qualification, I stand by every word of the quotation; but of course in this I am
speaking only within the limits of my own knowledge and belief, and will gladly
own myself mistaken when an exception is presented by you or anybody else. You
complain of my assertion that “it is again getting dark for the colored race.” This
isolated remark does great injustice to my lecture so far as respects the District of
Columbia. I took pains in that lecture to show the vast and wonderful improvement
in the condition of the colored people in this city, and especially to praise the
educational institutions with which they are now blessed. I spoke especially of the
Sumner school, and the hope of a future of my race which it inspires. The next
statement, also [word obliterated] from its connections, to which you object, is
that “the Washingtonian is indolent.” I did not say this, but I did say the genuine
Washingtonian to the manner born has a leisurely, indolent expression in all his
movements. If you stop into a store to purchase an article you may expect to wait
five minutes at least before any clerk will condescend to notice your presence.
That is what I said, and, in judging of it, you must remember that I am a colored
man, and that I was speaking to colored men. No doubt the editor and proprietor of
a powerful public journal would be waited upon with more [word obliterated] than
myself. Not only is it true that clerks are slow to wait upon colored persons in many
of our stores, but instances may be cited where they have failed to have been waited
upon at all, at any rate. Mr. Editor, I think you will agree with me that there is no
slander in this allegation. In speaking of the absence of enterprise and industry in
the city of Washington, I have committed an offense, if it be an offense, of which
the columns of THE REPUBLICAN have been equally guilty with myself. I am not
sure but at this point I have stolen your thunder, for no man in this community has
held up the destitution of Washington at this point more conspicuously than
yourself. Your main quotation is as follows: “You can generally tell the character
of a man by the way he wears his hat. On first sight you would think you were
among a lot of thieves by the manner in which they wear their hats in Washington.
They wear them down over their eyes, which gives them a sombre, sinister
appearance. Members of Congress set this fashion, being in the habit of wearing
their hats in this style, with their eyes cast down, thinking on the legislation of the
hour, and sometimes desiring to avoid recognition. Another distinction of the
Washingtonian is his negro pronunciation. There is a class there called the poor
white trash. During slavery they would follow an escaped slave as a dog would a
bone. Now they manage to eke out an existence by hunting and fishing. Then there
are the spoilsmen, pension buyers, lobbyists, &c, with all sorts of schemes to
make money. To be honest in Washington is to be considered a fool. Nobody ever
Says ‘No;’ all say ‘Yes.’ There is more insincere politeness and obsequious hat-
lifting there than anywhere else.”

This is a condensed statement, and is consequently imperfect. What I said
was, “There is no article of gentleman’s dress which can be worn more ex-
pressively than a hat.” You can almost tell an honest man from a rogue, a man of