0 evaluări0% au considerat acest document util (0 voturi)
26 vizualizări26 pagini
Jstor is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content. The washington-dubois controversy and its effect on the Negro problem has always preyed upon the conscience of americans, in the South as well as the North. Jstor's Terms and Conditions of Use provide, in part, that you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles.
Descriere originală:
Titlu original
Poxpey.1957.the Washington-Du Bois Controversy and Its Effects on the Negro Problem.
Jstor is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content. The washington-dubois controversy and its effect on the Negro problem has always preyed upon the conscience of americans, in the South as well as the North. Jstor's Terms and Conditions of Use provide, in part, that you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles.
Drepturi de autor:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Formate disponibile
Descărcați ca PDF, TXT sau citiți online pe Scribd
Jstor is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content. The washington-dubois controversy and its effect on the Negro problem has always preyed upon the conscience of americans, in the South as well as the North. Jstor's Terms and Conditions of Use provide, in part, that you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles.
Drepturi de autor:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Formate disponibile
Descărcați ca PDF, TXT sau citiți online pe Scribd
TIe WasIinglon-BuIois Conlvovevs and Ils EJJecl on lIe Negvo FvoIIen
AulIov|s) C. Spencev Foxpe Souvce Hislov oJ Educalion JouvnaI, VoI. 8, No. 4 |Sunnev, 1957), pp. 128-152 FuIIisIed I History of Education Society SlaIIe UBL http://www.jstor.org/stable/3692575 . Accessed 06/01/2011 1818 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=hes. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. History of Education Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to History of Education Journal. http://www.jstor.org THE WASHINGTON-DUBOIS CONTROVERSY AND ITS EFFECT ON THE NEGRO PROBLEM* C. Spencer Poxpey One of the most pressing problems in the United States today is that of the Negro; and two of the leading figures, ad- mired by some and maligned by others, are Booker T. Wash- ington and William E. B. DuBois. This problem, with roots buried in the early growth of our country as a result of two and one-half centuries of en- forced slavery, has always preyed upon the conscience of Americans, in the South as well as the North. Although slav- ery was accepted in both sections, it nevertheless plagued the innermost thinking of Americans, because it did not square itself with the basic tenets underlying the American creed. Following the Civil War, it became one of the foremost problems. The fifty year period, from 1865 until 1915, mark- ed an era in which the pendulum swung from one side to the other, with progress slowly but perceptibly being made. Even among Negroes themselves, it was, and still is today, a mat- er of not inconsiderable difference as to the means of bring- ing about improvement, if not the solution. One of the most relentless and bitter controversies on these aspects occurred between 1895 and 1915 between Wash- ington and DuBois, two opposites in every respect. It is doubt- ful that even if they had agreed they could have worked har- moniously together, and it is about these two men and their differences that this article is written. There are certain limitations inherent in the investiga- tion of a controversy involving two persons who believed in substantially the same goals, especially when one is still liv- ing, and has had the opportunity to reassess his earlier posi- tion. Another limitation is that the body of material dealing with their differences is personal and therefore subjective. However, an attempt will be made to check facts other than those from the protagonists themselves. There is a third lim- itation also. That is the fact that the views of one, accepted now, in the opinion of many may tend to discredit the other. *Reprinted in revised form from The Bulletin, Minnesota Council for the Social Studies, Fall, 1957. 128 THE WASHINGTON-DUBOIS CONTROVERSY 129 Because of these limitations, the scope of this article, while naturally touching the present, will deal mainly with the two decades when both men faced each other in life. However an attempt will be made, through the study of other sources, to assess the past as well as the present evaluation of their ef- forts in regard to the cultural, economic, and intellectual life of those for whom they worked. The nature of the controversy itself and the depth to which it sank may well be told in a look at the two men them- selves. No two persons were more unlike than they, in train- ing, temperament and in rearing. Perhaps their only common factors were that they were human, able, and members of the same race. Washington, born a slave in Virginia, walked from his home at Haleford to Hampton Institute, established to train Ne- groes in vocational education, and was graduated from that school. He so impressed the officials with his industry and punctuality that, upon graduation-a feat of considerable mo- ment for an ex-slave boy at that time-he was chosen to found and direct a similar school in the black belt of Alabama. He founded Tuskegee Institute in 1881, four years after the Com- promise of 1877, which saw the Negro problem left almost entirely to the South. He was not yet twenty-four years old. By nature he was observant, kindly disposed, and a good listener. Although an able orator and able to meet people well, he seldom expressed himself until he knew to whom he was talking and what their position was on the matter being dis- cussed.' Polite in manners, tactful in approach and diploma- tic in discourse, he was able to get along with the best or the worst of both races, a quality necessary for the times, and for that matter, any time. Born a slave, spending much of his early manhood dur- ing the years of one of the world's costliest wars and the trag- ic reconstruction period, Washington knew as well as anyone the southern scene. He knew, as DuBois could not know, the antipathies of the leading class and the lower whites who were to take over and make worse the Negro problem. He knew by experience the problems faced by the Negroes, the vast ma- jority of whom were living in a section where the stresses and 'W. E. B. DuBois, Dusk of Dawn (New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co., 1940), 79. 130 HISTORY OF EDUCATION JOURNAL strains were at the breaking point. He knew where the points of conciliation were; indeed, he was an integral part of that society. He had first-hand knowledge of the high illiteracy of both the whites and the Negroes, which one author places at 35% and 77% respectively. 