TO DISCONTINUE THE ENLISTMENT OF 
 NEGROES FOR MILITARY SERVICE. 
 
 • 2&2S ) 
 
 SPEECH 
 
 OF 
 
 Hon. JAMES L. SLAYDEN, 
 
 OF TEXAS, 
 
 IN THE 
 
 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 
 
 Tuesday, January 8, 1907. 
 
 O 
 
 WASHINGTON. 
 
5 . £ 
 
 *5.1 \.9t 
 
 
 SPEECH 
 
 OF 
 
 HON. JAMBS L. SIAIDEIi 
 _ 
 
 The House being in CoJnmittee of the Whole House or* tiiei state of 
 the Union and having under consideration the hill (H. R. 23551) mak¬ 
 ing appropriations for the Army for the fiscal year ending June 30, 
 1908— 
 
 Mr. SLAYDEN said: 
 
 Mr. Chairman : Although I have had the privilege of serving 
 in this House for ten years, I have not quite grown accustomed 
 to the habit of speaking to one bill while another was being 
 considered. But I have just had an illustrious example of how 
 it may be done, and it has put me somewhat at my ease in that 
 respect. For nearly half an hour we have had an active dis¬ 
 cussion of a bill for an increase of the Artillery Corps, a bill 
 that is not before the House, and which, so far as I am in¬ 
 formed, has not even been considered yet by the committee to 
 which it was referred. With this example to guide me, I shall 
 now, Mr. Chairman, beg the indulgence of the House while I 
 talk upon a matter that I wish to state frankly is not here in 
 the form of a bill. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, at the beginning of the present session I sub¬ 
 mitted a bill to amend the military laws so that after July 1, 
 1907, there would be no negro regiments in the Army of the 
 United States. 
 
 For a long time I have looked upon it as a desirable military 
 reform. . Recent events of a startling and deplorable nature have 
 convinced me that it is urgent. It can not be delayed, I appre¬ 
 hend, without risking a collision between white citizens and 
 negro troops. There is reason to fear that occasional assassi¬ 
 nation and riot may be succeeded by disasters that will measure 
 up to the standard of battle. Firmly believing that, as I did, I 
 regarded it as a duty to try to prevent such a condition by 
 amending the law. A series of violent outbreaks on the part of 
 negro soldiers, culminating in a murderous assault on the unof¬ 
 fending citizens of Brownsville, decided me to offer the bill with¬ 
 out further delay. The bill was not offered for buncombe. I 
 proposed it because I am absolutely convinced that it is a meas¬ 
 ure of reform which must ultimately commend itself to the 
 judgment of the American Congress. I very much regret to 
 say, however, that there does not appear to be any immediate 
 prospect of success. Like many good legislative suggestions, it 
 will probably have to die the death many times before the mind 
 and conscience of a majority can be awakened. The lack of 
 active sympathy for my measure among such of my Republican 
 colleagues as I have spoken to about it makes me realize that I 
 am not apt to have an opportunity to discuss the bill as pending 
 7050 - 3 
 
4 
 
 before the House, and so, Mr. Chairman, I shall avail myself of 
 this occasion to speak of it. 
 
 In the history of the negro troops of the United States one 
 finds many chapters that tell of violent breaches of discipline, 
 of riotous and mutinous conduct, of murder and race hostility. 
 All these are to be found in the cold, formal, oflicial reports 
 filed in the Department of War. These reports are not written 
 with any consideration of the great politico-social question on 
 which .they have an important bearing, but it takes no very 
 alert student to find the race question running all through 
 them. As a rule, oflicial reports are lacking in vitality, but 
 these, when they touch even remotely the great, hopeless, 
 and insoluble question—and if any question about the affairs 
 of men is hopeless and insoluble this is—that confronts a 
 layge (section of the country, throb and vibrate with human 
 interest. 
 
 In declaring their unfitness to be American soldiers I have 
 in view only the circumstances of their service. I do not im¬ 
 peach their physical courage. That is a virtue that belongs to 
 nearly all men, and if there is any difference between savage 
 and civilized man in this respect it possibly lies with the 
 savage, who is undeterred from rash ventures by thought of 
 the consequences. 
 
 But courage is only one of the qualities required in a good 
 soldier. There should be between him and the people whose 
 uniform he wears perfect sympathy and a common aspiration. 
 This sympathy, this aspiration, does not exist between the 
 blacks and whites, and in the very nature of things can never 
 exist. It is prevented by basic and unalterable differences. 
 
 This may be denied by some gentlemen who have only theo¬ 
 retical knowledge of the negro or who have at odd moments 
 studied in a casual and superficial manner the occasional speci¬ 
 mens that have been brought to their attention; but it is true 
 as gospel, as all men know who have studied the question at 
 close range. Sympathy of the sort that welds people into a 
 homogeneous political and social mass never has existed and 
 never will exist between negroes and Caucasians. It is not 
 only contrary to nature, but so contradictory of human experi¬ 
 ence that it is folly to expect and crime to build upon it. The in¬ 
 compatibility of races of a pronounced physical dissimilarity has 
 been recognized and pointed out by many writers and travelers. 
 Froude, in his fascinating book, The English in the West Indies, 
 speaks of it. That distinguished gentleman, whose clear mind 
 and high character all Americans admire and who will soon be¬ 
 come the British Ambassador to this Government, Mr. James 
 Bryce, speaks of the negroes in this country as “ really a differ¬ 
 ent nation dwelling beside or among, but not intermingled with, 
 the white nation.” As a philosopher and a statesman, and from 
 a plane far above partisanship, he discusses the relations be¬ 
 tween the colored and the white races, or, as he terms them, the 
 “ advanced and the backward races of mankind.” 
 
