Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T20:29:27.673Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Eisenhower Administration and the Desegregation of Washington, D.C.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 October 2011

Michael S. Mayer
Michael S. Mayer
Affiliation:
University of Montana
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Liberal historians have traditionally played down or neglected the achievements of the Eisenhower administration in the area of civil rights. At the same time, they have overstated the contributions of liberal Democrats and understated the role congressional Democrats played in obstructing civil rights in the 1950s. The liberal bias of most historians has led to a distorted picture of the political dynamics affecting the struggle for black equality. The fact is that the Democrats, as a party, were not so liberal in the 1950s as they have often been portrayed, and the Republican party was not so conservative. The positions of the parties in fact were not so clear-cut as they became in the next decade. Neither party forcefully and openly advocated full equality for blacks; both reflected the dominant racism of white society. Granting that, however, the Eisenhower administration was not the obstructionist barrier to civil rights that historians have often portrayed.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Policy History , Volume 3 , Issue 1 , January 1991 , pp. 24 - 41
Copyright
Copyright © The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA. 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1. Modern liberal historiography is not uncritical of Kennedy and Truman, hut it often strains to put the best possible construction on these presidents’ modest records on civil rights. For example, Burner's, DavidJohn F. Kennedy and a New Generation (Glenview, Ill., 1988Google Scholar) acknowledges the weakness of Kennedy's commitment to civil rights and several of Kennedy's failings in this area. It does not mention, however, Kennedy's reaction to the Freedom Rides. Preoccupied with his upcoming meeting with Krushchev, Kennedy told Harris Wofford: “Tell them to call it off. Stop them.” See Schlesinger, Arthur Jr, Robert Kennedy and His Times (Boston, 1978), 295.Google ScholarParmet's, Herbert S.JFK: The Presidency of John F. Kennedy (New York, 1983)Google Scholar, while not uncritical, is still more sympathetic than Burner's treatment. While Parmet lauds Kennedy's appointment of Thurgood Marshall to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals (256–57), his account does not contain a single word about Kennedy's disastrous appointments to the federal judiciary in the South. William Harold Cox, Robert Elliott, Clarence Allgood, and E. Gordon West were out-and-out segregationists.

With respect to Truman, Hamby, Alonzo, in Liberalism and Its Challengers: F.D.R. to Reagan (New York, 1985)Google Scholar, mentions the amicus curiae briefs filed by the government in several civil rights cases. By implication, he gives Truman credit for the actions and writes that the briefs threw “the considerable moral and political weight of the executive branch behind the assertion that the old ‘separate but equal’ doctrine should be overturned” (67). First, Truman deserves little credit for the briefs, his White House impeded efforts of the Justice Department to intervene. See Kluger, Richard, Simple Justice (New York, 1976), 558.Google Scholar Second, until Brown v. Board of Education, the government's briefs did not attack segregation per se.

Along similar lines, Ferrell's, RobertHarry S. Truman and the Modern American Presidency (Boston, 1983Google Scholar) mentions Truman's altercation with Adam Clayton Powell over the DAR's refusal to permit Hazel Scott to perform in Constitution Hall and Bess Truman's subsequent attendance at a tea the DAR gave in her honor. Ferrell does not mention, however, that Truman railed against Powell at a staff meeting and referred to him as a “damn nigger preacher” (Diary of Eben Ayers, 13 October 1945, Papers of Eben Ayers, Harry S. Truman Library, Independence, Missouri). Ferrell also neglects to mention that Truman never again invited Powell to the the White House. Hamby's, Beyond the New Deal: Harry S. Truman and American Liberalism (New York, 1973Google Scholar) does not even mention the incident. In spite of evidence in Ayers's diary, neither Ferrell nor Hamby refers to Truman's apparently regular use of the term “nigger” in private.

Ferrell and Hamby also give an unduly favorable impression of Truman's role in desegregating the armed forces. Truman issued E.O. 9981 only after southern delegates walked out of the Democratic convention, leaving Truman to mend somewhat damaged ties with northern liberals; Truman and his managers had opposed the strong civil rights plank Hubert Humphrey and the liberals pushed through. Moreover, Truman did next to nothing to enforce the order; the exigencies of combat in Korea began the desegregation of the armed services.

