THE EMANCIRATION OF A RACE DISSERTATION FOR THE DEGREE OF PhD. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY ANTHONY ~- CLAUDE MARTIN 19731' Illlllllll Wllllllll 3 1293 00997 4936 .____L__4_—___ “W LIBRARY Midligan 59 If. This is to certify that the thesis entitled The Emancipation of a Race presented by Anthony Claude Martin has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph-D- degree in listing.— J R Wmfiz Major professor Date Z3Wflf73 0-7639 University (g —-l'-— ABSTRACT THE EMANCIPATION OF A RACE BEING AN ACCOUNT OF THE CAREER AND IDEAS OF MARCUS MOSIAH GARVEY, TOGETHER WITH AN EXAMINATION OF DIVERS IDEOLOGICAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUGGLES IN WHICH HE BECAME INVOLVED BY Anthony Claude Martin Marcus Mosiah Garvey (1887-1940) occupies a cen- tral position in Black History as the organizer of the largest black nationalist movement ever. The present study examines his ideas and career as it unfolded in the West Indies, the United States, Europe and elsewhere. Examination of Garvey's ideas occupies the first portion of the study after a biographical introduction. Garvey's ideas centered around the principle that race was the primary consideration affecting the destinies of black peOple. They would therefore have to be emancipated on the basis of a platform of "race first." Race first meant striving for an independent black nation in Africa where black peOple could work out their own destinies free from oppressive rule by alien races. It meant also that ,/ . 2— .. _ o . o. . .. .o. . _. .: . .3 t a. . a .. o. C. A. .p .H o. .4 C. o. f. ... . .. a . o . .o. .. p. .n. o. e. .3 .. ... ‘. .. ._ C. . .uu r. .. 3. a. .. .w. o. .. .. S .c S .3 a. C. .u. v. to. v. .H .. .u “I .. .. .1 . . .2 u g 4» .. I l. C .. .2 I. .. .u o. .. 3 .. .. k» 1.. L a. a. .u I 3. .u .. n. .. v. .. o. 3. u ‘3 c. 2. A. .t o. .. .. ..u 3.. . . z a. 6. ... .. .. .. a. .u. .c t .. . .. .( ave (e an o o V o A a . . O b O u A 5 A“ h . fin.» F.» “H.“ u... 3 .. 3 . . .. a. v. 1 3 a. .t i .u 2 . a. . . :. ... a. :m .3 .. .... a. J .2 a. C . a. . .u- . . .3 w. ..: .u . . a. A. .. v. L. .. av .. .2 . . .- 3. t. . \x. .. 3. .. ._ .. a. s. S .. .su If" (I black people would have to be economically self-reliant. Religion, history, art, and every other aspect of the black experience would have to be vigorously infused with a black oriented point of view. And all of this would be facilitated by the possession of communications media under the control of the organization (the Universal Negro Improvement Association). The study shows that Garvey's powerful position in the United States and the world brought him into con- flict with the most powerful governments in the world, together with such disparate groups as the N.A.A.C.P. and the Communist International. Governments saw Garvey as a threat to stability among their black populations. Rival organizations saw Garvey as an ideological challenge to the methods they were proposing to eradicate the Oppres- sion of black people. Against all these powerful forces Garvey was able to prevail until his imprisonment in and deportation from the United States slowly loosened his grip on the black masses in America and elsewhere. THE EMANCIPATION OF A RACE BEING AN ACCOUNT OF THE CAREER AND IDEAS OF MARCUS MOSIAH GARVEY, TOGETHER WITH AN EXAMINATION OF DIVERS IDEOLOGICAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUGGLES IN WHICH HE BECAME INVOLVED BY Anthony Claude Martin A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of History 1973 Copyright by ANTHONY CLAUDE MARTIN 1973 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. INTRODUCTION: MARCUS MOSIAH GARVEY, 1887-1940 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 II. RACE FIRST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 III. NATIONHOOD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 IV. SELF-RELIANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 V. RELIGION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134 VI. HISTORY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 VII. PROPAGANDA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176 VIII. U.S.A. VS. U.N.I.A. . . . . . . . . . . 215 IX. GARVEY AND THE COMMUNISTS . . . . . . . . 301 X. OF THE N.A.A.C.P. AND INTEGRATIONISTS, AND GARVEY AND SEPARATISTS, OR, THE INTEGRATIONIST ONSLAUGHT . . . . . . . 397 XI. THE KU KLUX KLAN, WHITE SUPREMACY AND GARVEY--A SYMBIOTIC RELATIONSHIP . . . 532 AFTERWORD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 556 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 563 ii VOLUME I CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION: MARCUS MOSIAH GARVEY, 1887-1940 What do I care about death in the cause of the redemption of Africa? . . . I could die anywhere in the cause of liberty: A real man dies but once; a coward dies a thousand times before his real death. So we want you to realize that life is not worth its salt except you can live it for some purpose. And the noblest purpose for which to live is the emanci- pation of a race and the emancipation of posterity. -- Marcus Garvey1 History records that slaves-~by virtue of their experiences and the knowledge gained in captivity in strange lands-~have eventually become Masters of them- selves, and in time enslaved others. Let us there- fore use adversity as others have done. Take advantage of every Opportunity; where there is none, make it for yourself, and let history record that as we toiled laboriously and courageously, we worked to live gloriously. —- Marcus Garvey2 Marcus Mosiah Garvey was born in St. Ann's Bay, Jamaica, on August 17, 1887. His childhood was deeply rooted in the peasant environment which largely surrounded him. He once described an uncle, for whom he sometimes worked, as a sharecropper. His own parents also engaged in small-scale peasant farming. Garvey's was not a typical peasant experience, however. His father, a descendant of l the Maroons, Jamaica's African ex-slaves who successfully defied the slave regime, was also a skilled tradesman, a stonemason. Garvey's background further distinguished him from the typical peasant in that it included voluminous reading from an early age. For his father was possessed of a library among whose volumes Garvey developed an early taste for reading. His childhood was characterized by an adequate elementary education supplemented by private tutors and Sunday school. For a time he pumped the organ for his local Wesleyan church. His leadership ability seems to have manifested itself from the very beginning, for his physical prowess gave him a position of eminence among his peers. This situation brought about his first encounter with the legal entanglements which were to plague his whole career. For on one occasion a group of children led by him- self were apprehended and brought before juvenile court for stoning the windows of a church and school. A fine of one pound was placed upon young Garvey. This his father refused to pay and he was rescued from the reformatory by the efforts of his mother.3 Because of this incident Garvey henceforth harbored a deep animosity towards his father which was not lifted until twenty-four hours before his father's death in 1920. At the age of fourteen Garvey left school and became apprenticed to a local printer. Two years later, in 1903, he moved to Kingston, Jamaica's capital city, where he obtained work as a printer. By the time he was eighteen he had achieved what he later described as "an excellent position as manager of a large printing establishment." Participation in a strike, during which he consented to lead the workers despite assurances of favor from manage- ment, cost him his job. He then obtained new employment with the government printery. In Kingston Garvey quickly immersed himself in the intellectual and political life of the city. He made a systematic study of elocution, studying the style of preach- ers who impressed him and taking elocution lessons from Dr. J. Robert Love, pioneer black nationalist figure and sometime member of Jamaica's legislative council. Garvey's love for elocution and debating brought him third place in an island-wide oratorical contest in 1910. He was also active in organizing debating contests in West Kingston and elsewhere. By 1909 Garvey's political involvement had brought him into the National Club organized by a lawyer and legis- lative council member, Sandy Cox. Garvey was elected one of the assistant secretaries of this club, which sought to combat privilege and the evils of British colonialism on the island. It was about this time too (1910) that Garvey established the first of the many publishing ventures he ‘was to own, the tri-weekly Garvey's Watchman. ... .3!) . Jrlsia ..‘ L_ In 1910 Garvey embarked on the first of his many wanderings in foreign lands. Costa Rica was his first destination. There he worked for a while as a time-keeper on a United Fruit Company banana plantation, as a laborer on the pier at the capital, Port Limon, edited a paper, La Nacidn, harassed the British consul concerning his non- protection of the many British West Indian laborers work- ing in Costa Rica, was arrested for urging workers to fight for better conditions, and was eventually expelled from the country (or left to escape the authorities).4 By now Garvey was clearly a man with a mission and pointed irrevocably towards his life's work, the formidable task which he set himself, of emancipating a race. He con- tinued, for the next year or so, to wander through Latin America, going to such places as Panama and Ecuador where West Indian workers had migrated in large numbers in search of work. He observed the universal degradation of the black race, worked intermittently to finance his travels, started another small paper in Colén, Panama, and agitated among black workers. A black worker in Colén at the time remembers meeting Garvey round about 1912 as he addressed the Colon Federal Workers Union, made up mostly of black workers.5 There is a possibility that Garvey may have stopped briefly, perhaps in transit at a seaport, somewhere in the United 6 States during this period. From Central America Garvey returned briefly to Jamaica and by the autumn of 1912, undeterred by a lack of money, he was in England, where his only surviving sister, Indiana, was working as a governess. In England he indulged his love of public speaking at Hyde Park's Speak- ers' Corner, was a regular visitor to the visitors' gallery of the House of Commons, and worked for the Africa Times and Orient Review, the foremost Pan-African journal of the day. At the offices of this publication, which was edited by the Egyptian-Sudanese Pan-Africanist Duse Mohamed Ali, Garvey wrapped magazines, carried them to the post and express offices, wrote at least one article, and generally made himself useful in exchange for a small wage.7 He found the time to travel widely through England, Scotland and EurOpe and one authority who knew him well has made an unsubstantiated claim that he made it to North Africa.8 Garvey said later that he attended some lectures in law at Birkbeck College of the University of London. By July 1913 Garvey was, not surprisingly, almost destitute and applied for government assistance. Possibly because of his job at the Africa Times and Orient Review, however, (his article for the magazine was published in the October issue), he was able to eke out an existence for almost another year. By May of 1914, however, by which time he was probably again without employment, the Anti-slavery and Aborigines Protection Society intervened on his behalf, despatching him to the Colonial Office with an offer of a v.31”. ‘ - contribution from the society if the Colonial Office would put up some of the money to repatriate him to Jamaica. Early in June the society informed the Colonial Office that Garvey was now "endeavouring to raise a fund to meet passage money" and offered to match equally any amount prof- fered by the Colonial Office. Garvey managed to do without the largesse of these two agencies, however. He succeeded in raising his fare home and left England on June 17, 1914. This, Garvey's first sojourn in England, was of great importance to his career. The workings of British democracy made a lasting impression on him and, like later generations of visitors from the colonized world to the metropolis, he noted the contrast to the autocracy which the very same colonizers maintained in their tropical dependencies. He was often to call, in the years to come, for an extension of "British justice" to the colonies, Jamaica in particular. England gave him an opportunity, too, to enhance his already wide knowledge of the worldwide sufferings of the African race. In the pages of the Africa Times and Orient Review there appeared regularly articles by and about such leading figures from the four corners of the African universe as Booker T. Washington, Edward Wilmot Blyden, John Edward Bruce, W. E. B. DuBois. and William Ferris, to name but a few. Some of these would before long be his associates in the United States. Many Africans, ‘West Indians and other black people also visited the offices of the journal. And the fact that the journal combined a Pan-African outlook with wide coverage of middle and far eastern nationalist struggles and indeed all anti-colonial struggles, contributed further to Garvey's growth and influenced his future outlook. In his travels through England and Scotland, too, Garvey had an opportunity to meet and observe the conditions, often very severe, afflicting African, West Indian and other seamen and students of color. Garvey arrived back in Jamaica on July 15, 1914, his head bristling with ideas on making a living and found- ing a racial movement. To secure the former he tried sell- ing greeting and condolence cards and "monumental tomb- stones."10 To secure the latter he formed, five days after his arrival, the Universal Negro Improvement and Conserva- tion Association and African Communities (Imperial) League. The title bore testimony to the enlarged vision brought about by his travels and the fear, which he never relin— quished, that weak races were doomed to slavery and possibly extinction. In this regard he wrote, soon afterwards, For the last ten years I have given my time to the study of the condition of the Negro, here, there, and everywhere, and I have come to realize that he is still the object of degradation and pity the world over, in the sense that he has no status socially, nationally, or commercially (with a modicum of exception in the United States of America). . . .11 Garvey became president and travelling commissioner of the new organization and Amy Ashwood, whom he had met at o. ‘..- l' ' .» "“- uéz‘...‘ ' “at I I a. .u.‘ S " 300- ;’3..”‘ ._~. db- ‘4od , ‘0‘. I‘zs O“. I O o-ID‘ ‘ I a, . .:" ’ ..3-'-“ .us.-. ‘0‘ , .. II .‘0""C. ' ‘0‘... o...‘---'O' - e -:“"“.‘.~ 0.3: ‘- n'.i.-.§.II: so- u K u an :'~“Q.L‘f.‘ .. go. Gibb-o‘wd .- 3; A“ ~-o~5o-. ‘ “ “ V...-&. 4. In -- § .:W‘Aoo ...v 5' vggstb .‘.0_‘.' I o. . a. l“-‘.‘.‘. 'nu ”Co-u--..' ._. _. . Va ”3‘3. '="'~. - - b . -n----.‘ s ' '1 C. - n l, :- u " : . o e. -_~._.S .‘--_' D \s- . 3 04...---‘ .:O.-.-‘ . ..‘l? .— ‘n- b‘ \ . I. \ ““’s¢ a a ~ ‘..‘ h... . I‘ .m‘ s Q“- A ”o‘ .A .h . vu 5‘, ‘.-Q u.-. b h I. |__ ‘V “'A 3“ an. ‘0. ‘.~-: .h,‘ .. _ «J‘ .4‘ 0 I.-- . \ R A h ‘Pb caVQOA.' '. cct' .p-“‘ ‘ I mv.t . .- ‘0. ‘ -~-l ‘ ‘ “§e ‘ s .“‘s an“ y . Q . “:3. a»‘ n.‘~‘§’. 'v O :‘_u ~ 1." In ‘ N. g E U ‘vu..‘_~ oir‘—“oc ‘ ~ 1 u “'“ K‘.‘F. “"5. on; I.“ 'O. \u _‘ - “a". vnov ta I '~‘ . Va ' a 3.. . 1M»: . “ "9'35.- . k ' «:5 C. v... ;. “=t «. °a:‘.'a~.l ‘ ‘L'ZFGS, ~. the weekly meeting of the East Queen St. Baptist Literary and Debating Society, became its secretary. The associa- tion was formed on their second meeting.12 A few days later an inaugural meeting took place at the Collegiate Hall, Kingston, presided over by the mayor of Kingston.13 Recruiting was slow, even though Garvey worked tirelessly and succeeded in establishing himself in the minds of many as an agitator and a nuisance. During the first year or so Garvey entered into correspondence with Booker T. Washington, whose autobiography Up From Slavery had been a great inspiration, and extended a "hearty welcome" to W. E. B. DuBois on his visit to Jamaica. He also busied himself trying to organize an industrial and agricultural institute along the lines of Washington's Tuskegee. Oppo- sition to his movement was widespread from "respectable Negroes" who had not yet learnt to love their blackness. As Garvey wrote later, "I had to decide whether to please my friends and be one of the 'black-whites' of Jamaica, and be reasonably prosperous, or come out openly, and defend and help improve and protect the integrity of the black millions, and suffer."14 After about a year the organization could boast of 15 Up to this time its acti— only about a hundred members. vities were largely confined to Kingston. In November 1915, however, its first public meeting outside Kingston was held, in Garvey's hometown of St. Ann's Bay. The Jamaica Times . .'.~O’ fen-A'.ed' . . I?" yvbv O " O;- 0"" t: 015:6: bid vo- .. . . I {C .33 {.3918 a ‘-‘ ‘- «Iva-unwel- S:S:ES betoou-odo- Ia A: ...-.....'. Ami-e U. u::.. .. ' e u A ‘0‘ g .. A ‘ _. U S—IS5.S€. u.- .. .. L ‘ '4 :eLAtoae ..e :9..- u-uny-n, mu. ' o A '9 _: r u- . ~ub'e' :- c ‘ ~."' .Av' ->o a ‘5.“ 5.-. ‘_..‘ ”-Q‘A L _‘-- ~ ~“O‘Qfi. rv‘wn ‘ a..:...e: fer tzs ::-ao~ 4. ~ .5 b;.':l: .0“ wefi‘ fin ‘ -w s 9-8:133 ‘ ts be‘; ‘- O ‘EQe. E.-.- \o ‘s In" at ' N“ 'v..'~" Au Q ¢C.S;? .. c Q. iii ¢.a0've rec“ ‘ IElas ' ,‘_ hlVOts in ‘L. c ‘5‘... 6L " NE L“ tine c: n ‘ gar" ? 5‘ " “ . Lug. reported, "right merrily did the people of the town turn out to listen to their fellow townsman."16 Garvey had planned to undertake a fund-raising lecture tour in the United States beginning this very month, having received an assur- ance of support from Booker T. Washington. But the latter's death caused him to postpone his trip until 1916. In the meantime he held memorial meetings to honor Washington's memory. Garvey arrived in New York on March 23, 1916 for a lecture tour which he thought would last five months and would be confined to race audiences mostly in the South. He arranged for his mail to be delivered to an address in Jamaica during his absence and let it be known wherever he went in America that he was raising funds for an industrial institute to be established in Jamaica. Garvey's advent into the United States did not find him as much a stranger to conditions there as some are led to believe. For one thing his wide reading on racial matters had obviously included the race in North America. (If he read nothing else but the Africa Times and Orient Review he would have received a tolerably good introduction to race relations in the United States). More than this, though, Garvey's visit to the United States came in the midst of a large-scale migration of West Indians to that country. By the time of Garvey's early years in the United States, West Indians already formed a substantial part of the population —Efi___g‘ 10 of Harlem, there were West Indian migrant laborers in such places as Florida and South Carolina, the student bodies of such schools as Tuskegee and Howard had their fair share of West Indians, some West Indians had enlisted in black United States regiments and gotten themselves killed during the Great War, and professional and businessmen from the islands were a common phenomenon in many Afro-American communities. One islander, Cyril Briggs, was even editor of the New YOrk Amsterdam News. The to-ing and fro-ing of persons and ideas generated by this migration meant that adapting to the United States was probably not too much more of a problem for West Indians than adapting to the North was for Southern Afro- Americans whose great migration was proceeding at the same time. This unity of Afro-American and West Indian history was particularly well illustrated in Garvey's case. Before he even arrived in the United States in 1916 he had already corresponded with Booker T. Washington, welcomed W. E. B. DuBois to Jamaica, and spoken with Robert Russa Moton, Washington's successor at Tuskegee. By March 1916 Garvey's sense of mission, his convic- tion that he had been called upon by extraterrestrial forces to emancipate his race, had developed to an uncanny degree. Shortly before leaving Jamaica he had written, in a letter to Moton, "I am now talking with you as a man with a mission from the High God." Even though he still thought that Jamaica would be the main field of his exertions, he had €55 ev'.e :28 .4 ... o 6. e: Q‘- I '. .v.“" C. O .- r.. .. ..o.» O. a. _ .. ...» O. I. .c .H .. ... e ... a S .C ... e . can 9. a 5 rue... - \ ..- .‘..B'.. in ...“"~" a. 9» {o}- .... V S tress at t}; C 'v'. :c ‘ - _ O ‘0 -6»; Qt 'o. «1 .erican an: - - ll nevertheless already mapped out the course which he was to follow over the next few years. He wrote in the same letter, I have many large schemes on my mind for the advancement of my people that I cannot expose at the present to the public as in such a case my hope of immediate success would be defeated, as my enemies are so many and they are ever anxious to misrepresent me. I have firstly to found a press of our own and to get some working [start?] so as to demonstrate my true intentions. 7 Once in the United States, Garvey found lodgings with a Jamaican family in Harlem, came down with pneumonia, obtained work as a printer, and saved enough to start out on his fund-raising tour through the states. He gave his ad— dress at this time as 53 W. 140 Street in Harlem.18 By June he was lecturing in Boston and by November, demonstrating again the amazing mobility which had characterized his Central American and European visits, he had already visited, among other places, New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Pittsburg, Baltimore, Washington, D. C. and Chicago. He had also met a goodly number of prominent national and local Afro-American leaders. Among these was John Edward Bruce, whom he called "a true Negro," a man for whom he had "the strongest regard," a Dr. R. R. Wright, Jr., Dr. Parks, vice president of the Baptist Union, Dr. Triley of the Methodist Episcopal church of Philadelphia, Rev. J. C. Anderson whom he described only as being "of Quinn Chapel," Mrs. Ida wells-Barnett of anti- lynching fame, magazine editor Fenton Johnson and William H. Ferris.19 Bruce, Emmett J. Scott of Tuskegee and Ida Wells- I. '2'" 'f' tC‘Lfi ran: : .... (.... 37.: E ~ avtcl. .“- .0 0‘. at. :-0:- ' h..-~.. ... 9" I: .,Q- . -.- ‘us .-." “ ‘A§q . I -L‘ .3 .3. d.’ OL- ” ‘- e ”I... O0 0 f); O to n‘ {a b ‘ . Q .5 5C :‘?.. g,“ H 53'. Mnccew’ s““ F ~‘ 1 ‘ b. Hy.‘ Q wv‘ “a ’6- ‘ss “.“-. 3-- S'rw' “- "av- \.~‘O‘. a“: Q. .“ .a“ y- A .‘o C F ‘v ‘32‘ ‘ «vats Cf a“ ‘1. “v- 5‘ F‘“ . U '- .s e; 5 ‘0 ‘6 \¢‘eb “‘ «ak~:e' ;’ h‘as 3‘ a‘ «1 hi.) 0. . 12 Barnett were among those who provided him with introductions to the many prominent persons he met. Bruce had been an agent for and a regular contributor to the Africa Times and Orient Review. Ferris had once written an article for the same magazine in which he praised Garvey's October 1913 article, which had appeared a few months before his.20 Ferris was later to edit Garvey's weekly Negro WOrld from 1920 to 1923 and to hold a variety of high offices within the U.N.I.A. Bruce, after an initial period of skepticism, became a regular contributor to and member of the editorial boards of both the Negro Wbrld and Garvey's Daily Negro Times. To his death in 1924 he remained the staunchest of Garvey's supporters among the Afro-American intelligentsia. Garvey's whirlwind tour took him through thirty- eight states and lasted about a year. He returned at the end of it to New York, where he established a temporary base. Harlem, still only recently converted into the black section of New York, was already the veritable capital of the black world. Its population, composed in the vast majority of Southern and west Indian-born immigrants, was possessed of a rare vitality, containing as it did, a high proportion of radicals of all types and a large number of the greatest practitioners the race has produced of such creative arts as literature, drama, photography and more. Race uplift groups of all kinds abounded and the main thoroughfare, Lenox Avenue, was a favorite haunt of soap-box orators. III. . I- r l3 Harlem, however, was but a microcosm of the black world of the World War I period. The subjugation of Africa by European imperialism was still a fresh memory. In many parts of that continent colonial rule was still less than two decades old. In response to this an infinite number of nationalist and Pan-Africanist organizations had come into being in Africa, Europe, North America, the West Indies, Central and South America--everywhere that African people lived, and all looking towards the restoration of African independence. Apart from the African question, black com- munities everywhere had local problems of their own. In the United States it was lynching, the resurgence of the Ku Klux Klan, race riots, jim crow in the armed forces and everywhere else, and more. In Haiti it was the excesses of United States military rule. In Central America and Cuba it was the mistreatment of migrant West Indian labor. In England it was race riots and the non-employment of black people except in wartime. Practically everywhere else it was Euro- pean colonialism. With the exception of Ethiopia, and to some extent Liberia, the black man was everywhere in a state of non-independence. Garvey, in his involvement in the printers' strike, in his participation in Jamaica's National Club, in his agitation among black workers in Central America, in his travels in Europe, and in his formation of the U.N.I.A. (the "Conservation" had dropped out of the title along the way) had long embodied the spirit of black —_l . Sn'. ""25: 511.... inn-v v ' 9"... the"."'e, . - dhfiv. . w > . . ' . I.