 Speaking at the University at Oxford, in 1902, about the natu¬ 
 ral hostility between the races of men who are physically dis¬ 
 similar, he said: 
 
 Nothing really arrests intermarriage except physical repulsion, and 
 physical repulsion exists only where there is a marked difference in 
 physical aspect, and especially in color. 
 
 7050 
 
 l 
 
5 
 
 In the same lecture Mr. Bryce directed the attention of his 
 audience to the fact that the feeling of repulsion existed between 
 all dissimilar races and was more or less intense as the differ¬ 
 ence in color was more or less pronounced. There undoubtedly 
 exists a marked race antipathy between the white and the 
 Asiatic races, though less intense than that between the Cau¬ 
 casian and the negroid types. 
 
 Charles Francis Adams, of Massachusetts, than whom, I take 
 it, the negroes never had a better friend, who has made a careful 
 study of the race question, who has even gone to Africa for first¬ 
 hand information, says “ the race prejudice seems insurmount¬ 
 able.” 
 
 It is not my duty, nor is this the time or place, to explain, jus¬ 
 tify, or condemn the feeling. I merely assert as a fact that-mu¬ 
 tual race antipathy does exist, that its existence has been recog¬ 
 nized by students of the question who have considered it on a 
 plane far above partisan politics, and that it is folly to ignore it 
 in our legislation. If we persist in the folly, we will surely end 
 in disaster. 
 
 This deep-seated and ineradicable race hostility, which grows 
 daily more acute, is not peculiar to the United States. Although 
 dormant "when apart, it is unfailingly developed everywhere by 
 contact and competition. It has written tragic chapters into 
 the history of Asia, Africa, and Europe. The Moors were as 
 unwelcome to the people of the Spanish Peninsula as the Chi¬ 
 nese and' Japanese are to our fellow-citizens on the Pacific 
 coast, and it will not do to dismiss the Pacific coast race ques¬ 
 tion by saying that the objection to Asiatic immigration in Cal¬ 
 ifornia is only from the hoodlum element. It runs through all 
 classes of society. 
 
 It was my privilege to visit the city of San Francisco in com¬ 
 pany with a distinguished citizen of that city, then and now a 
 Member of this House. With him I visited the Chinese quarter 
 in that great and unfortunate city. Under his intelligent direc¬ 
 tion I was shown how the Chinese question impinged upon every 
 phase of the life of the citizens of the city of San Francisco. 
 He indicated to me in an unmistakable way the physical dan¬ 
 gers from contact, the danger from disease, the opportunities 
 for and tendency to crime, the increase of all sorts of social and 
 sanitary conditions which are to be avoided if possible, all due 
 to the Asiatic congestion. Furthermore, he showed me by ex¬ 
 amples the disastrous competition of the Asiatics with the citi¬ 
 zens of San Francisco and California, his constituents. He con¬ 
 vinced me that if this Congress did its duty to the people of the 
 American Union who reside,.upon the Pacific coast it would for¬ 
 ever make it impossible that those competitors in great numbers 
 should be permitted to come in from Asiatic countries. There¬ 
 fore, Mr. Chairman, I think I risk nothing in saying that what I 
 assert about this race question will be confirmed by every citizen 
 of California. 
 
 The race prejudice which exists on the Pacific coast is only 
 another form of the race question which is presented to us in 
 the South and is not confined to the hoodlum element of the city 
 of San Francisco, as many theoretical students of the question 
 residing in the eastern part of the United States have held. 
 It sometimes happens that the man who is slowest to think is 
 quickest to act, and I have no doubt, Mr. Chairman, that the 
 7050 
 
 ) 
 
6 
 
 violence which occasionally occurs in handling that question 
 in the city of San Francisco has been as much in the thoughts 
 of the higher as in the lower classes of society. 
 
 Mr. KAHN. Will the gentleman yield for a moment? 
 
 Mr. SLAYDEN. -With pleasure. 
 
 Mr. KAHN. In that very connection I desire to call the gen¬ 
 tleman’s attention to the report that was spoken of in the news¬ 
 papers, which was presented in the British Parliament some 
 months ago, with reference to the condition of the coolies in the 
 South African gold fields. The people of California have always 
 maintained that the oriental has vices which contaminate the 
 white race, and the report which was presented in the British 
 Parliament showed that the coolies in South Africa were so 
 vicious in morals and indulged in vices so abhorrent to our civili¬ 
 zation that the report was proclaimed to be absolutely unprint¬ 
 able. That shows conclusively that the people of California, 
 who are thrown in direct contact with these Asiatics, are not in 
 error in their estimate of the morality of the oriental. [Ap¬ 
 plause.] 
 