2. See Burk, Robert Frederick, The Eisenhower Administration and Black Civil Rights (Knoxville, 1984)Google Scholar, chap. 2–4 and 5; Mayer, Michael S., “Eisenhower's Conditional Crusade: The Eisenhower Administration and Civil Rights, 1954–1957,” Ph.D. diss., Princeton University, 1984Google Scholar, chaps. 1–2 and 3; Schlundt, Ronald Allen, “Civil Rights Policies in the Eisenhower Years,” Ph.D. diss., Rice University, 1973Google Scholar, chaps. 2 and 3; Adams, Sherman, First-Hand Report (New York, 1961), 333–34Google Scholar; Eisenhower, Dwight D., Mandate for Change (Garden City, N.Y., 1963), 234–36Google Scholar; Richardson, Elmo, The Presidency of Dwight D. Eisenhouier (Lawrence, Kan., 1979), 106–7.Google Scholar

3. Eisenhower, Dwight D., Waging Peace (Garden City, N.Y., 1965), 148–49.Google Scholar

4. Green, Constance McLaughlin, The Secret City: A History of Race Relations in the Nation's Capital (Princeton, 1967), 274–98Google Scholar; “Toward the Elimination of Segregation in the Nation's Capital,” Report of the American Friends Service Committee Community Relations Project, Washingtoniana Collection, Discrimination, January—June 1953, Martin Luther King Library, Washington, D.C. (hereafter MLK Lib.); “Laws Enacted by Congress, the Council of the City of Washington and the Legislature of the District of Columbia Relating to Segregation,” report by the Legislative Reference Service of the Library of Congress, Washingtoniana Collection, Discrimination, January-June 1953, MLK Lib.; Derthick, Martha, City Politics in Washington, D.C. (Cambridge, Mass., 1962), 41Google Scholar, 121; Washington Star, 8 February 1953.

5. New York Times, 18 October 1952; Time magazine, 13 October 1952, 23. During the campaign, Eisenhower also said that discrimination against nonwhite foreign visitors in Washington was “a humiliation to this nation” and “the kind of loss we can ill afford in today's world” (New York Times, 18 October 1952). Eisenhower's concern over the foreign-policy implications of segregation in Washington was a major factor behind his determination to end such segregation.

6. Mayer, Michael S., “Regardless of Station, Race, or Calling: Eisenhower and Race,” in Joann, Krieg, ed., Dwight D. Eisenhower: Soldier, President, Statesman (Westport, Conn., 1987), 33–41.Google Scholar

7. Adams, First-Hand Report, 333–34; Merlyn S. Pitzele to Eisenhower, 27 January 1953, and Thomas E. Stephens to Pitzele, 28 January 1953, both in White House Central Files, Official File (hereafter OF) 71-U, Dwight D. Eisenhower Library (hereafter DDEL); Columbia University Oral History Project (hereafter COH) interview with Herbert Brownell, 162.

8. Interview with Maxwell Rabb by Fred Greenstein. 1 thank Professor Greenstein for making the tape available to me.

9. Washington Post, 16 and 18 January 1953; Robert C. Albrook to Eisenhower, 23 December 1952, OF 71, DDEL.

10. Washington Star, 22 January 1953; Washington Post, 23 January and 6 February 1953.

11. Schlundt, “Civil Rights Policies,” 25–26.

12. Adams, First-Hand Report, 333; Washington Post, 26 March and 13 February 1953; Schlundt, “Civil Rights Policies,” 26–27; Derthick, City Politics in Washington, D.C., 41, 58; Bernard M. Shanley to James B. Carey, 6 April 1953, General File (hereafter GF) 124-A-l, 1952–53, DDEL. Burk contends that Spencer was appointed because he contributed heavily to the Republican party. His only apparent source is Derthick, 58, which actually states that Spencer's family “had contributed heavily to the Republican campaign chest.” However, Derthick contains an errata sheet to p. 58, which reads: “The statement that the family of Samuel Spencer contributed heavily to the Republican party is incorrect.” Eisenhower's other appointments were Robert McLaughlin, an Eisenhower supporter and former legislative director of the American Veterans’ Service; David B. Karrick, president of Fidelity Storage Company and owner of considerable real estate in Washington, who also held a law degree; and Mark B. Sullivan, an investment banker.