2 DuBois' background and training were just the opposite. Born in Massachusetts of free parents in 1868, trained at a high school where there was no racial discrimination, the eru- dite and scholarly youngster attended Fisk University, Nash- ville, Tennessee, and later Harvard University, where he re- ceived his doctor's degree in history, the first of his race to do so. His firsthand knowledge of the problem came in 1885 when it was decided that he should attend Fisk. Of this he said, "I was going into the South; the South of slavery, rebell- ion, and blackfolks; and above all I was going to meet colored people of my own age and education, and of my own ambi- tion." ' Thus trained, at two universities whose courses of study at that time and to an extent now, leaned heavily toward the arts and sciences, coupled with a background of living in a community which had no legal discriminatory practices, it is obvious that DuBois would approach the problem of the Negro differently. However, he recognized that not all Negroes should be trained in the vocations. Unlike Washington, DuBois was and is blunt, to the point and outspoken. Never lacking in ability to express himself, and fearless almost to the point of being foolhardy, he was not the type to move with ease among those whom he considered below him. Thus he was not able to speak "The Language" of the southerners, white or Negro. Of himself he has this to say concerning an interview with Washngton, one of the few as far as we could find out they every had: "I was quick, fast talking and voluble [and] ... found at the end... I had done all the talking."4 That both men were able and brilliant, no one can deny; that both wanted to improve the lot of the four million Ne- groes, just out of slavery and who were ushered into a society ' Harvey Wish, Society and Thought in Modern America (New York: Longmans, Green and Co., 1952), 34. DuBois, Dusk of Dawn, p. 22. 'Ibid., p. 80. THE WASHINGTON-DUBOIS CONTROVERSY 131 where their critics were many and helpers few, is unquestioned; and that each one in his own way contributed much to what DuBois now terms the "Dusk of Dawn" and biracial uplift is unchallenged. Their difference lies in their approach to the ultimate and best means of educating the Negro on terms of ability and competence which would make him accepted in America as a citizen. Apparently there was no serious difference between the two men until after the turn of the century, when, in DuBois' words, Tuskegee had become "The Negro capital of the United States."5 It is well at this point to put the basis of this contro- versy into proper perspective. Our country had just emerged from a bitter and long war-a war which saw kin fighting against kin and in which the end result, no matter what the outcome, was to leave scars which would take a long time to heal. The causes of this war need not concern us here, ex- cept to mention that the South believed most strongly in the justice of its cause. Because the South was the loser and be- cause of this belief-mainly that it had the right to withdraw and govern itself as it chose-the enormity of the problem of the South's restoration and adjustment to the newly freed Ne- gro was increased. Whatever the results of the war, the un- biased judgment of history prior to 1860 must hold with the South , as John C. Calhoun and others held, that it could se- cede. But it is another story after Appomatox-a story which many southerners even today do not want to believe is true. Generally there were three classes of people in the South after the war, two white classes and the Negro. The landholding class and the Negroes tended to work harmoniously with each other. For our purposes we shall refer to the landholders generally as the Gentry. The other class, whose hatred of the Negro was of long duration, even during the days of slavery, was the poorer group. Few had ever had slaves; most owned little property and had had even less to do with the actual pol- itical affairs of the South. This class we will call the Bour- bons. They were to come to power in the late 1890's and it is they with whom the four million freedmen were to deal. There SDuBois, Dusk of Dawn, p. 86. 132 HISTORY OF EDUCATION JOURNAL was a close relationship between the Gentry and the Negroes, while the Bourbons hated both.s This emnity increased after 1863 when President Abra- ham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation ordering the slaves in those states still fighting freed. For this class saw in the Negro an economic competitor and a political ally of the Gentry, which might indeed be the crux of the problem today. Moreover, it furnished, if the Gentry and the Negroes would combine their vote, the continued domination by those whom Washington called "'The better white people". As a matter of fact, this hastened the inevitable defeat of the South after Gettysburg, for the bulk of the poor whites saw little to be gained in continuing the fight. The end of the war brought four or five results, which will be mentioned here only because they helped to illuminate the background of the controversy. Firstly, it established more firmly the authority of the national government, and laid to rest the doctrine of legal secession, although sections of the South are today using all their powers to raise it from its grave. Secondly, it vetoed the Jeffersonian concept of an eco- nomy based on agriculture and small cities and accepted the Hamiltonian concept of industrialism based on free labor and a bountiful government. Thirdly, it freed the Negro slaves, and finally established the basis of making our government "one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." The plans of reconstruction need not concern us in any detail here. The Lincoln "go-in-peace-and-sin-no-more" plan was most lenient, but his death cut short his efforts be- fore the real problem came. It is indeed doubtful whether they could have been carried out had he lived. President Andrew Johnson's plan, at first tougher, was nullified under the Con- gressional dictatorship of the radicals, led by Senator Charles Sumner and Thaddeus Stevens. Briefly, three of Johnson's proposals must be mentioned, for it is in the execution of these plans that the problem really began. It provided that the states must hold constitutional conventions, accept the Thirteenth and later the Fourteenth and Fifteenth amendments, repudiate all debts made under the Confederacy and elect such officers as had been pardoned by Congress. When the South rebelled, stronger measures were used. The setting up of military districts and the appointing 'C. Vann Woodward, Origins of the New South (Baton Rouge: Lou- isiana State University Press, 1951), 210. THE WASHINGTON-DUBOIS CONTROVERSY 133 of governors, although necessary at the time, proved to be most disunifying. Force is never a good determinant in the long run. While the southerners generally accepted the terms as the quid pro quo for getting back into the union, it was done main- ly in words but not in spirit. The carpetbag rule in the South, of which much has been and will continue to be written as time passes, left many deep scars on the South and on the nation. It came at a time when America was experiencing growing pains, when the full weight of the industrial revolution was bearing heavily on the old in- stitutions, and when moral depravity was at its height, politi- cally and economically. To the victor go the spoils, and many unprincipled per- sons, northern and southern, Negro and White, used this per- iod as a means of lining their pockets with whatever was in sight. This was the eve of the era of "rugged individualism" or "Darwinian Socialism." Competition was rife in both sec- tions of the nation. A good case in point is that of a military governor in Louisiana who came South all but penniless, and after four years in office was a millionaire.8 These governors and their coherts used the freedmen, uneducated and without training and wholly unprepared, as office holders, a move which was to contribute greatly toward the disfranchisement policies of the Bourbons. The radicals were "enforcing" civil rights, much to the detriment of both the Negro and the white. The disputed Hayes-Tilden election of 1876, in which the North began its nearly seventy-year "retirement" from the Negro problem provides the basic prop in the setting of this controversy. The Compromise of 1877, four years before Washington was to establish Tuskegee Institute, was made at the Wormley's Hotel, on a strictly partisan vote of 8-7, de- cided not to go behind the disputed election returns but to ac- cept as valid the reports of the Republican Canvassing Boards in the three states in question. With the presidency upper- most in their minds, the leaders of the Republican Party, among whom were Senator John Sherman of Ohio and Con- gressman James Garfield, President-to-be, made an agree- ment with leaders of the Democratic Party which, in effect, abandoned the Negro as a national problem and left him to the eClaude Bowers, The Tragic Era (New York: Literary Guild of America, 1929), 363. 