New national era. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1870-1874, 1874-07-30
From the Progressive Americana
II is the Voice Jacob, hut the
Hand OF ESau.

From the Progressive Americana
II is the Voice Jacob, hut the
Hand OF Esau.
In our issue of July I'd, we published an
article, setting forth our views of what
course should be taken in the future by col.
ored voters of the country. The points we
covered were simply these-frst, the sus-
tanning of those Republicans who were true
to their platform and consequently were true
advocates of "equal rights for ALL" second,
to denounce those of the party who were
traitors to its avowed principles third, to
make pledge to advocate Civil Rights a
qualification necessary to secure our votes,
and fourth, to be in a position to demand
this pledge, so far as national candidates
were concerned, by national organization,
and auxiliary organizations in every State,
county and district in each State; fifth, a
unity of sentiment on the part of the press
to bring about this result, and asked the
opinion Of the press, relative to it. The
New National Era Of Washington, after
copying the article. replies in an able and
elaborate editorial under the title, Blind
Leaders," which will be found in another
column. With the whole article in the
AMERICAN, it differs, so far as it makes
known its opinion upon it.
The Era says it can speak for one of the
papers controlled by cOlOred men: THE
Era has never fatered in advocating the
passage of the Civil Rights Bill, and has
ever urged our people to be true to the Re-
publican party. We know there is no other
political organization in the country to which
the negro, as freedom-loving and patriotic
citizen can ally himself; hence, we have not
endeavored to lead the colored voters out OF
the party that gave US, ETC., etc."
We have not charged any paper with not
advocating the passage of the Civil Rights
Bill, as the Era implies, and the Era in advo-
eating it has done nothing more than any
other Of our journals have done. We are
not aware either, that single journal has
attempted to lead the cOlOred voters out of
the Republican party. But the point at
issue is, has the Era ever been quite ready
to tell the Republican party Of its apathy
and treachery." There is a vast difference
between telling Republicans of their nom
performance of their duty, and urging the
passage Of the Civil Rights Bill. But the
Era assumes that to tell the Republican lead
ers of their treachery to colored Republicans
is evidence of desire to lead colOred vot-
ers out of the party hence, they are "blind
leaders," and show a lack of devotion to the
Republican party. Now, we make no pro-
abandOns its principles, as we claim in this
instance it has done. We are devoted to
Republican principles, and will do all in our
power to hold the party to them. The fact
is, acquiescng in everything the party has
been pleased to say and do, is why we are
where we now are. If the treatment of
three years could have aroused a feeling of
Indignation, previous to the sitting of the
last session of Congress, as it has since, the
Civil Rights Bill would have been passed,
and if it is passed at the next session it will
be in order to hold the colored vote. What
we ask of the colored voters, and all we ask
is that they speak to the party just as Gerrit
Smith speaks to it through the columns of the
Era; in writing to the Hon. Frederick Doug
lass, he says :
/" The Republican party has disappointed
us-it has failed to redeem some of its
solemnly-made promises. What can we do?
We who are black and white men, who are
their friends? l wish we could leave this
party for a time and thus punish and improve
it,"
Thus speaks Gerrit Smith, the patriarch of
Republicanism, and Uho dare accuse him of
treachery: Yet he has said all that we ask
cololed men to say in one spontaneous voice.
and he has said only what cOlOred men ought
to say ; for to whom have they failed to re-
deem their premises? Not to Gerrit Smith
or the people of his race, but to the colored
people of the country. Yet we dare not tell
them so-while Gerrit Smith. in the magma
nlmlty of his soul, pleads for us, while we are
continually finding excuses for the party.
We should tell them without fear of copse-
quenCes, of their bad faith; for if thew re-
fuse to grant us civil rights, what difference
Is there between them and the Democratic
party, as far as the colored man is cOncernedp
None at all.
In reference to G. T. Downing's letter
which appeared in the Tribune, we never saw
it, until it appeared in the ERA, but without
expressing any opinion of Mr.. Downino,s
public career, we acquiesce to every word
contained in his letters. We cannot see that
it deserves the wholesale condemnation If
receives at the hands of the editor of the
ERA nor do we believe it would have re-.
ceived it had it been the production of anv
others pen. That gentleman NAV have
erred in many things, but he has struck the
key note IN this instance. and sooner or later
The ERA don't think 'sa naner in tho
country, edited by colored men has been al.
lent on civil rights" Nor we either. nor
have we said so and for that reason we can't
see how it can be very insulting.
Twill the American tell us what reason
there could be tor expressing dissatisfaction
with the bill as it was pending i'm Conoress
up to the time of its defeat p, s'~''
There was much cause for dissatisfaction
The bill was the first on the calendar in The
Senate, with an overwhelming majority
pledged, so far as the Republican platform
is concerned, to its support, snd there was
not single hour, from the opening till the
inal close OF the Senate, when it might not
have been passed by party vote. In the
senate, if we mistake not. there are forty.