‘ L RF u--r~ A .'000' b‘-O0.0- o. .0. with all 'Je e': I O. ' - > U“. .. g". ‘ .. Seen. .. I Ono... R‘:‘.. v--.~es tr. ...e ‘ be. O .3 a .. .332 trial: 1;- {'h‘ u t I‘ 3. ..ECK .3_es 1 \ . ‘ .P.hc.~ ‘A ‘A.. toy-.5-..” L" .‘ r ‘A ‘1. UV ...e Streets l Q ‘l‘ “‘H _: ““‘ .nh O&§. e“ 5... . . t g. .4 0.‘ a‘e: iiS 3A . .A ‘. ~l. ~~ ‘ u»: a... o. L- "~91“. . W .1 ‘I‘ V. ““8 e~.~..a\ c. u.‘“‘. v 5 li; tco sacceszm Of L‘ici‘ he ft. teen. .‘o.: ‘sas a $332688 14 protest which characterized the age. It was inevitable, therefore, that he should be tempted by Harlem, the most highly-politicized black community in the world. Garvey moved onto the center of the Harlem stage with all the ease and self-confidence of the man with a mis- sion. He visited W. E. B. DuBois at one of the N.A.A.C.P.'s offices on the white (downtown) side of New York's Manhattan and came away implacably opposed to the near total absence of black faces therein contained. DuBois seems to have done nothing to soothe his disgust. In Harlem meanwhile he took to the streets, joined the soap-box and step ladder orators, and formed political alliances with such prominent Harlem radicals as the Socialists A. Philip Randolph and Chandler Owen (soon to begin publication of their Messenger magazine) and Hubert Harrison, one-time Socialist and a leading Harlem intellectual. Someone who knew Garvey at this time recalled that he "could throw his voice around three corners without batting an eyelash."21 On June 12, 1917, Garvey was invited by Harrison to address a mass meeting attended by two thousand held at the Bethel A. M. E. Church for the purpose of organizing Harrison's Liberty League.22 Garvey himself had held a not too successful meeting not long before this, in the course of which he fell off the platform. The Liberty League meeting was a windfall, however, for he was a tremendous success. Shortly before, or perhaps shortly after Harrison's — k1-FL“. ; a? can. b... - t 3 * A: :22 C. ....ise o ‘ . " - a? : t:.e ..-16? ‘ fl . on. : 3;: same; 5 :3 .‘n‘-c‘.' -.. h 5vn."'“ " ‘ . ‘ o"! o v Q'!-' &”-~L .... ...-...»... '0! o f) A AL; - ....s nae. ‘.r '- H- .:.st Street. " IAIN 0- s . anal vanse ant-ac... : 2517.5 V..." . Hc“: a“e‘“‘ .‘ b . ‘ - 9" Mu. nswers' Sah'e s I . l 0 ’9y‘ . k (“K yrazsk 6;. 0., § \ ' ‘ V 15 meeting, Garvey began to hold weekly meetings of his own every Sunday at 3 p.m. They were held in Harlem's Lafayette Hall, at lBlst Street and Lenox Avenue. The meetings were slated to continue until October 1917.and Garvey was still being billed as head of the U.N.I.A. and A.C.L. of Jamaica. At one of these Sunday meetings on July 8, less than a month after the Liberty League gathering, Chandler Owen presided and Garvey's address was devoted to a denunciation of the 23 The first New "Conspiracy of the East St. Louis Riots." York branch of the U.N.I.A. may already have been formed by this time, for the association's address was given as 235 W. 13lst Street. The subject of this lecture shows that Garvey had once again demonstrated the propensity, as in Costa Rica and Panama, of quickly becoming embroiled in the purely local issues of wherever he happened to be. Garvey's first U.N.I.A. branch in New York, as well as a second attempted early in 1918, were both envisaged as being auxiliary to the Jamaica headquarters. Garvey himself, as president of the Jamaica division, did not hold office in them. Both efforts were disrupted by attempts by Socialists and Republicans to turn them into political clubs. On a third attempt based on the wishes of a nucleus of thirteen members, Garvey consented to become president of the New York branch, thus concretizing a decision which he had in all likelihood already contemplated, namely to cast down his bucket in the United States.24 With this move New York :I-rF' 3-083 1" v’r:.ma- .- Q 0. 9 . =a‘.~c- 36.8.. 5......- \ Q ‘- i'tZL'ZEI’QS .. e I: tn (ll 0- I ) ) ‘ 1 «5 " Id ‘ . ,I .. .. ~ -S-..ess - k‘v‘: ““3IV-.~' -..-n 5:9.-.“ . O A. r \us race :l‘ers . l ‘: . ~-~:‘."=I ‘0; l6 supplanted Kingston, Jamaica as U.N.I.A. headquarters. A schism developed in this new attempt, too, but Garvey weathered the storm. The association's meeting place had meanwhile moved from the Lafayette Hall to the Palace Casino where it remained for most of 1918. Once the decision to remain in the United States had been made, Garvey moved on with renewed vigor. The U.N.I.A. was incorporated under the laws of New York on July 2, 1918. On July 31 the African Communities League was incorporated . . 25 as a buSiness corporation. About a month later the Nggrg W9;1Q_appeared, destined to become the most widely circulated of race papers and the bane of European colonialists in Africa, the West Indies and elsewhere. It was initially edited free by Garvey. The earliest issues were distributed free by being pushed under peoples' doors in the early hours. Garvey himself participated in these early efforts at distri- bution. During the year Garvey embarked on his first fund raising tour outside of New York after moving the U.N.I.A. headquarters. His first stop was Detroit, where he was hit in the head by a stone thrown by a heckler. On his return to New York his secretary Amy Ashwood, who had accompanied him, was summoned to the District Attorney's office a total, she wrote later, of seventeen times. The authorities, it seems, suspected Garvey of raising funds for a non-existent ”Back-to-Africa" enterprise.26 This was not the first 6‘:; .a‘ ‘ A.. A..‘.U-o.UO ”I ‘v-u -- ~' “‘0‘...‘ . ‘ . - ~ v C" Au. 5 ‘- l... ufivoo. ... . ... . Q -~-‘. . ‘ O .5. . onyu‘aoa.e‘ a. . . 9,. ‘- o- e " ~ g. N‘ ‘0 uh‘ \H :1“:_~.; ......” "Wo‘~. - ~H~~ 2.. . - In. ‘I ‘ h big...» 5‘. 1.". V.‘ 17 indication of police interest in Garvey. His speech in 1917 on the East St. Louis riots had been attended by an assort- ment of persons he identified as police and secret service men. By November 11, 1918 the New York Times could report a meeting of 5,000 persons presided over by Garvey at the Palace Casino. The meeting celebrated the end of WOrld War I by calling on the allied powers to hand over the ex-German colonies in Africa to black rule. Several persons were nominated at the meeting to lobby on behalf of the U.N.I.A. at the up-coming Paris Peace Conference. Among them were A. Philip Randolph and Ida Wells-Barnett. The U.N.I.A. eventu- ally despatched a Haitian as High Commissioner to lobby during the conference due at least in part, no doubt, to the fact that Afro-Americans with few exceptions, were being denied passports to France by the United States government. (One month later Mrs. Wells—Barnett received a similar honor from the Democracy Congress of the National Equal Rights League led by William Monroe Trotter. She was denied a pass- port by the United States government).27 Shortly after the November meeting Mrs. Wells-Barnett addressed a U.N.I.A. meeting in New York. On this occasion, however, she annoyed Garvey by advising both him and his audience against the idea of a return to Africa and the establishment of what was sub- sequently to become the Black Star Line. Like most people who saw Garvey in action, she later testified to the . ... . . .. . a .0. a. a. v. ' a sad e o ..l. ”‘s '9” e m. U n \a» ..n A _ are 5 .... .. ... .. .... ~ . u... u“ . s Q s s 0.. ‘h e ' Q 9. .\Q 9 . I ... V. L“ Y. ... a. S 3 ‘I- o . . . a: .. ..u .. n. o. c C o. a .. A». e ‘5 .Q. .s 0 fi.\ C .3 g . ' yr. .15 v. a... u .4. I. 0. o. e .... v. 3‘ an e .C a. nu. e a» e .3 up" ... ... 5 ... a. ... :— .. p. v. .. ... v. .4. v. a . n. e to. ... o . u. p. . ... 2. a a n. ... 3. .» v... 6 wt 2. no V O ‘- § “._e S‘~-e nLl . rEQ"A- l8 remarkable sway which he exercised over his audience.28 By 1919 Garvey was already firmly established as one of Harlem's most important radical figures. And it was during this year that the fame of him spread all over the globe. Before the year had ended he would be regularly dis- cussed in the press and in governmental circles in Europe, Africa, the West Indies and elsewhere. Before the year had ended, too, he would come under increased scrutiny from a variety of law enforcement authorities in the United States. In March of 1919 at another large meeting at the Palace Casino, this time presided over by Chandler Owen, Garvey claimed that DuBois had humbugged the activities of his High Commissioner in France.29 (DuBois' own Pan-African Conference, held in February, had been widely mistaken in Europe for being a Garveyite gathering). The desire for an Afro-American lobby at the Paris Peace Conference was also responsible for bringing together a group of Harlem radicals and other prominent race-conscious individuals at the home of wealthy but race-conscious Madame C. J. Walker. Garvey was among those present at this meeting, out of which grew the short-lived International League of Darker Peoples.3o In June of this year Garvey incorporated his Black Star Line, its purpose being to place ships on the seas which would link up black communities worldwide by trade and also facilitate the movement of black persons free from the discriminations meted out on the ships of white nations. like Var-fi- ‘5‘. .AI ..‘h 0 .....1 Q ‘ .‘. - .5 .e: 6-- s *‘ e «Anna-HI 0“- O F I: H o 0 . U§->‘o ah ‘v ~ . rfi‘vfi'flv "fifl uhvgl-u. u‘-..’ . kt. to VF -‘ ‘ .' .....5 an.- a K n .. ‘.,. C: «... E '~-.:"‘3 - “\. V in, “;-.‘ ..._ Rh .‘ . hoe H‘“..‘ v ~§-..Qb a U Q 1:9 Ia = s .- . ca‘~ev ‘.h .. ."es ~- \“ § 5 3~it£ “5' . a“~l?;t;e ‘Q '_.. S r‘: s a “O A‘s V 19 The Yarmouth, the line's first ship, made its maiden voyage later the same year. It was in connection with this shipping company that Garvey was harassed, both before and after its incorporation, by District Attorney Edwin P. Kilroe of New York, culminating in rash statements by Garvey, a libel suit by Kilroe and a Garvey retraction. By the time of the Black Star Line's incorporation, Garvey claimed later, the U.N.I.A. had about thirty branches 31 This figure apparently in- and over 2,000,000 members. cluded sympathizers as well as members in any strict sense, but the spread of his ideas by this time could not be gain- said. As early as 1918 the Negro World had been reaching places as far as Panama and throughout 1919 Garveyites were blamed by colonial authorities for anti-white riots in Jamaica, Trinidad and British Honduras, among other places. The British government included Garvey in an undercover study on black radicals. In America, too, both J. Edgar Hoover of the Justice Department and Attorney-General A. Mitchell Palmer investigated Garvey, as did the Lusk Committee of the New York state legislature for its report into seditious activities published in 1920. In October of this year Garvey, fast approaching the peak of his career, had his closest escape from an untimely death. Several shots were fired at him by one George Tyler, two of which found their mark. The wounds were minor, how- ever. Tyler died mysteriously, supposedly jumping to his 20 death from the cell where he was awaiting an appearance in court. It was widely suspected that he planned to implicate persons unknown in his assassination attempt. A little over two months after this attempt on his life, on Christmas Day 1919, Garvey was married during a lavish spectacle at Liberty Hall, now the U.N.I.A.‘s own meeting place. His bride was Amy Ashwood, whom he had met shortly after returning to Jamaica in 1914. She had been U.N.I.A. secretary from its inception. In 1916 she had left Jamaica for Panama but had become reunited with Garvey in the spring of 1918 when she moved to the United States. The marriage was over by early 1920, the couple having parted company amidst a welter of accusations and counter-accusations concerning infidelity, financial misdealings and political strategies. 1920 witnessed the First International Convention of the Negro Peoples of the World, organized by Garvey, and lasting from August lst to 31st. At the opening session at Madison Square Garden an overflow crowd of 25,000 filled the arena and spilled out into the streets around. The other sessions took place in Liberty Hall in Harlem. Delegates attended from every nook and cranny of the black world. A Declaration of Rights of the Negro Peoples of the werld was adopted. This declaration listed the main grievances of the race, and demanded their resolution. Notice was served on European colonialists that the black man had an "inherent right . . . to possess himself of Africa" regardless of the Q ' ‘ ... .- F 5.5..5 V. a': o “ an. ‘..3. :.9 Ca...‘ ...” ca‘hflfl. ‘5' " -53.... ' O». I Pot v 1:":~V'-"' ......e. ..uvbn- . ' as the c:'" Dab-nu}. ‘np-‘s:- 00 ..-..U. A... . A .- 1“...“- .........-. 5'35 5:: i ’ h .e:en:::'.a‘ 1.1 ‘ea‘ers :f '.')v- -.. ‘aa 3.. a’ \g- . ““5?621f. 4 0‘ “'0 ‘R. t: .3. laY~ «Les‘ L C:;a::l ..e 'M: V« a. . «.lZEA ‘,3 s‘: ~C::A 21 claims of any other race or nation. Demands were made for the capitalization of the "N" in Negro, for black history in schools, for an end to lynching and for an end to sundry other discriminations. The red, black and green were adopted as the colors of the race, August 31 was proclaimed an inter- national holiday for black people and a Universal Ethiopian Anthem was adopted. During the course of the convention Garvey was elected President-General of the U.N.I.A. and Provisional President of Africa. The Mayor of Monrovia, Liberia, Gabriel Johnson, was elected Supreme Potentate, or ceremonial leader. Several other persons were elected leaders of various parts of the black world. 1920 also saw the birth of the U.N.I.A.‘s Negro Factories Corporation which, over the next two or three years, managed a number of U.N.I.A. businesses including launderies, restaurants, a doll factory, tailoring and mil- linery establishments and a printing press. Some of these ventures had been in operation since 1918, for Ida Wells- Barnett reported having been shown a U.N.I.A. restaurant and some unspecified smaller undertakings by Garvey in that year. By 1921 Garvey was unquestionably the leader of the largest organization of its type in the history of the race. The vast majority of U.N.I.A. branches existed in the United States, the West Indies and Central America, but formally organized branches or groups of adherents to his philosophy could be found then, and in the years that followed, 22 everywhere else that black people lived. In Canada, for example, there were branches on the west coast, in Nova Scotia, Montreal, Toronto and other areas. In Africa there were branches in several areas, including Liberia, Nigeria and South Africa. In Kenya nationalists such as Harry Thuku and JOmo Kenyatta were corresponding with him and/or care- fully reading his pronouncements. Branches appeared in England, even in Australia. Garvey had succeeded, like no one else, in gathering up the worldwide feelings of dismay at the loss of independence and defiance against colonialism and oppression, which characterized the "New Negro" spirit of the age. And not only had he gathered up this spirit, but he had remarkably been able to channel it into a single massive organization. By early this year, he was lamenting the fact that only four million persons had so far answered the call of the U.N.I.A. and he announced a total of seven hundred branches scattered over the world.32 In October the Nggrg ' WQEIQ announced eight hundred branches, four hundred and eighty of them chartered. There is no reason to doubt the number of branches, though concerning the figures for actual membership Garvey once explained, "we nominally count mil- lions of members of this association as those who have at some time or other possessed a disposition to help put over the program."33 Garvey's unparalleled success had the effect of 23 arraying against him the most powerful conglomeration of hostile forces ever to confront a race leader. The United States government was against him because they considered all black radicals subversive; the British and other European colonialist governments were against him because he was a threat to the stability of their African colonies; the Com- munists were against him because he successfully kept black workers out of their grasp and because he had no time for any talk about white workers being the best friends of black workers; the N.A.A.C.P., and other integrationist organiza- tions in the United States were bitterly against him because he argued that white segregationists were the true spokesmen for white America and because he in turn advocated black separatism, preferably by founding a strong government in Africa and reclaiming it as the black man's country, much as white segregationists proclaimed the United States a white man's country. His organization also had to contend with un- scrupulous opportunists who were not above sabotaging its workings for personal gain. In 1921 opposition from all these forces escalated to a remarkable extent. First the United States government, through the instrumentality of the State Department almost succeeded in dealing a near death blow to the organization by an attempt to prevent Garvey from re-entering the country after a short trip to the Caribbean area. Garvey's one month trip to promote the Black Star Line turned into a five 24 month game of international hide and seek as United States consuls in the area, under the direction of Secretary of State Charles Evans Hughes, stolidly refused to visé his passport for re-entry into the United States. He managed to make it back, however, after being briefly detained at New Orleans, barely in time for his Second International Conven- tion. At this convention the Communists, spearheaded by their black auxiliary, the African Blood Brotherhood, made a bid to capture his following. This attempt was foiled. Meanwhile the N.A.A.C.P., through its major black spokesman, W. E. B. DuBois, was steadily increasing its campaign of attacks in its organ the Crisis, and elsewhere, against Garvey. The black Socialists, too, had begun to criticize Garvey, and the British authorities were busy pursuing the policy they had begun in 1919, of banning the Negro WOrld, prohibiting U.N.I.A. officials from entering their colonies, and generally doing whatever they could to thwart the spread of Garvey's influence. Finally on January 12, 1922 Garvey was arrested for alleged mail fraud in the promotion of stock for the Black Star Line, which had by now run into difficulties. This was a signal for redoubled efforts on the part of his enemies. From then up to and beyond his trial in 1923, articles flew thick and fast from the N.A.A.C.P.'s Crisis, from the black Socialist Messenger, and from the integrationist black press, presuming his guilt and calling for his arrest and 25 deportation. These efforts became even more hysterical when, in June 1922, Garvey held a summit conference with the Ku Klux Klan in Atlanta, Georgia. A coalition of integration- ists shortly thereafter took to the streets of the United States and Canada in the notorious "Marcus Garvey Must Go!!!" campaign. Their expressed intention was to bring about the removal of Garvey and the complete "extirpation" of his movement. The high point of their efforts was reached when in January 1923 they joined hands with the United States government in its attempts to be rid of Garvey. In a well- known letter signed by eight integrationists from, among other places, the N.A.A.C.P., Urban League, the Socialist Messenger magazine and Chicago Defender, the Attorney-General of the United States was called upon to speed up the govern- ment's case against Garvey and get rid of his movement. The government responded enthusiastically to this integrationist support. Despite all this, the U.N.I.A. managed to push ahead. The Daily Negro Times appeared in 1922 and a Blackman maga- zine was projected, but did not in fact appear until much later. Garvey's second marriage took place during this year, to his private secretary Amy Jacques. Garvey announced his intention to tour the world, including Africa, in 1923. This tour did not materialize, but the threat was enough to cause much anxiety and agitation in the British Colonial Office. Despatches flew back and ‘A'.k :et‘.'€ ... '0. o A‘ -.R'.3 9 '.v..- . '- 3 ' -" u- " F r .. .59'~~ Lflnw“. '- Soovn-‘ he F 5:83S 87E: he'Oa‘- .u .- V ..fl-.. O ‘ .o On- ‘ a. — -:‘ 5'3..4. ~‘.O 5-..-.. 26 forth between the British representative in washington, the Colonial Office in London and British governors in Africa and elsewhere. Their general consensus was that Garvey should be prevented from landing in British colonies. Some areas even drafted special legislation prohibiting entry to certain types of people, to be used when Garvey appeared. 1923, however, was the year of his conviction on the mail fraud charges. On insubstantial evidence he was sen- tenced to the maximum five years in jail, in addition to a fine of $1,000 and ordered to pay the costs of the trial. There followed three months in the New York Tombs prison without bail, before he was released pending appeal. Despite these personal setbacks the organization continued to grow. Garvey was now claiming a 6,000,000 membership and nine hun- dred branches. Five hundred of the branches and a little less than half the memberships were said to be in the United States.34 1924 was Garvey's last full year as a free man in the United States. During this year the remarkable faith which his followers placed in him was again demonstrated when they subscribed enough to launch a new steamship line, the Black Cross Navigation and Trading Company. During this year the U.N.I.A. officially declared that God is black be- cause, they argued, God is a spirit but for purposes of conceptualization must reflect the image of the beholder. Hence God for black beholders must be black. 1924, too, was , I D ’ tase 12'. ---: a." "n a. . a O 1 H»'.o¢v .-b O O I t t . V ‘vbiflh 0‘ 2 ‘6‘... d “O . 'v ‘I O ‘ a. b.0‘0.00~00 ‘ .::.' ..' ,- S B'j‘. U...‘.H. the art“: a... ‘0. -l 'J 9" \'.."~ D- .05 .‘cu.’ :. save-.53, ._ ‘ .. ..u... ‘v ' Azfifl‘v :1 ~‘....HI‘:ES . Q D 3"" s ‘0.“ .rres*e~t ‘ R . .0. “axe: S C:.’.' t. ‘ R ‘I-Lfi - ‘»Stlc. I 27 the year of the blocking of Garvey's intention to set up a base in Liberia. The sudden announcement by the Liberian government led to a loss of $50,000 worth of U.N.I.A. cargo which was already en route to Liberia, plus the repatriation, at U.N.I.A. expense, of several pioneer families and U.N.I.A. officials who were on their way to Liberia at the time of the announcement. During this year the U.N.I.A. launched its Negro Political Union designed to bring its voting strength to bear on American and other elections by endorsing candidates based on their record of dealings with the race, and irrespective of party affiliations. DuBois, fretting at Garvey's continued freedom pending his appeal, denounced Garvey during this year as "the most dangerous enemy of the Negro race in America and in the world." In February of 1925 Garvey's appeal was turned down and he entered the federal penetentiary at Atlanta. What his enemies hoped to obtain through his imprisonment did come to pass. Schisms appeared in the American movement resulting, by 1926, in a splinter in the New York branch, the largest of all (estimated at 35,000 members at one time). These strains occasioned by Garvey's departure were still relatively minor. For Garvey, even from jail, managed to maintain some control, appointing and dismissing officers, and conferring often with his aides. At an extraordinary conference in Detroit in 1926 the Secretary-General, G. Emonei Carter, reported 814 "domestic" branches, 215 ”foreign” and 91 "new" ones (whether 28 foreign or domestic not specified), a grand total of 1,120. There were twenty-five pending applications for charters.35 Meanwhile the clamor for Garvey's release mounted. Thousands of petitions, telegrams and the like bearing huge numbers of signatures poured into various United States government departments from all over the world. Delegations went to Washington to meet the Pardon Attorney and other of- ficials. Massive parades were held in Harlem, led by an open car bearing Garvey's ceremonial robes and a large por- trait of the incarcerated leader. At one demonstration an estimated 150,000 peOple marched and jammed the sidewalks. Many prominent persons, including some who had campaigned for Garvey's imprisonment, now joined their voices to the chorus for his release. The government, bewildered by the depth of feeling shown for someone they liked to characterize as a crook, and viewing with apprehension the upcoming elec- tion year, decided to commute his sentence, but with depor- tation. Garvey's lawyer, sensing the illegality of deportation, fought but did not succeed in keeping Garvey in the country. When news of the commutation became known late in November 1927, large numbers of dormant U.N.I.A. members paid up their dues and became active again in anticipation of Garvey's reappearance. He was, however, spirited away to New Orleans by the authorities and deported from there. Five thousand loyal followers nevertheless were on hand to 29 listen to his farewell address from the deck of the vessel taking him to the West Indies. They stood in the rain and sang the U.N.I.A. hymn, "God Bless Our President" as the ship pulled away, bearing their leader from the scene of his greatest triumphs, never to set foot in the United States again.36 When the ship stopped in Panama Garvey was greeted by a delegation from the local U.N.I.A. and in Jamaica, where he arrived on December 10, he was given a hero's welcome as some of the largest crowds in the island's history turned out to greet him. None dismayed by his deportation, Garvey set about making the most of his adversity. In 1928 he visited England, presented a renewed petition to the League of Nations and visited Canada, where he was briefly arrested and silenced after a United States consul complained that he was making speeches in favor of the Democratic candidate for United States president. In August, 1929, Garvey held the Sixth International Convention in Jamaica. It was as spectacular as the earlier ones in Harlem. A split occurring at the convention resulted in the formation of a separate U.N.I.A. Inc., headquartered in the United States. Garvey remained head of his faction, now calling itself the U.N.I.A. and A.C.L. (August 1929) of the WOrld. The American schismatics did not carry the whole American field with them. They failed, for example, to win 30 control of the Negro World, which continued to carry Garvey's pronouncements. Units loyal to Garvey often changed their names to Garvey Clubs, Ethiopian Clubs and the like, and animosity between the two groups in the United States occa- sionally led to violence. 