 Mr. SLAYDEN. Mr. Chairman, I will say to my friend from 
 California [Mr. Kahn] that my information is as he has stated, 
 that that report was not printed because it would not do to 
 print; but I will also say to him that while I sympathize with 
 him, and while I mean as a Member of Congress, so long as I 
 may have the honor of being a Member of this body, to help 
 him solve that question properly. I am not altogether sorry that 
 he has an acute phase of it presented for his consideration and 
 that of his fellow-citizens out there on the Pacific. [Applause 
 on the Democratic side.] 
 
 Being greatly distressed at home by what Mr. Adams, of 
 Massachusetts, calls “ the insoluble question,” my sympathy goes 
 out to the white people of California who have a similar but 
 lesser trouble. 
 
 Admitting the existence of hostility between dissimilar races 
 who, because of circumstances that this generation can not in¬ 
 fluence, occupy the same territory and live under the same politi¬ 
 cal institutions, is it not unwise to arm the backward and less 
 responsible people and station them in the neighborhood of the 
 others? I think so, and upon that belief my bill was predi¬ 
 cated. 
 
 Let us now see what facts bearing on this question the rec¬ 
 ords of the Department of War will disclose. 
 
 FORT MEADE INCIDENT. 
 
 The Twenty-fifth Infantry, three companies of which were 
 recently dismissed the service by Executive order, has a particu¬ 
 larly vicious record. There seems to be in the minds of some 
 Members of this House a good deal of confusion on that point. 
 No companies, as companies, were discharged. Men were dis¬ 
 charged out of three companies, and it so happens that most of 
 the men out of three companies were discharged. The units 
 established by law, the company and the regiment, were not dis¬ 
 turbed. 
 
 To resume: 
 
 While stationed at Fort Meade, Dak., in the summer, 1885, 
 Corporal Hallon of that regiment murdered a citizen. The 
 people of the community lynched the murderer. It is worth 
 7050 
 
7 
 
 noting that even as far north as Dakota an outraged public 
 does not always, as it certainly should, await the slow formalities 
 of the law to punish the crime of assassination. About three 
 weeks after the lynching of the murderer fifteen or twenty negro 
 soldiers raided and “shot up” the town'of Sturgis, which is 
 only a mile and a half from the post, at about 1 o’clock in the 
 morning. They fired into dwellings and business houses and 
 killed one man. According to the testimony taken by the coro¬ 
 ner, the raiding, shooting, and killing was done in a thorough 
 military manner. The murderers marched as an organized body 
 and responded with fatal accuracy to the commands “ ready, 
 load, fire, etc.” 
 
 There are two points in the official account of the Sturgis raid 
 which are particularly well worth consideration, A gentleman 
 who was present immediately wrote an interesting account of 
 it to the President. I will quote one paragraph of his letter: 
 
 I happened to be at the fort last Saturday night when this last 
 wholesale shooting took place. I was standing in front of General 
 Sturgis’s quarters talking with him. We were about going into the 
 house when Lieutenant Sickles approached with a sergeant, and told 
 the general that he had seen some fifteen or twenty colored soldiers 
 going toward Sturgis with their guns. General Sturgis immediately 
 ordered Lieutenant Sickles to take a detachment of his men and go 
 at once and bring them back. A few minutes afterwards another lieu¬ 
 tenant came to the house and said he heard firing from the direction 
 of Sturgis, but he thought it was at the “ Half-Way House.” 
 
 Perhaps I should have stated, Mr. Chairman, that Fort Meade, 
 where the troops were stationed, is a mile and a half from 
 Sturgis. 
 
 The general then ordered him to take another detachment and arrest 
 the soldiers. 
 
 It is well worth while keeping in mind the fact that all this 
 was prior to the commitment of any crime beyond the slight 
 breach of discipline in going out of barracks without orders. 
 It was in anticipation of what really happened that the general 
 acted. The letter, written on the spot at once, goes on to say: 
 
 In about a half hour afterwards a horseman came riding up in 
 great haste and informed the general that the soldiers had fired into 
 Abe Hill’s house and killed an inoffensive cowboy who was standing 
 there, and that they had also fired volleys into one or two other houses. 
 General Sturgis then ordered that Captain Ord should make a check 
 roll call, examine the arms, and bring in such as had the appearance 
 of being recently fired. This was done. But the fellows had scampered 
 back by short cuts over the 1 7 s and had gotten into their bunks before 
 the roll call, which disclosea cue absence of only three, who, I think, 
 were satisfactorily accounted for. 
 
 Again I ask that it be observed, Mr. Chairman, that the gen¬ 
 eral commanding and other officers were advised of this raid 
 before any harm was done; that immediate and active steps 
 were taken to prevent mischief; yet, and notwithstanding, 
 fifteen or twenty soldiers did travel miles to the town of 
 Sturgis, raid it in military form, fire their guns in a military 
 way, kill a citizen, and travel the same distance back to the post 
 and escape identification. And yet there are eminent gentlemen 
 who say that it was impossible for men out of the three com¬ 
 panies at Brownsville to go two squares and back without de¬ 
 tection when the officers were not forewarned. The other point 
 that particularly merits attention is the fact that no negro wh® 
 had knowledge of the identity of the raiders and murderers 
 *7 would tell what he knew. Moreover, I may say to gentlemen 
 
 7050 
 
8 
 
 on the other side of the aisle, the conspiracy of silence is a habit 
 in the Twenty-fifth Infantry and a well-known characteristic of 
 the race. 
 