134 HISTORY OF EDUCATION JOURNAL tender mercies of what at that time was a Southern leader- ship not adverse to allowing the Negroes to keep his basic political and civil rights. The Wormley's Hotel agreement, later formalized in the office of the U.S. Attorney General, and approved by Pres- ident Grant, stipulated that the South, in exchange for the with- drawal of Federal troops, the withholding of national support from the Republican regimes and the leaving of the Negro to the South, would use its influence to continue the count of the Election Commission (which assured the Republicans the oc- cupancy of the White House), would respect the civil rights of all citizens, including the freedmen, and would refrain from the use of violence.9 Meanwhile, when President Rutherford B. Hayes began to carry out the measures of the compromise, which gave him the presidency, there developed a serious struggle for politi- cal power in the South. The Gentry, who had consummated the compromise and who were expected by the Republicans to live up to their end in regard to the Negro, had the edge, and were well satisfied that they could live up to the agreement. Paul Buck states: "The Compromise of 1877 pleased those north- erners who still dreaded the prospects of a national Demo- cratic administration by placing Hayes in the White House to purify the Republican party. [It] implied a surrender to those who had insisted upon a thorough establishment of nationalism and complete equality as a result of the war." 10 However, when the South was restored and the Union army left the scene, there was a determined spirit-an un- yielding obsession-to blame all of the ills of the area on the Negro. While they went through the motions of according him his "place" on paper, the hostility of the masses was most intense. Cash observes that "The Yankee was to retire from this thirty year conflict in what amounted to abject defeat.... It was still a world in which the principle of the Old was pre- served virtually intact; a world in which the Negro was still, 'mud-sill' and in which the white man, any white man, was in some sense a master."" 'Paul Hayworth, The Hayes- Tilden Disputed Election (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill & Co., 1906), 285-286. 1'Paul Buck, Back to Reunion (Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1937), 100-101. "W. J. Cash, The Mind of the South (New York: Doubleday & Co., 1941), 117. THE WASHINGTON-DUBOIS CONTROVERSY 135 The economic conditions in the South were such that all three classes were at odds. The only things they had in com- mon were poverty and depravity. Reconstruction measures had reduced the land of the Gentry who became, in fact, a land- holding class without capital. The other class of whites, worse off because they had no direct entre for getting loans from the North, and who were the eternal enemy of the Negro, had neither the money nor the political power at the time to fight the Gentry. But they did have more land they they had before the war. Thus the Negroes, always close to the Gentry, allied themselves with that class who tended to exploit him and the poor whites. This exploitation was to have a telling effect on the Ne- gro and on the enmity which developed between the Gentry and the Bourbons. Cash states: "The common whites were de- prived of their former liberties and, in large numbers, brought within the scope of direct exploitation... They (the Gentry) came to use white tenants only through the operation of race loyalty and old paternalism." 12 One of the strangest facets of this study and one which is equally baffling today, is why both the Negro and the poor whites, suffering generally at the hands of the wealthier class, who used both groups to keep itself in power and pitted one against the other to such an extent that hatred multiplied, could not then and cannot now find common and mutual ground for their own betterment. Perhaps it is well to take a closer look at the Negro and the poor whites of that period, for it is their animosities, fed and nurtured by poverty and ignorance on the part of both, a fact which Washington seems to appreciate and understand far better than DuBois, which led to the schism. The South had a few, if any, public schools for the gen- eral use of Negroes or poor whites. The Gentry believed in light taxation and private education for their children. As a result, both the Negro and the poor white were very nearly illiterate, and thus were easier to exploit. Therefore, it was easier to fan the fires of race hate and intolerance between them. Whatever one may say about the carpetbag rule in the South, one must admit that it did give direction to the estab- lishment of public schools for Negroes and whites. Apologists lbid., pp. 172-173. It must be pointed out that Cash himself, a southerner from South Carolina, was of this poorer class, and may indeed be a bit biased. 136 HISTORY OF EDUCATION JOURNAL for the South do not always want to admit this fact, but, for example, Florida's public school system was begun in 1874 under carpetbag rule, with Jonathan Gibbs, a man of color, serving as state superintendent. Buck observes that "It seems beyond a doubt that in including the principle of the common school safely in the state constitutions, the carpetbag govern- ments established a principle which henceforth remained un- assailable." 