1929 marked, too, Garvey's entry into Jamaican elec- toral politics. Between the convention and the end of the year Garvey formed a Peoples' Political Party (P.P.P.), began campaigning for a seat in the Legislative Council, was jailed for three months for contempt by British judges when he promised to reform the bench if elected, and was elected to the Kingston and St. Andrew Corporation (K.S.A.C.) council while in jail. Upon his release the corporation promptly declared his seat vacant but he was returned unopposed early in 1930. Meanwhile, the British judges convicted him again, this time for supposedly libelling British colonialism, arising from an editorial in his Blackman newspaper. The Blackman, a daily, had appeared in March 1929, and was an important vehicle whereby Garvey championed the cause of Jamaica's oppressed and demolished, for a time, the monopoly of the conservative press. Garvey's bid for the Legislative Council was defeated in January 1930, largely because the majority of the black masses still had no vote under British colonialism. His P.P.P. nevertheless successfully placed some candidates in both the K.S.A.C. and the Legislative Council. Garvey 31 himself continued to serve on the K.S.A.C. council for the next few years, on one occasion (1931) being re-elected while out of the country. During this period Garvey occasionally acted as a de facto trade union leader, taking up the causes of unorganized workers. In 1930 he actually formed a Workers and Labourers Association, envisaged not as itself a trade union, but as an agency for popularizing the need for unionization. Meanwhile his Jamaican journalistic efforts continued with a succession of papers. The demise of the Blackman in 1931 was followed by the New Jamaican, an evening paper in 1932 and 1933, when it folded. The Negro Wbrld to which Garvey had continued to send articles, also ceased publica- tion in 1933. Almost immediately there followed the Blagk Mag, a magazine which Garvey published first in Jamaica and later in England up almost until his death. In 1931 Garvey made yet another trip to England and the League of Nations. Back in Jamaica he continued to hold political meetings, in 1932 welcomed Nancy Cunard to Jamaica, formed an amusement company and dabbled in real estate. A Seventh International Convention was held in Jamaica in 1934, followed some months afterwards by a shift of his base of operations to England. In England Garvey contacted African students, har- rangued the crowds at Hyde Park's Speakers' Corner, and managed to keep together those divisions of the U.N.I.A. 32 which had survived the depression, the schisms following his deportation from the United States, and the inroads into his erstwhile followers (especially in the United States) made by Father Divine, Muslims, the Peace Movement of Ethiopia, the Communists and divers other groups who participated in the mad scramble for Garvey's followers, once he was removed from the country. His organization in the United States remained viable despite all this, however, and in 1936, 1937 and 1938 Garvey visited Canada to meet with his North American followers. There was nothing on these occasions to prevent him from coming as far as Windsor, Ontario, a stone's throw from Detroit. His United States followers on these occasions would cross the border in large numbers, and would, among other things, attend Garvey's School of African Philosophy which provided crash courses for U.N.I.A. organizers. After his 1937 visit to Canada he toured the West Indies, speaking to enthusiastic audiences in St. Kitts, Nevis, Antigua, Montserrat, Dominica, St. Lucia, St. Vincent, Grenada, Barbados, Trinidad and British Guiana. During his 1938 visit to Canada he held his Eigth International Convention in Toronto from August 1 to 17. Despite his deportation, and despite the increasing fragmentation of his membership, his ideas continued to hold sway among the black masses in America with remarkable tenacity. For one thing the fragmentation did not always 33 mean a difference in ideology between the various splinter groups. Many of them, such as the Peace Movement of Ethiopia, and the Mborish Americans, continued to regard Garvey as something of a patron saint even after breaking from the U.N.I.A. The Communist press of the 1930's in particular, is filled with stories of the frustrations meted out to Communist organizers in black communities because of the persistence of Garvey's doctrines of race first and separa- tism. Those of Garvey's followers who remained in U.N.I.A. units in the United States loyal to him tried hard throughout the 1930's to find a way to get him back, knowing full well that his presence would help reunify the movement. In this effort they received the enthusiastic support of Senator Theodore G. Bilbo, Mississippi segregationist, whose 1939 United States Senate bill to acquire a West African home for those Afro-Americans who wished to go, Garvey supported. Garvey died in London in June 1940, active to the end in his efforts to emancipate a race. NOTES MARCUS MOSIAH GARVEY, 1887-1940 lNegro World, April 28, 1923, p. 10. 2Amy Jacques Garvey, Garvey and Garveyism (Kingston, A. J. Garvey, 1963), p. 29. 3Amy Ashwood Garvey, "Marcus Garvey - Prophet of Black Nationalism" (unpub. manuscript, n.p., n.d., Amy Ashwood Garvey papers, London), p. 9. 4National Archives of the United States, General Records of the Department of State, Record Group (R.G.) 59, 811.1086 191/46, Roy T. Davis, U. S. Legation, Costa Rica to Secretary of State, March 5, 1928; ibid., General Records of the Department of Justice, R. G. 60, 198940, Anonymous letter to the Department of Justice, n.d. [August 1919?]; "Prophet of Black Nationalism," p. 20; J. A. Rogers, World's Great Men of Color (New York, J. A. Rogers, 1947), p. 599; Garvey and Garveyism, p. 7. 5Interview with Mr. J. Charles Zampty, Highland Park, Michigan, April 17, 1973. 6The Jamaica Times of November 13, 1915 quotes Garvey at p. 29 as saying that he has travelled in "America, North and Central, Europe and parts of the West Indies." Another source claimed that Garvey first visited the U. S. in 1911 - F. A. McKenzie, "Is There a Black Peril?", Overseas, VI, April 1921, p. 43. If the Jamaica Times articIe is correct and the Overseas one wrong, a further possibility may be an intranSit stop on his way to or from England. 7"Prophet of Black Nationalism," p. 21; New Jamaican, August 16, 1932, p. 2; W. H. Ferris in the New York Amsterdam News, February 11, 1925, p. 1. 8J. A. Rogers, op. cit., p. 599. 34 35 9Public Record Office, London, Colonial Office records, G/27424, Register of Correspondence, Jamaica, de- stroyed file, letter from M. Garvey, July 8, 1913; ibid., Misc/19729, May 28, 1914, "Repatriation of M. Garvey," Register of Correspondence, Colonial Office, destroyed file, June 9, 1914; ibid., destroyed file, June 19, 1914. In the case of all these destroyed files, the actual correspondence has been destroyed but a synopsis of their contents remains. 10"Prophet of Black Nationalism," p. 54. 11Marcus Garvey,.mu3, A Talk With Afro-west Indians - The Negro Race and its Problems (Kingston?, African Communities League, 1915?), p. 1. 12"Prophet of Black Nationalism," p. 41. 13Ibid., p. 51. 14Amy Jacques Garvey, ed., The Philosophy and Opinions of Marcus Garvey or Africa fOr the Africans (Second edition, London, Frank Cass, 1967), Volume II, p. 127. 15"Prophet of Black Nationalism," p. 60. 16Jamaica Times, November 13, 1915, p. 29. 17Garvey to Moton, February 29, 1916, facsimile in Daniel T. Williams, Eight Negro Bibliographies (New York, Kraus Reprint Co., 1970), n.p. 18"Prophet of Black Nationalism," p. 77; Garvey to Emmett J. Scott, June 9, 1916, in Eight Negro Bibliographies. 19Marcus Garvey, Jr., "West Indies the Mirror of Truth," Champion Magazine, I, 5, January 1917, p. 267. 20Africa Times and Orient Review, I, 4 (N.S.), April 1914, pp. 77173. 21Negro Wbrld, April 8, 1922, p. 6. 22James Weldon Johnson, Black Manhattan (New York, Atheneum, 1968, first pub. 1930), p. 253. slat. '\‘ ' .gd ns‘v's 1"“. 1'. q U I . v. ..u .. o. e. p v. p L. a. ... ~ \ he.‘ .‘I. O . .\ ‘3 an. I a {N 9. O I .6. .. T. .n..: Z. ....I .. I. r ... an. .. I v . e . . . a. \ lo. I as. ... e .s. a .... ... .1. a a \ c ...s E T; .. q. s. u. ... .. ... t . . as ... T. «J T. ‘c. c.— Iu .. h. .g o t .. u" VA .2 K. n». u. .u ... c. . . MP» ... ' In” e ! Q ' n "I 2 ... H- . . . ‘4‘ \m an ”e ”u 9“. ‘7‘ are» A.» .s - u.“ \ A on ' It; 36 23Marcus Garvey, Conspiracy of the East St.‘Louis Riots (New York, U.N.I.A., 1917). 24Philosophy and Opinions, II, p. 129; Garvey and Garveyism, p. 25. 25R. G. 60, 198940, William Ware, President, Cincinnati U.N.I.A. to Chief Inspector, Post Office Depart- ment, November 18, 1930. 26"prophet of Black Nationalism," pp. 111-113. 27Ida B. Wells, Crusade for Justice - The Autobio- graphy of Ida B. Wells, edited by Alfreda M. Duster (Chicago, University of CHicago Press, 1970), pp. 379-380. 28 114-116. Ibid., p. 381; "Prophet of Black Nationalism," pp. 29Crisis, xxx, 2, December 1920, p. 60. 3oMessenger, August 1922, p. 470. 31Philosophy and Opinions, II, p. 129. 32Negro Wbrld, February 19, 1921, p. 1; February 26, 1921, p. 6. 33 Ibid., January 6, 1923, p. 2. 34Evening World, June 29, 1923. 35Negro WOrld, March 27, 1926, p. 7. 361bid., December 24, 1927, p. 5. CHAPTER II RACE FIRST In a world of wolves one should go armed, and one of the most powerful defensive weapons within the reach of Negroes is the practice of race first in all parts of the world. -- Marcus Garvey1 What We Believe The Universal Negro Improvement Association advo- cates the unity and blending of all Negroes into one strong, healthy race. It is against miscegenation and race suicide. It believes that the Negro race is as good as any other, and therefore should be as proud of itself as others are. It believes in the purity of the Negro race and the purity of the white race. It is against rich blacks marrying poor whites. It is against rich or poor whites taking advantage of Negro women. It believes in the spiritual Fatherhood of God and the Brotherhood of Man. -- Marcus Garvey2 Marcus Garvey, unlike most twentieth century leaders of the race in the Western Hemisphere who approach him in stature, built a mass organization that went beyond mere civil rights agitation and protest and based itself upon a definite, well thought out program which if followed 37 38 explicitly, would, in his opinion, lead to the total eman- cipation of the race from white dominion. Central to the ideological basis underpinning Garvey's program was the question of race. For Garvey, the black man was universally oppressed on racial grounds, and any program of emancipation would have to be built around the question of race first. Before the black man could think in terms of any other form of struggle (such as joint co-operation with white workers) he would first have to ef- fect his emancipation as a race. For Garvey, then, the race became a "political entity" which would have to be re- deemed.3 Against the rival suggestion that humanity, and not the black race, should be the objects of his zeal, he argued that it was not "humanity" which was lynched, burned, jimrcrowed and segregated, but black people.4 The black man in a white world was forever marked out for oppression by the conspicuousness of his color, and he would now turn this disadvantage into a positive rallying force. Garvey declared simply, "The Ethiopian cannot change his skin; and we shall not."5 The primacy of race characterized the U.N.I.A. from its beginnings in Jamaica6 and by 1919 officials of the United States government were drawing attention to what they considered this subversive doctrine.7 Active member- ship in the U.N.I.A. was confined to people of African origin. 39 Garvey went about the task of converting the dis- abilities of race into a positive tool of liberation with a thorough aggressiveness. "No man can convince me con- trary to my belief," he declared, "because my belief is founded upon a hard and horrible experience, not a personal experience, but a racial experience. The world has made being black a crime, and I have felt it in common with men who suffer like me, and instead of making it a crime I hope to make it a virtue."8 Accordingly, the consciousness of Garvey's followers was saturated with the new doctrine. Black dolls were manufactured for their children; at a time when most leading Afro-American newspapers camouflaged their racial identity under such titles as the Chicago Defender, the New York Amsterdam News, etc., Garvey's own paper unashamedly proclaimed itself the Negro World; he encouraged his followers to support their black businessmen and professionals;9 the race catechism used by his followers disabused the minds of black folk concerning the claims of the Hamitic myth by explaining that contrary to this myth, black people were "certainly not" the recipients of any biblical curse;10 advertisements of a racially demeaning nature were frowned upon by the Negro World;11 the Negro Wbrld sponsored beauty contests and published photographs of beautiful female members of the race, a subject on which Garvey waxed poetic-~"Black queen of beauty, thou has given 12 color to the world;" the dictum of the European 40 missionaries that man was created in the image and likeness of God was utilized to show that a white God could not be a correct image and likeness of a black person; the organiza— tion's Black Cross Nurses were "organized to create a system of relief for any great calamity which might overtake the 13 the Bible was delved into to Negro peoples of the world;" show that "race prejudice is as old as the human family, and that even religious teachers are not free from it," since the marriage of Moses to an Ethiopian as recorded therein, had displeased his family;14 indeed, practically every as- pect of the organization was designed with the purpose of bolstering the black man's self-esteem and fostering a pride in self. The primacy of race in Garvey's thought was coupled with a deep pessimism concerning the future of the black man in America. The black man, with increasingly ample educa- tional opportunities, would in Garvey's view aspire towards positions of influence. Such aspirations would bring him into direct competition with the white power structure. Within fifty to a hundred years such confrontation would lead to a racial clash which would end disastrously for the black race. This analysis led Garvey inevitably in the direction of racial separation. His economic ventures in the United States amounted to an attempt towards a nucleus of a self- sustaining (and therefore self-employing) black race in 41 America. But his gaze looked more longingly towards Africa as the salvation of the African abroad. Even in Africa, though, he found the European overlords attempting to in- crease the seeds of future racial discord, as in 1938 when he found himself protesting British consideration of a pro- posal to resettle European Jews in Tanganyika, Kenya or British Guiana. "I am seriously protesting on behalf of the natives to whom these countries belong," he wrote on this occasion, "against the attempt to complicate their national and future existence, and I may repeat that the protest is not actuated by any unfriendly attitude toward the Jews, but because of the dangers of the future and the injustice it will bring to the native population."15 Garvey's concern over the salvation of the race led him to harsh criticism of any weaknesses which he perceived among his race, and there was no phenomenon which displeased him more than that of the black man who did not think in racial terms. Such criticism brought out the finest of his invective--”Yes, this an 'Uncle Tom Negro.’ Yes, a 'yes boss Negro'--a 'howdi massa Negro'--a 'yes Mass Charlie Negro.‘ A Negro who will be satisfied to blacken a white man's shoes all the days of his life and lick the white man's spittle if he orders him to do so."16 Garvey viewed the question of the black man's racial survival with an urgency that singled him out from contem- porary black leaders. And his doctrine of race first 42 permeated all aspects of the black man's existence. Thus he manifested an acute awareness of the role of culture as a tool for liberation. He himself was a prolific poet of liberation.17 Indeed, his poems are as good a source of his ideology as any. They were replete with such themes as the beauty of the black woman, the need for self-reliance, the glories of African history, the necessity for an end to black participation in white wars, protests at the Italian invasion of Ethiopia, and the like. This experi- mentation with the arts for purposes of politicizing the membership was also indulged in by one of Garvey's closest associates from among the ranks of the Afro-American intel- ligentsia, John Edward Bruce. One such Bruce creation, a play entitled ”Preaching vs. Practice," expressed Garvey's hostility towards unscrupulous black preachers. The main characters consisted of a bank manager, a "very suave" Baptist preacher and some New Negroes, who were members of the U.N.I.A.18 Another Bruce play, "Which One," provided an excellent example of the use of this medium for political education. The main characters this time were a Mr. Sennebundo Ajai, an African U.N.I.A. diplomat, and three young ladies, one each from Martinique, the British West Indies and Afro-America, all of whom were in love with the hero, who was on the verge of departure for Nigeria on U.N.I.A. organizational business. In between the romantic escapades the audience was treated to monologues extolling 43 the virtues of the U.N.I.A. The set was liberally decorated with the red, black and green of the U.N.I.A., and the hero and the lady of his choice eventually announced their in- tention to be married in a Liberty Hall in Africa.19 Garvey himself indulged in political play-writing. A creation of his, "The Coronation of the African King," was performed at his Edelweis Park headquarters in Jamaica in 1930. The play was in three acts and included scenes in New York, Washington, Paris, London, the West Indies, Ashanti, Dahomey, Senegal and the Sudan. One scene showed the French premier and British Prime Minister David Lloyd George conferring over U.N.I.A. penetration into Africa. Another scene featured black voices delivering stirring oratory against a backdrop of African freedom fighters en- gaged in bloody struggle with French usurpers in the Sudan. The whole play was conceived as a dramatization of the re- sults of U.N.I.A. propaganda since 1918.20 Garvey's heyday in the 1920's coincided with the Afro-American literary efflorescence know as the Harlem Renaissance, for the race and Africa-consciousness of which Garvey himself was in no small way responsible. Yet Garvey could not uncritically accept the exoticism and exaggerated Negritude which sometimes characterized writers of the period. He accordingly joined in the chorus of criticism against Claude McKay's Home to Harlem. Writing from France he disapproved strenuously of black writers who were 44 "prostituting their intelligence, under the direction of the white man, to bring out and show up the worst traits of our people. . . ." McKay's book he considered "a damnable libel against the Negro." As against such works he postu- lated his conception of the type of artist the race needed--"We must encourage our own black authors who have character, who are loyal to their race, who feel proud to be black, and in every way let them feel that we appreciate their efforts to advance our race through healthy and de- 21 cent literature." The Negro WOrld, in similar vein, took Countee Cullen, another luminary of the Harlem Renaissance, to task. The paper deplored the fact that a Harvard graduate could overdo the Negritude idea to the extent of writing:‘ Not yet has my heart or head In the least way realized It and I are civilized.22 Also, during U.N.I.A. international conventions in New York and Jamaica, a literary censor was recommended who would safeguard the race from material unfavorable to the black man.23 During the latter half of the 1930's Garvey increas- ingly focused his attention on Paul Robeson, the leading black motion picture actor of the period. Garvey paid due homage to Robeson's artistic ability but did not like the spectacle of the foremost black dramatic personality of the age being cast in a series of roles calculated to demean 45 black folk. Robeson was reported in 1929 to be the pro- jected star of a satire on Garvey's career written by two white authors known for their sensationalism of Harlem's seamier side. Whether this had anything to do with Garvey's attitude is unclear. The play was to be titled "Jeremiah the Great."24 At any rate, 1935 found Garvey denouncing Robeson's appearances in such well-known stage and motion picture productions as "Emperor Jones," "Sanders of the River" and "Stevedore." Readers of Garvey's Black Man magazine were informed that "Paul Robeson, the Negro actor, has left London for Hollywood. He is gone there to make another slanderous picture against the Negro." The point was made that in days gone by any black man who succeeded in white circles was automatically lionized. That day should be no more. The hope was expressed that Robeson was now making sufficient money "so that when he retires from the stage he may be able to square his conscience with his 25 race by doing something good for it." 1937 found Garvey protesting to the British Broadcasting Corporation against anti-black programs and to the British Moving Picture Board 26 against Robeson's films, while in 1939, one year before his death, he actually published a critical pamphlet aimed at Robeson's films.27 Robeson withdrew from Hollywood the same year for the same reasons contained in Garvey's criti— cisms.28 Garvey's concern with the racial implications of culture embraced also vaudeville (the U.N.I.A. owned two 46 follies companies in the post-United States Jamaica period),29 various U.N.I.A. choirs and bands (such as the 0 and also Universal Jazz Hounds of the Jamaica U.N.I.A.),3 sport, where Garvey expressed keen interest in the wider implications of the Joe Louis vs. Max Schmeling bouts of the late 1930's.31 Garvey's doctrine of race first was severely tested by the presence within the race of large numbers of persons of mixed African and Caucasian origin. Although obviously not white, such people were light enough to form a visible sub-group within the black race. The division was height- ened by certain historical factors. In his anxiety to forge intra-racial solidarity, Garvey identified the light- skin question as a major stumbling block. He took the position that "There is more bitterness among us Negroes because of the caste of color than there is between any other peoples, not excluding the people of India."32 He went as far as to assert that prejudice within the race probably exceeded that directed against the race by alien races.33 This position brought Garvey into serious ideolo- gical conflict with middle-class leaders in the United States and the West Indies, many of whom were themselves of lighter hue. Such opposition was particularly hostile in the United States, where integrationist leaders took the position that this problem either did not exist, or was relatively minor in the United States, and that Garvey, V o. ‘ S. a v.0 ' ..eolv s - . ... 