Skip to main content

[John S.] Rock to Frederick Douglass, September 30, 1858

page_0001

HOTEL DUPUYTREN, No. 5 Rue Dupuytren, Paris, Sept. 30th, 1858.

FREDERICK DOUGLASS, ESQ.: MY DEAR SIR:— My letters remind you occasionally that "I still live," and have in remembrance those of my fellows in the United States, who I have suffered with, and hope to be able soon to suffer again with. It is time, I think, that colored men had learned that their interests are mutual; that the success of one colored man is, to a great extent, the success of the race. I believe that every colored man who succeeds, in spite of the infamous oppression everywhere attached to us in the United States, is worth to us, as an oppressed and rising people, more than a million of the strongest arguments to prove our equality. The masses of the whites, having succeeded in oppressing us, are foolish enough to believe that we are an inferior race. And when a colored man succeeds in doing something really wonderful, we are generally insulted by such expressions as, "Is it not remarkable for a colored man!" or still oftener, in the true American English, "He is a smart nigger; isn't he?" just as though a colored man or a nigger is not as capable of great actions as a white one. It is evident that the whites of the United States think us inferior; but it is equally apparent that the masses of them are not remarkable either for the profundity of their judgment, or their common sense. The only arguments which reach them are the simplest. We would do well to FORCE upon them, by every possible means, an acknowledgment of our complete equality, and this can only be done by every colored man's feeling his degradation, and that he must do something to remove the curse which they have put upon us. I hold, therefore, that it is

page_0002

the duty of every colored man to labor incessantly not only for his own elevation, but for that of his race. Our elevation, to be successful, must be made a common cause. let our application be:

"Help us to help each other, Lord, Each other's cross to bear; And each his friednly aid afford, And feel his brother's care."

At present we are not united. We suffer little differences of opinion to divide us. Besides, some of our public men in days of yore have misled us. We were told that we must cease all menial employments, and be mechanics and professional men, and that those who would not do so, were stumbling blocks in our way. This created, to some extent, a prejudice against labor; and I think that this idea has been carried too far. We have been taught that the honest girl who works in the kitchen, and the industrious man who stands behind another, is not so good as the mechanic, and that the mechanic is not so good as the professional man. And what has been the result? Why, sir, many of our young girls and young men have left positions in which they could have accumulated something, and ultimately have bettered their condition, and have learned trades, only to starve at them. The system is false. The professional man is no better than the mechanic, and the mechanic is no better than the laborer; and any system which teaches us differently is false. There is no disgrace in being poor, and working honestly to hew out our independence; and the sooner we see it, the better it will be for us. Let us work, and lay up our money; we have much need of it. Poor people of every other race are obliged to do it, and I do not think that our experience warrants us in expecting ore than other people. Our fault has not bee in being servants, but in being content with our condition as such. I repeat it—let us work and make a position which the world will be forced to respect. If is of no consequent whether we are waiters, mechanics, or professional men; we are all servants to each other, and no class of society is independent of the rest. Let us better our condition; this we owe to ourselves and our posterity.

Since I have been here, I have been questioned often in relation to the colored churches of the United States, and especially those of Philadelphia, which are the most numerous. My answers, though often satisfactory, have not always been so. The cause is, the French people do not understand us. As a class, we are fanatically religious, and of course we must have our church; and as there are differences of opinion among us, we must have our churches.— This is the Frenchman, who is by no means religious, does not understand. A good Catholic said to me he would let all the churches go to the d—l, before he would go into one that proscribed him on account of his color. I asked him what he would do? He said he would do without a church. This "do without" would be as hard for us to understand, as it is for them to understand our system of colored churches.— Now I think it decidedly unwise to establish separate churches in communities where all are equal. But take for example Philadelphia, with a talented and industrious colored population, paying more poor tax than supports their own poor—how would it become them to abolish their colored churches, and be "stuck" back in the corners of the white churches? Indeed, this would be a sad commentary on their common

page_0003

sense. I admit that many of our churches have been nuisances and curses to us, and many bigoted and ignorant ministers have misled us; but for all that, the colored churches are monuments of our industry and independence. The whites say if you worship God in our churches, you must do it under certain restrictions. The colored people say, if we cannot come in as equals, we cannot worship with you; and here is the secret of the establishment of colored churches in the United States. Now, there is one thing very curious in America, if a colored man does anything, his color attaches to it. If our talented and mutual friend Garnet opens a free church for all the world, and the rest of mankind, it will be styled a colored church. If your brilliant correspondent "Normal" opens a school for any who choose to come, it is colored; in short, whatever a colored man does, the odium of his color is attached to it, and it is taken for granted that it is inferior. The only way that this can be changed, is to better our condition, and make the color respectable. This reminds me of a visit which I paid some days since to Hotel de Cluny, which is one of the finest remains of the ancient mansions of Paris of the sixteenth century. It was purchased by the government in 1843 for 500,000 francs, and is now turned into a museum of antiquities, many of them very rich and all decidedly interesting, and especially so to the antiquarian. The only object which I shall notice is the one which serves my purpose at present. It is a triptych, brought from the Church of Bombarsund, and presented, I believe, by the Russian Government. It presents a number of figures, painted BLACK, which appear through apertures cut in gilt leaves which cover the rest of the surface. In the centre is the Virgin Mary, with the babe Jesus. They are both painted black, which was undoubtedly their natural color. This case reminds me of an account given by Mr. Seymour of certain images of our Savior, brought from Rome in the early age of the Church, which, he says, were perfectly black, and of negro cast." I have many curious facts sustaining this position, but I have no desire to enter into a discussion of the subject at present— more especially so, as it is of no material consequence to mankind in general what color they were. I hope that the bleaching out of most of the virtues of white men in American may not place them in the position of the "pale horse," which John speaks of in the Revelations. (Rev. ch. vi—v. 8.)