 AT WINNEMUCCA. 
 
 Winnemucca, Nev., is the next scene of a criminal outbreak 
 by this regiment. In June, 1899, while on the way to the 
 Philippines, a train load of the men of the Twenty-fifth was 
 halted at Winnemucca for supper. As soon as the station was 
 reached the officers went to the hotel for supper, and the men, 
 who were under no restraint whatever, according to the judge- 
 advocate, Major Groesbeck, scattered through the town. They 
 invaded a saloon in large numbers and soon became boisterous 
 and took possession of the bar. They seized and took away 
 the liquors and shot and wounded the barkeeper. All efforts 
 to identify the perpetrators of the outrage were futile. No 
 negro would tell, and so the guilty, aided again by the con¬ 
 spiracy of silence, escaped detection and punishment. 
 
 THE SAN CARLOS AFFAIR. 
 
 In October, 1899, at the San Carlos Indian Agency, Ariz., 
 twelve or fifteen men of the company of the Twenty-fifth In¬ 
 fantry then stationed there made a murderous attack upon four 
 peaceful Indians, beating them to insensibility with clubs. In 
 this instance four of the would-be murderers turned states evi¬ 
 dence, and I presume the others were punished. General Mer- 
 riam, who commanded the department at the time, advised the 
 removal of the negro soldiers and expressed the opinion that 
 “ white men would likely make less trouble.’’ 
 
 I regret, Mr.'Chairman, that General Merriam failed to say 
 why white men would be apt to make less trouble, but that he 
 did say so and that he must have had an excellent military reason 
 for it is beyond all doubt. I commend his suggestion to the 
 Members of this House and ask them to consider why the recom¬ 
 mendation made by the commanding officer at the time that 
 the guard was sent to replace those who had been mutinous, 
 boisterous, and murderous should be for white men. 
 
 AT EL TASO. 
 
 Apparently when the War Department has been in doubt as to 
 where negro troops are to be stationed they are sent to Texas, 
 and so, after the murderous assault on the Indians made it 
 necessary to remove them from the San Carlos Agency, Company 
 C, of the Twenty-fifth Infantry, was sent to El Paso. I dare 
 say there was no other place they could be sent without meet¬ 
 ing with a protest, for no place, North or South, seems to want 
 them. As bearing on this point, I ask attention to a letter writ¬ 
 ten to Senator Culberson on the 4th day of June, two months 
 and nine days before the trouble at Brownsville, in which Secre¬ 
 tary Taft said: 
 
 The fact is that a certain amount of race prejudice between white 
 and black seems to have become almost universal throughout the coun¬ 
 try, and no matter where colored troops are sent there are always some 
 who make objections to their coming. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I would that I had the privilege of taking 
 this House into my confidence and telling them some stories 
 about the stationing of these colored troops which I have re¬ 
 ceived from such sources and from gentlemen whose identity 
 1 can not reveal. Suffice it to say, however, that the most 
 7050 
 
 4 
 
9 
 
 vehement protest against the stationing of these colored troops 
 in the vicinity of the communities represented by the spokesmen 
 in protest have been received from the North, and very far 
 North at that—a large part of it. 
 
 However, they were sent to El Paso in 3899 and took 
 tion at Fort Bliss. They arrived at El Paso- about the middle 
 of November, 1899, and in just three months their deviltry 
 began. A number of men out of Company A “ took rifles from 
 the arms racks and w r ent to the city jail of El Paso, where 
 two soldiers were held for trial by the city authorities on charge 
 of drunk and disorderly, fired into the city jail, killing one 
 policeman on duty there.” I quote this from the language of 
 Captain Loughborough, who reported the affair.to the Adjutant- 
 General of the Department of Texas. The well-attested facts 
 in this case are these: On the night of February 16 Corporal 
 Dyson, of Company A, Twenty-fifth Infantry, was arrested 
 for being drunk and disorderly and confined in the city lockup. 
 Sergt. John Kipper and two privates went to the jail and en¬ 
 deavored to secure Dyson’s release by offering to give a bond 
 for his appearance, but was informed that the only officer who 
 had authority to release Dyson had gone home and would not 
 return until morning. 
 