93133.: ’. . -..h—v. up...“ 5 Fh'w-O 5» t... .8 Ga . .-RA . o 5‘ an! 9.50.. l 'Inl'l «a. vhs ..H ...... .2... .. .. a e c e a r» 9. ca p. A» a». I ......n w~ He‘s. Q \\ .... 3:.aece;. ..C‘... a.‘.tm S 1‘ .... w. .5 C71 c. I .1 up. C e a 1 T. Q 0 e e e a‘l‘ QNM #5 .1 1a .. . i , itiibl 47 because of his west Indian background, was erroneously importing this feature of island society into an Afro- American scene which he did not understand. This integra- tionist argument was well expressed by W. E. B. Dubois, editor of the Crisis, organ of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (N.A.A.C.P.), and, during Garvey's American period, the veritable dean of Afro- American integrationists. DuBois stated the integrationist counter-claim as follows:- . . . there is no doubt but what Garvey has sought to import to America and capitalize the antagonism be- tween blacks and mulattoes in the West Indies. This has been the cause of the West Indian failures to gain headway against the whites. Yet Garvey imports it into a land where it has never had any substantial footing and where today, of all days, it is absolutely repudiated by every thinking Negro; Garvey capitalizes it, has sought to get the cooperation of men like R. R. Moton on this basis, and has aroused more bitter color enmity inside the race than has ever before existed. The whites are delighted at the prospect of a division of our solidifying phalanx, but their hopes are in vain. American Negroes recognize no color line in or out of the race, and they will in the end punish the man who attempts to establish it.34 The reality was not identical with DuBois' asser- tions. For here, as elsewhere in his long-continuing ideological struggle with Garvey, DuBois, the eminent scho- lar, abandoned his historian's craft and allowed the wish to father the thought. Garvey had indeed come out of a West Indian society which then (and to a lesser extent now) was stultified by an exaggerated three-tiered system of white-brown-black social stratification. As early as 1913, r'. 1' ll.‘l\‘u. .Ill'\ II I I: . 48 in one of his earliest extant articles, Garvey drew atten- tion to the problem.35 In a pamphlet of around 1915 he returned to the subject,36 and on the eve of his departure for the United States in 1916, he poured his heart out in a letter to Robert Russa Moton, Booker T. Washington's suc- cessor at Tuskegee Institute. Cataloguing the woes of the black man in Jamaica, he explained that "The black man naturally is kept down at the foot of the ladder and is trampled on by all the shades above. In a small minority he pushes himself up among the others, but when he 'gets there' he too believes himself other than black. . . ."37 This caste situation in Jamaica, a legacy of slavery and British imperialism, never ceased to exercise Garvey's mind, and after his expulsion from the United States he launched a frontal assault on the problem. His new Jamaican daily, the Blackman (the name of which caused much hostility from the brown class) editorializedz~ Some people are afraid, some annoyed and others disgusted that we, as they say, RAISE THE COLOUR QUESTION The question has long ago been raised and put into vindictive operation. The colour question is the one and only reason that we cannot find a black girl or boy in store or office in this city when to our certain knowledge intelligent ones among them . . . have been refused at places filled with half illiterate brown and mulatto girls and boys affecting the attitude of supe- riors in behavior. . . . There is going to be fairplay in this country yet. 'The Blackman' is on the job and soon will blacken some of these stores and offices beyond recognition. 49 As the editorial suggests, even in Jamaica, where the color-caste distinctions were acute, the tendency of the brown class was to deny its existence, much as DuBois and the Afro-American integrationists did. But Garvey was relentless in his attempts to bring the issue to the sur- face. "This hypocritical cry of 'Peace, Peace,‘ when there is no Peace is ruinous to the peace and harmony of society," he declared. We deny the existence of a condition that is woven into the warp and woof of the fabric of our social and public life. We refuse to admit the presence of a feature in our national life, the inescapable results of whose insidious workings cause delay, irritation and annoyance. We rave against, we for- bid, we threaten those [who] dare to refer to the evident, the patent facts and their glaring results. While the whole land is leavened and permeated with the evils of colour distinction and we cry out for harmony and peace. We are, to use a vulgar phrase, a bunch of cheats. We are dishonest, immoral, liars, hypocrites.39 This type of assault on entrenched privilege brought Garvey a death threat from an anonymous "Jamaican Secret Society of Colored Men," who considered him a "black swine." Garvey, characteristically, offered a reward of £20 for identification of the culprits and let it be known that he would welcome any attempt on his life.40 The color situation within the race in America was different only in degree, but certainly not in essence. And here, too, Garvey found himself in trouble for loudly declaiming on the unmentionable. Upon arrival in the United States in 1916 he had embarked on a thirty-eight 50 state tour which revealed many basic similarities. Garvey's critics made, and continue to make much of the fact that in the United States anybody with the slightest trace of African blood was considered black by white people. But this did not nullify the fact that the experience of slavery in the two areas had been similar. In Afro-America, the tendency of slaveowners to manumit their mulatto chil- dren had caused a disproportionate number of mulattoes among the free black population. By the abolition of slavery in the 1860's these had often obtained a headstart in educational and economic matters which easily converted itself into social snobbery. Indeed, it was not long be- fore white pseudo-scientific racists were beginning to explain the disproportionate numbers of light-skinned people -in business and the professions in terms of the admixture of genetically "superior" white blood. It is not surprising then that Garvey discovered in Afro-America a preference for light-skinned people as clerks, waitresses, etc., and news- papers full of advertisements for skin-whiteners, often couched in the crudest possible language. Added to this, he discovered in New York, Boston, Washington and Detroit the "Blue Vein Society" and the "Colonial Club." "The West Indian 'lights' formed the 'Colonial Club' and the American 'lights' the 'Blue Vein' Society."41 These attitudes ex- tended into the churches. In the Detroit church of Reverend Bob Bagnall, later on N.A.A.C.P. Director of Branches, 51 Garvey, acting on a tip, occupied a seat not too far from the front "and the effort nearly spoiled the whole service, as Brother Bob, who was then ascending the pulpit, nearly lost his 'balance' to see such a face so near the 'holy of holies.'" On a similar attempt to test the Blue Vein and Colonial Club type churches in New York "the Reverend Daniels was ready to fight."42 It would appear then, that Garvey, as one of his supporters pointed out, did not "appeal" to intra-race color prejudice in the United States but rather "revealed" it.43 Despite the similarities of course, the situation in America, where the white majority did not need the sup— port of the buffer mulatto element to the same extent as the white minority in the islands, was not as serious as in the West Indies. Garvey was fully aware of this.44 The situation in America was serious enough to warrant exposure and attack, but in the West Indies it more nearly approxi- mated a rigid caste structure. Garvey himself pinpointed this difference better than any of his critics: In the term 'Negro' we include all those persons whom the American white man includes in this appelation of his contempt and hate; . . . The contents of the term are much reduced in Jamaica and the West Indies, but it carries no less of reprobation against the per- sons. . . . The great curse of our Jamaica communal life is the failure of the hybrid population to real- ize their natural and correct identification. . . ."45 What this meant in concrete terms was that whereas the U.N.I.A. in the United States numbered among its ranks 52 people of all colors excluding white, and business and pro- fessional people in addition to the great mass of workers and peasants, in Jamaica it was largely confined to the ”humbler sections” of humanity. Which led Garvey to sur- mise that "God seems to save from the bottom upwards."46 Garvey's experience with the light-skinned element, both in the West Indies and America, led him to be hostile towards those who seemed to portray the supercilious atti- tudes he abhorred. It led him, too, to consider miscege- nation to be an evil which should not be perpetuated--"We are conscious of the fact that slavery brought upon us the curse of many colors within our Race, but that is no reason why we of ourselves should perpetuate the evil. . . ."47 To those people who were of lighter hue he suggested that "The off-colored people, being children of the Negro race should combine to re-establish the purity of their own race, rather than seeking to perpetuate the abuse of both races."48 The doctrine of race first had various implications for Garvey's attitude towards white people. It meant first of all the absolute exclusion of white people from member- ship in the U.N.I.A. and affiliated organizations. This fact was spelled out in the organization's constitution and in its race catechism. White people were also prevented from holding shares in Garvey's economic undertakings. The desire to build racial self-reliance led logically to the rejection of white financial philanthropy. In reply to a 53 suggestion by a white reporter in 1921 that "certain negro- philes in Massachusetts" might be prevailed upon to contri- bute to the U.N.I.A., Garvey replied, "We do not want their 49 And one of the money; this is a black man's movement." many remarkable achievements of Garvey is that through vigorous racial self-reliance he did succeed in collecting much larger sums than his contemporaries who had the sup- port of white philanthropists. Race first meant, however, not only race first for black people, but for other races as well. As far as Garvey was concerned, white people put race before all other considerations. White republicans, democrats, social- ists, and even Communists, in the final analysis would prove unreliable allies in the struggle, for at crucial points their position as white men would override other considera- tions. And not only did white pleple place racial self- interest before all other considerations, but they were for the most part hostile towards the black man. Accordingly Garvey often preferred an honest expression of racism to the friendly overtures of the philanthropist. For behind the friendly countenance of the philanthropist there often lurked a racist, and the open expression of racism appealed to Garvey as mre honest. Furthermore, the honest expression of racism was a blessing in disguise, since it forced the black man into a heightened racial consciousness, whereas the smiling liberal could lull the African into a sense of 54 false security. Garvey seems to have held these views from very early in his public career. In an article probably written in 1916, and published in Chicago in January of 1917, Garvey expressed his admiration for the tremendous strides made by Afro-Americans in the short period since the Civil War--strides which had already placed the Afro- American in the forefront of the race in such areas as race enterprises and education. Garvey saw southern racism as a factor in this progress--"The honest prejudice of the South was sufficiently evident," he explained, "to give the Negro of America the real start--the start with a race conscious- ness, which I am convinced is responsible for the state of 50 So the honest development already reached by the race." expression of white racial self-interest, then, did not unduly worry Garvey. Indeed, he could even admire it, for he considered it the duty of every race to seek its own interest. Thus he could say, "We have to admire the white man who fixed the Bible to suit himself, and who even fixed tradition itself, telling us that everything worthwhile and beautiful was made by the white man; that God is a great white man, that Jesus was a white man, and that the angels, etc. whatever they are, are as beautiful as peaches in Georgia."51 By the same token, however, white self-interest was seen as entirely detrimental to black self-interest. And within the confines of a country such as the United States, 55 where whites formed a large ruling majority, such white racial self-interest would tend inexorably towards the ex- termination of the black minority. It was for this reason that Garvey favored racial separation, ideally based on a black state in Africa. It was for this reason too that Garvey usually deprecated the participation of black sol— diers in white people's wars, especially where this involved fighting other black people. On this subject he felt so strongly that he is said to have wept after witnessing the depleted ranks of black New York veterans marching down 52 This was also the subject Harlem's Lenox Avenue in 1919. of some of his poetic meditations:~ When blacks fight blacks in white men's wars They're fools for all their valiant pain, For they shall never hOpe for right In whatsoever is the gain.53 Despite the fact that Garvey would not accept white philanthropy or allow whites to join his organization, it did not follow that he could not work to a limited extent with white people. In fact, by maintaining an independent black power base, he had more freedom to work with or sup- port widely differing types of white persons and organiza- tions on specific projects or for limited objectives, than some of his contemporaries who were straitjacketed in inter-racial organizations. The first category of white people with whom Garvey could cooperate were certain types of radicals. These were 56 usually people engaged in anti-colonial, anti-imperialist or anti-racist struggles. Often they were leaders of mass movements like his own and he could identify them as kin- dred spirits. Among persons in this category were Eamon De Valera, the Irish leader, who on one occasion was listed as a featured speaker at Garvey's Harlem Liberty Hall,54 and the Russian revolutionaries Lenin and Trotsky55 (even though Garvey was opposed to American Communists). He often had a good word for historical figures such as John Brown, Elijah Lovejoy, and others of abolitionist inclina- tion.56 He also had great admiration for Captain A. A. Cipriani, white leader of the Trinidad Workingmen's Asso- ciation (TWA), whose public career largely coincided with Garvey's in time and political outlook. Cipriani had be- come head of the TWA in 1919 at the invitation of the mem- bers, who were black. From its inception the association was a Garveyite stronghold in Trinidad. Many of its meetings were held in Port-of-Spain's Liberty Hall and its second-in-command W. Howard Bishop, was a prominent Garveyite. Garvey corresponded with Cipriani, and the latter made representations to the British government in 1937 to change their intention of barring Garvey from entry into the island.57 Another well-known white radical for whom Garvey seems to have had much respect was Nancy Cunard, a member of a wealthy shipping family who incurred the ire of her 57 parents, to her great financial loss, for becoming involved in a variety of black causes. In 1932 Cunard visited Jamaica to gather material for her Negro Anthology58 and was the guest at a reception arranged by Garvey, whose paper carried much favorable comment on her visit and on 59 At least two of his New York her political position. meetings were also addressed by a Dr. Marie Louise Montagu, white president of the International Humanity League.60 If Garvey could associate with some radical whites of the far left in deference to their anti-imperialist stance or reputation as leaders of the masses, he could also contrarily, though by no means inconsistently, asso- ciate to a limited extent with segregationists of the far right. Among these were white persons from the Southern United States who were among the greatest racists of the twentieth century and were not known for any efforts to conceal their belief in the racial inferiority of the black man. Yet these persons shared one very crucial ideological tenet with Garvey--they, too, believed in race first and therefore in the separation of the races, preferably by colonization in Africa, and an end to miscegenation. Be- tween these two sets of strange bedfellows there developed a symbiotic relationship which was fascinating in the un- written code of conduct accepted by the parties. Their dealings centered around facilitating the colonization pro- gram which was central to Garvey's plans and in avoiding .. v2“: : ... 0" - , o "..- ~ on: obv— .---h ‘ ... II Q‘::afl n ‘ _---- 0. 0.31.0": .E ...-b .50. c a :v n v;--‘ on..-" ..- -4 . c . I 1 ‘A~‘ M. g‘.‘ .....V' H—‘. ‘ "O~ UH ...... (‘303-~ .... "‘b§.a. .; . h .v-... A; ....~ ‘ .‘-': b- -.- -i -\ .‘I- ‘ a.“ . . IL. 93'c~ '... -u“§‘ .‘ - o ‘A- ‘k- ..V‘ o- . -» “a ...e r ‘ V'. ' . ‘9 ‘ -.:S. S\““‘ -.." o . - N: a 's .. ’ . ... ._v-~ ~..,, . :- A ‘M c: I h-.e'v I - a .‘ ~.3»- h:‘ . :-.;3 * ‘0 ‘AA 5 V‘ 3“:..v ‘I‘» 3": . .‘\‘\‘ ‘0- 5‘ NJC: s Se- “‘~A ‘L s.‘€ L ‘h. " . ‘ 5r -‘. ... ‘ (.h ‘C 3s- 5 ‘ “(5.“;- "£‘\.“ \.“: .5 gm - \_:A‘I s' A ‘VMv w. h -‘ V. 58 the racial cataclysm which they both thought would come from a close juxtaposition of the races. Garvey thus dis- missed out of hand the accusations of his integrationist detractors that he had "joined" the Ku Klux Klan. Simi- larly, Major Earnest Sevier Cox of the White America Society could reply to accusations that he and Garvey had formed an alliance, and that he was Garvey's desciple, by stating that they had an understanding concerning the inte- grity of both races, and that was all.61 This aspect of Garvey's ideological position has endeared him to white segregationists and racists apart from those with whom he dealt actively. (He dealt mainly with the Ku Klux Klan, Senator Theodore G. Bilbo of Mississippi, Earnest Sevier Cox of Virginia, and John Powell of the Anglo-Saxon Clubs of America.) Among others who saw in Garvey a black champion for their cause were the German Emergency League Against the Black Horror, who sought Garvey's aid in 1921 for the removal of French African occu- pation troops from the Rhineland.62 Garvey had previously attacked the presence of these troops in Germany, but on different grounds-~he thought that the French were afraid to send them home because their exposure to Europe and mili— tary training might augur ill for French colonialism.63 An amusing example of the white segregationist attempting to extract what he can use of Garvey's separatist ideology comes from a review of Garvey's Philosophy and 59 Opinions appearing in a South African journal in 1968. Unlike some racist publications, this journal did not ig- nore the fact that all of Garvey's thought was not palatable to them. It however praised his stand against miscegenation and declared: There are many black marks against Garvey. But if the leaders of African states like Zambia, Kenya, Tanzania, Sudan and so on were to abandon racialism and accept his philosophy of non-racialism coupled with pride in and upliftment of the Black African, Africa would be- come a far happier and more peaceful continent.64 One of the most controversial of Garvey's endorse- ments of white segregationists came in 1921 and centered around President Warren G. Harding's controversial speech delivered in Birmingham, Alabama. Harding, before a crowd of 100,000 people spoke in terms reminiscent of Booker T. Washington. After declaring that he was going to be frank and honest whether people liked it or not he postulated that "Racial amalgamation there cannot be. Partnership of the races in developing the highest aims of all humanity there must be if humanity is to achieve the ends which we have set for it. The black man should seek to be, and he should be encouraged to be, the best possible black man and not the best possible imitation of a white man."65 Harding further suggested that the black man should cease to vote solidly Republican just as the southern white man should cease to vote solidly Democratic. He hinted vaguely at' increased educational opportunities for black folk, but 533338 YES " v .. v-. 5.. .03. \ . 9- «'- Q q Sh:€s.a :5 ‘ QV:.9g-‘ . ‘Q‘---II‘~ . o no . “" Ce-.. .‘vb‘ ”.-.: .. “.E n. U: S~ra=e~\, ‘0 '¢ ‘ha‘ ‘ o N Q ‘ ‘33s . ' he“ § ~v I.‘ .‘P'e‘v‘ ' I ‘ O. o \ ~e 60 with a proviso about education suited to peoples' positions in life which sounded like a rehashing of Booker T. Washington's ideas on industrial education. Garvey's re- sponse was an immediate telegram pledging the support of 66 all New Negroes. A New York Times correspondent saw the speech as an attempt by the Republican party to win over the white south,67 a view probably shared by Garvey's inte- grationist foes. Despite Garvey's limited agreements with some white persons, the insistent black nationalist thrust of the U.N.I.A. ensured the hostility of the majority of white persons. One white lady witnessing a U.N.I.A. parade at 125th Street in Manhattan in 1920 is said to have tearfully exclaimed, "And to think, the Negroes will get their liberty before the Irish."68 Garvey's race first doctrine was essentially a strategy to ensure self-reliance and equality for the down- trodden African race. Unlike the white preachers of this doctrine with whom he collaborated, he did not go a step further and preach racial superiority. He more than once stressed that "All beauty, virtue and goodness are the ex- clusive attributes of no one race. A11 humanity have their shortcomings; hence no statement of mine, at any time, must be interpreted as a wholesale praise of, or attack upon any 69 race, people or creed." The race catechism used by Garveyites reinforced this attitude as follows: 61 Q. Did God make anngroup or race of men superior to another? A. No, He created all races equal, and of one blood, to dwell on all the face of the earth. Q. Is it true that the Ethiopian or Black group of the human family is the lowest group of all? A. It is a base falsehood which is taught in books written by white men. All races were created equal.70 And like all reformers and revolutionaries, Garvey dreamed of an era of universal peace and humanity which would be facilitated by a rehabilitated race-- The heart of the Negro is deep and holy. Misdirected, it has been emotional and sentimental up to the pre- sent, but the recovery of the race in its sublimest thought will give it an urge, direct it toward an end that will bestow great blessings upon mankind. Such blessings would include the salvaging of "the bankrupt civilization of white Europe."71 NOTES RACE FIRST lNegro World, July 26, 1919, quoted in, A. Mitchell Palmer, "Exhibit No. 10. Radicalism and Sedition Among the Negroes as Reflected in their Publications," Investigation Activities of the Department of Justice, V01. XII of Senate Documents, No. 153, 66th Congress, lst Session, 1919 (Wash- ington, D.C., Government Printing Office, 1919), P. 163. 2Negro World, January 5, 1924, p. 4. 3The Black Man, II, 3, September-October, 1936, p. 5. 4Negro World, July 28, 1923, p. l. 5Philosgphy and Opinions, II, p. 62; The Blackman, August 28, 1929, p. l. 6A U.N.I.A. application form of 1915 required the applicant to state his color. Enclosed in Marcus Garvey to Booker T. Washington, April 12, 1915, Box 939, Booker T. Washington papers, Library of Congress. 7National Archives of the U.S., Records of the Post Office Department, R.G. 28, Box 56, Unarranged #500, U.S. Post Office, Translation Bureau, to Solicitor, Post Office Department, July 24, 1919. 8Speech at the Ward Theatre, Kingston, Jamaica, Negro WOrld, January 7, 1928, p. 2. 9National Negro Voice, July 19, 1941, p. 8. loUniversal Black Men Catechism, (n.p., n.d.), p. 8. 62 Q. Q. J 3'15 (6.: :e:.e::;:r. 2: deal: g. - ‘ .l q. :0 .v. I . ‘4 d", \ I " ‘ ‘4' v Q ‘ \vvou-' s ... v .3...’ 3’ Ce 0 5- k.‘TEVp . ‘ '9 ..lZathrs - 53.634 ‘ ' (SCLA;‘: ~VZ' Zi .... {a ”.1: I 1: ~ to h dazaica 63 11After Garvey's imprisonment some such advertise- ments (e.g., for bleaching creams) did appear, no doubt a reflection of financial necessity; for a letter protesting this development, see, Negro Wbrld, September 7, 1929, p. 4. 12Amy Jacques Garvey, ed., Selections From the Poetic Meditations of Marcus Garvey TNew York, A. J. Garvey, 1927), p. 22. 13 Literary Digest, August 19, 1922, p. 42 (photo). 14Universal Black Men Catechism, p. 10. 15Public Record Office, London, Foreign Office records, F.O. 371/21637, Garvey to Viscount Halifax, Secre- tary of State, Foreign Office, November 22, 1938. lsglggfiggg,* September 3, 1929, p. 1. 17Selections . . . ; Amy Jacques Garvey, The Tragedy of White Injustice (New York, A. J. Garvey, 1927). The Black ManmagaZine also contains a large number of his poems. 