ion Society.

[Footnote 1: See Chapter X, Section 3.]

In the decade 1837-1847 Frederick Douglass was outstanding as a leader,
and other men who were now prominent were Dr. James McCune Smith, Rev.
James W.C. Pennington, Alexander Crummell, William C. Nell, and Martin
R. Delany. These are important names in the history of the period. These
were the men who bore the brunt of the contest in the furious days of
Texas annexation and the Compromise of 1850. About 1853 and 1854 there
was renewed interest in the idea of an industrial college; steps were
taken for the registry of Negro mechanics and artisans who were in
search of employment, and of the names of persons who were willing to
give them work; and there was also a committee on historical records and
statistics that was not only to compile studies in Negro biography but
also to reply to any assaults of note.[1]

[Footnote 1: We can not too much emphasize the fact that the leaders
of this period were by no means impractical theorists but men who were
scientifically approaching the social problem of their people. They not
only anticipated such ideas as those of industrial education and of the
National Urban League of the present day, but they also endeavored to
lay firmly the foundations of racial self-respect.]

Immediately after the last of the conventions just mentioned, those who
were interested in emigration and had not been able to get a hearing
in the regular convention issued a call for a National Emigration
Convention of Colored Men to take place in Cleveland, Ohio, August
24-26, 1854. The preliminary announcement said: "No person will be
admitted to a seat in the Convention who would introduce the subject
of emigration to the Eastern Hemisphere--either to Asia, Africa, or
Europe--as our object and determination are to consider our claims
to the West Indies, Central and South America, and the Canadas. This
restriction has no reference to personal preference, or individual
enterprise, but to the great question of national claims to come before
the Convention."[1] Douglass pronounced the call "uncalled for, unwise,
unfortunate and premature," and his position led him into a wordy
discussion in the press with James M. Whitfield, of Buffalo, prominent
at the time as a writer. Delany explained the call as follows: "It was
a mere policy on the part of the authors of these documents, to confine
their scheme to America (including the West Indies), whilst they
were