 Kipper and the others then went away, but returned to the jail 
 at 5 o’clock in the morning with guns and axes and undertook 
 to release their comrade by force. In the resulting melee Po¬ 
 liceman Newton Stewart was killed, as was one of the soldiers. 
 Eight Army rifles, it developed, had been taken from the gun 
 racks, and six of them were ultimately recovered. The guilty 
 men were arrested, with the exception of one who deserted and 
 ran away from the country. One noncommissioned officer, Cor¬ 
 poral Powell, confessed. It is a pleasure to say that to Captain 
 Loughborough, a zealous and capable officer, is very largely due 
 the credit of securing the evidence which convicted the mur¬ 
 derers. Sergeant Kipper, one of the noncommissioned officers 
 in whom some people place so much confidence, was tried and 
 convicted, and, on appeal, the conviction was affirmed. The report 
 of Gen. Cyrus A. Roberts, then lieutenant-colonel of the Thir¬ 
 teenth Infantry, and acting adjutant-general, Department of 
 Texas, who examined into the circumstances, is an interesting 
 review of the situation and of the incidents leading up to the 
 crime. While he does not say in the same direct, blunt way that 
 Major Blocksom did when he reported on the Brownsville affair 
 that “ the causes of the disturbance are racial,” it means the 
 same thing. 
 
 To some extent I am trying to follow these reports on the mis¬ 
 deeds of the Twenty-fifth Infantry in chronological order, and 
 the next on the list is the occurrence at Fort Niobrara, Nebr. 
 I shall not weary the House with a repetition of the details. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS of Texas. If my colleague will permit me, 
 I desire to state that at the time of the incident at El Paso it 
 was a part of the district I then represented, and I am well ac¬ 
 quainted with the circumstances that occurred there. This man 
 who was killed was an ex-soldier of the Spanish war. His 
 name was Stewart. He was the only support of his father and 
 mother, who were very old and poor and were dependent upon 
 him. He was at the time of the incident a jail guard. When 
 these parties were arrested and put in jail, this young man was 
 7050 
 
10 
 
 on guard and was killed. I tried to get them a house built, and 
 endeavored to secure a pension for these old people, but failed, 
 as the bill was turned down by the committee, and I am unable 
 to state their condition at the present time; but it certainly was 
 horrible. 
 
 Mr. SLAYDEN. I think that the committee, under the circum¬ 
 stances, might have departed from its rule and granted a pen¬ 
 sion to these unfortunate people, who had been deprived of their 
 support by soldiers of the country. 
 
 Suffice it to say that it has been described by C. H. Cornell, 
 chairman of the Republican Congressional committee of the 
 Sixth Nebraska district, as a “ wanton and cold-blooded mur¬ 
 der,” committed by soldiers of the Twenty-fifth Infantry with 
 Krag-Jorgensen guns. In commenting a few days ago on the 
 outbreak at Brownsville, Mr. Cornell says of the Niobrara in¬ 
 cident : 
 
 Although the murdered one was of their own color and without 
 character, the act was no less a crime than the like one which fol¬ 
 lowed it in Brownsville, and only emphasizes the necessity of some form 
 of salutary punishment. While the soldiers might justify silence in 
 the latter case on account of fear lest a fair trial could not be had in 
 Texas, no such excuse could prevail here, since the murdered one was 
 not a citizen of this community, but a woman of their own race in 
 whom no one would have any special interest, and the trial could have 
 been purely on its merits without prejudice against the prisoners. 
 Yet those who possessed the necessary information were as silent in 
 the former as in the latter instance. 
 
 I want to assure Mr. Cornell that there was no more need for 
 the conspiracy of silence at Brownsville, Tex., than at Valen¬ 
 tine, Nebr. He should not forget that Sergeant Kipper, who 
 murdered an officer of the city of El Paso, had a fair trial and 
 was convicted on the testimony of his fellow-criminals. 
 
 For a few minutes, Mr. Chairman, I will leave the history of 
 the Twenty-fifth Infantry—that regiment which so richly de¬ 
 serves the title of “ Bloody Twenty-fifth ”—and ask your atten¬ 
 tion to the conduct of other colored organizations in the Army. 
 
 AT SUGGS, WYO. 
 
 In June, 1892, Suggs, Wyo., w r as the scene of disorders, and 
 some of the men of the Ninth Cavalry (colored) were the evil¬ 
 doers. Maj. C. S. Ilsley, of the Ninth Cavalry, said that the 
 trouble was due to quarrels about lewd women, but he says 
 there was a bitter feeling between the citizens of Suggs and the 
 troopers on account of the color of the soldiers. 
 
 Twenty of the troopers, armed with carbines and revolvers, 
 raided the town and fired “ volley after volley,” according to 
 Major Guilfoyle, into the houses of the citizens. Major Guil- 
 foyle says, in his report to the camp adjutant, that “ the feeling 
 against the troops has been and is very bitter, being perhaps 
 intensified by race prejudice.” The soldiers acted in military 
 concert in this as in other cases. 
 
 AT HUNTSVILLE, ALA. 
 
 The members of the Tenth Cavalry (colored), at Huntsville, 
 Ala., in October, 1898, made an attack on the provost guard in 
 an effort to release one of their comrades who was under arrest 
 for the use of vile and abusive language. Maj. E. D. Thomas 
 said of it: 
 
 This unprovoked assault and mutinous interference with the provost 
 guard caused the shedding of innocent blood, bad feeling between organ¬ 
 izations, and endangered the lives of peaceable citizens, terrorized the 
 7050 
 
11 
 
 community in the vicinity of the railroad depot, and scandalized and 
 disgraced the military service, which calls for the severest condemnation. 
 