18John E. Bruce papers, Schomburg Collection, New York, F10, 8 (n.d.). 191bid., BD 10, D. 1. 20Blackman, June 21, 1930, p. 3. 21Negro World, September 29, 1928, p. l. 22Negro World, January 9, 1932, p. 2. 23Ralph Bunche, "The Programs, Ideologies, Tactics and Achievements of Negro Betterment and Interracial Orga- nizations," unpublished manuscript prepared for the Carnegie-Myrdal study on The Negro in America, June 7, 1940 (Schomburg Collection), p. 419; Negro World, June 7, 1924, in F.O. 371/9633. * "Black Man" refers here to Garvey's monthly maga- zine published for the most part in England. "Blackman" refers to his daily (subsequently weekly) paper published in Jamaica. were t: f\) \1) 4.1) 0‘ ' ‘ ‘- ‘\ J- v. Re“':&" C: 3; V ~' (“‘3‘stcn'} 3s 212‘s 64 24Negro World, November 9, 1929, p. 5. The authors were to be Wallace Thurman and Willard Jourdan Rapp. 2521225_fl32. I, 10, late October 1935, pp. 10-11. 26Panama Tribune, February 14, 1937. 27Marcus Garvey, Grand Speech of Hon. Marcus Garvey at Kingsw§y_Hall,‘LondonJ Denouncing the Moving Picture Propaganda to Discredit the Negro (London, Black Man Pub. Co., 1939). 28Paul Robeson, Jr., "Paul Robeson: Black Warrior," Freedomways, XI, 1, First Quarter, 1971, p. 26. 29Blackman, April 16, 1929, p. 8. 3OIbid., August 27, 1929, p. 3. 31Black Man, III, 10, July 1938. 32Negro World, December 8, 1923, p. 1; Philosophy and Opinions, II, p. 128. 33Marcus Garvey, An Answer to His Many Critics (U.N.I.A. press release "To the White Press of the World," January 1923). 34W. E. B. DuBois, "Marcus Garvey," The Crisis, XXI, 3, January 1921, p. 114. 35Marcus Garvey,.hnu;,"The British West Indies in the Mirror of Civilization," The Africa Times and Orient Review, October 1913, p. 159. 36Marcus Garvey,¢hmu, A Talk With Afro-West Indians (Kingston?, African Communities League, 1915?), p. 6. 37Garvey to Moton, February 29, 1916, reprinted in Eight Negro Bibliographies. 38 Blackman, April 16, 1929, p. 2. 1.1 . . lu- :. .Vi - ... A» Pia —.. a ~ I a a .1— 14.“ .4” -.. I.- I II. .I‘ no... '5- I Ii. 5 . rKJ I -\ v PK J ' -\v t d C. an o 4. 1n». ulrfl a. ‘9. u“ ‘ Vs ... o O. .u C L . v .c a. fit u. o e .. . Q Q "I“ Iflh W A e n u u p$ ; Qu n s v a Av VJ «.4 ‘bQOl."’ ¥;.I‘AF 65 39Blackman, January 22, 1930, p. l. 4°Blackman, May 20, 1929, p. 7. 41 . . . Philosophy and Opinions, II, p. 58. 421bid. 43 Negro World, October 27, 1923, p. 6. 44£Eig}r December 1, 1923, p. 1; Philosophy and Qpinions, II, p. 56. 4 5Blackman, September 17, 1929, p. 1. 46Ibid. 47An Answer to His Many Critics, n.p. 48Marcus Garvey, Aims and Objects of Movement for Solution of Negro Problem Outlined (New York, Press ofithe U.N.I.A., 1924), n.p.; Philosophy and Opinions, II, p. 42. 49Rollin Lynde Hartt, "The Negro Moses," The Independent, CV, February 26, 1921, p. 205. 50Marcus Garvey, Jr., "The West Indies in the Mirror of Truth," Champion Magazine, I, 5, January 1917, p. 267. SlNegro World, April 28, 1923, p. 10. 52Saunders Redding, The Lonesome Road (Garden City, New York, Doubleday, 1958), p. 229. 53§lgg§_ggp, I, 11, late December 1935, p. 4. S4Handbill in the John E. Bruce papers announcing a Liberty Hall meeting on Saturday, January 1 (year not given). 55Philosophy and Opinions, I, p. 73. 56Negro Wbrld, March 7, 1925, p. 1; Philosophy and Opinions, II, p. 10. ...-... . -" n.5, b p “\v v o 66 57New Jamaican, September 1, 1932, p. 2; CO.323/1518, minuteW of 21 July 1937. 58(London, Wishart, 1934). 59New Jamaican, July 12, 1932, p. 2; July 18, 1932, p. 1; July 29, 1932, pp. 1-2; July 30, 1932, pp. 1, 3. 60Negro WOrld, April 19, 1924, p. 2; August 23, 1924, p. 3. 61Ibid., August 15, 1925, p. 4. 62"A German Appeal to Garvey," the Nation, CXIII, 2947, December 28, 1921, p. 769. 63Philosophy and Opinions, II, p. 113. 64Bulletin of the Africa Institute, Pretoria, March 1968. (Copy in A. J. Garvey papers.) 65New York Times, October 27, 1921, p. 11. 66Ibid. 671bid. 68Truman Hughes Talley, "Garvey's 'Empire of Ethiopia,'" World's Work, XLI, 3, January 1921, p. 265. 69Philospphy and Opinions, II, p. 134; Blackman, June 21, 1929, p. 1. 7oCatechism, pp. 2-3. 712122£_!§g. II, 3, September-October 1936, p. 4. .H . we ‘- — abnc— . 1. Do RH an... .: :. .I .C : z. . .. a. fit... 5. AW 2. a. Q . we Q A» . C. . . .. .. I>~ LI an 7 V¢ ~V km... .& no a. t. “I I . .fl ‘5 sun a“ A v I e: H \l pt :4: r c g. a". V Vu y § 1' A. “0.9 C L. tset an” 1 A J-Ai h CHAPTER III NATIONHOOD When we, as members of the Universal Negro Improvement Association, talk about a government of our own in Africa, a flag of our own and a national anthem of our own, some Negroes laugh at us, but we have only pity for them, as they know not what they do. When Uncle Sam lynches her black boys with her uniform on their back, and John Bull calls her ex-soldiers aliens who helped her in the Ashanti and Zulu wars to take big slices of Africa, then it is high time for some dull, apathetic Negroes to think in terms of nationhood. -- Marcus Garvey1 . . . we are determined to solve our own problem, by redeeming our Motherland Africa from the hands of alien exploiters and found there a Government, a nation of our own, strong enough to lend protection to the members of our race scattered all over the world, and to compel the respect of the nations and races of the earth. -- Marcus Garvey2 Garvey was the complete Black Nationalist. The whole of his public career was enacted during a period when African peoples all over the world had descended, in some cases only very recently, into near total subjugation. In Africa itself only Liberia and Ethiopia maintained a very precarious independence. In the western hemisphere, the only independent black nation, Haiti, was invaded by United 67 68 States marines and occupied from 1915 to 1934. Black people were universally oppressed, lynched, enslaved and discriminated against. Convinced that black people must seek salvation first as a race, Garvey set himself the task of doing this through the principle of nationhood. Black persons should be brought into one active community which, based in Africa, would encompass the whole African universe. By belonging to this Pan-African community of 400,000,000 (Garvey's critics often took issue with his arithmetic) black persons could rely on the force of an overwhelming majority, even in areas, such as the United States, where they were in a minority. The U.N.I.A. represented the nucleus of this nation, and Garvey's intention was to move its headquarters to Liberia, a scheme which was foiled in 1924 by the combined hostility of the Liberian, British, French and United States governments. The idea of nationhood, like probably all of his major ideas, had already been formulated by Garvey before the U.N.I.A. was formed. As early as 1910 he had been elected secretary of the National Club in Jamaica. This club sought to break the stranglehold of the Jamaican plantocracy on that island's political life, and agitated for self-government for Jamaica. Garvey later claimed some limited success for the club's struggle against the plantoc- racy.3 By the time that the U.N.I.A. became operative in 69 the United States, then, Garvey had long come to the con- clusion that mere civil rights agitation was not sufficient to demolish the black man's burden. He proclaimed his dis- agreement with the limited strategies of his rivals--the Universal Negro Improvement Association, he declared, did not speak "in the language of theology and religion; not in the language of social reform, but the Universal Negro Im- provement Association speaks in the language of building a government: of building political power and all that goes with it."4 And "all that goes with it" the U.N.I.A. did have. Indeed, the U.N.I.A. during Garvey's American period became a microcosm of the African nation which Garvey hoped to build. In the international conventions beginning in 1920 the U.N.I.A. had its parliament. Issues were aired and de- bated, usually for the full thirty-one days of August, and all officers, including Garvey himself, were duly elected. Delegates, themselves usually elected by U.N.I.A. branches and other race organizations, attended from places as far apart as Australia, Africa and North America. Presiding over the organization from 1920 onwards was a Potentate, a kind of constitutional monarch. The U.N.I.A. constitution stipulated that the Potentate must be an African from the Motherland. Garvey himself, the executive head, was given the title of Provisional President of Africa. The African diaspora was subdivided into several broad geographical 9} 70 regions, each presided over by a Leader. The organization had its own "Universal Ethiopian Anthem" which in 1920 was adopted as ”the anthem of the Negro race." The anthem had been begun in 1919 by Arnold J. Ford, musical director of the U.N.I.A., at a spot in a meadow where a black girl had been found mutilated and murdered.5 The organization, too, had its own Magna Charta in its "Declaration of Rights of the Negro Peoples of the World"6 adopted at the first annual International Convention of the Negro Peoples of the WOrld, at the opening ceremonies of which in New York in 1920, 25,000 black people were present. Garvey himself was bestowed with the title "Honorable" at this convention.7 A U.N.I.A. civil service administered its own exams and pre- pared workers for service in the organization.8 The U.N.I.A. demonstrated the trappings of nationhood, too, by bestowing titles on deserving members of the race. White as well as black critics ridiculed the practice, to which Garvey retorted, "I am accused of creating Dukes, Barons and Knights. Who gave the white man a monopoly on creating social orders?"9 To W. E. B. DuBois, his indefatigable critic, did he especially oppose this argument--"If DuBois was created a Knight Commander of the Bath by the British King, or awarded a similar honor by some white Potentate, he would have advertised it from cover to cover of the 'Crisis,’ and he would have written a book and told us. . . ."10 With similar logic Garvey insisted on wearing, I.- “A! o ‘:-A bio!" . .Vv‘~ av--- . nz.“ () '9: f I 71 on ceremonial occasions, uniforms and robes after the fashion of those worn by the leaders of sovereign states. Garvey lived long enough to see the Italian fascists install a Duke of Addis Ababa after their invasion of Ethiopia. He pointedly noted the lack of hostility to this occurrence by those who had ridiculed him in 1924 for appointing John E. 11 The external attributes of Bruce a Duke of the Nile. nationhood could also be seen in the uniformed auxiliaries of the U.N.I.A., such as the Universal African Legions, the Universal Motor Corps, the Universal African Black Cross Nurses, Juveniles, and so on. The most extravagantly impressive item of Garvey's nationalist inspired pageantry centered around the court receptions that marked his conventions. Such receptions were conceived of as "the biggest event in the social life of the Negro Peoples of the WOrld." One such reception was adorned with a statue of the Black Queen of Beauty holding aloft her torch of truth.12 Among the retinue at such court receptions were "Her Majesty Candace and Provisional Ladies of the Royal Court of Ethiopia of the U.N.I.A."13 The most enduring of the U.N.I.A.‘s external trap- pings of nationhood was its flag of red, black and green, adopted in the 1920 Declaration of Rights as the official colors of the African race. The question of a flag for the race was not as trivial as might have appeared on the sur- face, for in the United States especially, the lack of an ". ‘U In W o 1 ‘ o .3 Val: p. I '¢u " {“0 Q :“r‘49 f" V 72 African symbol of nationhood seems to have been the cause for crude derision on the part of white persons and a source of sensitiveness on the part of Afro-Americans. White derision over this deficiency was summed up in a popu- lar American song "Every race has a flag but the 'coon.'" A report of 1912 appearing in the London based Africa Times and Orient Review (for which Garvey worked) documented the 14 far-reaching consequences of this song. A Bishop J. Lennox of the African Methodist Episcopal Church of Zion of Cleveland, Ohio, had emerged from a theatre where the song had been sung to be met by a fistfight between an Irishman and an Afro-American who had objected to the white man's repeating the song. The bishop duly parted the contestants but was moved by the incident to design a flag for the race to remove this source of ridicule. His flag was subse- quently endorsed by 85,000 (according to the article) mem- bers of the race at a convention in Ontario. The general conclave of the bishop's church also endorsed the flag. The flag was a complicated affair of stars and bars and red, white, blue and purple, and was based on biblical symbolism (purple for Jesus' robe, white for the purity of the saints, blue for the loyalty of the Negro to the United States, etc.) The flag itself was apparently not a great success but the idea lived on with Garvey who was able to translate it into the more meaningful (and today universally adopted) red, black and green. 73 Garvey was in all probability familiar with the bishop's article. In 1921 he declared, Show me the race or the nation without a flag, and I will show you a race of people without any pride. Aye! In song and mimicry they have said, 'Every race has a flag but the coon.‘ How true! How true! Aye! But that was said of us four years ago. They can't say it now, . . .15 The race catechism used by Garveyites explained the significance of the red, black and green as red for the "color of the blood which men must shed for their redemption and liberty," black for "the color of the noble and distin- guished race to which we belong," and green for "the luxuriant vegetation of our Motherland."16 On at least one occasion Garvey gave a different explanation for the colors. On this occasion his purpose seems to have been to delibe- rately alarm his interviewer. The interviewer was Charles Mowbray White of the United States government-sponsored coalition of businessmen, conservative trade-unionists and professional people known as the National Civic Federation. This gentleman called on Garvey at the Black Star Line offices during Garvey's 1920 International Convention to ascertain Garvey's ideological position. He was informed in answer to a question that the red expressed the U.N.I.A.‘s sympathy with the "Reds of the Wbrld," the green expressed a similar sympathy for the Irish in their struggle against the British, and the black stood for people of the African race.l7 74 The nationalist implications of Garvey's flag, like other aspects of Garvey's thought, were not confined to Afro-America but inspired nationalist struggles on the African continent too. Thus at the charter unveiling cere- mony of the U.N.I.A. Woodstock division in Cape Town, South Africa in 1924, the feature speaker, J. G. Gumbs, who hap- pened to be both president of the massive Industrial and Commercial Workers' Union and a member of the advisory board of the Cape Town U.N.I.A., expressed particular grati- tude for the red, black and green flag, a flag, as he expressed it, "of our own."18 In the very next year the African National Congress, also of South Africa, adopted a .gold, black and green flag--gold for the country's wealth, black for the people and green for the land. The flag sug- gested by a Garvey admirer and influential ANC member, T. D. Mweli Skota.19 In the 1950's the red, black and green could be seen in Kenya, this time with a shield, arrow and spear superimposed on it, as the flag of Jomo Kenyatta's nation- alist Kenya African Union.20 (Kenyatta himself had come under Garvey's influence as early as 1921.)21 It was of the nature of Garvey to follow his ideas through to their logical conclusions. One of the more im- portant consequences of his doctrine of nationhood, then, was the establishment of representatives of the race in strategic areas. To this end the Declaration of Rights of the Negro Peoples of the world had called ”upon the various 75 governments of the world to accept and acknowledge Negro representatives who shall be sent to the said government to represent the general welfare of the Negro peoples of the world."22 Just days after the adoption of this declaration the announcement was made that the U.N.I.A.‘s Leader of the American Negroes would soon take up residence in a Black House in Washington, since black people could not elect one of their own to the White House.23 But even before the declaration and the Black House proposal (which was not implemented) the U.N.I.A. had sent commissioners to France to the Versailles peace conference of 1919. Their lobbying efforts did not succeed in obtain- ing any abatement in the zeal of the European imperialist powers to seize the ex-German African colonies.24 Perhaps‘ for this reason the 1920 declaration wrote the League off as ”null and void as far as the Negro is concerned, in that it seeks to deprive Negroes of their liberty."25 Neverthe- less by 1922, the U.N.I.A. was ready to try the League again. A U.N.I.A. delegation consisting of Oxford trained George 0. Marke from Sierra Leone, Professor J. J. Adam from Haiti, who was educated at Tuskegee, William LeVan Sherrill from Afro-America, a graduate of Philander Smith College, Little Rock, Arkansas, and Professor James O'Meally from Jamaica, a former headmaster of Calabar College, proceeded to Geneva to lay a petition before the League.26 The petition re- quested that the ex—German colonies be turned over to black 76 leadership, since black soldiers had been responsible for their capture. The petition suggested that under black leadership they could make good within twenty years. Then 400,000,000 black people would not be serfs any longer.27 The delegation arrived in Geneva early in September of 1922, secured seats in the assembly hall and were ad- mitted to all committee rooms and were generally treated with courtesy. After lobbying for three and a half weeks they were able to interest the Persian delegation in sub- mitting the petition on behalf of the U.N.I.A. The Persians did so, but by this time the current session of the League was within three days of ending. It therefore had to be filed away for consideration at the 1923 session. The dele- gation seems to have performed a highly successful feat of lobbying for they were allowed to sit among the official delegates rather than in the gallery where non-official delegates sat. According to a member of the delegation, of about three hundred similar unofficial delegates attempting to present petitions, the U.N.I.A. was the only one which succeeded.28 For the 1923 League session the U.N.I.A. again des- patched a representative, in the hope that the 1922 petition would be debated. This time the sole delegate was Professor Jean Joseph Adam, a former president of the San Francisco U.N.I.A. division and a member of the 1922 delegation who had acted as its secretary and translator. Now he was 77 upgraded to the rank of First Provisional Ambassador of the Negro Peoples of the World to France. He would reside in Paris and would lobby at Geneva.29 He sailed from New York on August 23, and on August 24, the British Consul-General in New York, who kept a close watch on the U.N.I.A., so in- formed the British Ambassador in Washington who so informed 30 By the time that Adam got the Foreign Office in London. to Europe the League, probably at the instigation of Britain and France, whose ex—German African territories were the objects of the U.N.I.A.‘s race-conscious desires, had quietly thwarted Garvey's plans. They had gotten around the U.N.I.A.‘s assumption of nationality by resolving that all nationals with grievances should present them through their respective governments. As far as Garvey was con- cerned, of course, the African wherever he lived had no government to speak to his interests and so he should be heard as a race. And the U.N.I.A., with its aspirations to nationhood, represented these racial interests.31 Further- more, the United States was not even a member of the League, which fact doubly excluded Afro-Americans. Nevertheless, here, as elsewhere, Garvey had trodden upon the toes of British and French imperialism, and a de- bate of his petition would have represented an immense propaganda victory for him (which, as other events showed, could readily be translated into unrest in British and French colonies) as well as a serious embarrassment for (X 78 Britain in particular. The boldness of his scheme is overshadowed only by the remarkable fact that it almost succeeded. Britain and France had ample reason to thwart Garvey's petition, for the African nationality which he desired could only be obtained at their expense. Among other things, the petition stated:- we, your Petitioners, representing the four hundred million Negroes of the world, desire to bring before you the fact that our race is now seeking racial political liberty; that we desire to found a Govern- ment of our own, and that we shall be given the opportunity to exercise that liberty that is common to all free men of all races and nations. The document recalled the heroic efforts of black soldiers, supposedly in the cause of democracy, and showed that all subject peoples had received something out of the war, save and excepting only the majority of Africans:’ we readily appreciate the fact that the League of Nations has taken into consideration the restoration of Palestine to the Jew. . . . Ireland has been given the consideration of a Free State Government, Egypt has been granted a form of independence, and there is still a great consideration for India, who was represented at the Peace Conference at Versailles through and by reason of the splendid service rendered by Indian soldiers.32 Garvey issued a renewed petition in 1928 and con- tinued to try and attract the League's attention thereafter, but never came any closer to success than in 1922.33 The U.N.I.A. drive for nationhood did not stop with commissioners to the League of Nations and a provisional ambassador to France. Travelling commissioners were con- stantly on the move, establishing personal contact with {’ln SJ 1 'n 't! ' m m ”3 .