13. Washington Post, 8 February 1953; Washington Star, 8 February 1953; Neighborhood News (The Official Organ of the Rhode Island Avenue Citizens Association), 21:3 (March 1953): 6–8, Washingtoniana Collection, January-June 1953, MLK Lib.Google Scholar

14. Rose to Adams, 19 January 1952; Charles Willis to Adams, 2 February 1953; Rose to Willis, 2 February 1953; Lois to Willis, 25 February 1953; President's Appointments, Thursday, 12 March 1953; Rose to Eisenhower, 17 March 1953; Rose to Eisenhower, 30 July 1953; all in OF 71-U, DDEL.

15. Green, Secret City, 286–87, 296–97; August Meier and Rudwick, Elliott, CORE: A Study in the Civil Rights Movement (Urbana, 1975), 114Google Scholar; Blum, John Morton, V Was for Victory (New York, 1976), 217–18.Google Scholar

16. D.C. v. John R. Thompson Co., Inc., Criminal No. 99150, Mun. Ct. D.C. (10 July 1950); Green, Secret City, 297; Washington Post, 25 April 1953; Washington Star, 22 January 1953.

17. D.C. v. Thompson, 81 At. 2d 294 (24 May 1951); Green, Secret City, 297; Washington Star, 22 January 1953; New York Times, 1, 2 May 1953.

18. D.C. v. Thompson, 203 F 2d 579 (1953); Green, Secret City, 297; New York Times, 23 January, 1, 2 May 1953; Washington Star, 7 December 1952, 22 January 1953; Washington Post, 23 January 1953. Written by Chief Judge Harold M. Stephens, the majority opinion was joined by Bennett Champ Clark, James M. Proctor, and Wilbur K. Miller. Prettyman concurred in the result only. Charles Fehey wrote a vigorous dissent and was joined by Henry W. Edgerton, David L. Bazelon, and George T. Washington.

19. Washington Post, 23, 28 January 1953; Washington Star, 25 January 1953.

20. Washington Post, 25 April 1953; Washington Star, 10 March 1953; Pittsburgh Courier, 2 May 1953; New York Times, 11, 12, 13 March 1953; Schlundt, “Civil Rights Policies,” 33.

21. Washington Post, 3 May 1953; Washington Times Herald, 3 May 1953; D.C. v. Thompson, 346 US 100 (1953); Green, Secret City, 298; New York Times, 9 June 1953.

22. Green, Secret City, 297–98; Baltimore Afro-American, 19 September 1953; Washington Star, 9 January 1953; Washington Post, 18 October 1953; New York Times, 10 June 1953.

23. Donovan, Robert J., Eisenhower: The Inside Story (New York, 1956), 160; Eisenhower, Mandate for Change, 236; Rose to White House Committee on Human Relations, “Informal Report on Segregation in Washington, D.C,” 2 July 1953, OF 71-U, DDEL; Washington Post, 18 February 1954; Washington Star, 27 December 1953.Google Scholar

24. Rabb interview with Greenstein; COH interview with E. Frederic Morrow, 164–65; Rose to White House Committee on Human Relations, “Informal Report on Segregation in Washington, D.C.,” 2 July 1953; editorial clipping (no source, no date), Papers of Bryce Harlow, Civil Rights, DDEL; Eisenhower, Mandate for Change, 236.