 He also said: 
 
 It is impossible for me to give the names of the ringleaders. This 
 could not he ascertained by any known means. The people connected 
 with the colored organization throughout this investigation have studi¬ 
 ously avoided stating or giving names of principal instigators of ths 
 riot, in my opinion trying to shield the organization from censure and 
 endeavoring to shift the responsibility and blame for this disgraceful 
 affray on other and innocent parties. 
 
 Here it will be observed, Mr. Chairman, as elsewhere, there 
 was a conspiracy of silence on the part of the black troops. 
 
 THE AFFAIR AT FORT CONCHO. 
 
 In 1881 men from the Sixteenth Infantry and Tenth Cavalry, 
 stationed at Fort Concho, in Texas, numbering about 150, raided 
 and “ shot up ” the town of San Angelo, a mile or two distant. 
 General Grierson, who commanded at the post, said tfiat he had 
 reason to believe that three noncommissioned officers and two 
 privates were the leading spirits. 
 
 This again helps to destroy faith in the suggestion that the 
 noncommissioned officers of these negro regiments can be relied 
 on to keep their men in order and restrain them from the per¬ 
 petration of crime. Residents of the city of San Angelo have 
 lately written me that hundreds of shots were fired into build¬ 
 ings occupied by citizens of both sexes and all ages. Fortunately 
 only one person was wounded. These negro soldiers arrested 
 the sheriff of the county and demanded that a prisoner held by 
 him on the charge of murder be turned over to them, mani¬ 
 festly with the idea of lynching him. 
 
 They defied and held in contempt the civil authorities. 
 
 AT SAN ANTONIO. 
 
 On the 9th of April, 1867, as the records of the War Depart¬ 
 ment will show, Company E, of the Ninth United States Cavalry, 
 colored, while stationed at San Antonio, Tex., was guilty of 
 mutiny. The first sergeant at the head of his company attacked 
 and killed Lieutenant Griffin and seriously wounded Lieutenants 
 Heyl and Smith. 
 
 KEY WEST INCIDENT. 
 
 However, the Twenty-fifth Infantry has been conspicuous, 
 even among the negro troops, for its persistent career of crime 
 and mutiny. In 1898, while on the way to Cuba, the regiment 
 was delayed a few days in Key West. What they did there to 
 maintain their record of insurrection and contempt for law is 
 told in the following language by the sheriff of Monroe County. 
 Please obsefVe that the statement is sworn to. I have a letter 
 from an attorney of Key West, who was then police judge, 
 which confirms the statement of the sheriff and which also says 
 that a drunken soldier, whom he was arresting, fired his pistol 
 at the officer. 
 
 State of Florida, Monroe County: 
 
 Before the undersigned authority personally appeared Frank W. 
 Knight, who, being duly sworn, says : That I was sheriff of Monroe 
 County, Fla., in May, 1898, and that the Twenty-fifth United States 
 Infantry (colored) was at that time in the city of Key West awaiting 
 orders for Cuba. That on the 20th day of April, anno Domini 1898, 
 at about 10 p. m. of the same day, one Henry A. Williams (colored) 
 and one of the men belonging to the Twenty-fifth United States Infantry 
 was brought to jail by the city police, charged with an assault with 
 intent to kill; that at about 1 a. m. next morning at least thirty or 
 forty of the soldiers belonging to said Twenty-fifth United States In- 
 7050 
 
12 
 
 fantry, armed with their guns, came to the jail and surrounded the 
 jail, and came to the door of said jail and demanded the said Williams, 
 saying that if he was not delivered to them they would break the jail 
 down. I being overpowered and no arms to defend myself and the rest 
 of the prisoners in jail and fearing trouble might come to all in 
 jail, thought it best to deliver said prisoner to them, intending to re¬ 
 port the matter to the commanding officer at the barracks the next 
 morning. Deponent further says that another reason why he delivered 
 the prisoner over to them was because he had other prisoners in jail 
 charged with murder, and he feared that if he did not turn over this 
 man they would carry their threats into execution, and he would then 
 lose those who he had confined for murder. That the conduct of these 
 men was boisterous, and they were crying out all the time that if I 
 did not turn this man over they would riddle me with bullets and that 
 there would not be a brick left in the building. 
 
 Sworn to and subscribed before me this the 27th day of December, 
 A. D. 1906. 
 
 F. W. Knight. 
 
 Sheriff Monroe County, Fla. 
 
 L. W. Bethel, 
 
 Notary Public, State of Florida at Large. 
 
 BROWNSVILLE. 
 
 And now, Mr. Chairman, I shall say a few words about the 
 latest outbreak of negro soldiers—that of Brownsville on the 
 night of the 13th of August, 1906. 
 
