St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1890-01-25

1t is not so much a coincidence, as it
is perhaps the evidence of careful
thought, that Mr.. INGALLS, adopted pre-
cisely the same line of argument that
the GLOBE has pursued in our several
discussions of this subject. We have
persistently urged that the question
does not belong to the domain of par
tisan politics, nor is it in any sense a
sectional one. 1t is a race question,
pure and simple, without regard to the
numerical strength of the two races in
various localities of the country and
without regard to what political party
is to derive an advantage from the vot-
ing strength of either race. As long as
the question is narrowed to partisan
politics and to sectional limits it cannot
be discussed profitably or be disposed
of satisfactorily. Therefore Mr.. In
CALLS has displayed the true quality of
craftsmanship by lifting his subject
above the low horizon where the poll
ticians are inclined to keep 1t, and by
treating it with the seriousness that it
merits. While the GLOBE is not pre-
pared to indorse all that Mr.. INGALLS,
@A''S SeaN3 Iva " uSlOC hllu Illin Ill etli VI
his conclusions, yet we do insist that he
has followed the only correct line of
argument, nor can we refrain from eX-
pressing our admiration for the cour-
ageous manner in which he cut loose
from the stereotyped method of discuss
ing the negro problem.
Mr.. INGALLS, is right when he says
the dominating race of this continent is
the most arrogant, pretentious, exclu-
slve and indomitable in history. He hit
he nail equally squarely on the head
when he said no other race on earth
would have submitted to what the
negroes have patiently endured. The
simple statement of these two facts pre-
sents our whole race problem in a nut
Shell. On one hand stands the conquer
ing, governing race of the world. On
the other is the most docile. submissive
race on earth. How are you going to
get two such distinct, different races of
people on the plane of civil, political
and social equality? There are only
two ways by which it can be done-one
is by amalgamation, the other by repeal
ing human nature. The thought of
amalgamation is repulsive even to Mr.,
INGALLS,. ''There is no poisoning so
fatal as the adulteration of race" saws
he; aud truer sentiment was never
uttered. AS human nature is now con-
stituted it would require a superhuman
power to remove existing race preju-
dices. How, then. can Senator INGALLS,
hope to avert race conflicts unless the
races are separated?
The conditions which prevail in the
South to-day are precisely what they
would be in New England under similar
circumstances, or in any other part of
the world where the supremacy of the
Caucasian race was drawn in question.
In vein of sarcasm as just as it was
bitter. MIR. INGALLS, reverted to the
fact that an anti-slavery sentiment had
no existence in New England until it
was found that slavery was improbable.
The New EngIander of to-day would
take the same material view of the race
question if he were situated as the
Georgian OF Virginian is. He would
just as readily come to the conclusion
that it was Improbable to place his
person and his property under the dom
inatlon of an inferior race. Under like
circumstances the Vermont man would
be just as much of a bulldozer as his
Mississippi brother. So what good can
be derived in discussing this race ques-
ton from sectional standpoint, when
it is simply question of whether or
not human nature can be repealed by
congressional enactments? President
HARRISON cleaned out the negro help
from the White house for the same rea-
son that the Georgian asserts the right
of the white man to govern Georgia
politics. When reduced to the alter
native of choosing between races II
prefers his own. That is human nature,
and it will be human nature until the
millennium daWns.
In the main Mr.. INGALLS, made a
good analysis of Caucasian character,
but he oyerreached the mark in appeal
ing to the magnanimity of the Southern
whites In asking them to step down and
out from control of their local affairs,
and to turn their state governments
over to the blacks. 1t is not in CaucaS-
ian nature to make voluntary surren-
der of power, and surely it could not be
expected when that power is to be
transferred into the hands OF an adj
mittedly inferior people. Mr.. INGALLS,
would not dare to ask the white people
of Kansas to make such concession as
that. If he did he wouldn't hold his
seat in the United States senate an hour
after he had made the demand. Why,
then, would he desire the white people
of Mississippi to do what would be re-
garded an outrage in Kansas? If the
whole black population Of Mississippi
were transferred to Kansas to-day we
venture the assertion that there would
be more race differences and race con.
flicts in the latter state than in the
former; and unless we are seriously
mistaken in the mettle of the man,
when the conflict did arise Mr.. INGALLS,
would be true to the instincts of his
own race, and would be Loyalty main
tanning the asceudency of the whites.
The negros position in American life
is an unfortunate one, for which he is
in no wise responsible. We owe it to
ourselves, as well as to him, to deter
mine what is best to be done with him.
of unequal citizenship into which he
has been brought without any effort of
his own, then let US temper the force of
circumstances so as to make his lot en-
durable. If he is not satisfied with
that. but is ambitious for that social
equality which is the legitimate asso-
eiate of civil and political equality, then
we must eonfne our discussion of the
question to the only two alternatives
that are presented to us-amalgam alton
or separation. Which shall it be, Sena-
tor INGALLS,?
A USELESS WRANGLE.
One would suppose from the way that
many of the leading Democratic organs