Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1873-03-15
AGAssIz ON THE NEGRO.

10 lut = ulOu anu <Au6IlCdu
Public expectation was recently aroused
by an intimation that an humiliation of
Ariel was in course of preparation by dis
tinguished clergyman. As nothing of the
sort has yet appe lred, the question natural
ly arises, has the reverend gentleman under
taken more difficult task than he at first i'm
sgined? Does be find that an impartial
reading of the original Hebrew brings him to
the same conclusion? Can it be possible
that Ariel can not be answered, and that his
propositions will have to be regarded as es.
tablished truth? If they are false they GER
tainly ought to be exposed, and the thanks
of patient public will be due the distin-
guished divine for the exposure. If any
part of the theory be true there will not be
wanting evidence to support it; and the fol-
lowing from a recent lecture by no less
parsonage than Prof. Agassiz, shows that
Ariel is not altogether unsupported in his
Interpretation of Hebrew:
81 have pointed out over hundred
specific differences between the bonal and
nervous systems of the lvtite man and the
negro. Indeed, their frames are alike in
no particular. There is no bone in the ne
gro's body which is relatively the same in
shape, size, articulation, or chemically of
the same composition as that Of the white
man. The negro's bones contain far
greater proportion Of calcareous salts than
those of the white man. Even the negro's
blood is chemically a Uery different fluid
from that which courses in the veins of the
white man. The whole physical organiza-
ton differs quite as much from
the white mans as it does from
that of the ctimpdnzee-that is in his
bones, muscles, nerves, and fbres-the
chimpanzee has not much farther to pro-
gress to become white man (thau the ne
crO). This fact science ineJOrGbly demon
strdteS. Climate has no more to do with
the difference between the white man and
the negro than it has with that between the
negro and the chimpanZee, or it has be-
tween the horse and the ass, or the eagle
and the owl. Each is distinct and separ-
ate creation. The negro and the white
man were created as specifically different
as the owl and the eagle. They were de-
signed (by the All Wise creator) TO fill diff
ferent places in the system of nature. The
negro is no more negro by accident or
misfortune than the owl is the kind of
bird he is by accident or misfortune. The
negro is no more the white mans brother
than the owl is the sister Of the eagle, or
the ass the brother ofthe horse"
Now, how do reverend and learned gen.
tlemen propose to reconcile the fact dem
enst1ated by science, that the negro's blood
is chemically very different fluid from
that which courses in the veins of the white
man-with the declaration of Scripture
that "God made of one blood all nations,"
etc? Is science false or mistaken? Or is
the declaration of Scripture a mere legend
which this "enlightened" age scorns to re-
cognize? or are they both true? and "God
and nature then at strife?" Most certainly
not. There is no such strife as this; and
yet it is quite possible that both statements
can be perfectly true. statewide.