which is against the constitution of the world, is vain. The
question, then, which we must seriously consider is this: What
is the real meaning of Race; what has, in the past, been the law
of race development, and what lessons has the past history of
race development to teach the rising Negro people?

When we thus come to inquire into the essential difference
of races we find it hard to come at once to any definite
conclusion. Many criteria of race differences have in the past
been proposed, as color, hair, cranial measurements and
language. And manifestly, in each of these respects, human
beings differ widely. They vary in color, for instance, from the
marble-like pallor of the Scandinavian to the rich, dark brown
of the Zulu, passing by the creamy Slav, the yellow Chinese, the
light brown Sicilian and the brown Egyptian. Men vary, too, in
the texture of hair from the obstinately straight hair of the
Chinese to the obstinately tufted and frizzled hair of the
Bushman. In measurement of heads, again, men vary; from the
broad-headed Tartar to the medium-headed European and the
narrow-headed Hottentot; or, again in language, from the highly-
inflected Roman tongue to the monosyllabic Chinese. All these
physical characteristics are patent enough, and if they agreed
with each other it would be very easy to classify mankind.
Unfortunately for scientists, however, these criteria of race
are most exasperatingly intermingled. Color does not agree with
texture of hair, for many of the dark races have straight hair;
nor does color agree with the breadth of the head, for the
yellow Tartar has a broader head than the German; nor, again,
has the science of language as yet succeeded in clearing up the
relative authority of these various and contradictory criteria.