The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1873-12-25
CIVIL RIGHrs-aADlCAL nrPoC-
RISY.

We have read the civil rights bill intro
duced by Mr. Morey, Of Louisiana, in the
House, which We presume to be the counter
part Of the one now pending in the Senate,
introduced by Mr.. Sumner, and We are
forcibly struck with an omission which tells
fearfully against the sincerity Of the North
ern Radicals in their professed love Of the
negroes and their desire to give them fun
social equality. While the bill gives the
negroes the full right Of all white people in
hotels, on all railroads and steamboats,, at
ell theatres and other places Of public
amusement and in all common or public
schools, and inficts heavy penalties on
all who. at such places, discriminate
against them, making them liable not
only to the party aggrieyed in the
sum Of $500, but also in the sum Of $1,000,
and from one month to one years imprison-
ment for the public offenA, it says not one
word in relation to churches or places Of re-
ligious worship, thus leaving the colored
people in this respect without any protec-
ton whatever at law. Now it is generally
supposed that religion places all mankind
more upon terms Of exact equality than any
thing else, but the puritanic northern Radi-
Gals do not seem to think so, If we may
Judge them from this omission. They are
willing that the negroes shall be forced on
the whites at hotels, theatres and other pub
lie places Of amusement, but. they are un-
willing to let them sit side by side with
them in the worship Of God. It would
not do for some wealthy negro to secure
pew in the very center Of some fash
ionable Northern church and fll it
up with half dozen sweet specimens of
his fragrant race. The Yankee negro lover
intends to guard against any such intrusion
upon his dainty worship at his gilded altars.
It is all very we'll to force the landlord of a
hotel to admit any dirty specimen of the
man and brother" to the ladies' dining
room, there to sit and gormandize with the
white gentleman's wife and daughter, and
compel the managers of theatres to sell him
front seat in the dress circle, but to let
the same ''man and brother into fashion
able cbarch is more than they can stand.
They tell us this is interfering with religion,
and is unconstitutional SO it is, and the
whole bill is unconstitutional and most
wanton and reckless interference with social
customs and habits. But il the one is to
be forced, there is no reason whatever why
the other should not be. If negroes are to
be forced by law and grievous penalties
every where else they may desire to
90, why should the churches be exempt
from this intrusiong It shows as clearly as
anything could the insincerity and hypoc-
risy OF Radical professions. They, most of
them, do not want association with Che col
ored people, they arc really more prejudiced
against them than arc their old masters, the
abused people of the South. They are not
disposed 20 treat them half as kindly or
show them the same disintercsted consider
alton, and they resort TO this legislation as
political thing to keep up their influence
over the negroes and to show their hostility
aud contempt for Southern whites. It is
possible that the present Congress, so large
" Radical, pressed by the negro clamors,
may be able to get this bill, or something
like it, ripened into law, but if they do,
it can never be carried into effect. The
public sentiment of the country revolts
against all these attempts to force social
equality against the remonstrances Of nature
and nasure's God, and they will prove fail
ures to certainty. Society cannot be reg
ulated by law in a really free country. No
statutes to prescribe what man or woman
must wear, or what eat OF drink, or what
company they shall keep, can be enforced
in free republic. It takes the edicts of
despots, and their cannons and bayonets, to
do this. The true principle is to give ensire
individual freedom in all matters not incom-
patible with public order and the rights of
Others.