/span>But this is sadly true of those who are actuated by this prejudice. There is not only a heathenlike disregard to the relation which God has established between man and man, but this disregard is acted out just as bravely, and as silly as if God could not discern it, or rather as if there was no God to discern it. A nation covered with Egypt\u2019s darkness could do nothing more. \u201cHe that hateth his brother is in darkness.\u201d <\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

              \n


              \n\u00a0[A footnote to\u00a0Pennington\u2019s\u00a07th\u00a0point\u00a0above\u00a0\u2013 his point about prejudice as sacrilege \u2013\u00a0gives\u00a0\u00a0a\u00a0first-hand portrait of prejudice in a Hartford church:]\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

              I have been in the habit of thinking very reserved and indifferently on this whole subject. I do not mean to say, that I have ever been reconciled to the negro pew. But I have managed so as to accommodate myself without much difficulty. I have, for a number of years, on going into a white church, followed the practice of standing in some one of the aisles, rather than take the negro pew, or to contend for one to which I am unwelcome. But I find that I have, as a minister of the gospel, a responsibility in the matter. I must think of it, and feel more directly than I have. And the more I do think of it the more my soul sickens.\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

              I have turned aside several times into the South Baptist church in this city, to hear Mr. Knapp, since he has been here. The first time I went the church was only moderately full, and as usual I stood in the aisle. The second time the church was overflowing. A Mr. S. met me at the door and gave me a polite introduction to a seat, said by him to be \u201cone of the best.\u201d As the house was so full I took the seat, but saw the design. It is \u201cone of the best seats,\u201d but the particular design was that it should be the first inside the door, and consequently, the farthest off from the preacher. Hence for the sake of the seat itself it was good, even \u201cone of the best.\u201d But for the design it was bad. <\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

              I went again on Friday evening last, Jan. 8th.\u00a0A Mr. F. met me and seated me in the second seat from the door. All this passed on. The preacher took his text, Romans ii. 4. \u201cThe riches of his goodness.\u201d A part of the first clause of the verse. His object was to prove and illustrate\u00a0<\/span>the goodness of God.\u00a0<\/span><\/i>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

              He began by saying that \u201cthe goodness of God is too much overlooked by us all,\u201d &c. The preacher produced a number of considerations to prove his subject, as the fact that God created the human soul; has constituted man for exquisite enjoyment, and has made ample provision for his enjoyment; has given a law to guard his rights; He has interposed the strongest barriers to sin; He has given His Son, &c. I do not attempt to give the exact number of his proofs, nor his own order and wording. I admired Mr. Knapp more on account of his strong positions and stout eloquence, than for his arrangement of matter. I enjoyed the sermon much, and the reason I did not fully enjoy it, was on account of the scene which I shall now relate. When I took my seat there was but one other person in the slip, which left room for three other persons. There were, I believe, two persons in the slip behind me, which left room in the two slips for six persons. Presently there were some three or four persons who wanted seats. Instead of following the same plan that had been followed from the pulpit down to us, that is, of first filling up the seats in the slips, and then put a loose bench in the aisle, the loose bench was brought before these seats were full, and we were blocked up when there were six vacant seats in the two slips. This would not have cut so deep, but presently again in came two colored men, on the opposite side of the house. These were handed across the house and had to climb over the shoulders of those who sat on the loose bench, over the bench, over the top of slip doors! Now some one will ask \u201cwhat of all that? The house was crowded. I sat on a loose seat in the aisle.\u201d I answer again, the whole thing is worth just nothing. But the <\/span>design<\/span><\/i>.\u00a0If a man\u00a0<\/span>designs<\/span><\/i>\u00a0to murder me,\u00a0he is a murderer though I may come off with my life. In view of this\u00a0case\u00a0I say:\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

                \n
              1. There is no hope of getting right in the church so long as protracted meetings and revivals are managed strictly on the man-hating principle. Those who get religion under such management, will get prejudice as a part of their religion. <\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n
              2. I have serious scruples whether I do not sin in fellowshiping ministers and churches who tolerate these measures in the solemn season of a revival. <\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n
              3. I do not expect any one but myself to be responsible for what I say. <\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n
              4. If people wish to expose their own want of sense, we are not willing to have them; we have no eyes to see it. <\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                [End of footnote]<\/span><\/p>\n

                1841<\/p>\n

                Public domain. Source: Internet Archive.<\/pre>\n
                \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
                A Text Book of the Origins and History Etc. of the Colored People by James W.C. Pennington \u00a0CHAP. V.\u00a0\u00a0 Slavery on this continent did not originate in the condition of the Africans.\u00a0 It is very commonly asserted that the Africans have been enslaved because they are fit only for slaves. This would prove to be … Continue reading Excerpts from A Text Book on the Origins and History Etc. of the Colored People<\/span> →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[104],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-631","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-james-w-c-pennington"],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/hartfordlit.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/631","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/hartfordlit.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/hartfordlit.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hartfordlit.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hartfordlit.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=631"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/hartfordlit.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/631\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/hartfordlit.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=631"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hartfordlit.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=631"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hartfordlit.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=631"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}