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 fel
lows 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 infa
mous oppression everywhere attached to us in
the United States, is worth to us, as an oppress
ed and rising people, more than a million of the
strongest arguments to prove our equality. The
masses of the whites, having succeeded in op
pressing us, are foolish enough to believe that
we are an inferior race. And when a colored
man succeeds in doing something really won
derful, we are generally insulted by such ex
pressions 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

the duty of every colored man to labor inces
santly not only for his own elevation, but for
that of his race. Our elevation, to be success
ful, 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 lit
tle 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 la
bor; 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 indus
trious 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 some
thing, and ultimately have bettered their condi
tion, 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 con
sequent 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 question
ed often in relation to the colored churches of
the United States, and especially those of Phil
adelphia, which are the most numerous. My
answers, though often satisfactory, have not al
ways been so. The cause is, the French people
do not understand us. As a class, we are fan
atically religious, and of course we must have
our church; and as there are differences of op
inion among us, we must have our churches.—
This is the Frenchman, who is by no means relig
ious, 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 pro
scribed 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

sense. I admit that many of our churches have
been nuisances and curses to us, and many big
oted and ignorant ministers have misled us; but
for all that, the colored churches are monu
ments 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 color
ed 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 re
mains 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 re
minds me of an account given by Mr. Sey
mour 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 sustain
ing 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 con
sequence 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 second
hand 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 pros
pers, 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

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 offer
ed 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 per
mit 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 con
fessed his error, but I have not got the wine.

There is a society which exists in every quar
ter of the globe, which claims an antiquity co
eval with creation itself, and an organized ex
istence for at least three thousand years. This
society professes to know no man by his coun
try 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, ap
plied 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 char
ter 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,

the mother of modern Masons, could have been
guilty of imposing upon us, and that this im
position 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 se
crets? Could one of them work his way into
a foreign lodge? Could he stand that instru
ment 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 Yan
kee 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 SmithSmith, Gerrit

Gerrit Smith (1797– 1874), a New York businessman and land speculator, became best known for his philanthropic work for such reform causes as temperance and abolition. Between 1828 and 1835, he donated large sums of money to the American Colonization Society, but abandoned that movement in 1835 when his sympathies shifted to the immediate abolitionists. In the 1840s, he gave approximately 140,000 acres of land in upstate New York to three thousand black settlers, thus qualifying them to vote. Smith was a founder and frequent candidate of the Liberty party, running for governor of New York on that ticket in 1840 and winning a seat in Congress in 1852. When the Free Soil merger with moderate antislavery Democrats and Whigs lured away many Liberty party supporters, Smith helped bankroll that organization until 1860. Smith befriended Douglass when the latter moved to Rochester, and Smith frequently helped finance Frederick Douglass’ Paper. Like Douglass, Smith supported John Brown, but psychological stress caused by the failure at Harpers Ferry brought on the first of a series of bipolar episodes that greatly reduced his subsequent reform activities. Ralph Volney Harlow, Gerrit Smith: Philanthropist and Reformer (1939; New York, 1972); Gerald Sorin, The New York Abolitionists: A Case Study of Political Radicalism (Westport, Conn., 1971), 269– 87; Lewis Perry, Radical Abolitionism: Anarchy and the Government of God in Antislavery Thought (Ithaca, N.Y., 1973), 170– 80; John R. McKivigan and Madeleine Leveille, “The ‘Black Dream’ of Gerrit Smith, New York Abolitionist,” Syracuse University Library Associates Courier, 20:61– 76 (Fall 1985); NCAB , 2:322– 23; DAB, 17:270– 71. , 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 elec
tion, I would say after you shall have succeed
ed 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.