Although nearly sixty years have passed since the emancipation of the Negro, there is still in American thinking much that was brought down from slavery. However kindly disposed individual owners may have been, that institution denied full personality to the slave. As Murphy says: "This bondage fixed instinctively a limit beyond which the Negro must not ascend; it fixed a limit below which the Negro must not fall."3 This attitude bore especially heavily upon the aspiring Negro, pierced through as it often was with the fear that if a Negro were admitted to the treasures of knowledge and liberty, the day might come when, because of his knowledge, he might no longer submit. Denmark Vesey in revolt in South Carolina in 1822, Nat Turner in Virginia in 1831, to say nothing of other insurrections and of thousands of individuals who resisted punishment and ran away to free territory, gave ground for such apprehensions.

The Emancipation Proclamation did not destroy this idea. It persists to-day among many white Americans, North and South, who denounce the injustices to the Negro and personally may show him great kindness and consideration, yet who do not think of him in terms of capacity for full personality. Thus, men and women who think of themselves as good Americans will argue that the Negro is all right, but that it was ordained of God that he should be a "hewer of wood and drawer of water." Or again, they may grant that the Negro must be given opportunities, but declare at the same time that he must be made "to know his place." Such attitudes were often not consciously chosen. They were absorbed by the individual as he grew up, just as he absorbed his other feelings and prejudices. Consciously or unconsciously, however, these people have adopted attitudes which survive from a past condition and system of servitude.

The legal protection guaranteed to slaves varied in the different states. The courts dealt with the most serious crimes committed by Negroes, such as murder, riots, and uprisings, but most of the crimes of slaves were dealt with by master or overseer without reference to the courts. The habit of dealing with public conduct of Negroes by other than legal procedure has not passed away but is becoming recognized as an outworn method of racial contacts. At the present time in many communities the Negro is still dealt with by vigilantes, by self-appointed groups, or by individuals who chastise without court procedure as alleged misdemeanors or crimes seem to the executioners to merit. White men of influence often intercede with the courts and secure "their Negroes" such consideration as white influence commands. Courts are not unknown in which accused Negroes escape punishment, not in proportion to their guilt or innocence, but in accordance with the standing of the white men who ap-peal to the courts in their behalf.1 Many "Black Laws" were passed between 1865-1868 to deal with occupations, labor contracts, apprenticeship, and vagrancy of Negroes. These statutes attempted to fix by law after emancipation the conditions, largely with reference to labor, not far removed from the previous system in the belief that compulsion was necessary to make the newly emancipated people work. To many Negroes, freedom did at first, of course, mean ceasing from labor; but the stem commands of hunger and cold were stronger than legal codes or court orders. Vagrancy was made a part of the compulsory labor system by such devices as, for example, the laws of one state which provided that the sheriff should hire to the person who paid his fine and costs any Negro who did not pay the fine imposed for vagrancy. Similar penalties were legal for breach of contract and for other offenses.2

Survivals of this view of Negro labor have persisted in some plantation sections in the customary way of settlement between landlord and tenant. One white man said that some of the landlords in his district regarded any surplus handed Negro tenants as "tips" rather than wages due. Many plantation tenants work year in and year out with little knowledge of what they produce. There are often no written contracts. The landlord keeps the books and at the end of the year settlement is made according to his accounts, thus there is no check upon error or subterfuge. In many cases this means that the Negro gets only his meager food, clothing, and shelter. If the landlord desires exorbitant profits or encourages thriftless tenants, the end of the year finds the Negro with a sufficient debt to make it possible to prevent his leaving, since in some localities it is against the law or custom for Negroes to leave a plantation if they are in debt.1 There are many plantations where fairness is shown the tenant, even shiftless ones being dealt with leniently, and the bad conditions are passing away, but public opinion, colored by the surviving customs of the past, has been slow to change them. In other fields of labor, this surviving idea serves to keep wages down on the erroneous theory that Negroes do not need the same standards of pay as other workers because they can live more cheaply or because, as other workers, some of them will loaf if they get more pay than their bare creature needs require. On the other hand, some employers have adopted a progressive policy of stimulating the wants and standards of living of Negroes to give them incentives to regular work. Attitudes due to ideas of race. The people whose ancestors lived in Northwestern Europe along the North Sea and on the rivers, many of which flow into the sea, have made a conquest, military and economic, of much of the rest of the world. They govern several hundred millions directly and control by mandates and "spheres of influence" a large part of the remainder. Out of this group or racial experience, and the power and prestige flowing from it, has developed the popular idea of racial superiority. This increase of power and prestige of a people who hold "dominion over palm and pine" has naturally bed pride in their courage, knowledge, wealth, and cul-ture that led them into such influence over the world. This idea of superiority of Caucasian stocks has been made a popular standard by which other groups are measured.1 The white people of this age, of course, have not been the only ones to hold such an idea and there are among them many who see its limitations. Kipling, the great modern prophet, has pointed out in his "Recessional" the great responsibilities and dangers to the strong who hold controlling world power. The view of racial superiority has been held by peoples from the Assyrians and Egyptians to the Greeks and Romans, when they achieved success and wielded great power over subject peoples.2 Writers and others who express this idea argue that the governments of self-governing white men can neither be the possession of another race, nor share their responsibility of control with other races. In other words, as it relates to the Negro in America, he is to be permanently a sub-citizen.3 This kind of an attitude is back of such remarks as that of an attorney, prominent in his local community, who said, "We give the Negro as much justice as it is safe for him to have".