it is discouraging. Such is the demand of race prejudice, and such the
position of inferiority in which it insists on placing the Negro.
Slavery held the Negro there, and since emancipation, this
race-separation is intended to accomplish the same purpose. The
Southern white man makes no objection to the race or color of the
Negro, but only to his position as an equal. He was not merely
tolerated, he was more than tolerated, as a slave, and he is now as a
servant.

The present controversy in regard to the color-line is calling forth
some frank admissions from intelligent white men at the South. Thus
the Rev. Wm. H. Campbell, an Episcopal clergyman of South Carolina,
vindicates his refusal to sit in Convention with the Negroes by the
inferiority which the Almighty has stamped upon them. Mr. Campbell
says:

"The Bishop does not understand or appreciate the reasons why some
of us cannot, under any circumstances, sit in Convention with
Negroes. The objections commonly made need not here be referred to.
The difficulty with some of us is not 'on account of color,' as it
is usually, but not with strict accuracy, put; for some Negroes are
as white as some white men, but because they are of an inferior
race, so made by the Almighty and never intended by him to be put
on an equality with the white race, in either Church or State."

The question at issue is not one of expediency, but of principle; and,
among Christians, whether in the individual church or the
ecclesiastical body, it is a question of Christian duty to be settled
by the Divine authority of the Master himself. We propose no argument
on the subject, but content ourselves by quoting a few well-known