 The main facts in this case are too well known to require re¬ 
 statement. I merely want to comment on some of the pleas put 
 forward for the defense. The theory advanced by some emi¬ 
 nent gentlemen about the murder of Frank Natus and the 
 wounding of Policeman Dominguez is so preposterous that citi¬ 
 zens of Brownsville, when advised that it would be made, re¬ 
 fused to believe it The Secretary of War well says: 
 
 The suggestion that a body of men sharing the hostility of the people 
 of the town should dress themselves in the cast-off clothing of the col¬ 
 ored soldiers ; should visit the army target range some 15 or 20 pules 
 from the post for the purpose of obtaining used cartridge shells and 
 clips, and then go through the town firing from 100 to 150 shots into 
 houses where women and children were likely to be killed ; should ac¬ 
 tually kill one man and attack the police of the town and nearly kill its 
 lieutenant, and should then sprinkle the cartridge shells and clips on the 
 streets of the town, all merely for the purpose of making a case of 
 murder and riot against the colored troops and of thus securing their 
 removal in the interest of the townspeople whose lives had been thus 
 taken or endangered, is. so grotesque in its improbability and absurdity 
 as hardly to call for discussion or comment. 
 
 In reply to those gentlemen who say that the soldiers could 
 not have left their barracks, made the raid through the streets 
 of Brownsville, fired into the Miller Hotel and other buildings, 
 killed Frank Natus and wounded Dominguez, and then have 
 returned to the post in the time claimed and without detection, 
 I direct their attention to what men of the same regiment did at 
 Sturgis, in Dakota. In that case they went 1 \ miles from Fort 
 Meade to the town of Sturgis, “ shot up ” the town, and killed 
 one man, and got back to their post without being identified. 
 Thus, it will be observed, they must have traveled approximately 
 3 miles. 
 
 At Brownsville the post is separated from the town by only 
 a stone wall, and the entire raid did not cover over 750 yards. 
 At Fort Meade the commanding officer and his subordinates 
 were advised of the raid as soon as it was undertaken, and 
 General Sturgis, in the language of an eyewitness, “ immediately 
 ordered Lieutenant Sickles to take a detachment of his men 
 and go at once and bring them—the raiders—back.” 
 
 At Brownsville the commanding officer, Major Penrose, knew 
 
 7050 
 
nothing of the raid until it was over, and refused to believe 
 that his men were in it until convinced by evidence of their 
 guilt. 
 
 General Sturgis, commanding at Fort Meade, at once ordered 
 Captain Ord to make a check roll call, examine the arms and 
 bring in all that had the appearance of being recently fired. 
 Major Penrose, I believe, did order a roll call, but the arms 
 were not inspected until the next morning, and when inspected 
 w r ere, of course, found to be bright and clean. To pull a small 
 piece of cloth through a gun barrel is the work of a second, and 
 so far as evidence in this case goes the inspection might as well 
 have been delayed a week. 
 
 THE MOTIVE. 
 
 I fancy very few crimes are committed without the criminal 
 having some reason for his acts—either revenge or gain. In 
 this case it is not difficult to find the causes—at least some of 
 the minor causes. In his telegram of the 20th to the Military 
 Secretary, Major Blocksom mentions what he thinks are the 
 causes. The first he names is racial hostility. Then he men¬ 
 tions the fact that the soldiers were made to drink at separate 
 bars, and personal encounters between soldiers and citizens as 
 other reasons. He might have stopped with the first reason 
 given, for it embraces the second and is the explanation of the 
 others. The soldiers had been advised that the people of 
 Brownsville did not want them there, and they arrived in an 
 ugly mood. I have letters stating that on the way down they 
 asked the conductor of the Brownsville train if there were white 
 women in the town whose favor they might expect. They were 
 insolent in their bearing with citizens and particularly rude to¬ 
 ward women. 
 
 Fortunately for the citizens of Brownsville, whose politics 
 might be thought by some gentlemen to have caused the trouble, 
 in the only two occasions on which soldiers were personally as¬ 
 saulted the rows were with Federal officeholders who are Repub¬ 
 licans. 
 
 Fred Tate, inspector of customs, in his report to the collector, 
 says that a negro soldier pushed and elbowed his way through a 
 crowd of ladies, one of whom was Mrs. Tate, and jostled and 
 rubbed against them in a rude manner. This act of deliberate 
 rudeness provoked the anger of Mr. Tate, who did what most 
 men under the circumstances would have done, and what was 
 perfectly proper for him to do, in knocking the soldier down. 
 
 Mounted Inspector Baker, another Republican Federal office 
 holder, tried to prevent a quarrel between two drunken soldiers 
 and a ferryman and to stop a torrent of foul abuse pouring out 
 of the mouths of the soldiers, and in doing so, to use his own 
 language, “ pushed one of them forward.” The soldier was too 
 drunk to keep his balance on the sidewalk and stepped off into 
 a mudhole. Baker adds, “As the negro walked off he said, ‘ We 
 will see about this to-morrow.’ ” 
 
 Two soldiers did hunt Baker the next day and, as he believes, 
 for the purpose of making a row, but finding him prepared and 
 evidently willing, they became discreet and left without doing 
 any harm. 
 
 On the 12th of August, just twenty-four hours before the as¬ 
 sault on the town, Mrs. Evans, a highly respectable woman and 
 7050 
 
14 
 
 wife of a worthy citizen, was seized by the hair and thrown vio¬ 
 lently to the ground by a soldier in uniform. 
 
 These incidents accentuated the feeling of hostility between the 
 soldiers and citizens—a hostility which always and most signifi¬ 
 cantly runs along race lines. They show a state of mind which 
 leads up to and explains the actual assault on the town, and, in 
 my opinion, they clearly show the unwisdom of putting negro 
 soldiers in a station near communities of white people. 
 
