REVIEWER. "We have noticed but slightly the anatomical difference which distinguishes the species of men, such as the existence of the colored skin, the rete mucosum in the black and not in the white, because they are too well known and admitted now to be brought into question. They are specific differences which cannot be changed by advanced civilization, circumstances, or any other means,” &c. DR. SMYTH. "The whole enormity," &c. "is perpetrated by these writers when they declare that the differences among men 'cannot be changed by advanced civilization or any other means.'" Mr. Kettell asserts, in language so clear, that it is impossible to be mistaken, that the anatomical differences" s" "are specific differences which cannot be changed," &c.; but Dr. Smyth represents him as speaking of differences generally, intellectual and moral; and the words " any other means" to include, "by missionary efforts," as will be evident by reading the whole sentence. Again: REVIEWER. "It results from the establishment of the fact of specific differences in the races of men, that the philanthropic world, for the last fifty years, has been proceeding entirely upon a false assumption, and scientific facts are now developing the truth that the effect of these efforts is to degrade the white species, and to destroy the dark species. All naturalists admit the fact, that a mixed race is inferior to the white race," &c. DR. SMYTH. "That the philanthropic world for the last fifty years (by missionary efforts) has been proceeding entirely upon a false assumption"-" and that the effect of these efforts is to degrade the white species, and to destroy the dark species." The language of the Reviewer is perfectly inoffensive to the most delicate conscience. He is speaking" of the fact of specific differences in the races of men" arising from "the anatomical differences which distinguish" them, and of which he had been speaking in the two sentences immediately preceding those quoted; and then tells us that philanthropic amalga mation abolitionists would "degrade the white species" and "destroy the dark species," because "all naturalists admit the fact that a mixed race is inferior to the white race." But it assumes another character by the words in the parenthesis ("by missionary efforts") interpolated by Dr. Smyth; and the offence becomes intensely aggravated by making the Reviewer say that the effect of these missionary efforts "is to degrade the white species, and to destroy the dark species!" I designed to represent the whole enormity of unchristian inference practically consequent upon" such conduct, but dare not trust myself to speak of it as it deserves. Every reader is competent to estimate it; and Dr. Smyth has expressed the character of it in the words, that it "is nothing short of an impeachment of the truth, a rejection of the authority, and a Cain-like denial of the charity of the Bible, which makes every man the keeper of his brother man, and the guardian of his dearest blessings." Having disposed of this preliminary matter, I will now proceed to the consideration of the works under consideration in the order in which they are introduced in this article. I must premise, however, that as all these works are attacks on Messrs. Agassiz, Dr. Nott, Mr. Gliddon, and me, chiefly on scriptural ground, except that Mr. Moore examines Mr. Agassiz's theory of Zoological Provinces ;--and as the fundamental principles of my book are essentially different from those I understand them to advocate, and which have not been controverted by the authors under examination, I am not called upon to examine the scientific matter they have advanced-nor the scriptural--beyond what may be necessary for my vindication. I say the principles I have advocated have not been controverted; because what I have said in relation to "Cain"-" his wife"-" the sons of God"--and the "daughters of men," &c., involve no principle contained in my volume, but is mere collateral matter to show the legitimate latitude of discussion of the subject. So little do I value the little I have said on these subjects, that, by the suggestion of a reverend Professor in Rutgers College, N. J., whom I highly esteem, I entertained the thought of expunging them from a second edition; and sincerely hoped I might not be called upon publicly to defend them in a manner to prevent me from doing what I should think proper respecting them. They have, however, been so prominently exhibited to the public, as the chief features of my book, to the exclusion of any public consideration of other and more important topics in the natural history of man; and they have been so frequently, and I may say, injudiciously, eagerly seized upon for the purpose of branding my book with infidelity, that, in self-defence, I shall be compelled, in this paper, to justify the use I have made of these subjects; which will, of course, make it improper for me to alter a subsequent edition. It must not be supposed that I was brought to entertain the above design, from any doubt of the accuracy of the views entertained; but merely because they are not necessary to any part of my system, and might be improperly used by skeptics in various ways. The truth should be always spoken, when necessary; but it is not always necessary to speak the truth, when silence is permitted. Dr. Spring, and especially Dr. Smyth, have made it necessary for me to satisfy the public, that what I have said on this subject in my Natural History of Man, was not carelessly and sportively used with a view to injure sacred history; and also to show that I have as good authority for what I have said, as any of my opponents has exhibited for