Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1874-03-03
GIN HIS TRUE CHARACTER"
Senator BrOwnlOw on the Civil
Rights Bill.


Rights Bill.
The East Tennessee COIOred Organ
Speaks fits Piece About the Senator
A Pretty Caustic Article.
From the MaryviIle Republican (edited by a
Colored MANI, Feb. q.
Hon. VIM. G. Brownlow has written
letter to the KnozUille Chronicle in
relation to his position on the civil
rights bill and other Congressional
questions. He, contrary to the expec-
tations Of The colored people, takes
strong ground against the civil rights
bill.
The Senator exposes himself In his
true character, practically demonstra-
ting his past asseverations on political
questions affecting the interests of the
colored race, have been actuated by
desire to secure the emoluments of Of
flee, and, consequently, has acted hypo-
critically IN the past; but, now that he
does not expect to be a candidate for
reelection to the Senate"-and accord
inglY mot caring whether" has ''views
are popular or not" he expresses his
real sentiments, which are In keeping
with his pro-slayery record before the
war.
He emphatically says that he is op-
posed to the lChoLe bill because of the
feature which compels the education
together of white and colored child
ren?" When, too, the "mixed school
clause" will, probably, be expunged, by
the Judiciary Committee, before SUBJ
uniting the bill to a vote.
The Senator exhibits the petty preju-
dice and partisan rancour of a third
rate pro-slayery demagogue of 1850!
Now, we do not believe in the practi-
cability of this mixed school clause"
ourselves; we know the white and col
ored races prefer their own churches
and schools, separate and distinct; but,
where public sentiment tolerates such
''mingling of races AS Oberlln,
Berea, Maryvile, and other colleges
what legal authority can prevent 1t!
We are utterly opposed to the primary
schools being mixed, or the churches to
be united. only where 1t is the expressed
will of both classes. But is there not
such principle as justice? embracing
equality before the law.
Senator Brownlow would have the
colored people believe that the rights
they now possess have been mere gifts
from the whites, to which they were
not entitled by merit or law-human
and Divine. He does not have one
word to say against the other sections
of the bill; he condemns them all be
cause of the imperfections (as he con
siders it, Of only one!
When the Reverend Senator declared
in Philadelphia, in his debate with
Pryne. that the negro was only a spe-
cies of intelligent monkeys, he cam'
nearer expressing his sentiments thai
he did when he declared in favor of tn
Acknowledgement of the slave IN 1865
or 1867.
He thinks the colored people but {
''smal minority" in this country
Well, what if they are; are they not a
much entitled to Justice as the large
majority? And if this small minorit.
had not voted with the Republican
party in the past, where would VIM
G. Brownlow and the Republican
party have been to-day? Dlt
not the colored men shed thei
own blood, not only to make them
selves freemen, but TO perpetuate ant
sustain this Union? While the dolores
people owe debt of gratitude to tE
Republican party, what does the Re
publican party owe to the dolores
voters? Have not the colored voter
fully paid the debt by elevating thel
benefactors to offices of profit an
trust, accepting the crumbs tina
have fell from the rich mans table!
Could not Senator BrownlOw hav
spoken one word In favor of the Othe
clauses of the Civil Rights Bill? Doe
he condemn the whole because Of tha
one clause?
Again, we say we do not favor tn
strict enforcement of this mike
SCHOOL, and church classes; for W
don't believe it could effect any goo
at all. But to condemn the whole bl
because of one obnoxious clause is
show our opposition to the whole bill
and as the Senator says, prejudice
is at the bottom of this opposition.
VIII the great and good Republlca
party be controlled by prejudice? If 5
what difference is there between Il
two political parties on this continent