— B’H his t?a,,€ t 79 U.N.I.A. branches. In some areas, especially on the Afri- can continent, such commissioners had perforce to operate clandestinely, for they faced arrest by the British, French, and other colonialist authorities, if caught. There were also provisional ambassadors appointed, and legations set up, in other places besides France. One such place was Liberia, where a legation was set up in 1921. Its resident secretary was Cyril Crichlow from Trinidad. His correspondence with Garvey was couched in the language and style of similar correspondence between British and American diplomatic representatives and their home govern- ments. Telegrams were also exchanged between the legation and U.N.I.A. headquarters in Harlem, in a special code. The resident secretary summed up his duties in a letter to Garvey, in the following terms:~ The oral instructions of Your Excellency, being con- ceived from the point of view that the post was a diplomatic one, the Commissariat a Legation, and my position Secretary to the Legation, indicated that I should do all that a Legation Secretary would be ex- pected to do--study the Liberian situation, the people and the government, ferret out all important news about whomsoever and whatsoever, and make con- fidential reports to Your Excellency direct, aside from other reports that I might send to the Council through Your Excellency.34 In the case of Liberia, Garvey had attempted to establish a legation without openly advertising it as such. In January of 1924, however, he despatched an ambassador to Britain amidst much fanfare. He had been distressed during his travels in Europe to discover that all peoples and races 80 residing there had someone who could look after their in- terests, the African being, as per usual, the sole excep- 35 The first U.N.I.A. ambassador to Britain was Sir tion. Richard Hilton Tobitt. Tobitt, a former African Methodist Episcopal minister and schoolmaster in Bermuda, had attended the 1920 U.N.I.A. convention and was one of the signers of the Declaration of Rights. He was elected Leader of the Eastern Provinces of the West Indies and, as a result of his refusal to disavow the U.N.I.A. he lost his position in the church and suffered a withdrawal of govern- ment support from his school.36 On his appointment he was admitted by Garvey to the "exclusive order of Knight-Com- mander of the Sublime Order of the Nile," which entitled him to use the prefix "Sir."37 He was charged with the task of representing the interests of the Negro peoples of the world at the Court of St. James. He was to study the poli- tical situation in England as it affected the African race. Garvey considered the time propitious (Tobitt sailed in January of 1924) because 1924 was a year of Labour Party rule. A Labour government, Garvey surmised, would be less difficult to deal with than aristocratic Conservatives, since they should have some sympathy for the aspirations of the mass of people. For this reason, too, Tobitt was charged with creating favorable sentiment among the English working class, for, as Garvey explained, "If you can con- vince the English working man that he has no cause for 81 complaint against the Negro it would be impossible for any government in Great Britain to do anything that would af- fect the interests of Negroes, . . ." If English workers refused to fight, then there was no way that Britain could go to war with the U.N.I.A. in Africa. Tobitt, like Adam in France, would be a provisional ambassador only, and would give way when a truly independent Africa began sending ambassadors of its own.38 Garvey, with all the aplomb of the master propagan- dist, officially informed the British government of the appointment of the Hon. Richard Hilton Tobitt as "High Commissioner and Minister Plenipotentiary to His Britannic Majesty's Government" in a note that read as follows: Honourable Richard Hilton Tobitt is accredited by the Universal Negro Improvement Association to interest himself in all matters affecting the interest of the Negro race within Great Britain. It continued, His credentials have been submitted to His Majesty's Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary and it is hoped that His Majesty's Government will accord to him such courtesies as are extended to other representatives of independent races and sovereign peoples.39 Upon arrival in England, Tobitt requested interviews with the prime minister and the secretary of state of the Colonial Office, so that he might present the credentials of the U.N.I.A. and A.C.L. His request precipitated a debate over whether a response should properly come from the British Foreign Office or the Colonial Office. One Colonial ("In YEars of irde: 82 Office official suggested that it was the business of his department "to keep Garvey and his associates out of West Africa--not out of No. 10."40 Keeping the U.N.I.A. out of No. 10 (official residence of the British prime minister) should be the responsibility of the Foreign Office. Another Colonial Office official considered the adverse effects on British colonialism in the West Indies which would flow from any such official recognition of the U.N.I.A.: The confidence of the West Indies in HMG [His Majesty's Government] would suffer a rude shock if any sort of official recognition were given to this Association, which has a record of fraud, sedition, and incitement to violence.41 Not surprisingly, Tobitt's request for an interview to present his credentials was finally turned down.42 The U.N.I.A. High Commissioner nevertheless did remain in England awhile, among other things addressing meetings of 43 In 1925 he U.N.I.A. branches in Manchester and London. crops up again, this time as High Commissioner of the Eastern Provinces of the West Indies. In this capacity he fared much better with the Dutch colony of Surinam, where he was received by the governor and given the freedom of the colony.44 It is worth noting in passing that Garvey's diplo- matic service in the years 1919 to 1925 can stand comparison in terms of scope and size with those of many of the new African and West Indian independent states in the early years of independence in the 1960's. 83 One year before refusing to accept Garvey's High Commissioner to the Court of St. James, the British govern- ment had seriously considered extending quasi-diplomatic recognition to the Cuban division of the U.N.I.A. The situ- ation in Cuba was unique. Here, thousands of black workers, especially Haitians and Jamaicans (the latter British sub- jects), had for years been recruited to work as laborers on Cuban sugar plantations. (Many of their descendants still live in Cuba, particularly in Oriente province.) In Cuba these black workers were ruthlessly oppressed and were af- forded practically no legal protection, either by the Cuban government or by British diplomatic personnel. In this situation the U.N.I.A. became firmly entrenched among the black workers in Cuba and in time became mutual aid society, race uplift organization and quasi-government for the black population. It was practically the only effective attempt to look after their interests.45 Not surprisingly, by the mid-1920's Cuba had far and away the largest number of U.N.I.A. divisions and chapters in the West Indies with a total of fifty-four, almost twice the number in Trinidad, which ranked second with thirty. Garvey's own Jamaica had ten at this time.46 In this situation the British minister in Cuba bought the U.N.I.A.‘s idea of extending semi-official recog- nition to it as the organization protecting the interests of British west Indian workers in Cuba. The Foreign Office |‘. hue wn Or?“ ..e H. u. 9 Sara» 84 in London to whom the suggestion was forwarded, decided to sound out three governors of its West Indian colonies before coming to a decision. These governors, all of them well acquainted with the work of the U.N.I.A. in their own colonies, were mostly totally hostile to the idea. The governor of Barbados, for example, explained that there were but two U.N.I.A. branches in the island, one of which was composed of "more solid men" and lacked "any distinctly anti-white proclivities," while the other was allegedly very probably disloyal. Semi-official recognition of the Cuba U.N.I.A. would give a fillip to the local branches which might end in headaches for British colonialism. "If, how- ever," he replied to the Foreign Office query, the Cuban branch were recognised as the centre of protection of the interests of the British West Indians in that Country I foresee that the Society would obtain a status in this Colony that might be very inconvenient. It would certainly result in a very large increase in membership and the hot heads in the Association would probably be awakened to renewed zeal to stir up trouble between the two races. The Barbadians are generally a quiet well behaved body of men, but they are very excitable and easily roused.47 He further indicated that U.N.I.A. members had recently sent threatening letters to planters and were encouraging the workers to strike, and with the approach of croptime in the sugar plantations, these hot heads might become restive. Furthermore, it would be inconsistent to recognize the U.N.I.A. in Cuba and repress it in Barbados (where it was subject to police surveillance and the Negro world was III II.- .51 ,:r; V--- as. ‘ ',' I ' a, ‘ Q ' e:«lea 2 85 banned.) The British governor of Jamaica was somewhat less hostile to the idea, possibly because the Cuban U.N.I.A. was largely Jamaican in composition. He was prima facie against recognition, but in the peculiar circumstances, "as a means of obtaining concerted action for the protec- tion of British West Indians in that country," he could not 'forsee how this Government would be embarrassed by semi- official recognition of the persons mentioned, provided that care is taken to prevent all idea that this Government is in any way Party to the recognition."48 His refusal to condemn the idea outright was in part due to his belief that there might be facts concerning the proposal with which he was not familiar. The governor of Trinidad, where the U.N.I.A. was usually most repressed among the British West Indian islands, replied briefly and with venom: I am strongly averse to any action which might in any way lead to the Universal Negro Improvement Association believing that His Majesty's Government regarded the Association as one which could in any way improve the position of His Majesty's negro [sic] population in the West Indies. He added that he had recently refused a petition from the Trinidad U.N.I.A. to lift the ban on the Negro WOrld "owing to the objectionable character of the matter which this publication continues to contain."49 Based on these Opinions, the British minister in 86 Cuba was advised to withhold recognition.50 Thereafter the Cuban government, with the collusion of such American employers of black labor as the United Fruit Company, increased its campaign against the U.N.I.A. which, among other things, was responsible for strikes against these employers. U.N.I.A. officials were sometimes jailed and branches were sometimes closed by the government.51 In 1930 Garvey himself was refused permission to visit Cuba. General Manuel Delgado, Secretary of the Interior, ex- plained that there was no race problem in Cuba, but the U.N.I.A. was nevertheless stirring up same. He also issued a statement ordering the provincial governments to close all U.N.I.A. branches.52 If Garvey's provisional government was well supplied with ambassadors and travelling commissioners, he himself on his travels acted like a head of state, requesting, and sometimes receiving interviews with such people as the governor of British Honduras and the president of Costa Rica.53 It was partly for this reason, too, that he made his much-criticized visit to the headquarters of the Ku Klux Klan in Atlanta, Georgia. He reasoned that he was the head of the largest international organization of black people while the Klan represented the "Invisible Empire" which most truly represented white opinion in America, and thus a summit conference was in order. The U.N.I.A.‘s assumption of nationality was not 87 without its humorous incidents. In 1923, for example, the U.N.I.A. despatched an official delegation to the funeral of United States President, Warren Harding. The delegation rode in a car complete with a member of the Universal Afri- can Legions on each running board. After the funeral the delegation amused themselves by driving through the streets of Washington and watching the policemen salute and hold up the traffic to let them pass. They had obviously been mis— taken for representatives of a sovereign state. William Sherrill, remembering the incident a decade later explained that "Having never before enjoyed such consideration at the behest of southern police, we took full advantage of our mistaken identity."54 Underpinning Garvey's predilections towards nation- hood were his own speculations on political theory. He seems to have given some thought to the question of demo— cracy. He conceived the major problem of democratic prac- tice to be the devising of a mechanism of government which would ensure the permanent representation of the popular will, a popular will which would apparently be synonymous with the expression of the majority of the population, but which would somehow ensure "that all the citizens of that government will be satisfied and in sympathy with each 55 He found fault with American democracy on this other." score. He explained that often only a tiny minority of the population actually votes for the president of the Oh :"QR " U‘y.‘ 5| °'v‘er t:- 88 United States, so he does not necessarily represent the will of the majority in the population. Furthermore, since the executive often controlled the judiciary, appealing from one to the other would sometimes be like appealing from Caesar to Caesar.56 In order to solve these problems of non-majority government and insensitivity to the popular will he once wrote a short essay on "Governing the Ideal State." He proceeded on the premise that since all systems of government ultimately depend on human implementation, he would devise a system whereby representatives of the people would fulfill their trust or suffer immediate recall, dis- grace and execution:- Government should be absolute, and the head should be thoroughly responsible for himself and the acts of his subordinates. . . . He should be the soul of honor, and when he is legally or properly found to the contrary, he should be publicly disgraced, and put to death as an outcast and an unworthy representative of the righteous will of the people. Such threat of instant recall and death should also hang over the heads of the ruler's subordinate officials:‘ His administrators and judges should be held to strict accountability, and on the committing of any act of injustice, unfairness, favoritism or malfeasance, should be taken before the public, disgraced and then stoned to death. To further ensure the incorruptibility of the ruler, Garvey suggested that he "be removed from all pecuniary obligations and desires of a material nature" through the device of a very large salary and allowances, both during and after his administration. In return, the ruler should (n ‘ ““Hn 89 devote himself entirely to the governance of the state, and during the period of his administration, he should fore- stall the possibility of sectarian interest group pressure by spurning the company of all friends outside of his im- mediate family. And to prevent the device of a ruler amassing an ill-gotten fortune in his wife's name, Garvey suggested that any non-disclosure of receipts and disburse- ments of the ruler's household by the wife (whose duty it would be to keep such accounts) would result in death for the whole family, excepting only any member who reported the act before discovery. For such persons found to have abused their trust, their disgrace would not end at death. For "images of them should be made and placed in a national hall of criminology and ill fame, and their crimes should be recited and a curse pronounced upon them and their generations." These stringent measures advocated by Garvey were influenced obviously by pessimism concerning human nature, no doubt influenced by his own experiences with his graft- ridden subordinates. They were also motivated by his quest for the elusive notion of government for the good of all the people, in order to "prevent the factional party fights of Socialism, Communism, Anarchism, etc., for the control of Government, because of the belief that Government is controlled in the interest of classes, and not for the good 57 of all the people." A i ) fih ’5: i.» 5‘ ANN” 90 Furthermore, Garvey foreshadowed the unwillingness of independent African countries to be restricted by estab- lished political ideologies (sometimes to the point of random eclecticism) by insisting that he felt free to "pick out the best in every government, whether that government 58 In his annual be monarchical, democratic or soviet." International Convention Garvey recognized a major step towards the realization of race democracy, "the greatest Legislative Assembly ever brought together by the Negro 59—-an appraisal which was not histor- peoples of the world" ically inaccurate. Garvey's thoughts on democracy led him inevitably to the consideration of such subjects as capitalism and communism, since the concept of democracy is meaningless without relation to the economic system underpinning it. He considered capitalism to be a necessary stage in human advancement while simultaneously expressing uneasiness at the results of its unrestrained uses. He summed up this attitude in an essay on "Capitalism and the State"--"Capie talism is necessary to the progress of the world, and those who unreasonably and wantonly oppose or fight against it are enemies to human advancement: but there should be a limit to the individual or corporate use or control of .60 it. He also gave poetic expression to his abhorrence of unrestrained capitalismrr 91 The common thief now steals a crust of bread, The law comes down upon his hungry head; The haughty land robber steals continents, With men, oil, gold, rubber and all contents. The first you say is a hopeless convic', While the latter escapes the law by trick; That grave, one-sided justice will not do The poor call for considration, too.6l Garvey saw the hand of unrestrained capitalism in many of the world's wars and international problems: Oil 'concessions' in Mexico or Persia; rubber 'conces- sions' in Liberia, West Africa; sugar or coffee 'concessions' in Haiti, West Indies, to be exploited for the selfish enrichment of individuals, sooner or later, end in disaster; hence ill-feeling, hate, and then war.62 Garvey's disapproval of unrestrained capitalism extended to the nascent upper crust of his own race. And like Frantz Fanon three decades later, he was of the opinion that this class among the black race was more destructive than similarly circumstanced persons among the white and other races. For while white millionaires endowed charita- ble foundations and otherwise displayed some progressive characteristics, rich black persons tended to be more para- sitical and destructive to their own race. During the International Convention of 1924 Garvey expressed this idea thus--”We have not only to fight the white capitalist, but we also have to fight the capitalistic Negro. He will sell 63 In his own people into Hell the same as anybody else." 1929 he repeated similar sentiments-~"The Negro or 'Coloured' race is developing a class of millionaires or money boarders, much more dangerous to the race's life and 92 existence than any similar group of men among any other race."64 For solutions to these problems Garvey seems to have leaned in the direction of reforms of a social demo- cratic nature rather than towards the complete eradication of the capitalist system. He favored ceilings of one mil- lion and five million dollars for investible funds con- trolled by individuals and corporations respectively. Sums accumulated above these figures should be appropriated by the state. The state should also expropriate without com- pensation the assets of capitalists and corporations who fomented wars and strife in the furtherance of their finan- cial interests.65 In his own organizations Garvey attempted where possible to implement these ideas by organizing his business ventures along cooperative lines and by placing a ceiling on the number of shares any one person could own in the Black Star Line. He seems to have sometimes seen such efforts as attempts by poor people to establish "a capital- istic system of their own" to ”combat the heartless capital- istic system of the masterly ruling class."66 On one occasion, while representing workers in Jamaica in a dispute with the United Fruit Company, he even described himself as a capitalist in an attempt to show that he also was an em- ployer of labor, but nevertheless found ways to avoid the excesses concerning which the strikers he represented were complaining.67 §\:st o “9." fl V0”? 93 Garvey's disapproval of unrestrained capitalism, coupled with a reluctance to advocate a complete overthrow of the capitalistic system, was indicated also by the com- pany he kept, so to speak. For the Third World leaders whom he admired were generally those of similar political outlook--people like himself involved in nationalist strug- gles and like himself attempting to walk a precarious tightrope between capitalism and communism. The most impor tant of these were Mahatma Gandhi in India, Clements Kadalie, leader of the Industrial and Commercial WOrkers' Union in South Africa, and Captain A. A. Cipriani, leader of the Trinidad Workingmen's Association. These leaders were usually lumped together with Garvey in Communist jour- nals as "petit-bourgeois reformists" "misleaders" and ”fakers." Imperialist governments usually considered them dangerous agitators. Garvey's tendencies to social democracy can also be seen in his optimism concerning the election of Franklin D. 68 and most of Roosevelt in the United States in the 1930's all in his long-standing fondness for the welfare socialism represented by the British Labour Party. As early as 1923 Garvey was reported by the New York Age as being a member of this party.69 His support of the Labour Party was due first of all to the belief that a government, supposedly of workers, would not manifest the same imperialistic designs against the Third WOrld peoples as did the British (D n’ I: U 3 (D ) U) :1, '-4. D I - l :3 n: m It) If [U '_.l ($3 () '1 94 Conservative Party, which represented the aristocratic element. This has been a perennial dream of colonized peoples in the British empire, but one which has usually been betrayed. In 1923, for example, Garvey, rejoicing over the fact that the British Labour Party was now the official opposition in parliament, editorialized on the significance of this event for black British subjects as follows: Let us take new courage as well as firm confidence in our effort, and let us be inspired through the achieve- ment of the Labour Party in England and the Labor forces all over the world. The ascendancy of Labor in politics will bring about a new political order which cannot be as sense- less as the one to which they succeed. . . . Labor may have enough sense to know that the best course it could adopt toward its own prosperity is to be fair and friendly to all human groups. We would not contemplate labor going out to fight other peoples for the adventurous exploitation of that which is native to such peoples. We could not think of Ramsay McDonald as Premier of England declaring war against native Africans who seek to protect their native rights, but we would expect it of David Lloyd George or an Arthur J. Balfour, who represent the Tory element and the capitalistic crowds of their coun- try. . . . We are glad of the downfall, therefore, of the Tory Government of England. We also rejoice when other monopolist political organizations tumble down to be succeeded by the control of that element of the people who know what human love is, who know what jus- tice is.70 In going so far as to ascribe such altruistic tendencies to the Labour Party, Garvey seems to have been departing from his normal position of blanket hostility to white groups, regardless of affiliation, except where he could cooperate 95 with them for limited objectives. His position here con- trasted with his attitude to white groups before, or indeed afterwards, as his handling of overtures from the United States Communists in 1924 was to show. In January of 1924 Garvey celebrated the victory of the short-lived government of Ramsay McDonald with a tele- gram informing the new premier that the U.N.I.A. looked to Labour as allies of the black race in the fight for national independence in Africa.71 Almost simultaneously he des- patched his U.N.I.A. ambassador to England and explained the propitiousness of the time in terms of the Labour vic- tory.72 The propitiousness of the time and Garvey's generally favorable attitude towards the Labour Party may have had something to do with the fact that at about this very time the London U.N.I.A. was expressing appreciation for the fact that the Labour Party had been assisting unem- ployed black persons in London to find work.73 This unusual endorsement of Labour in Britain was also due in some measure to Garvey's lack of substantial distinction between the Labour Party's welfare socialism on the one hand and Russian socialism as practised under Lenin, on the other. For, as will be seen later, despite his feuds with Communists in the United States, Garvey admired Lenin for his mass movement and his attempts to curtail capital- istic control, and he considered the British Labour Party to be of the same stripe. In eulogising Lenin at Liberty In (0 "V U) ‘h- C b... ‘R 5‘ o 9‘- g ’ ‘.‘-\ c"~n ~‘~\ 96 Hall in 1924 upon the Russian leader's death he said, I believe, in time, that the whole world will take on the social democratic system of government now existing in Russia. It is only a question of time, I say. England is the first to have reached out for this per- fect state of social democratic control among its peoples.74 By 1932 he was willing to admit that the Labour Party had not arrived at Communism but that it was working diligently towards this goal and would soon be "Red Communists," a proposition which did not appear to alarm him.75 In the meantime he had reiterated his support for the party during the 1929 elections.76 In 1927 the Labour Party did receive an opportunity to reciprocate in a minor fashion. South African trade union leader Clements Kadalie, during a visit to Britain, succeeded in obtaining the party's assistance in the case of a Nyasalander, Isa Macdonald Lawrence, who had been sentenced by British authorities to three years hard labor for import- ing into Central Africa six copies of Garvey's Negro World and two of the South African WOrker's Herald. A Labour M.P., Mr. Richard Wallhead, raised the question in the House of Commons, as a result of which Lawrence was re- leased.77 In the 1930's reports of Garvey's affiliation with the Labour Party were revived. He himself was quoted in 1931 as saying that during a recent visit to England he had addressed crowds in Hyde Park "on behalf of some of my r- 6? n1 ..-- One- 5'...