25. Pittsburgh Courier, 3 October 1953; Washington Daily News, 25 September 1953; Washington Post, 18 October 1953.

26. Washington Post, 23, 27 October 1953; Washington Star, 26 October 1953; Policy Order of the District of Columbia Government Regarding Non-Discrimination, 25 November 1953, copies in Washingtoniana Collection, Racial Discrimination, July-December 1953, MLK Lib. and OF 71-U, DDEL. All contracts after 15 November were required to contain the following clause:

In connection with the performance of work under this contract, the contractor agrees not to discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, creed, color, or national origin; and further agrees to insert the forgoing provision in all subcontracts hereunder, except subcontracts for standard commercial supplies or raw materials.

27. Report of the Subcommittee on District ofColumbia Affairs, 15 February 1954 and 14 December 1954; Memorandum for the Files by Joseph R. Houchins, 10 August 1956; L. T. DeLisio to Jacob Seidenberg, 17 August 1956; Report of the Subcommittee on District of Columbia Affairs, 4 December 1956; Memorandum by Seidenberg to Members of the Subcommittee on District ofColumbia Affairs (no date); Seidenberg to Members of the Subcommittee on District ofColumbia Affairs (no date); all in Records of the President's Committee on Government Contracts, Subcommittee on District of Columbia Affairs, Accession Group 62-A-638, File No. 6–5 (hereafter “Records of Committee on Government Contracts, D.C. Subcommittee”), Federal Records Center, Suitland, Maryland; Green, Secret City, 314–15; Burk, The Eisenhower Adminstration and Black Civil Rights, 61–62.

28. Green, Secret City, 258–60; Memorandum for the Files by Robert M. Weston (Public Utilities Commissioner), 8 September 1954, Records of the Committee on Government Contracts, D.C. Subcommittee, Federal Records Center.

29. McNeil, Genna Rae, Groundwork: Charles Hamilton Houston and the Struggle for Civil Rights (Philadelphia, 1983), 171–73; Green, Secret City, 260 Memorandum for the Files by Western, 8 September 1954, Records of the Committee on Government Contracts, D.C. Subcommittee, Federal Records Center; Washington Daily News, 27 August 1953; Washington Times Herald, 29 December 1953.Google Scholar

30. Memorandum for the Files by Weston, 8 September 1954; Statement by Walter J. Bierwagen, Vice-President of the Amalgamated Association of Street, Electric, Railway, and Motor Coach Employees of America, American Federation of Labor, Thursday, 21 January 1954; Memorandum to the Files by Seidenberg, 16 February and 17 February 1954; Report of the Subcommittee on District of Columbia Affairs, 16 March 1955; Memorandum to the Files by Seidenberg, 15 July 1954; Report of the Subcommittee on District of Columbia Affairs, 20 July 1954; Memorandum for the Files by Weston, 9 September 1954; Memorandum by Weston (no date); Memorandum to the Files by Seidenberg, 9 September 1954; Report of the Subcommittee for District of Columbia Affairs, 19 October 1954; Seidenberg to Wolfson, 23 September 1954; Memorandum to the Files, 13 December 1954; Report of the Subcommittee for District of Columbia Affairs, 14 December 1954; Seidenberg to Richard Nixon, 28 December 1954; Memorandum to the Files by Seidenberg, 27 December 1954; Memorandum to the Files by Seidenberg, 13 January 1955; Report of the Subcommittee for District of Columbia Affairs, 18 January and 15 March 1955; Report of the Subcommittee for District of Columbia Affairs, no date (1956); all in Records in Committee on Government Contracts, D.C. Subcommittee, Federal Records Center; Atlanta Daily World, 22 January 1955; Washington Daily News, 27 August 1953; Washington Star, 2 December 1953, 13 January 1955; Washington Times Herald, 29 December 1953; Baltimore Afro-American, 22 January 1955; Pittsburgh Courier, 22 January 1955; Washington Post, 14 January 1955; New York Herald Tribune, 14 January 1955; New York Times, 14 January 1955.

