Copyright 2000 by Princeton University Press
Published by Princeton University Press, 41 William Street Princeton, New Jersey 08540
In the United Kingdom: Princeton University Press 3 Market Place, Woodstock, Oxfordshire OX20 1SY
All Rights Reserved
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Jumpin Jim Crow : southern politics from Civil War to civil rights / edited by Jane Dailey, Glenda Elizabeth Gilmore, and Bryant Simon.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0-691-00192-8 (cloth : alk. paper)
ISBN 0-691-00193-6 (paper : alk. paper)
eISBN: 978-0-691-21624-9
1. Southern StatesPolitics and government18652. Southern StatesRace relations. 3. Southern StatesSocial conditions. 4. Afro-AmericansCivil rightsSouthern StatesHistory. 5. Sex roleSouthern StatesHistory.
I. Dailey, Jane Elizabeth, 1963- II. Gilmore, Glenda Elizabeth. III. Simon, Bryant.
F215 .J86 2000
975'.04dc21 00-027861
https://press.princeton.edu/
R0
Preface
A PREFACE is something usually written by the author or authors of a work that follows. It is the very nature of what follows in this instance, however, that prompted the main doubts in the mind of the present writer about his qualifications for this assignment. Here is a book filled with splendid examples of the way history has come to be written at the end of the twentieth century: whereas the writer of the preface began his writing back toward its beginningin the 1930s. Naturally his publications reflected fashions of their period. Fashions change, and over the next six decades, to some extent so did his writing, but that does not make him the precursor or inspirer of the new school. Among the things that the writer of any preface and the authors of the essays in this collection do have in common, however, is by all odds the most fascinating field of American history, the southern part.
Older generations of historians filled long shelves with books and monograph series about the Reconstruction period. But not until recently did historians include such vital struggles as those the freedpeople made for legal protections, rights, and privacy of their marriages, their families, and the custody of their own children, legal rights that only whites enjoyed in the old order and rights that they sought to deny free blacks afterward. Violence was, of course, commonly acknowledged to be extensive during Reconstruction. But it was usually attributed to mobs of poor whites or explained by the need to restore order, prevent black domination, or maintain white supremacy by white militia and Klansmen. Only lately has serious attention been focused upon those who benefited and used for their purposes the reign of racist terrorism, lynching, torture, murder, and massacres. It was not the poor whites but the white elite who as a result gained domination not only of the blacks but over whites of the lower order as well. White elite supremacy did not go unchallenged by political combinations of whites and blacks in several southern states during the years following Reconstruction. One such movement was that of the Readjusters of Virginia. They did win power briefly in the name of a free ballot and human rights, but they were soon undermined by propaganda against miscegenation.
Paternalism was a lasting heritage from the old order, and males generally continued to take charge and have things their own way. An odd exception was control over the prevailing conceptions of the Souths past. That proved to be womens work in the last two decades of the nineteenth century and the first two of the twentieth. It was therefore the white ladies, not the white gentlemen, who bore primary responsibility for the myths glorifying the old order, the Lost Cause, and white supremacy. It was the United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC), and the Daughters of the American Revolution (DAR), Daughters of Pilgrims, and Daughters of Colonial Governors who were guardians of the past. Non-daughters were excluded. White women took over the shaping, methodology, and writing of what is now called public history, but of an elite sort.
Our new historians, men and women, are of a quite different order. The representatives in the essays that follow also write about race, segregation, and politics, but not in celebration of the past. Only a few illustrative examples can be offered here.
One of them deals with political history of the traditional kind, but in order to make important corrections in prevailing views. A striking and well-known reversal of political allegiances of the races took place in the early decades of the twentieth century when southern Democrats became Republicans and southern Republicans became Democrats, thus reversing traditional allegiances that had lasted since Lincoln and the Civil War. The common explanation was the New Deal and what happened in two presidential elections, those of 1932 and 1936. For blacks it was the appeal of Roosevelt reforms, the promise of jobs, relief, and hope for the future. For southern whites it was the appeal of conservative Republicans and their fight against the New Deal. It was that simple. A far more complex and satisfactory explanation comes from one of our new historians. It considers push factors as well as pull factors. For black voters the push came from the racism of the Lily White Republicans during the 1920s. For southern whites the push was from northern New Dealers. Other factors are so numerous that only a few can be mentioned here: the NAACP, woman suffrage, black migrants in the North, white primaries in the South, and black intellectuals and writers, to mention only a few.
Defiance could take ugly forms in the modern Southdefiance of the law, the federal government, and the elemental human rights to life, liberty, and property. One example is the violence of the Second Reconstruction, which sometimes equaled or even exceeded that of the First. The new outburst followed the Supreme Courts Brown decision against segregated schools in 1954. The poor whites revived the Ku Klux Klan; white elites founded the White Citizens Councils and proclaimed massive resistance, and 101 of 128 southern Congressmen signed the Southern Manifestoall in defiance of the law. If any single act ignited the fuse of violence it was that of President Dwight Eisenhower, who on September 25, 1957, ordered federal troops into Little Rock to control the mob preventing nine black children from entering school in that city. Reactions to the first intervention of federal troops since the Compromise of 1877 were numerous. One example must suffice.
Just a week after the Little Rock incident there appeared a pamphlet entitled South Carolinians Speak: A Moderate Approach to Race Relations. Sponsored by five Episcopalian ministers of the state, it consisted of twelve essays that were certainly moderate by any reasonable standard even though treasonous heresy by then current standards. One of the essays was by Claudia Thomas Sanders, a Charleston blueblood of high intelligence, wife of a prominent physician, and mother of two children. They lived in a large handsome house in the small city of Gaffney. A few weeks after the pamphlet appeared five Klansmen set out to dynamite the house. The earlier of several bombs that failed to ignite contained enough dynamite to destroy the whole house and much of the neighborhood. The one that finally did explode was smaller but big enough to damage the house severely. One of the five Klansmen confessed fully and identified the others, with eight police officers as witnesses. The FBI investigated and confirmed the evidence entirely. The case against the Klansmen was solid. Then the Klansman who confessed suffered a mysterious accident and was crushed to death under his own car. A local magistrate ruled the dead mans confessions inadmissible as hearsay and dismissed the case against two of the accused. A jury of white men acquitted the other two. Hooded Klansmen paraded the streets and cheered a showing of the old film, Birth of a Nation. The state press applauded the outcome and the Charleston