Communipaw [James McCune Smith] to Frederick Douglass, August 8, 1856

FROM OUR NEW YORK CORRESPONDENT.

Mr. EDITOR:—We did not celebrate the first of August, in our lane, because we failed to discover in it, that which we ought to celebrate; we even go the length of criticizing those, who do celebrate it, as favoring that system of compromises which is ruining the philosophy, and philanthropy of our land.

The British Emancipation act was a compromise act, inasmuch as it paid masters, so called, twenty millions of pounds, for property which they never owned, thus admitting that man held property in man. Surely that is a principle which no abolitionist can admit, much less celebrate.

Whatever joy we may have felt on that first of August, which witnessed the breaking of the bonds of Physical Slavery of 800 millions of our brethren in the West Indies, must now be tempered with sorrow at the fact, that the interest of the British Government, and people, in the then freed men, to a large extent, ceased with the fruition of that act. A paltry twenty thousand pounds was appropriated for the education of the freed men—and except what missionary enterprise has done, that is all give to the former slave in consideration of the robbery and embruting which had been perpetrated on him for centuries. No effort has been made to secure him such progress in arts and agriculture as should vindicate the policy of Emancipation. Millions of pounds are devoted to the development of the colony in Canada, in canals, bridges and railroads, and not a hundred pounds for like purposes in Jamaica. In looking at these short-comings of the British people, in regard to their black fellow subjects, we do not feel like sounding their praises for the little they have done, in view of the much they have left undone.

Then again, as black men in our lane, sympathizing with black men in Jamaica, we do not see aught in the first of August to throw up our hats about. If our black brethren had won their freedom by the strong hand, then we could shout with them. But as it is their freedom was a boon conferred, not a right seized upon and held. It is the order of things.

"Massa gib me holidays."

Now, sir, we in the United States, whom God has made black, need expect no such GIFT. Our freedom must be won, and the sooner we wake up to the fact, the better. And we had better cease teaching our children, by celebrating given freedom, to shape their hopes that way. Such freedom is not worth the [shaving?] It is freedom struggled for and won, that firts the mind and the body to enjoy, defend and improve by it. For the fight that lays before us, we must seek some other day, with other signification than the first of August. Let us

seek some day in which some enslaved black man in our own land swelled beyond the measure of his chains, and won Liberty or Death.—Let us search the Calends for the day when Denmark Vesey suffered gloriously in Charleston, as the head of an insurrection, or when Nat. Turner turned all Virginia pale with fright, or when those brave men fought at Christiana. There is an electric feel about those days. The blood stirs, as it ought to stir; and the lips of speakers, in whatever grove, would talk profitably of these themes which cast their glorious light on our future.

Our white brethren cannot understand us unless we speak to them in their own language; they recognize only the philosophy of force—They will never recognized our manhood until we knock them down a time or two; they will then hug us as men and brethren. That holy love of human brotherhood which fills our hearts and figures our imagination, cannot get through the—in this respect—thick skulls of the Caucasians, unless beaten into them.

Only think of it! I have been at Newport, saw Philo, and really must admit that in getting up the Sea Girt House, a splendid Hotel in the finest location in Newport, he has done fair fight for the good cause; there lies behind this kind of effort, the proof of that "force" which our saxon brethren understand, respect and bow before.

They have had several political meetings over at Brooklyn, to enquire how black men shall vote in the coming election. The tide favors Fremont; but your correspondents, Ethiop and Observer, that is Wm. J. Wilson and Dr. T. Joiner White, have held up the banner of of Radical Abolitionism successfully against all comers. Ethiop's argument was written out; it is broad in view, masterly in logic, and of high rhetorical finish. I would like to see it in print. Dr. White showed great knowledge of facts, and knew how to make them tell.

I am sorry to add that the only weak point in their position, which the other side attacks fiercely, is the position of Gerrit Smith on Kansas, which the Fremonters affirm, does not differ materially from the position of the Republican Party. And they affirm that the man who condemned black men for voting for men, who voted for slaveholders, to hold office in Civil Government, condemns himself when with a document affirming the brotherhood of man in one hand, he gives the sanction of his great name, greater than his means, to those who basely deny the black man's brotherhood with the other hand.

Yours,

COMMUNIPAW.