13 The period from 1880 to 1890, when the Gentry lost po- litical control of the South, was one of utmost significance, if for no other reason than the fact that the real leaders, the better class of whites, really made an effort to make the South in fact a part of the nation. Led by such men as Wade Hamp- ton, George Washington Cable, Sidney Lanier, Woodrow Wil- son, Joel Chandler Harris, Henry Grady, Henry Q.C.Lamar, Alexander Stephens, Tom Watson and others in each state, many gains were made toward easing the tensions. It was dur- ing this period that Negro education received its greatest im- petus from the South as well as the North. It appeared as if the Negro was indeed to be accepted. Now this class with whom Washngton, not DuBois, was in closest contact, was moderate in its approach to the pro- blem. It did not propose to accept the Negro as an equal, but it did insist that he be given an opportunity to prove himself as a citizen. It insisted upon fair treatment at the polls and in general intercourse between the races. These were the better educated leaders, who felt that in time the Negro would prove himself as a citizen. Wade Hampton, in 1885, expressed the general view of this group, which, it must be admitted, was fast losing its influence as a political and economic factor in the South. "The Negro belongs to a subordinate role, but he need not be ostracized. He is inferior, but that does not fol- low that he should be segregated or publicly humiliated. Ne- gro degradation is not a necessary corollary of white supre- macy." 14 This was paternalistic, and there was no way possible for DuBois to accept such a statement of that sort, even if it were made during a political campaign. Nevertheless, the Ne- gro became the focal point in the political battle throughout the "SBuck, op. cit., pp. 163-164. "Quoted in C. Vann Woodward, The Strange Case of Jim-Crow (New York: Oxford University Press, 1955), 30-31. THE WASHINGTON-DUBOIS CONTROVERSY 137 South, with the Bourbons, using intimidation and even resort- ing to overt acts of violence, greatly disapproved by the Gen- try, who were powerless to stop them. The Ku Klux Klan, or- ganized in 1867 at Pulaski, Tennessee, became so violent that General Nathan Bedford Forrest, its first national head, re- signed and ordered it dissolved. It did disappear for a while, but was revived on a local level by the Bourbon demagogues, who saw in the disfranchisement of the Negro their ascent to power and the double elimination of the twin objects of their venom at the time, the aristocratic Gentry and the Negro. The Gentry had had their day and were overthrown by this poorer, less educated class which was to isolate the South from the rest of the nation for nearly fifty years. From this class came Benjamin "Pitchfork Ben" Tillman of South Caro- lina, who walked out of the Democratic National Convention in 1936 when a Negro offered prayer; Hoke Smith of Georgia, who opened the way for the Talmadges, father and son; W. K. Vardaman of Mississippi, whose place was taken by Theodore Gilmore Bilbo; and now James Eastlund. There is comfort, however, in the fact that although still potent, this group is small and fast disappearing. During the first decade of power, from 1890 to 1900, 1,111 Negroes were lynched in the South.15 By legal and ex- tra-legal methods, the Boubons had all but nullified whatever gains had been made by the Negro since Appomattox. It was during the middle of this decade that Washington made his now famous "Atlanta Compromise" address, which was to provide the fuel for.the Washington-DuBois controversy. The Bourbons were in the saddle, but the gentry were not yet through. Largely through the efforts of Grady, who had gone north to preach the gospel of nationalism, a new South sought full partnership in the nation as an equal. In an impas- sioned speech at Boston, he pleaded for financial aid in terms of investments in a section which had an abundance of labor and all the land and resources necessary to be fully a part of the growing industrialism which was enveloping the North. He did much to convince the North that the South was indeed willing and ready to embrace this new industrial movement, and invited investors to come to Atlanta to the exposition, to iSCash, op. cit., p. 301. 138 HISTORY OF EDUCATION JOURNAL be held in 1895. His untimely death was a blow to the nation and the South. especially to the moderate whites and the Ne- gro. The Atlanta Exposition, at which President Grover Cleveland was to make the principal address, was to be the biggest event in the New South. And in order to offset the onus of the tirades made against the betterment of racial goodwill, as well as to have the top spokesman for the cause of the Ne- gro have a part, Governor Bullock of Georgia invited Wash- ington to speak. The move was kept secret until the last pos- sible moment, lest the Bourbons try to stop it, as he was not sure what the reaction would be to a Negro addressing a white audience. Washington was barely thirty-six years old when he was nervously introduced by Governor Bullock as a true repre- sentative of "Negro enterprise and Negro civilization." It is reliably reported that the Governor paced the floor where he and Washington waited in the anteroom next to the platform. No mention was made of what Washington was to say, but there was some apprehension as to how his message would be re- ceived by both Negroes and the whites. The excerpts from Washington's address, which will be quoted in broken parts so as to give a closer picture of his position in this controversy, are taken from the full text as found in his monumental book, Up From Slavery. Looking at the position made by the Bourbons that the Negro was a drain on the South, he said: "One-third of the population is of the Negro race. No enterprise seeking the material, civil or moral welfare of this section can disregard this element of our population and reach the highest success. If the South goes, it must carry the Negro with it; if it falls, it must fall with the Negro." He chided those Negroes and whites who had given the Negro positions of rulership in the government whenthe Negro was hardly able to read. "Ignorant and inexperienced, is it not strange that in the first few years of our new life we began at the top instead of the bottom; that a seat in Congress or the state legislature was more sought than real estate and indus- trial skill; that the political convention of stump speaking had more attraction than starting a dairy farm or a truck farm." This section of Washington's speech was interpreted by the Bourbons and by many Negroes, including DuBois, to mean THE WASHINGTON-DUBOIS CONTROVERSY 139 that he was taking the Negro out of politics and had accepted the disenfranchisement of the Negro at this time. DuBois, while not going so far as to say Washington had accepted this stand, does accuse him of soft-pedaling the political rights and aspirations of Negroes. 16 At the time of Washington's speech, there was a move on foot, supported by many well-thinking whites and Negroes, that the best thing for the Negro was deportation. DuBois was not among this group. This move had and had had earlier some support in congressional circles. Indeed, Lincoln and Johnson both seriously discussed this possible move; the former even had sent some Negroes to Haiti, while the latter asked for a report as to the cost of transporting millions there. 17 This move reached great proportions under the leadership of Mar- cus Garvey at the turn of the century, when his "Back to Afri- ca Movement" resulted in many Negroes going back "Home". 18 However, through the efforts of Washington and DuBois and others, it was stopped cold and did not arise again until immediately after World War I, when Ku Klux Klanism became rampant. To this group, Washington said: "To those of my race who depend upon bettering their conditions in foreign lands, or underestimate the importance of cultivating favorable rela- tions with the Southern white man... I would say 'Cast down your bucket' where you are-cast it down in making friends in every manly way of the peoples of all races by whom you are surrounded. Cast it down in agriculture, mechanics, in com- merce, in domestic service and in the professions." This phase of the speech was to bring content to the Bourbons, who left out his reference to the professions and interpreted it to mean that the Negro was to have only those jobs at the bottom. It is this phase, also, which DuBois attack- ed with unremitting vehemence in his program of "The Tal- ented Tenth", about which we will have more to say later. Recognizing, but lightly touching, the evils being perpe- trated in the South against the Negro, and recognizing the slow 1"W. E. B. DuBois, The Souls of the Black Folk (Chicago: A. C. McLung & Co., 1903), 53. 