entered by the soldiers, and some two hundred and fifty Negroes temporarily held, while the search was proceeding and inquiries being made.  They were all disarmed, and those with concealed weapons, or under suspicion of having been in the party firing on the police, were sent to jail."[2] It is thus evident that in this case, as in many others, the Negroes who had suffered most, not the white men who killed a score of them, were disarmed, and that for the time being their terrified women and children were left defenseless.  McKelway also says in this general connection:  “Any Southern man would protect an innocent Negro who appealed to him for help, with his own life if necessary.”  This sounds like chivalry, but it is really the survival of the old slavery attitude that begs the whole question.  The Negro does not feel that he should ask any other man to protect him.  He has quite made up his mind that he will defend his own home himself.  He stands as a man before the bar, and the one thing he wants to know is if the law and the courts of America are able to give him justice—­simple justice, nothing more.

[Footnote 1:  R.S.  Baker:  Following the Colour Line, 3.]

[Footnote 2:  Outlook, November 3, 1906, p. 561.]

5. The Question of Labor

From time to time, in connection with cases of violence, we have referred to the matter of labor.  Riots such as we have described are primarily social in character, the call of race invariably being the final appeal.  The economic motive has accompanied this, however, and has been found to be of increasing importance.  Says DuBois:  “The fatal campaign in Georgia which culminated in the Atlanta Massacre was an attempt, fathered by conscienceless politicians, to arouse the prejudices of the rank and file of white laborers and farmers against the growing competition of black men, so that black men by law could be forced back to subserviency and serfdom."[1] The question was indeed constantly recurrent, but even by the end of the period policies had not yet been definitely decided upon, and for the time being there were frequent armed clashes between the Negro and the white laborer.  Both capital and common sense were making it clear, however, that the Negro was undoubtedly a labor asset and would have to be given place accordingly.

[Footnote 1:  The Negro in the South, 115.]

In March, 1895, there were bloody riots in New Orleans, these growing out of the fact that white laborers who were beginning to be organized objected to the employment Of Negro workers by the shipowners for the unloading of vessels.  When the trouble was at its height volley after volley was poured upon the Negroes, and in turn two white men were killed and several wounded.  The commercial bodies of the city met, blamed the Governor and the Mayor for the series of outbreaks, and demanded that the outrages cease.  Said they:  “Forbearance has ceased to be a virtue.  We can no longer treat