asserting to the contrary. The only mention of my work, by the Rev. T. V. Moore, is in the list of works he proposes to review at the head of his able article. He placed it in the list for some purpose other than to examine the principles it contains, because he does not mention it afterwards. It is more than probable he had not read it, and merely placed it in the list to present to his readers the authors on the subject; for, throughout his article, he has adopted positions and principles advocated or controverted in my book, without noticing the one or the other, which, from the manly tone of his paper, he would not have done, if he had read it. Nor do I think he has adopted the disingenuous expedient of selecting M. Agassiz's publication as the sum and substance of all that has been written on the subject, because he thought the theory of Zoological Provinces could be more easily overthrown, than other positions opposed to his views. Such an expedient is the common resort of little minds wedded to a theory, and regardless of truth, among whom I should be slow to place Mr. Moore, judging from the scope and general hearty and healthy tone of his article. Besides, the supposition would be unjust to M. Agassiz; for, if we should grant what Mr. Moore has asserted, page 349, and which is also a fundamental principle of M. Agassiz-viz.: "Man, being an animal, under the same physical laws as to his physical economy with the lower tribes, must be considered, in discussing this question, as subjected to the same principles of classification that are adopted in other departments of nature."-M. Agassiz's theory of Zoological Provinces for man, would require more labor for its overthrow than has yet been bestowed upon it by Mr. Moore. The argument in favor of M. Agassiz would stand thus: All animals of different species were created in, and inhabit, different zoological provinces. Man is an animal; therefore, All men of different species were created in, and inhabit different zoological provinces. The minor premise being admitted by Mr. Moore, to avoid the conclusion, he is driven to disprove the major, which he attempts throughout the remainder of his paper, with ingenuity, but not so convincingly as to make it "a res adjudicata in science." Besides, Professor Agassiz has the fact with him, that the dark races of men are confined to zoological provinces, and that only the white species enjoy an indefinite range. But man is an animal, and something more--a psychical animal-and, consequently, what is affirmed of animals cannot logically, and by a necessary sequence, be affirmed of him, which is the position taken in my Natural History of Man, chap. 4, in which it is maintained, that "The distribution of vegetables and animals over the earth is not analogous to the distribution of the human species, and therefore such distribution will not assist our investigations in relation to Man."-P. 120. But I am not disposed to become a party in this controversy, because I do not agree with either of them in the necessary fundamental principle of their arguments, that animals are the analogues of man. (See the chapter on Analogies in my "Natural History of Man," page 308.) we But, although I am not disposed to examine Mr. Moore's scientific positions, because he has advanced nothing on the general subject that I have not elsewhere discussed, I must deny his broad assertion, that know that the different races of men freely and permanently amalgamate,” if, by using the plural pronoun, he intended to be understood that this is a conceded point by naturalists. I do not deny it with a view to discuss it in this paper, but for the purpose of adding some new facts strongly supporting the views entertained on this most interesting subject in my Natural History of Man. In a paper read to "The American Ethnological Society." Nov. 3, 1849, by Dr. Browne, of Philadelphia, (a gentleman whose accuracy in microscopic investigations is well known to, and appreciated by, naturalists,) published by A. Hart, Philadelphia, 1850, in pamphlet, p. 20, entitled, "The Classification of Mankind by the Hair and Wool of their heads," &c., the following conclusions are arrived at, pages 19, 20: "1st. Hair is, in shape, either cylindrical or oval; but wool is eccentrically elliptical or flat; and the covering of the negro's head is eccentrically elliptical or flat. "2d. The direction of hair is either straight, flowing, or curled; but wool is crisped or frizzled, and sometimes spirally twisted; and the covering of the negro's head is crisped or frizzled, and sometimes spirally twisted. "3d. Hair issues out of the epidermis at an acute angle, but wool emerges at a right angle; and the covering of the negro's head issues out of the epidermis at a right angle. "4th. The coloring matter of a perfect hair, for example, that of the head of the white man, is contained in a central canal; but that of wool is disseminated in the cortex, or in the cortex and intermediate fibres; and the covering of the negro's head has no central canal. "5th. The scales of the cortex of hair are less numerous than those of wool, are smooth, and less pointed, and they embrace the shaft more intimately; and the scales on the filaments of the covering of the negro's head are numerous, rough pointed, and do not embrace the shaft intimately. "Corollary.