1tW. E. B. Dubois, Black Reconstruction (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1937), 267. 18Roi Ottley, New World A-Comin' (Boston: Little, Brown, 1943), 66-72. 140 HISTORY OF EDUCATION JOURNAL progress being accorded him in the North at that time, es- pecially in the newly forming labor movement, Washington joined the industrial leaders of both sections in their oppos- tion to the labor movement and asked the Negro, "to bear in mind that whatever sins the South may be called upon to bear, when it comes to business, pure and simple, it is in the South that the Negro is given a man's chance in the commercial world." The labor unions had not generally accepted Negroes then, partly because the American Federation of Labor was a union of craft unions and there were few skilled Negro work- ers, and partly because of racial discrimination. The big in- dustrialists in the North then (and many in the South now) op- posed the labor movement. Washington urged these leaders to use Negro laborers. His severest critics attack this posi- tion, holding that he did not fully comprehend the implications of the part labor as a mass movement was to play in indus- trialism, which was turning away from rugged individual- ism.9 It is said, not without some foundation, that he approv- ed the use of Negroes as strikebreakers. Washington closed his address by touching on the ques- tion which was to make his utterance a subject of great debate in the future, but which at that time was a soothing balm to those concerned with social equality. "In all things that are purely social, we (the Negroes) can be as separate as the fin- gers, yet as one hand in all things essential to mutual pro- gress. .. .The opportunity to earn a dollar just now is infinitely worth more than the opportunity to spend it at an opera house."20 The Washington Compromise, honorably and seriously made, was hailed in the North and in the South by leaders of all shades of opinion. The North saw in it a workable solution to what was a vexatious problem which would lead to the quicker development of the nation and to the fulfillment of that dream, not yet realized but well on its way, of a nation "indivisible." This was indeed a New South, and now the in- 1'John H. Franklin, From Slavery to Freedom (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1947), 389. 20Booker T. Washington, Up from Slavery (Garden City, New York, 1900). The speech is quoted in this book. It is not given in full in this arti- cle. THE WASHINGTON-DUBOIS CONTROVERSY 141 dustrialists could go full speed ahead with their program, un- hindered by the threat of racial strife. The Gentry read in Washington's speech a program which would bring the South fully back into the nation, back to economic solvency and back to political importance, with the Negro playing a not inconsiderable role. Indeed, the continued enfranchisement of the Negro was of inestimable importance if the Gentry were to keep their position--a position which they were fast losing, if they had not already lost it. The Negroes generally, DuBois included, saw in the Compromise a ray of hope it if were heeded. DuBois, at the time a sociology professor at Atlanta University, observed that "Here might be the basis of a real settlement between the white and the blacks in the South, if the South opened to the Negro the doors of economic opportunity and the Negroes of the South cooperated with the South in political sympathy.,"2 The Bourbons looked at it differently. They saw in the speech a possible wedge to break the hold of the Gentry through the complete disfranchisement of the Negro. Bol- stered by the Plessey vs. Ferguson Decision, in which the United States Supreme Court enunciated the famous "separate but equal" doctrine in 1896, they made short work of any attempt to insure civil rights for the Negroes. The position of the Bourbons was further strengthened by the Supreme Court two years later in the Williams vs. Mississippi Case, in which the Mississippi plan for the use of the "white primary" was validated (not to be reversed until the Gaines vs. Texas Case of 1942). Although the plan was worked out in Mississippi, it was under Tillman that South Carolina was actually the first to use the plan in 1896, one year after the "Atlanta Compromise." By 1915 it was in use in eleven other states. However, Washington's address was well received; it made him indeed the spokesman for the Negro and the New South on racial matters; and it is at this point that the envy of DuBois was kindled. The speech also kindled the enmity of many whites, especially the Bourbons, who did not look kindly on the fact that here was a Negro who was to advise with the presidents and with leading industrialists on problems of the South, 21 uBois, Dusk of Dawn, p. 55. 142 HISTORY OF EDUCATION JOURNAL It is worth noting some of the observations of the nation- al press in regard to this address at that time. The Atlanta Constitution the next day hailed it "a platform upon which blacks and whites can stand with full justice to each other." 22 The New York World editorially commented that "a Negro Moses stood before a great audience of white people and de- livered an address that marks a new epoch in the history of the New South."23 The Boston Transcript declared that the address "seemed to have dwarfed all other procedings. . .the sensation it has created in the press, North and South has nev- er been equalled.''24 Let us now turn to the position advanced by DuBois. First of all, he was and is one of the most scholarly men in America. He has had two or three careers, and has had the opportunity to revise and reappraise his position in the light of present conditions. But we are concerned primarily here with his theory of the Talented Tenth, postulated in 1898. This theory later led to the Niagara Movement of 1905, which form- ed the basis for the organization of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People in 1909, and culmin- ated in the publication of The Crisis, the organ of that organi- zation, in 1910. DuBois a social scientist, held that there are in all races individuals who have exceptional abilities, and that the real and only differences between races are due mainly to en- vironment and opportunity. From these exceptional persons, who should be trained in the arts and sciences, should come the leaders of the Negro race. "I believed in the higher edu- cation of a Talented Tenth, who through their knowledge of modern culture could guide the American Negro into higher civilization.. .a leadership which could be trusted to bring this group into self-realization and to the highest cultural possibil- ities."25 DuBois feared and did not trust the white man to do this, and held that the Negro should be trained at all levels and in whatever lines his capacity would follow. He held that, in or- der to do this, special colleges and universities, staffed by 22The Atlanta Constitution, September 18, 1895. The New York World, September 18, 1895. 