“ AA.. 5v... ‘Q- A --oab ’¥~- es-C‘... ‘7“ ...e, 97 friends in the Labor party.”8 In 1934 and 1935 his im- minent departure from Jamaica was reported as linked to an intention to run for parliament as a Labour Party represen- tative for West Kensington.79 The late 1930's found him reprinting an occasional article from the left-wing Labour journal Tribune in his own Black Man.80 Garvey's reflections on political theory, and es- pecially on democracy found expression in his conception of his own leadership. Though at times showing a tendency towards the autocratic, he was nevertheless imbued with a consuming notion of service which led to a fatalistic accep- tance of sacrifice as the inevitable consequence of leader— ship,81 despite occasional complaints concerning the difficulties of race leadership and the unworthiness of errant colleagues.82 Garvey's concept of leadership as dedication, sacri- fice, and even martyrdom, was matched by a loyalty among large numbers of his followers which astounded observers. Kelly Miller of Howard University, one of the small number of non-Garveyite Afro-American intellectuals who attempted to analyze him with some semblance of objectivity, wrote that "it must be conceded that he has begotten for himself an intensity of discipleship which has no parallel among "83 Miller noted that on the death Negroes in this country. of Frederick Douglass, Howard University, of which Douglass had been a trustee, could raise only a few thousand dollars —*1 98 to endow a school in his honor. The Douglass home had similarly failed to become a mecca for the race. In the case of Booker T. Washington, too, his campfollowers, many of whom were indebted to him for their exalted positions, were very indifferent to the attempt to raise an endowment of half a million dollars in his honor. This contrasted sharply with the devotion of Garvey's followers, even, and indeed more so, after his incarceration. T. Thomas Fortune, veteran civil rights fighter, dean of Afro-American jour- nalists, former close associate of Booker T. Washington, and, for the last few years of his life editor of the Negro World, made a similar observation: The editor of the Negro World is in a position to judge of this matter because he has been actively engaged in race journalism for forty-five years and has known every leader of the race in America and in other lands during that time, personally or by reputation, from Frederick Douglass to Marcus Garvey. None of them had the magnetic personality of Mr. Garvey; none of them could draw men to him and hold them as he. None of them had a world-embracing slogan that appealed to the Negro people everywhere. These observations were part of a Fortune editorial entitled "Loyalty to Mr. Garvey Most Striking Thing in Race 84 A petition from the Jacksonville, Florida, History.” U.N.I.A. division to President Coolidge for Garvey's re- lease from prison, expressed the same idea in more poignant fashion--"The world has never had a character, as a leader, such as Marcus Garvey, one of the most inspiring and coura- geous idealists in history. And this Marcus Garvey is all 99 85 the Negro has ever had." To the official mind of an Attorney-General of the United States, such loyalty was ir- rational and disturbing. He explained his perplexity in a memorandum to President Coolidge:e The situation as presented in the Garvey case is most unusual. Notwithstanding the fact that the prosecu- tion was designed for the protection of colored people, whom it was charged Garvey had been defrauding by means of exaggerated and incorrect statements circulated through the mail, none of these people apparently be- lieve that they have been defrauded, manifestly retain their entire confidence in Garvey, and instead of the prosecution and imprisonment of the applicant being an example and warning against a violation of law, it really stands and is regarded by them as a class as an act of oppression of the race in their efforts in the direction of race progress and of discrimination against Garvey as a negro [sic]. This is by no means a healthy condition of affai?§.36 Such loyalty manifested itself in many thousands of letters, telegrams, petitions and the like which poured into departments of the United States and other governments whenever Garvey was unfairly dealt with by officialdom.87 It manifested itself too in such scenes as those which were enacted during Garvey's trial in 1923 for alleged mail fraud. Hundreds of his supporters knelt, prayed, lamented and allegedly threatened witnesses. The police wagon carrying him to prison was obstructed by an estimated three hundred people, and, in the quaint language of the New York Times, "88 This "several negresses [sic] showed marked emotion. paper was as perplexed by these manifestations of devoted- ness as had been the Attorney-General of the United States, and in an editorial entitled "A Hero More Sorry Unimaginable," /I .tp: “0' ‘ vi :1‘. 9n 4- - fl 5. d- R ‘V-vo o x..€ J“'5 0“. 100 chided Garvey's supporters--"Surely there ought to be in- telligence enough among the colored people to see that Garvey illustrated their worst and weakest qualities, not their best and strongest."89 A Barbadian Garveyite faced with the option of deportation from Liberia or disavowing Garveyism refused to do the latter since he considered the principles of the U.N.I.A. too deeply engraved on his heart.90 During the annual Convention of 1926, with Garvey in jail, 150,000 people paraded through Harlem behind Garvey's robes and cheered from the sidewalk.91 This loyalty was manifested, too, in the fact that only about eighteen persons out of the 35,000 Black Star Line stock- holders written by United States government officials who seized the company's books, were willing to agree that they were dissatisfied with the company's operations. All eighteen were, Garvey thought, in the employ of the govern- ment.92 Many of these same stockholders were among those who subscribed $4,400 towards a defense fund the very same 93 night of his arrest. Such feats of fund raising were quite commonplace. In 1919 in Cuba stevedores bought up 94 $250 worth of shares in a few minutes. In 1921 Garvey collected an estimated $25,000 U.S. in Costa Rica, most of 95 The United Fruit Company at it within forty-eight hours. Puerto Barrios, Guatemala, reported a sale of drafts des- tined to the U.N.I.A. and Black Star Line of $2,941.08 between November 1921 and February 1922. This figure was 0' 0A. nan-[UV‘ . A'H 'Qq V.“ on-.. Uwach -. ‘1:;' c... ¢dJs.. 5.. 6L 101 considered an understatement. The population of Puerto Barrios was given as only 2,400.96 Within a year of his release on bail in 1923, Garvey is said to have collected 150,000 balboas from followers in Panama.97 Concerning such manifestations of loyalty, Ngggg Wp£1d_columnist S. A. Haynes concluded that Garvey had de- monstrated two things, namely that black people coud be organized, and that they were indeed "eager to repose confi- dence in and support sincere Negro leadership."98 If any- thing, this may even have been an understatement. A visitor to Garvey's Harlem offices in January 1920 reported a line of people stretching over a hundred yards along 135th Street waiting to see Garvey, some for no other reason than to personally express their appreciation to him.99 Not surprisingly, such fierce unswerving loyalty was often branded "fanaticism," and Garvey's critics and enemies did not hesitate to describe the style of leadership exist- ing within Garvey's provisional African nation as fascist. Such accusations were helped along by a strain of violence which seemed to run among Garveyites. Apart from anti- colonial struggles in which they were implicated, such as the 1919 uprisings in Trinidad and British Honduras,100 Garveyites, particularly in the United States, were often implicated in violent confrontations with rival persons and groups. Possibly the most publicized of such cases involved the murder of former U.N.I.A. Leader of the American Negroes, 102 J. W. H. Eason in New Orleans in 1923. He had broken with Garvey and was in the midst of a nationwide campaign against the U.N.I.A. He was shot after addressing an anti-Garvey meeting in New Orleans. Two members of Garvey's police 101 force were arrested but later acquitted after trial. W. A. Domingo, Jamaican ex-editor of the Negro world reported that "in New York City, as early as the Fall of 1919, I raised my voice in protest against the execrable exaggera- tions, staggering stupidities, blundering bombast and abominable assininities of our black Barnum, culminating in Thomas Potter and myself being assaulted, kicked, and placed under arrest by Garveyites in the Spring of 1920."102 In August of 1920, too, several hundred Garveyites invaded a revival meeting being held under a big tent at W. 138th Street in Harlem by the Reverend Adam Clayton Powell, Sr. The cause of this disturbance was the Reverend Charles S. Morris, veteran missionary from Norfolk, Virginia, whose sermon contained a rejection of Garvey's African program, because, in his opinion, the colonialist powers were too strong to be dislodged. Uniformed police and plainclothes- men had to escort the reverend gentleman home, and by a circuitous route, since the most direct route went past Liberty Hall.103 The "Marcus Garvey Must Go" campaign launched by A. Philip Randolph and the so-called Friends of Negro Freedom to have Garvey deported leaned heavily on such incidents in () tn tn (1) 103 their efforts to build a case. They informed the Attorney- General of the United States concerning the clause in the U.N.I.A. constitution which debarred persons convicted of crime from being received by the Potentate, save where such crime had been committed in the interest of the organization. They regularly catalogued a long list of such incidents, in- cluding attacks on their own anti-Garvey meetings.104 W. E. B. DuBois, too, appended his name to the list of real or potential victims of U.N.I.A. violence and threats. He "was not only threatened with death by men declaring them- selves his [Garvey's] followers, but received letters of such unbelievable filth that they were absolutely unprint- able." His friends were moved, he declared, to provide him with secret police protection when he landed in the United 105 Arguments over Garvey's States from his trip to Africa. trial sometimes turned peaceful gatherings such as house parties into brawls resulting in slashings and other in- 106 A case similar to the Eason murder occurred in juries. Miami in 1928. Here a Laura Champion, alias Laura Koffey, a self-styled African princess whose unauthorized money- collection endeavors from U.N.I.A. branches had been denounced by the organization, was killed at an anti-Garvey meeting addressed by herself. A Garveyite was murdered by her followers in retaliation. The president and the Colonel of Legions of the Miami U.N.I.A. division were charged with 107 and acquitted of first degree murder. The late 1920's 0'. O" () . nu. d..- '- 1 U o ‘0- b .811: NA “ ‘5‘. ‘ «3.. - u‘rl: V‘ ‘ ‘ Tao 'v' p Q.. W5 ' tr. " he; Ear i hea 13, 104 and 1930's also witnessed street fights in Harlem between Garveyites and Communists, and between rival Garveyite fac- tions. The violent streak running through Garvey's sup- proters was not the only point of similarity between Garveyism and the doctrines of fascism and nazism which arose shortly afterwards in Europe. In their fierce nation- alism, in their doctrines of racial purity, in their uni- formed indoctrinated youth groups, in their conversion of the crowd into disciplined uniformed units, with some quali- fications in their anti-Communism, in the impassioned oratory of their leaders, in the pageantry, the atmosphere of excitement surrounding their movements, European fascism and nazism bore certain resemblances to Garveyism. Such similarities were not lost upon contemporaries. J. A. Rogers, journalist and historian, lifelong acquain- tance of Garvey and during the 1920's and 1930's a regular contributor to Garvey's newspapers, noticed the similarities during a trip to Mussolini's Italy in 1927. Writing from Italy for the Negro WOrld, he said, The other thing that made me feel at home, as I said, was Fascism, or should I say Mussolini. I have been through the agitation that raged around Garvey in Harlem in 1922, and I have but to shut my eyes and ears to color, the issues, and watch human conduct to hear the same old tune sung to different words. He went on to disapprove of the violent excesses accompany- ing Mussolini's rule and pointed out that Mussolini had done a: "’ ('3" v -.‘oov '9 (I! () p q :1 'i 5'. I... -«E s: (n f O (D .4. :g :T' t ,o '9 [u 09.!) Hf 'i (D (In 105 an about face from his former socialistic anti-clerical stance. He continued his observations, In brief, Mussolini is a 'benevolent despot,‘ with none of the Caesar pose one sees in his popular pictures. But, of course, the masses, which take to Fascism as they do to a dogfight or the latest song or any other novelty, are looking for fireworks or a miracle--a reason for not judging Marcus Garvey too harshly.108 Ten years later Garvey himself impressed upon Rogers the fact that the U.N.I.A. had ante-dated Mussolini with the style of government associated with the latter. He said, We were the first Fascists. We had disciplined men, women and children in training for the liberation of Africa. The black masses saw that in this extreme nationalism lay their only hope and readily supported it. Mussolini copied fascism from me but the Negro reactionaries sabotaged it.109 At a speech the same year (1937) delivered in Canada to U.N.I.A. members who had travelled across the border from Detroit, Garvey emphasized the same point--"The U.N.I.A. was before Mussolini and Hitler were heard of. Mussolini and Hitler copied the program of the U.N.I.A.--aggressive 110 nationalism for the black man in Africa." On other occa- sions he pointed out that he had preached race purity before 111 Hitler, and in 1935 he told an interviewer in London, They laughed at me because I dressed my followers up in uniforms and paraded them through the streets. But look what Mussolini and Hitler have done with shirts and uniforms. If I had been left alone the Negro, too, would have had a shirt.112 The question of fascism recurred very often in Garvey's various publications. In 1923, for example, the New York Amsterdam News quoted a Negro world editorial [ll R-uc v-..... In f” tn ‘2‘ 106 which claimed that the U.N.I.A. had accomplished a bloodless 113 In 1929 revolution more far-reaching than fascism. Garvey's Jamaican paper the Blackman editorialized, while Garvey was in jail, to the effect that "Marcus Garvey is the Mussolini of the Negro race and no other Negro can or has come up to him as a fighter for the liberties and rights 114 of a people." Garvey himself identified one trait he admired in Mussolini as his iron fisted rule, which Garvey considered necessary at some stages of history.115 Garvey's interest in Hitler, too, coincided with his rise to influence in Germany. Indeed, even before Hitler's journey to power in the early 1930's, Garvey, on a visit to Germany in 1928 had expressed himself as being impressed by German thoroughness and discipline. He suggested that black people might profitably imbibe some of these qualities.116 In 1932 the editor of his New Jamaican praised Hitler's role ll7 as a patriot, a view that Garvey shared. Garvey hoped further that the black race would produce a Hitler and that black people would acquaint themselves with Hitler's ideas. By 1934, though, mindful of his own experience in the United States and Jamaica, he concluded that a black Hitler could only be permanently successful in Africa. For Africa af- forded a far greater opportunity for an appeal along nationalistic lines than areas in the African dispersion.118 Garvey, then, admired Hitler and Mussolini for the points of similarity between their programs and his. He was als: I . o .’ 0'. -.. ‘b' ‘ o no so- i “I! A. p“ ~lob..~l I Van?" iv“ and O 58:37. 1 a O AIICCAI v.1 's». A. “y-q. ' s...» - C N' ‘ nu“ ‘ “Oboe- J v- 107 also correct in pointing out that his program had pre-dated theirs, and he is in no way unreasonable in suggesting that his program may have been known to them since the Garvey phenomenon was widely reported in European newspapers and journals from at least as early as 1919. We have already seen the German Emergency League Against the Black Horror, obviously a racist organization in the Hitler mold, seeking Garvey's support as early as 1921, over a decade before Hitler's rise to power. Garvey's admiration for Hitler and Mussolini was not, however, an unqualified one. His admiration was based on the objective consideration of their political style and philosophy. He was too astute not to realize, however, that the particular theories they held could spell only ruin for Africa, and he opposed them resolutely on this basis. As early as 1924 he despatched a telegram to Mussolini from the Fourth International Convention of Negro Peoples of the World, meeting in Harlem, requesting a change in Mussolini's Africa policy and self-determination for Italian colonies in Africa.119 His dual attitude of limited endorsement and hostile opposition to Hitler and Mussolini can best be explained in a Garvey statement of 1933 on Hitler: Adolph Hitler, the German Chancellor, cannot be mistaken for anything else than a patriot. . . . . . . We are interested in Hitler only from the point of view of Germany's relationship with our race. :a' .0 ‘|F‘ “at. u 00h~ O... U- u . V 7* a... a. . y. . ’A u by H: a... a... ...L‘ 108 It is evident that if Hitler hates the Jew, he also hates the Negro. . . . Whilst we admire him as a German Nationalist, or rather, Patriot, we must not do so to the loss of our nationalism or patriotism, therefore, it would be very unwise for us to encourage one as pronounced in his views as Hitler. Hitler stands for a greater Germany, which is his right, and the Negro should stand for a greater Africa which is also his right.120 Opposition to Mussolini was couched in similar terms.121 And a Negro WOrld editorial of 1928 argued that Mussolini was not only aware of Garvey, but considered him a menace to his plans for Italian imperialism in Africa. The edito- rial quoted from a speech in which Mussolini had referred to a Harlem riot as follows:‘ ‘There is one great quarter in New York called Harlem where the population is exclusively Negro. A great riot broke out there last July which, after a whole night of sanguinary conflict, was finally controlled by the police, who found themselves opposed to com- pact masses of Negroes. The editorial commented that Mussolini's account was exag- gerated and represented an indirect warning to the United States that Afro-American race consciousness was a menace to his schemes in Africa, especially since he knew that Garvey's program came out of Harlem. The editorial continued, He may not call Marcus Garvey by name, but Negroes throughout the world know that he regards Garvey as the most potential hindering force to his scheming and planning to lay robber hands on Africa's wealth. It ended in prophetic vein-~"We are somewhat puzzled, in common with other beholders, at the new attitude for Ras Taffari toward the ancient enemy of Ethiopia, but we will .5. It. a». 109 not take hasty judgement."122 With Mussolini's invasion of Ethiopia in 1935 Garvey's opposition became strident, and practically every issue of his Black Man was adorned with hostile articles and poems bearing verses of which the following from a Garvey creation entitled "The Smell of Mussolini," is typi- cal:~ Let all Italians live and die in shame, For what their Mad Dog did to our dear home: Their Mussolini's bloody, savage name Smells stink from Addis back to sinful Rome. We'll march to crush the Italian dog, And at the points of gleaming, shining swords, We'll lay quite low the violent, Roman hog.123 Garvey's concept of nationhood was, therefore, ex- tremely well-developed. Not only was it adorned with the paraphernalia of nationality (flag, uniforms and the like), but it was buttressed by Garvey's own speculations concern- ing such questions as democracy and fascism, and reinforced by his style of leadership. Through his ambassadors and commissioners, too, the U.N.I.A. made concrete steps towards assuming the role of Pan-African nation. This, of course, was a provisional nation, hiding the time of Africa's libera- tion. Within maybe fifty years, Garvey conjectured, while W. E. B. DuBois and the N.A.A.C.P. "will be sending up peti- tions to Congress asking them to introduce another Dyer Anti—Lynching Bill, Marcus Garvey and the U.N.I.A. will be coming up the Hudson Bay with a flotilla of battleships, I ' ‘ I... I.... tee ‘IAII -:.In ‘b-lU-‘ R an - 5“ "In . ‘ ‘ 5‘ ~- ‘Vvu 110 dreadnoughts and cruisers to land our first ambassador, and whilst they will be introducing bills in Congress, we will be entertained in the White House as being the first ambas- sadors from the great African republic. And let me tell you, they will hear us then."124 There can be no doubt that Garvey's assumption of nationality filled a very great void in the lives of black peoples, especially during his most successful years, from 1919 to 1925. Almost nowhere on the globe did black people at this time have a government of their own race. And the U.N.I.A., reaching as it did into every area where black people lived, sowed the seeds of nationalism, and on occa- sion even acted in fact as a provisional government. NOTES NATIONHOOD 1Negro World, January 30, 1926, in Public Record Office, London, F.O. 372/2257. 2Blackman, December 30, 1929, p. 1. 3Garvey identified some of the other leading figures in the Club as S. A. G. Cox, Alexander Dixon, H. A. L. Simpson, a Mr. DeLeon and himself-~Blackman, September 11, 1929, p. 7; see also Jamaica Times, April 30, 1910, p. 22, quoted in Rupert Lewis, "A Political Study of Garveyism in Jamaica and London: 1914-1940" (University of the West Indies, Department of Government, Unpub. MSc. Thesis, July 1971), p. 53. A contemporary remembered Garvey as one of the most frequent speakers at the Club's weekly meetings. His speeches were usually anti-government. See, R. N. Murray, ed., J. J. Mills - His Own Account of His Life and Times (Kingston, Collins and Sangster, 1969). 4Negro World, February 24, 1923, p. 2. 5Philosophy and Opinions, II, p. 140; Negro World, August 25, 1923, p. 2. 6Philosophy and opinions, II, pp. 135-143. 7Blackman, December 28, 1929, p. 14. 8Negro World, October 8, 1921, p. 4. 9Ibid., February 4, 1928, p. l. 10Philosophyand Opinions, II, p. 313. llElEEE_E2§y II: 2, July-August 1936, p. 18. 111 nvw f Aldo: \ fivv‘Q-o n-..- 39, 112 12Blackman, August 24, 1929, p. 3. 13Invitation in Arthur A. Schomburg papers, Schom- burg Collection, Box 10. 14"New Flag for Afro-Americans," Africa Times and Orient Review, I, 4, October 1912, p. 134. 15Negro world, March 19, 1927, p. 1 (reprint of a 1921 speech). 16Catechism, p. 37. 17National Civic Federation Papers, New York Public Library, Box 152. White also sought views on Garvey from W. E. B. DuBois and the anti-Garvey black socialists A. Philip Randolph and Chandler Owen. 18Negro World, June 14, 1924, p. 9. 19Mary Benson, South Africa: The Struggle for a Birthright (Middlesex, Penguin, 1966), P. 46. 20Donald Barnett and Karari Njama, Mau Mau from Within, quoted in Wilfred Cartey and Martin Kilson, eds., Independent Africa (New York, Vintage, 1970), p. 105. 21C. L. R. James, The Black Jacobins (New York, Vintage, 1963), p. 397. 22Philosophy and Opinions, II, p. 141. 23New York World, August 18, 1920, p. 13; New York Times, August 18, 1920, p. 2. 24National Negro voice, August 30, 1941, p. 4. 25Philosophy and Opinions, II, p. 141; Catechism, p. 39. 26Negro world, June 18, 1932, p. 6. 27Ibid., June 11, 1932, pp. 1, 5. ... .. “.... ..a ... ‘— ACHA u... E. \ a. n \- “v w‘ C4. 5C1 113 28Ibid., August 25, 1923, p. 3. 29Ibid. 3oF.O. 371/8513, H. G. Armstrong, H. M. Consul- General, New York, to H. M. Charge d'Affaires, Washington, D. C., August 24, 1923. 31Negro World, October 27, 1928, p. 7. 32Petition of the Universal Negro Improvement Asso- ciation and African Communities' League to the League of 'Nations, Geneva, Switzerland, n.p.--copy in U.S. National Archives, R.G. 59, 800.4016/19. 33See, e.g., Negro Wbrld, October 27, 1928, p. 7; August 3, 1929, p. 2; November 14, 1931, p. 1; Public Record Office, F.O. 371/18505, J. V. Wilson, League of Nations to William Strang, Foreign Office, and related correspondence, May 1934. 34R.G. 59, 882.00/705, Crichlow to Garvey, "Special Personal Report," June 24, 1921. 3SNegro World, January 26, 1924, p. 2. 36Public Record Office, London, Colonial Office re- cords, C.O. 318/356, Governor of Bermuda to Secretary of State, Colonial Office, 2 November 1920. 37Negro WOrld, January 26, 1924, p. 2. 38lbid. 39C.O. 554/64, Marcus Garvey and P. L. Burrows, Secretary-General of the U.N.I.A. to Rt. Hon. J. H. Thomas, H. M. Colonial Secretary, January 25, 1924. 402219,, minute on file, dated 13 February 1924. 41Ibid., mintue of 6 March 1924. 42Ibid., private secretary of the Secretary of State, Colonial Office to Tobitt, 8 March 1924. 'l) U (D ‘O .— ‘v-\- C b. you FH..'A 5V“ .. v . . =‘6~. thus--. ' u (“Ia-.. Ubh-y..~ V9335 0AA .. Se: R 363:6: (I) t): D a .e, ‘A 9‘ 5v I): 114 43Negro World, April 5, 1924, p. 5; April 19, 1924, p. 8; May 10, 1924, p. 8. 44Ibid., May 19, 1925, p. 7. 45Ibid., February 2, 1924, p. 2. A correspondent from Santiago de Cuba says that Jamaican U.N.I.A. members control the dispensing jobs in many hospitals and use their positions to provide medical care for Haitians and Jamaicans. 46U.N.I.A. Central Division (New York) Files, Schomburg Collection, Box 2, a. 16. The figures are for the years 1925-1927. 47F.O. 371/8450, Charles Bain, Governor of Barbados to Secretary of State, Colonial Office, 16 January 1923. 48Ibid., Governor L. Probyn to Duke of Devonshire, Secretary of State, 25 April 1923. 49;p;g,, Governor Wilson of Trinidad to Secretary of State, 20 January 1923. 50Ibid., Under Secretary of State, Colonial Office to Under Secretary of State, Foreign Office, 29 May 1923. 51Negro World, August 4, 1928, p. 8; Blackman, June 28, 1930, p. 9. 