-Hair will not felt, but wool will; and the covering of the negro's head will felt-has been felted.” In another equally important paper by Dr. Browne, published in the Democratic Review, Nov., 1850, he gives a scale and diagram of the pile of three species of men, and the piles of crosses, or hybrids, of these species; and the very remarkable fact is established, that an amalgamation of the characteristics of the parents does not take place in the hybrid offspring, but that the pile exhibits the characteristic of each parent, inclining in quantity to the parent to whose type the hybrid inclines. These very important facts demonstrate a want of homogeneity in these hybrids, incompatible with full and perfect constitutional vigor, and will assist Mr. Moore, and other advocates of the unity of the human species, to account for the following kindred facts disclosed by the late census. It appears that, in the last ten years, the free colored population increased only 8.51-100 per cent.; and the slave population 27.83-100 per cent. Mr. Moore, being a resident of Richmond, Virginia, knows well that the free colored population of the North and West is annually increased by fugitives from the slave states, and by manumission in the South; consequently, the 8.50-100 per cent. is not to be credited to the natural increase of the free colored population; on the contrary, the whole, or a large part, should be added to the natural increase of the slave population from which it is derived. Mr. Moore must also know that no part of this vast difference can be accounted for by a supposition that the free negroes in the free states emigrate from these states, more than slaves emigrate from the slave states; because it is well known that the emigration of slaves from the slave states to the free states, to Canada, and Liberia, is many times more than of free negroes out of the free states. The cause must be looked for in the fact, that almost every negro north of Mason & Dixon's line, is a hybrid, possessing the heterogeneous constitution indicated by the above quoted papers of Dr. Browne. So universal is the condition, that Dr. Browne gave up the search for pile from a pureblooded African at the north, and was compelled to send to the south for it. Another most important kindred fact has been brought to my notice by the labor of some close observer, who has published the statistics “of insanity and lunacy among our free colored population over the whites and the slaves," which proves a constitutional defect to prevail in this hybrid I insert it as an important document worth preserving. race. 1851.] Natural History of Man. STATISTICAL TABLE FROM THE UNITED STATES CENSUS OF 1840. Total Insane and Proportion. Population. Idiots. .1 in 950.... New Hampshire. 284,036. 486.. 1 " 584... 1,355.... 94.. Massachusetts 729,030...... 1,071. .1 " 662. 8,669....200. Vermont.. 291,218.. 398. 730. .. 13.. Connecticut 301,856.. 498. .1 " 606.. 8,159.... 44.. Rhode Island.. 105,587.. 203. 3,243.. 13.... 1 " 249 New-York....... 2,378,890. 2,116. 50,031....194.. New-Jersey 351,588. 369.. ... 21,718..... 73. Pennsylvania..... 1,676,115.... 37,952....187. Delaware.. 58,561. 52. 1 19,524.... 28. Maryland..... 317,717. 387 ....151,515....141. Virginia.... 740,968. .498,829....381 .1" 1,309 North Carolina... 484.870... 580.. .1 " 835. .268,549....221. .1" 1,215 South Carolina... 259,084.. 376. .335,314....137.. .1" 2,440 Georgia.. 407,694. 294. 1" 1,387. .283,697....134.. ..1 " 2,117 Ohio.. 1,502,022. 1,195. Kentucky. Louisiana... 1,257.. 17,345....165.. 105 590,253. A vast difference is observable between the free north-eastern states, and those west and south-west of them, which may be chiefly attributed to two causes, viz. :-The uncongenial climate to the negro constitution in the north-eastern states, which operates with more power on an enfeebled hybrid, than on a pure and vigorous constitution; and that emigrants and fugitives from the South, many of whom possess unimpaired constitutions, concentrate in the southern or western free states. The average insane and idiots in the ten free states is 1 in 129, and in the eight slave states is 1 in 1715, a most striking and frightful disparity, deserving the careful consideration of honest abolitionists, as well as the philosophic advocates of the unity of the human species. In taking leave of Mr. Moore, I must express my regret that he has disparaged his otherwise respectable article by the coarse and rancorous paragraph relating to Dr. Nott, a gentleman whose talents and position are too well known to be affected by such ebullitions. Invective is expected from men of undisciplined minds, because it is their only verbal means of offence or defence; but nothing can justify it in a well-bred man, but some personal injury, so provoking as to excuse an overpowering outbreak of passion. The paragraph in question throws a suspicion on the whole article, that Mr. Moore is the prudent, calculating, defender of his profession, not the conscientious advocate of truth; for no person can think he believes Dr. Nott to be "some Alabama negro-trader, who has found it more profitable to sell men's bodies than to cure them, and who wishes to write his trade into respectability." If his design was to sneer, it is disreputable; and if he was really as ignorant of Dr. Nott, as the literal sense of his paragraph implies, he is censurable for a malicious intention to inflict an injury without just cause. However important it may be to the private character of an author to be a physician instead of a negro-trader, it is not of the slightest importance to the public, who will judge his published works by what they contain, and not by his private character. The Baconian philosophy is not less valuable to mankind because its illustrious founder was the "meanest," as well as the "wisest and brightest" "of mankind;" and Paine's "Common Sense" was as valuable to our revolutionary sires as if it had been written by a conference of Divines. Truth |