24The Boston Transcript, September 20, 1895. asDuBois, The Dusk of Dawn, p. 70. THE WASHINGTON-DUBOIS CONTROVERSY 143 college-trained Negroes, should be set up to instruct this Tal- ented Tenth. As a starting point, he insisted "The Negro in conscience [feel] bound to ask three things [now]: First, the right to vote; second, civic equality and third, the education of youth according to ability."t26 It will be noted that both Washington, while he did not share DuBois' mistrust of the better whites, and DuBois made no mention of social equality at that time. Both implied in their positions that such was a personal matter, and their main difference was in approach rather than ends. Neither one opposed the basic educational views of the other, for Washing- ton, who sent his daughter to college, asked in the Atlanta Compromise that Negroes enter the "professions". DuBois wanted only those of exceptional talent to enter college. Nei- ther expected full acceptance of the Negro to come immedi- ately. At this point, it would seem to an impartial observer, looking over the record after nearly fifty years, that one must look elsewhere for the real reasons for the controversy. In- deed, the masses of Negroes, with a background of little or no formal training, did need to start at the bottom, as Washing- ton believed; but that did not imply that they should have to remain there. Certainly there were some, though not many at that time, who should have been trained in the higher branches of knowledge; but it did not follow that leaders necessarily have to come from such a class. There were many outstand- ing leaders who came up from the ranks without attending col- lege. Among these was Washington. In developing his theory of the Talented Tenth, DuBois delivered a series of lectures, one of which was published as: "Of Mr. Washington and Others." In it he accused Washington personally. Recognizing the serious problems of the South and and much that was good in the Atlanta Compromise, he ob- jected to "indiscriminate flattery" and to what he implied was a "continually belittling and ridiculing themselves." The way to gain their just rights, said DuBois "is not be voluntarily throwing them away and insisting that they do not want them." Instead Negroes must demand them constantly. Mr. Washing- ton's propaganda," he said, left the impression: "First, that the South is justified in its present attitude toward the Negro 26DuBois, The Souls of Black Folk, p. 53. 144 HISTORY OF EDUCATION JOURNAL because of the Negroes' degradation; secondly, that the prime cause of the Negro's failure to rise more quickly is his wrong education in the past; and thirdly, that his future depends pri- marily on his own efforts." Such ideas, declared DuBois, were "dangerous half-truth[s]."27 Except for the personal attack on Washington, the tenets of DuBois' position were not to be seriously disputed. It must be admitted that DuBois had set a clear road. However, he was hardly justified in his charges that Washington had taken the Negro out of politics or that he was belittling and ridiculing the Negro. There were factors fomenting in the South, winked at, if not condoned by the North, which were to drive Washington further to the right and DuBois to the left. These were the clash between the Bourbons and the Gentry over political con- trol of the South and the philanthropic zeal of the North and the South in regard to educating the Negro. The Gentry bitterly opposed the Mississippi Plan, al- ready touched upon. It was a losing battle, but they even made public statements against it. At the Louisana State Conven- tion in 1898, Washington entered the political area publicly for the first time and urged that body not to accept the "white primary." He said, "The Negro does not object to an educa- tional or property test; only let the test fall equally on black and white." Washington entered the Georgia Convention the following year, when Tom Watson, the great southern Populist leader, made a final plea for Negro suffrage before Hoke Smith took over. While it appears that Washington was not enthusiastic about populism, he wrote many letters to leading figures in the State, Negro and white, asking them to defeat the Missis- sippi Plan. His lack of response from the Negroes caused him to comment in a private letter to one of his friends that "I am disappointed with the Coloured people of Georgia. I have been corresponding with the leaders but cannot stir up a single col- oured man to take the lead in trying to head off this plan."29 DuBois was in Georgia at this time; he was certainly a leader. Although it cannot be determined whether or not Washington 27Ibid., pp. 54-55. C. Vann Woodward, Origins of the New South, 337. 29Ibid., p. 343. THE WASHINGTON-DUBOIS CONTROVERSY 145 wrote him, DuBois does not mention such a letter. He does say, however, that Washington did do a "little" something about the situation in Louisiana and Georgia, which, it would seem, would make him hardly guilty of "voluntarily" taking the Negro out of politics. Although these were the last public utterances Washington made on the political situation, it is well to note that he made no public blast at the failure of the Negro leaders of Georgia to assist in stopping, if possible, the Mississippi Plan. He was the kind of leader who was most effective in working behind closed doors. The efforts of the Bourbons was so complete and relent- less that Washington took the position that the less said the better. The Bourbons were taking advantage of any and all utterances and statements made by Negroes and moderate whites and using them for all they were worth. For example, an editorial in the Charleston News and Courier attempted to reduce the separate but equal thesis to an absurdity, sugges- ing the extent to which such a doctrine might lead. The Bour- bons took up the suggestions and turned them into serious pro- positions. In the next few years every one of the moves was put into effect in varying forms in all of the states, with the exception of separate counties for Negroes. (As recently as 1956 two cities, one in Florida and one in Alabama, passed resolutions to set up separate counties.) After the South had become almost completely segregated, Washington retired from any frontal public attack on the situation and seemed to recognize, if not accept, segregation as an accomplished fact. DuBois severely criticized this position, as he held that such issues should be ever kept before the public. To keep quiet, he argued, was an act of acceptance. DuBois is very pointed in his criticism of Washington for giving opinions relative to political matters and even ac- cuses him of advising philanthropists against supporting higher education for Negroes. (If the latter charge is true, Washing- ton was a failure; for Carnegie, Rockefeller, Guggenheim, Duke, Slater, Peabody, Phelps and Stokes must then have turned a deaf ear to his advice.) DuBois states: "After a time almost no Negro institution could collect funds without the recommendation or acquiescence of Mr. Washington. Few political appointments were made anywhere in the U.S. (among Negroes) without his consent."" S0DuBois, The Dusk of Dawn, p. 73. 