In taking a walk some days since in the Champs Elysus, I saw on the shelves of a secondhand bookseller, a book with a curious title printed lengthways on the back. It was "the life of Frederick Douglass." Now, who do you think could be so villainous as to take the life of Mr. Douglass? I looked inside, and there learned that it had been taken by his own hands, and that Joseph Barker was an accomplice; that the deed had been committed at Wortley, near Leeds, in England. I looked farther, and found a strong puff from the Boston Courier.— Says I to myself," How wonderful is man!" The Boston Courier is now dead, and the man whose life was taken, "still lives" and prospers, and, "upon a pinch," could spare another life and live again.

I am so much better that I am able to walk six blocks to my meals, which I take at a Table

page_0004

d'hote—besides an extra walk or ride of an hour or so in the afternoon at 4 or 5 o'clock, before dinner.

Day before yesterday I got into a discussion with a Catholic priest at the dinner table about the meaning of the word peevish. He said it was synonymous with the French word lache, or poltroon. I said it was equivalent to the words chagrin or maussade. The discussion waxed warm; two other learned doctors of the Church, priests if you please, were called in by him to decide. They, of course, were excellent French scholars, but they were not remarkably learned in the English. They decided against me. I would not yield, however, and the priest offered to bet me a bottle of brandy or wine, that I was wrong. This I declined to do, telling him that I never made bets. He asked me why? I told him it was against my religion; but if he wanted to present me with a bottle of wine, I would accept it as a present. He ridiculed the idea of having a religion which would not allow a man to bet, but would permit him to eat meat on Fridays! I told him I did not want to win, but we would settle the matter by referring to a dictionary. This we did, and the dictionary was on my side. I told him that he had fairly lost his wine.— Some twenty others decided—the priests among the rest—that it was at least a moral victory, and that he ought to pay. He confessed his error, but I have not got the wine.

There is a society which exists in every quarter of the globe, which claims an antiquity coeval with creation itself, and an organized existence for at least three thousand years. This society professes to know no man by his country or his complexion, all distinctions being obliterated by the expanse of reflection that "the world is our county, and man our brother." It is purely a philanthropic society, and of course its object is neither to stimulate nor cultivate cruel or wicked feelings of any kind. According to an ancient writer,

" 'Tis founded on a brother's love, Relief and truth its pillars prove; Its corner stone is Charity— The building's then Free Masonry."

But by a strange fatality, the Masons of the United States, with white complexions, have disregarded the ancient landmarks, and said that men of a darker color than themsleves could not be admitted into their lodges. Some colored men, having been made in England, and wishing to become attached to lodges in the United States, having been refused, applied for a charter to establish a lodge of their own; this being also refused, they applied to the Grand Lodge of England, and got a charter in 1784. Here you have the cause of the origin of what is called black Masonry in the United States. The white Masons now say, by what authority I do not know, that we are not only clandestine, but that we are not even in possession of the genuine secrets of the order. Now, this is indeed strange. Can it be possible that the Grand Lodge of England,

page_0005

the mother of modern Masons, could have been guilty of imposing upon us, and that this imposition could be successful for three quarters of a century? This is hardly probable. If not, "what's the fractions?" Are the colored Masons of the United States clandestine, or are they not? Have they the genuine secrets? Could one of them work his way into a foreign lodge? Could he stand that instrument which detects instantaneously all that is not such as we are authorized to receive?— These are questions of importance to me, and I propose before this week goes over my head (and to-day is Thursday,) to test this matter for the benefit of the 5,000 of my brethren in the United States. If we are wrong, let us know it and correct our error—"better late than never;" if we are right, let the truth stand emblazoned before the world as another act of American tyranny over us on account of our color. I promised you I will do the thing up handsomely, and give you the result. If I am rejected because I cannot work my way in, or because of some informality of my diploma, it being five years old, or because some Yankee objects, I will give you the exacts results— so, reader, be prepared for the issue in the next paper.

Now, I have a word to say to the colored voters of New York. A rare opportunity offers to elect that noble hearted man Hon. Gerrit Smith, who has done so much for us. I hope every one of you will let your votes tell in earnest. By all means devote that day to freedom. And to my friends in Massachusetts, who I had hoped to be with before the election, I would say after you shall have succeeded in placing good men upon your tickets— do your duty at the polls. Having entire confidence that you will do this, I must be content to bid you

ROCK.

Creator

Rock, John S.

Date

1858-09-30

Description

[John S.] Rock to Frederick Douglass. PLSr: Frederick DouglassP, 22 October 1858. Argues the only route to racial equality is black unification despite class divisions and religious differences.

Publisher

This document was calendared in the published volume and has not been published in full before.

Collection

Frederick Douglass' Paper

Type

Letters

Publication Status

Unpublished