 It seems too absurd, Mr. Chairman, that at this late day we 
 should be asking who did the shooting. I fail to see how there 
 is room for honest doubt. If the -soldiers had been white and 
 the circumstances the same, if the same mass of clear, strong 
 evidence against them had been submitted, and if the President 
 had dismissed them from the service in the same manner, there 
 not only would have been no doubt as to who were the murder¬ 
 ers, but the action of the President would have been almost 
 unanimously approved. But, then, the whites are not a val¬ 
 uable political asset handled in bulk, which explains many 
 things. 
 
 Does any sane man believe the stupid suggestion that the 
 white citizens of Brownsville, because of their hostility toward 
 black soldiers, fired into their own houses and killed one of 
 their own people, at the same time endangering the lives of 
 their women and children? Such a theory is an insult to the 
 intelligence of the country and seeks to put the people of 
 Brownsville below the beasts of the field. Even the dumb 
 brutes love their young and will protect them. Shots were de¬ 
 liberately fired into a house which only a few minutes before 
 had been the scene of a children’s party and which still had a 
 number of occupants. By the merest chance no one was killed, 
 for the shots took effect only 4| feet above the floor. Surely 
 sectional and political prejudice has gone the limit in this cruel 
 suggestion. 
 
 If it is seriously urged, Mr. Chairman, that the people of 
 Brownsville did this shooting, I most solemnly protest against 
 the reflection on their marksmanship. I do not believe that you 
 could find any community in the United States, even that least 
 accustomed to the use of arms, who could not hit the barracks 
 buildings at Fort Brown, at which the people of this Texas town 
 are said to have fired. I know there is no such community in 
 the State of Texas. Had the people of Brownsville been armed 
 with these rifles and doing the shooting on that awful August 
 night the list of casualties would have been longer and the dead 
 and wounded would not all have come from one side. [Ap¬ 
 plause.] 
 
 A few days ago I read in the Washington Herald a statement 
 made by a retired officer of the British army who, although he 
 spoke guardedly, as becomes a visitor to the country, did not 
 conceal his surprise at the fact that black soldiers are kept in 
 our Army for service in times of peace. He said that Great 
 Britain, even under the stress of war and in the face of repeated 
 disasters, did not employ them against the Boers in South 
 Africa. He assigned as a reason for the British policy the ad¬ 
 mitted prejudice, mutually entertained, of the races. I mention 
 this, Mr. Chairman, to show that the people of the United 
 States are not peculiar in this respect. I say the people of the 
 United States, instead of the people of the South, because of 
 7050 
 
15 
 
 comparatively recent events which show that this prejudice 
 does not stop at Mason and Dixon’s line. Lynchings are a dis¬ 
 grace, I admit, and they should be made impossible by the en¬ 
 actment of such intelligent laws and by such prompt and rigid 
 enforcement of them that no man’s thoughts -would ever turn in 
 that direction for the punishment of crime. But they are not 
 peculiar to the South. They are only more frequent there be¬ 
 cause of multiplied instances of crime of a frightful sort. Even 
 Springfield, Ohio, if the press and that entertaining essayist, 
 Ray Stanard Baker, tell the truth, has on occasions resorted to 
 lynching. And strangely enough the mob spirit was largely di¬ 
 rected by race prejudice. The lynching of a negro criminal at 
 Springfield in March, 1904, was followed by a very carnival of 
 crime directed at the black inhabitants of that city. Not only 
 was there evidence of prejudice against the particular criminals, 
 but it seemed to have been directed against the whole negro 
 race. They were hunted out of their homes and their property 
 destroyed by fire. Mr. Baker describes the situation in this 
 way: 
 
 The public was apathetic. No one seemed to care; only a nigger had 
 been hanged. 
 
 Danville, Ill., was also the scene of a manifestation of race 
 prejudice, -which the writer says is growing with the growth of 
 the negro population. It would - not be difficult to multiply 
 these illustrations of the fact that the race prejudice which 
 exists in the South, and which we admit, is also to be found in 
 the North, but usually denied. The newspapers give us over¬ 
 whelming evidence of it every day. 
 
 As I have already said, I fear that we have not yet reached 
 the stage where we will legislate on this mqtter intelligently 
 and for conditions as we find them. But we will reach it by 
 and by. 
 
 After a few incidents like those at Fort Meade, San Carlos, 
 El Paso, and Brownsville Congress will be really aroused to a 
 discharge of its duty in this matter. Repeat the Brownsville 
 affair with a change of locus—let it occur in Michigan, New 
 York, or Illinois—and a new light will be seen. Until then we 
 will be as patient as possible, having faith that finally the sym¬ 
 pathy of the whole country will be given to that section which 
 has been so tried in the school of disaster, a section which 
 stands face to face with the perplexities and dangers of the 
 most difficult question any people on earth were ever called 
 on to meet and solve. When all the States comprehend this 
 question, which now they barely apprehend, they will help us 
 of the South to make it certain that the homes of white men in 
 a white man’s country will be protected by white men only. 
 [Loud applause.'] 
 
 7050 
 
 O