146 HISTORY OF EDUCATION JOURNAL DuBois went even further, claiming that Washington had created a "machine" which sought to keep him impervious to attack by others. He charged that this "machine," supported by philanthropists, even bought the Negro press, so that Wash- ington and his efforts would be ever kept before the public. He alleged that Washington had "ghost" writers to make out his speeches. Neither of these charges could be documented, but they do shown that bitterness had turned to acrimony. Sensing the discord that was developing among Negroes and the use to which the Bourbons were putting this controver- sy, there came from the philanthropic element a move to get Washington and DuBois together to stop public bickering. A committee met with Du Bois and tried to interest him in join- ing Washington at Tuskegee. DuBois and Washington did meet to discuss the matter in 1904. This was not the first contact the two men had had. DuBois had applied for a position at Tuskegee earlier, but had accepted the position at Atlanta Uni- versity before hearing from Washington who was favorably impressed with DuBois at that time. There is no direct record of the two meetings of the men in 1904, although in the works of both there are comments from which some conclusions can be drawn. DuBois does mention the meetings in a book pub- lished forty years later. Of the last meeting, he wrote: "I got no clear understanding of just what I was to do. There ensued long delays, and it seemed to me I wanted to make my position clear."'31He went on to attack Washington's ideas in similar vein to those attacks mentioned earlier. Washington made no public statement directly, but he did attack DuBois by indirection. While not calling any names, he harpooned the "intellectuals" for believing that because they were born in the North and were college graduates from northern colleges and universities and were generally living in the North, that the southerner was incapable of accepting leadership in racial matters. He delivered a scathing attack on their opposition to attempts to work out the problems with the white people of the South. In particular, he attacked the belief that the Negro would remain "uncompromising" and maintain "relentless antagonism to the South" until all injus- tices were removed. "The truth is," said Washington, "I sus- pect. . . they live too much in the past. They know books, but Sl3bid., pp. 79-80. THE WASHING TON-DUBOIS CONTROVERSY 147 they know almost nothing about the Negro," especially the needs of the Negro in the South. 32 Needless to say, DuBois and Washington were never to get together to work as a team, although except for general statements, the attack on Washington was lessened and event- ually stopped. It gave him contact with the whites who really were not concerned with civil rights for Negroes. This is hardly true, but it is worth looking into. Having seen the Negro all but completely disfranchised by the use of the white primary and made a second class cit- izen by the "separate but equal" doctrine, the liberal element from the North and the moderates of the South made a move which was to bring DuBois and Washington to the real parting of the ways but which was to contribute to a climate of opinion which today may lead to the elevation of Negroes to first class citizenship, even in the South. That was the education through philanthropy. While no attempt will be made here to recount in any detail the monumental effort put forth in this regard, a general statement is necessary to focus attention on the final break between Washington and DuBois and to show how the breach was healed in private. Men of wealth began to pour millions of dollars into southern education, Negro and white, for all types of schools and colleges-those for the vocations and those for the "Tal- ented Tenth." Many individuals likewise contributed. It is safe to say that without this impetus, southern education could hardly have got moving, and the fate of the Negro would have been bad indeed. It is true that these funds and donors made no attempt to dictate the policies of the South in regard to po- litics and civil rights, but they did insist that states, if they used such funds, must make honest efforts to educate the Ne- gro. The philanthropy of these individuals, hardheaded bus- iness men who made their millions through ingenuity and com- petition, was more than charity. It was purposeful giving, mo- tivated by their sense of the trusteeship of wealth. Contacts had to be made with the leading men of the South, Negro and white. From whom among the Negroes would they seek advice? Certainly not DuBois; although they recognized the great work 3Booker T. Washington, My Larger Education (New York: Double- day & Page, 1911), 112, 127. 148 HISTORY OF EDUCATION JOURNAL he was doing, they knew that his position was less acceptable to the Bourbons than was Washington's. It was less a question of whether they accented vocational education as against col- lege education, more a question of having someone in the South who could talk with both moderates and Bourbons. (It might be noted that their funds were used for Atlanta University, Morehouse, Spellman and Bennett for women, and Fisk, to name a few colleges which were offering courses designed to train the "Talented Tenth.") The philanthropists, it would seem, felt that time would dissipate prejudices through educa- tion, and the less said on the matter the better in the long run. It was the influence Washington had with philanthropists and moderates and indeed with presidents that concerned Du- Bois. William McKinley came to visit Tuskegee. Washington was to dine with Theodore Roosevelt-an incident which infur- iated the Bourbons and contributed greatly to the solidarity of the Democratic Party in the South. (One southerner is re- ported to have said, "The Republicans under Lincoln gave the Nigra political equality and now under Teddy Roosevelt want to give him social equality.") William Howard Taft had con- ferences with Washington. None of this pleased DuBois or many Negroes who deprecated Washington's lack of a college education. Extremest attacks by Bourbons on all those who dared question their actions finally chased DuBois from his chair at Atlanta University and completely silenced Washing- ton. However, the attacks gained support and sympathyfor the cause of the Negro generally. Moreover, it brought DuBois and Washington closer together. A look at these events is revealing. Dr. Andrew Sledd, a professor at Emory College, near Atlanta, Georgia, pub- lished an article deploring lynching and Jim-Crowism; he was fired. Later he was hired by the University of Florida where he eventually became president. John Spencer Bassett, who was to gain fame as an historian, was severely criticized for publishing in the Atlantic Monthly the comment that next to Robert E. Lee, Washington was the greatest man to come out of the South in a century. Although the Board of Directors of Trinity College, now Duke University, did not fire Bassett, he found southern hospitality to be such that he left. Enoch Banks, a native Georgian, was dismissed from the University of Flo- rida in 1911 for saying in a magazine that the North was rela- tively right and the South relatively wrong in the Civil War.A3 3sCash, op. cit., pp. 324-325. THE WASHINGTON-DUBOIS CONTROVERSY 149 It had become wrong to dissent in public in the South. With this as a backdrop and with the Atlanta riots of 1905 echoing in his ear, DuBois severed his relations with Atlanta University. He went to Buffalo, New York, where he and twenty- eight others organized the Niagara Movement. It was formal- ly incorporated in Washington, D. C. in 1906 with an eight-point program. Generally, these points called for free speech and press, manhood suffrage, dignity of labor, abolition of distinc- tions based on race, and the right of all men to receive any type of education and training their abilities would permit. It called on the Federal Government to see that such