31. Eugene Davidson (president of the D.C. Branch of the NAACP) to Bernard Shanley, 19 February 1953; Shanley to Roger Jones (director of the Bureau of the Budget), 26 February 1953; Shanley to Davidson, 26 February 1953; Byron Allen (vice-president of the D.C. NAACP) to Shanley (no date); Shanley to Allen, 5 May 1953; all in OF 71-U, DDEL; Diary of Bernard Shanley, 24 July and 5 August 1953, copy in possession of Fred Greenstein, Princeton University; Policy Order of the District of Columbia Government Regarding Non-Discrimination, 24 November 1953, Washingtoniana Collection, Discrimination, July-December 1953, MLK Lib.; Washington Post, 18 January and 23, 24 October 1953. The Pittsburgh Courier of 31 October 1953 carried a story about the proposed order, which observed that the commissioners acted only after being “constantly prodded by the Administration.”

32. Washington Post, 24 November 1953; Schlundt, “Civil Rights Policies,” 25.

33. Washington Star, 29 November 1953.

34. D.C. Government Policy Order, 24 November 1953; Washington Star, 29 November 1953; Washington Post, 24 November 1953. Burk states incorrectly that “sections of the Department, including the Jail Division, were not affected at all by the desegregation order” (52).

35. D.C. Government Policy Order, 24 November 1953; Washington Star, 25, 29 November 1953; Washington Post, 24 November 1953; Green, Secret City, 294, 316–17; Schlundt, “Civil Rights Policies,” 27; Memorandum to the Files by Seidenberg, 3 December 1954, Records of the Committee on Government Contracts, D.C. Subcommittee, Federal Records Center.

36. Washington Post, 24 November 1953; Washington Star, 25 November 1953; Pittsburgh Courier, 29 May 1954; Schlundt, “Civil Rights Policies,” 34–35; Burk, The Eisenhower Administration and Black Civil Rights, 53; J. Lee Rankin to Maxwell Rabb, 30 April 1954, GF 124-A-1, 1954(1), DDEL.

37. Washington Daily News, 2 December 1953; Washington Post, 24 November 1953; Burk, The Eisenhower Administration and Black Civil Rights, 64.

38. Schlundt, “Civil Rights Policy,” 28–29; Washington Post, 24 November 1953.

39. Washington Post, 27 March, 28 April, 11 September, and 24 November 1953; Washington Star, 9 May, 5 June, and 11 September 1953; Schlundt, “Civil Rights Policies,” 28–29; Adams, First-Hand Report, 334; Burk, The Eisenhower Administration and Black Civil Rights, 64–65.

40. Derthick, City Politics in Washington, D.C., 122; Burk, The Eisenhower Administration and Black Civil Rights, 62–63.

41. Derthick, City Politics in Washington, D.C., 120.

42. Facts on File, 1953, 213; Rabb interviews with Greenstein.

43. Mayer, Michael S., “With Much Deliberation and Some Speed: Eisenhower and the Brown Decision,” Journal of Southern History 52:1 (February 1986): 43–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Duram, James C., A Moderate Among Extremists: Dvuight D. Eisenhower and the School Desegregation Crisis (Chicago, 1981), 105–42Google Scholar; Burk, The Eisenhower Administration and Black Civil Rights, 151–73.

44. Mayer, Michael S., “The Eisenhower Administration and the Civil Rights Act of 1957,” Congress and the Presidency 16:2 (Autumn 1989): 137–54; Burk, The Eisenhower Administration and Black Civil Rights, 204–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

45. Memorandum, n.d., Administration Series, Little Rock (1) Whitman File, DDEL; Eisenhower to John Stennis, 7 October 1957, OF 142-A-5-A (4), DDEL; Eisenhower to William C. Cramer, 9 October 1957, OF 142-A-5-A (4); Eisenhower to Price Daniel, 3 October 1957, OF 142-A-5A (2), DDEL; Belknap, Michael R., Federal Law and Southern Order: Racial Violence and Constitutional Conflict in the Post-Brown South (Athens, Ga., 1987), 47–49; Duram, A Moderate Among Extremists, 157.Google Scholar

46. Mayer, “Eisenhower's Conditional Crusade,” 491–501; Interview with William Rogers, 21 March 1990; Interview with Lawrence Walsh, 22 March 1990.