a program was carried out. 34 The Niagara Movement created quite a sensation in 1906 when close to one hundred members marched barefooted in the streets of Harper's Ferry, Virginia, on their way to the place where John Brown had made his raid. This movement, while it aroused many Negroes to the acuteness of the race problem, did not attract any whites to its membership. In 1908 an incident in Springfield, Illinois focused atten- tion on just how bad race relations really were. A Negro was lynched there and one of his kin came to New York and gave some details to a group of liberal whites and Negroes. A com- mittee was formed of both races, with DuBois as a member, out of which was formed the National Association for the Ad- vancement of Colored People in 1909. DuBois was named di- rector of publication and research. Recognizing the contributions of both DuBois and Wash- ington and taking note of the position of the Negro both South and North, it was decided that DuBois wasto continue his "re- search" in the safer confines of the North and that he refrain from engaging in any personal attacks upon Washington. It seemed that the NAACP considered the better part of valor not to have the two leading Negroes feuding with each other over a matter, the end results of which both were in full agree- ment. Those closest to both DuBois and Washington knew that both wanted the best for their race and that both could harm their cause by their differences. Thus the verbal controver- sy ended, as far as the public knew. 3DuBois, Dusk of Dawn, pp. 88-89. 150 HISTORY OF EDUCATION JOURNAL It would seem that many of the charges and counter char- ges attributed to both men were without real foundation. Who could deny that the basic educational needs of the Negro then, and possibly now, lay in vocational pursuits? Who could deny that there was then and is now a need for Negroes trained in the professions, the sciences, and the arts? Washington did not op- pose the latter nor DuBois the former. Who can deny that the Negro then was not qualified to hold offices of government gen- erally, but that there was no reason to deny him the right to vote? Who could deny that there was then and is now a need for men who can get along with all the elements in the population as well as those who can and will spell out boldly the true road which leads to citizenship and justice for all? Washington be- lieved this.35 DuBois believed this. Then what of the controversy itself? There are no records, which could be found here, in the absence of their personal papers, to show that after the NAACP was formed there were any attacks made by either man on the other. It is not known, for example, whether Washington ever joined that organ- ization. But of his approval of it, we are certain. In 1911 he asked publicly for its support, and from then until he died he worked with all organizations which sought to improve relations between the races. True American that he was, he took no part in those extreme movements which sought to take the Negro from the United States. Not only did he support the NAACP, but he worked even harder with the National Urban League, feeling that the latter, which had more support in the South, would tend to ease the rather acute situation there. 36 People today, especially many youthful Negroes, judging the gains being presently made by the Negro throughout the na- tion and especially in the South, tend to besmirch or at least criticize some aspects of Washington's position. But they for- get that their judgment is based on conditions in Mid-Twentieth Century United States. Two generations and two global wars have come and gone; there are today better educated whites and Negroes who are more tolerant of each other. Even DuBois ad- mits that much of the opposition to Washington was "envy". 3sFranklin, op. cit., p. 390. MSamuel Spencer, Booker T. Washington and the Negro's Place in American Life (Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1955), 177. THE WASHINGTON-DUBOIS CONTROVERSY 151 Admittedly, Washington did hedge here and there and ac- cepted the half loaf, not as a permanent solution as some wanted to believe, but as a means toward which the whole loaf could be obtained later on. To criticize this move is not only baseless, but is to assume that Washington had a choice in the matter. It was just as simple as this--the half loaf or nothing. He did what he had to do at the time, what was possible for him to do under the circumstances, and did it with utmost skill and diplomacy. His work was and is indeed as much responsible as that of any- one else for the break in the racial clouds. Nor is DuBois, who today is subjected to much adverse criticism, to be censured for his basic position then. His ef- forts did kindle and quicken the Negro to a realization of his la- tent possibilities. It was not a tragedy, it would seem, that such a controversy existed; for the efforts of both men prove that there was then and is now a need for the tolerant respect of di- vergent opinions on the same problem; that there was then and is now a need for both types of leaders. One must wonder if there is today such a balance of leadership among Negroes on the means of achieving full recognition and acceptance as the type and class of citizen that both Washington and DuBois en- visioned and for whom they worked. Looking back over the controversy and judging it by the time of its setting and placing its implications on the present racial situation, these conclusions seem inescapable: 1. The controversy was more personal than ideological, with the weight of pettiness falling far more heavily on DuBois and his group than on Washington and his group. The end results tended to retard rather than aid the problem of the South. 2. Both men were sincere in their efforts, but tended to view the problem in too narrow a circle, and were far more optim- istic about its immediate improvement than conditions of the times warranted. 3. Washington was far more realistic in his approach to the immediate needs of the Negro and in dealing with the people who had to be handled in order to bring about this improve- ment. 4. The breach, though considered wide and sharp, revealed that best results in social, racial, and economic matters cannot be obtained through rushing and that the basic tenets of the American Creed are so deeply ingrained in the conscience of 152 HISTORY OF EDUCATION JOURNAL the nation that the cause of justice and fair play will inevit- ably come to the deserving. 5. The sincerity of the efforts of both Washington and DuBois proved to the Negro in general and the nation at large that, given time and opportunity, Negroes could and would prove themselves worthy of the best there is in America. 6. The publicity given to their differences, while it retarded racial progress somewhat in the South, did bring the Negro problem into sharper focus nationally, thereby helping to hasten the creation of the present climate of public opinion so favorable to the improvement of conditions of all minori- ties. 7. Finally, it revealed that there were and are many persons of good will throughout the nation who believe in fair play. The Washington-DuBois Controversy did help and is helping to provide conditions leading to improved race relations. CONTRIBUTORS TO THIS ISSUE Edgar B. Wesley is visiting professor of the history of education at the University of Michigan. C. Spenser Poxpey is an administrator in the public schools in Delray Beach, Florida.