52R.G. S9, 837.00--General Conditions/27; New York Times, January 30, 1930, p. 4; January 31, 1930, p. 9. Some Branches were reopened six months later--Blackman, June 28, 1930, p. 9. 53F.O. 371/5684, F. Gordon, H. M. Consul, Port Limon, Costa Rica to A. P. Bennett, H.B.M. Minister, San José, Costa Rica, 9 May 1921; ibid., Governor Eyre Hutson of British Honduras to Secretary of State, Colonial Office, 14 July 1921. 54Negro world, July 9, 1932, p. 2. 55Ibid., October 3, 1925, p. 1. 56Ibid., January 7, 1928, p. 2. 115 57"Governing the Ideal State," Philosophy and Opinions, II, pp. 74-76. 58 Negro World, October 3, 1925, p. 1. 59Blackman, September 7, 1929, p. 1; Negro world, August 3, 1929, p. l. 60Philosophy and Opinions, II, p. 72. 61Tragedy of White Injustice, p. 13. 62Ibid.; see also, Blackman, April 8, 1929, pp. 1, 6; January 7, 1930, p. 1. 63Dailngorker, August 12, 1924, pp. 1, 5. 64Blackman, September 5, 1929, p. 1. 65Philosophy and Opinions, II, p. 72. 66§lEEEEEEv January 3: 1930, p. 1; see also, New Jamaican, September 6, 1932, p. 5. 67Blackman, May 29, 1929, p. 7. 68§l22£_fl2£/ 1. 2, January 1934, p. 14. 69New York Age, July 7, 1923. 7oNegro world, December 15, 1923, p. l. 71Ibid., February 2, 1924, p. 1. 72Ibid., January 26, 1924, p. 2. 73Ibid., January 12, 1924, p. 7. 74ibid., February 2, 1924, p. 3. 75NeWJamaican, October 12, 1932, p. l. .. n.p. ... . _ o ...n 1 2.... \P. o ..c . 1.. a» at at I s... .C. ..Q c; ‘Q t Q. nu no 116 76Blackman, April 3, 1929, p. 1; June 7, 1929, p. 1; June 4, 1929, p. l. 77Clements Kadalie, My Life and the ICU (New York, Humanities Press, 1970), p. 125; Negro World, August 20, 1927, p. 2; George Shepperson, in Sylvia Thrupp, ed., Millennial Dreams in Action (The Hague, Mouton and Co., 1962), p. 153. Kadalie and the Negro World give the country of importation as Rhodesia, Shepperson says they were im- ported into Nyasaland. 78Negro World, December 19, 1931, p. 8. 79Ethiopian World, May 26, 1934; New York Times, May 3, 1934, p. 3; March 28, 1935, p. 12. 80E.g., Black Man, III, 11,November 1938. 81E.g., R.G. 60, 198940, Garvey to J. W. Snook, War- den of Atlanta Federal Prison, c. November 16 [date hidden by file binding] 1926; African Nationalist Pioneer Movement (Detroit), Garveyism a Political Creed, n.p.; Tragedy of White ijustice, p. 11; Nggro WOrld, March 24, 1923, p. 10; April 30, 1927, p. 1; August 10, 1929, p. 3; December 5, 1931, p. 1; January 30, 1932, p. 1; Voice of Freedom, I, 2, August 1945, p. 1; R.G. 59, 882.00/705, Cyril A. Crichlow to Garvey, June 24, 1921. 82E.g., Negro World, August 14, 1926, p. 1; August 24, 1929, p. 3; January 30, 1932, p. l. 83Ibid., September 3, 1927, p. 2. 84Ibid., May 9, 1925, p. 4. 85Ibid., June 25, 1927, p. 1. 86National Archives of the United States, Records of the Office of the Pardon Attorney, R.G. 204, 42-793, John Sargent, Attorney-General to the President, "In the Matter of the Application for Commutation of Sentence of Marcus Garvey," November 12, 1927. 87See, e.g., the many thousands of these still re- tained in R.G. 60, 198940; R.G. 204, 42-793; National Archives n P x ' 6d lie-A. I F o . depc" A - ~.-¢\v ”Q I '- an“: J.uv.b. u — Ovot st 1. v... 5’ AC... 563’ :- a ‘ hi 4. "‘ A ‘ D so. . .~ H \ 1" a. V-- ~: A ~ '05 AA. .I','v. 7 £133:- Vny‘ (.4 r# .'" an E) ."1 ‘ ~ Guate- a” 117 Sen. 69A-J25, Senate Judiciary Committee, 69th Congress-- Petitions; also Negro Wbrld, December 19, 1925, p. 2; Blackman, October 10, 1929, p. l. 88New York Times, June 22, 1923, p. 19; also, New York Herald, June 237 1923; Negro world, June 30, 1923, p. 2; Nembhard, Trials and Triumphs, p. 88. 89New York Times, July 3, 1923, p. 12. 90C.O. 554/62, British Consul O'Meara, Monrovia to Secretary of State, Foreign Office, August 23, 1924; also 91Negro world, August 21, 1926, p. 2. White New York paper§_(the Herald, Tribune and Journal) estimated 100,000 in their editiOns of August 16. 92Marcus Garvey, Speech Delivered by Marcus Garvey at pral Albert Hall (London, Poets and Painters Press, 1968, first pub. 1928), p. 13. 93Bruce papers, BL 27, Bruce to editor, The WCrld, January 17, 1922. 94Federal court records, Southern District of New York, FRC 539440, Joshua Cockburn to Garvey, December 5, 1919. 95F.O. 371/5684, F. Gordon, H. M. Consul, Port Limon, Costa Rica to A. P. Bennett, H. B. M. Minister, San José, Costa Rica, May 9, 1921. 96R.G. 59, 811.108 G 191/27, American Consul, Guatemala City to Secretary of State, March 9, 1922. 97F.O. 371/10632, Panama and Canal Zone, Annual Report, 1924. 98Negro world, May 6, 1933, p. 4. 99Hugh Mulzac, A Star to Steer By (New York, Inter- national Publishers, 19727, p. 81. ‘FA‘ .46., ‘ C.V‘¢ 5~§ni vfiv’ 0“. I a C02. H.- :1 ('2 O P! 118 100Tbny Martin, "Revolutionary Upheaval in Trinidad, 1919: Gleanings from London and Washington," Journal of Negro HiStOEXJ LVIII, 3, July 1973. 101Garveyand Garveyism, p. 109. 102"The Policy of the Messenger on West Indians and American Negroes--W. A. Domingo vs. Chandler Owen," Messenger, March 1923, p. 639. 103New York Age, August 28, 1920, p. l. 104"Garveyism and Anarchism," Messenger, October 1922, pp. 500-502. 105w. E. B. DuBois, "A Lunatic or a Traitor," Crisis, XXVIII, 1 May 1924, p. 9. 106New York Amsterdam News, June 27, 1923, p. 1; February 18, 1925, p. 2. 107New York Times, March 21, 1928, p. 13; Ne ro World, July 14, 1928, p. 7; July 21, 1928, p. 4; Ju y 28, I928, p. 6. 108Negro WOrld, May 21, 1927, p. 9. 109J. A. Rogers, World's Great Men of Color (New York, J. A. Rogers, 1947), p. 602; Garvey said this during a conversation with Rogers in London in 1937. 110Black Man, II, 8, December 1937, p. 12. 111Ibid., II, 3, September-October 1936, p. 2. 112New York Amsterdam News, August 31, 1935, clipping in U.N.I.A. Central Division (New York) files, Box 15, G. 113New Ybrk Amsterdam News, September 19, 1923: P- 12. 114Blackman, December 14, 1929, p. 5. 115Ibid., April 4, 1929, p. 2. 119 116Negro World, August 25, 1928, p. l. 117New Jamaican, July 28, 1932, p. 3; Black Man, 2, January 1934, p. 13. 1: 118Black Man, 1, 4, March-April, 1934, p. 3. 119 Negro Wbrld, August 9, 1924, p. 6. 120 Black Man, I, 1, December 1933, p. 2. 121 . . Ibid., April 16, 1929, p. l; Negro Wbrld, May 7, 1932, p. l. 122 Negro World, October 6, 1928, p. 4. 123Black Man, II, 2, July-August 1936, p. 9. 124Negro World, February 24, 1923, p. 2. CHAPTER IV SELF-RELIANCE The Universal Negro Improvement Association teaches to our race self-help and self-reliance, not only in one essential, but in all those things that contribute to human happiness and well being. The disposition of the many to depend upon the other races for a kindly and sympathetic considera- tion of their needs, without making the effort to do for themselves, has been the race's standing disgrace by which we have been judged and through which we have created the strongest prejudice against ourselves. The race needs workers at this time, not plagiarists, copyists and mere imitators; but men and women who are able to create, to originate and improve, and thus make an independent racial con- tribution to the world and civilization. —- Marcus Garvey1 No one had a keener sense of racial outrage at the injustices perpetrated against the black man than did Marcus Garvey. Yet, imbued with the experience of the widely travelled and the well read, and full of the influence of Booker T. Washington, he decided from early in his public career that black people would have to rely largely on their own efforts to completely shake off the shackles of oppression. In a pamphlet published in Jamaica round about 1915 around the same time as he was 120 .4 '9 121 corresponding with Washington or shortly thereafter, he explained in very Washingtonian terms that "The Negro is ignored to-day simply because he has kept himself back- ward; but if he were to try to raise himself to a higher state in the civilized cosmos, all the other races would be glad to meet him on the plane of equality and comrade- ship." ‘He went on to express an idea which would later cause him much enmity from Afro-American integrationists of the DuBoisian anti-Washingtonian school--"It is indeed unfair to demand equality when one of himself has done nothing to establish the right to equality."2 Garvey never abandoned this dual tendency to score the white ”race for its injustice, while simultaneously utilizing the language of condemnation to spur the black race on to greater self-reliance. This emphasis upon self-reliance was a logical and necessary corollary to Garvey's race first doctrine. For if the U.N.I.A. was to organize around the racial principle, then this must preclude the strings of white philanthropy. He was not averse to approaching white governments of black people and the League of Nations to support his pro- grams, but he obviously considered this kind of quasi- diplomatic activity to be different from founding a black mass movement on white support. Garvey's belief in the necessity for self-reliance led him occasionally to speak in the language of Social 122 Darwinism. He attacked the pseudo-scientific racists who tried to justify genocide against black people in terms of the Darwinian "survival of the fittest"3 and turned their arguments to the cause of racial self-reliance. "White philosophers," he argued, "Darwin, Locke, Newton and the rest . . . forgot that the monkey would change to a man, his tail would drop off and he would demand his share."4 And not only had these philosophers been mis- taken, but black heroism in the Great War had finally given the lie to such false assumptions. He reminded his black audiences that "that theory has been exploded in the world war. It was you, the superman, that brought back victory at the Marne."5 The urgency felt by Garvey for racial independence and self-reliance led him to argue that in independent endeavor lay the only hope of eventual solution to the problem of race prejudice. The white race would cease its aggressiveness towards the black when it was met by inde- pendent black power of a magnitude equal toits own. White prejudice was manifested "not because there is a difference between us in religion or in colour, but because there is a difference between us in power."6 Furthermore, Garvey was of the opinion that the black man had little choice in the matter. If he did not continue going forward, spurred on by his own efforts, 123 i _then he would slide backwards into slavery and even extermination. ."The days of slavery are not gone for- ever," he reminded his followers. "Slavery is threatened for every race and nation that remains weak and refuses to organize its strength for its own protection."7 The most important area for the exercise of inde- pendent effort was economic. Garvey believed, like Washington before him, that economics was primary. (Successful political action could only be founded on an independent economic base. "After a people have estab- lished successfully a firm industrial foundation," he wrote, "they naturally turn to politics and society, but not first to society and politics, because the two latter cannot exist without the former."8 Within months of his arrival in the United States in 1916, Garvey was already appraising, with approval, the efforts made by Afro- Americans in the economic field. At this early period, before he had made his decision to cast down his bucket in the United States, he wrote, in a vein having prophe- tic implications for his own career, "The acme of American Negro enterprise is not yet reached. You have still a far way to go. You want more stores, more banks, and bigger enterprises. I hope that your powerful Negro press and the conscientious element among your leaders will con- tinue to inspire you to achieve. . . ."9 This desire for economic self-reliance dominated 5.... A‘ V: Li: (I: “Av -: 41‘ AL Vt. \ “a 124 Garvey's thought. The fact that the black man was a con- sumer and not an independent producer worried him. "Let Edison turn off his electric light and we are in darkness in Liberty Hall in two minutes," he once said, "The Negro is living on borrowed goods."10 7 Garvey made a valiant attempt to change this state of affairs. Between 1918 and the early 19205 Garvey's headquarters area in New York City, sprouted a large assortment of U.N.I.A. businesses. The Black Star Line, which eventually owned several ships, was incorporated in 1919 according to the laws of Delaware, but with its main office in Harlem. The Negro Factories Corporation was in- corporated the same year. Under its aegis there appeared Universal Launderies, a Universal Millinery Store, Uni— versal Restaurants, Universal Chain Stores, as well as a hotel, tailoring establishment, doll factory and printing press. In addition, the organization in New York had by the first half of 1920 acquired three buildings, one lot and two trucks, and its weekly organ the Negro World had achieved a circulation of 50,000, this figure having jumped from 17,000 in eleven months under the editorship of William H. Ferris, an author and graduate of Harvard and Yale. By 1920, too, Garvey was even contemplating a large bank.11 By 1920, upwards of three hundred persons were employed by the U.N.I.A. and its allied corporations in the United States, and between 1920 and 1924 U.N.I.A. C» a» ‘V 125 and allied employees on occasion exceeded one thousand in the United States alone.12 In addition to the parent body in Harlem, local branches of the U.N.I.A. in the United States and else- where also owned considerable amounts of property and sometimes ventured into local business ventures. The en- couragement of local businesses was in fact a prime motive for the enterprises established in Harlem by Garvey. They were for demonstrative purposes to propagandize people into the possibility of increased black business endeavour, as much as for anything else. In 1927, for example, after several years of financial assault on the organization, and two years after the incarceration of Garvey, his attorneys, in an application for pardon, stated that the organization still owned assets, usually real estate, valued at$20,000 in Philadelphia, $30,000 in Pittsburg, $50,000 in Detroit, and $30,000 in Chicago, among other 13 Local units outside the United States partici- places. . . . . 14 pated in such economic actiVity also. The Colon, Panama, U.N.I.A., for example, ran a co-operative bakery, while the Kingston, Jamaica, branch ran a laundry and an African Communities League PeOples Co-operative Bank, the shares of which were open only to U.N.I.A. members.15 The normal form of U.N.I.A. business organization was along co-operative lines.16 £10 In () “ .5'. () () (3 'll {r H ‘. d (1 a 126 The individual business enterprises established by U.N.I.A. branches all over the world were to be linked, according to Garvey's grand design, into a worldwide system of Pan-African economic co-operation. He envisaged a trading network linking up the African communities throughout the world. Such a trading community, when fully developed, would be so large that the economies of scale generated would enable it to thrive even in the face of hostility from the rest of the world. Garvey summed up this idea thus: "Negro producers, Negro distributors, Negro consumers! The world of Negroes can be self— contained. We desire earnestly to deal with the rest of the world, but if the rest of the world desire not, we seek not."17 The Black Star Line (and later the Black Cross Navigation and Trading Company) was to be the carrier for this Pan-African trade. Among the areas most receptive to the idea of a Pan-African trading network was West Africa, traditionally the home of some of the most experienced traders of the race. The representative of the Black Star Line in Lagos, Nigeria, went so far in 1920 as to try to encourage Garvey to defer his dream of a Pan-African nation in favor of a concentration of effort on the Pan-African economic link. He considered the former scheme particularly formidable because of the certain opposition of imperialist powers.18 This attitude was fairly common among more moderate 4:) 0n In ~VA o INQ- .- 00... b ‘- 127 elements on the West African coast. The National Congress of British WeSt Africa, itself a Pan-West African nation- alist group, endorsed Garvey's Black Star Line idea as a "great and even sublime conception for which everybody of African origin will bless the name of Marcus Garvey," and agreed that New World Africans should be welcomed back home to the continent, but also considered a Pan-African political entity unfeasible.19 I Garvey's attempts to establish economic self- reliance went beyond cooperative business enterprises, for U.N.I.A. branches acted as mutual aid friendly socie- ties for the payment of death and other minor benefits to members. In rural areas among poor communities, this aspect of the organization's operations assumed greater importance. Local divisions also were required to main- tain a charitable fund "for the purpose of assisting dis- tressed members or needy individuals of the race," a fund for "loans of honor" to active members, and an employment bureau to assist members seeking work.20 Economic self-reliance, especially on the American scene, acquired a special urgency for Garvey, for he fore- saw a depression which he thought would finish the black man in America for good: "The readjustment of the world, as I have often said, is going to bring about an economic, industrial stagnation in America that is going to reduce the Negro to his last position in this nation."21 H. .. .1 ‘4‘ in. (I) on (I) U 0 r 128 The U.N.I.A. quest for self-reliance led to spora- dic attempts at educational facilities provided by the organization. Garvey's correspondence with Booker T. Washington and his visit to the United States were both motivated by a desire to establish in Jamaica an industri- al and agricultural school along the lines of Washington's Tuskegee Institute in Alabama. This desire for an educa- tion geared towards independence continuously cropped up. The 1920 Declaration of Rights had demanded unlimited and unprejudiced education for black people,22 and U.N.I.A. locals in Port Limon (Costa Rica), Colon (Panama), British Guiana and elsewhere ran elementary and sometimes grammar schools.23 One such school in Colon was described, two months after its inception in 1925, as being along co- operative lines (with free tuition for members' children), with an enrolment of over three hundred, and staffed by five British West Indian and one Panamanian teacher, the latter appointed to satisfy a government requirement for a Spanish-speaking teacher.24 In New York City the association owned a "Booker T. Washington University" in the early years, and in 1926 the association in the United States obtained the Smallwood-Corey Industrial Institute in Claremont, Virginia, afterwards renamed Liberty University. The school was reported to be on property adjoining the James River and containing the wharf where the second lot of 3. A» ..L 129 slaves landed in Virginia in 1622. The school was trans- ferred to the U.N.I.A. in consideration for assuming its outstanding indebtedness. At the time ofiits transfer the school's vice-president, J. G. St. Clair Drake, was the U.N.I.A.‘s International Organizer, while its principal, Caleb B. Robinson, was a member of the Philadelphia divi- sion. The school's founder, John D. Smallwood, had been educated at Hampton Institute in Virginia.25 Liberty University was acquired amidst high hopes that it would become a successful vehicle for imparting self-reliance, race pride and rehabilitating black history.26 The university, like several other Afro-American colleges of the period, was in fact a high school, and it struggled on for three years before being closed in 1929 due to financial difficulty. Those students who did attend were often sponsored by local U.N.I.A. units and were dedicated Garveyites.27 In addition to formally organized schools the U.N.I.A. throughout its history organized in-service training courses of various kinds. During Garvey's American period, for example, the organization carried out such programs for its civil servants, and ex-school- master James O'Meally wrote a special guidebook for pros- pective U.N.I.A. officers.28 And during Garvey's last years in London he organized a School of African Philosophy which, by means of correspondence courses, as well as 130 intensive courses administered by Garvey himself in Canada (after U.N.I.A. conventions in Toronto), prepared U.N.I.A. workers for their roles in the organization. NOTES SELF-RELIANCE 1Negro World, August 18, 1923, p. l. 2A Talk With Afro-West Indians - The Negro Race and Its Problems, p. 2. 3Blackman, November 14, 1928, p. 1. 4St. Louis, Mo., Star, October 6, 1923, copy in F.O. 371/8513. 5British Guiana Tribune, May 15, 1921, copy in C.O. 318/364. 6Negro World, February 1923, p. 2. 7Ibid., May 22, 1926, p. 1. 8Ibid., May 17, 1924, p. 1. 9Marcus Garvey, "The West Indies in the Mirror of Truth," Champion Magazine, I, 5, January 1917, p. 267. 10Negro World, January 26, 1924, p. 3. 11William H. Ferris, "Garvey and the Black Star Line," Favorite Maggzine, IV, 6, July 1920, p. 396; Amy Ashwood Garvey, Marcus Garvey: Prophet of Black Natignal- ism, pp. 153, 154? MiEhaeI Gold, "When Africa Awakes," NEW York World, Magazine and Story Section, August 22, 1920, p. 7; Ida B. Wells, Crusade for Justice, p. 380; F.O. 371/4567, M.I. l.c., New York, to Foreign Office, January 7, 1920; New York Amsterdam News, January 31, 1923, p. 1; John E. Bruce2Papers, BL 11, undated anonymous letter, "To the Editor." 131 nu. bu. fin ‘v ‘V~~, “n n «a i ‘ fly qu nk \P has 5? s .\ 132 12Ferris, op. cit.; Negro World, May 6, 1933, 13R. G. 204, 42-793. 14The Star and Herald (Panama), April 19, 1925, p. 3; R. G. 5977819.5032, Odin G. Loren, American Vice Consul, Colon, Panama, to Secretary of State, Washington, D.C., April 22, 1925. 15Negro World, June 30, 1923, p. 7; Blackman, July 30, 1929, p. 3; Blackman, August 23, 1930, p. 7. 16Negro World, February 2, 1924, p. 1. 17Blackman, April 10, 1929, p. 2. 18John E. Bruce papers, Ms. 267, Akinbami Agbebi to Bruce, 18 May 1920. lgTimes of Nigeria, May 24, 1920, pp. 4, 5, quoted in J. Ayo Langley, "Garveyism and African National- ism," Race, XI, 2, October 1969, p. 159. 20Universal Black Men Catechism, p. 28. 21Negro World, January 26, 1924, p. 3. 22Catechism, p. 36. 23Negro World, December 24, 1927, p. 6; Blackman, August 5, 1929, p. 3; ibid., June 21, 1930, p. 3. 24R. G. 59, 819.5032, Odin G. Loren, American Vice Consul, Colon, to Secretary of State, Washington, D.C., April 22, 1925; The Star and Herald, April 19, 1925, p. 3. 25Negro World, July 24, 1926, p. 3. 26£2$Qyp August 7; 1926, p. 10; August 28, 1926, 27F.g.: ibid., June 16, 1928, p. 4; June 30, 1928, p. 8; July 21, 19287‘p. 8; July 28, 1928, p. 2; March 23, 1929, p. 6r‘August 17, 1928, p. 4; August 24, 1929, p. 13; 133 September 7, 1929, p. 3; January 23, 1932, p. 4; Blackman, August 26, 1929, p. 8. 28John E. Bruce papers, 68-6; 143-8. 29E.g., Black Man, IV, I, June 1939, p. 8. 5.1 (7‘ CHAPTER V RELIGION God in the affairs of men is on the side of the strongest battalion. -- Marcus Garvey1 . . . in spite of all the evidence . . . Negroes still believe that Garvey is not dead. What is wrong? Was he immortal? Was he not human and subjected to sickness and death like the rest of us? -— S. U. Smith, treasurer Harmony Division, Jamaica In March of 1917, the Champion Magazine, an Afro- American monthly journal appearing in Chicago, editorial- ized on the need for a religion that would inspire the black man to do for himself. The editorial noted that "From a secular standpoint both Booker T. Washington and Dr. DuBois with their different schools of thought supplied it." Nevertheless, the article continued, "such faiths do not penetrate so deeply into the nature of a man as those inspired by his spiritual self." The edi- torial went on to articulate an impassioned plea: "The Negro is crying for a Mohamed, a Prophet to come forth and give him the Koran of economic and intellectual welfare. 134 135 Where is he?"3 An article by Marcus Garvey had appeared in this magazine two months earlier,4 and within the next two years Garvey would be on his way towards answering his plea. Garvey seems to have had frequent contact with religion during his early years. At the age of seven he is supposed to have enjoyed affecting the role of preacher among his playmates.5 As a boy, too, he pumped the organ in the Wesleyan Methodist Church in St. Ann's Bay, Jamaica, the church to which his parents belonged.6 Garvey later 7 which fact did not deter him converted to Catholicism, from following an independent line in things religious. Among the people whom he claimed rendered assistance to the U.N.I.A. in its formative years in Jamaica were a Catholic bishop and Scottish clergyman.8 One of Garvey's earliest public appearances in Harlem took place in the hall of a Catholic church during the first half of 1917.9 Like many of the world's great revolutionaries and reformers, Garvey dreamt dreams, saw visions, and long before his dreams assumed worldwide importance, he was imbued with a self-conscious premonition of impending greatness. This phenomenon, coupled with his fascination for religion and religious ritual, gave his career a messianic quality which he himself was not reluctant to express. He was not loathe to compare his own career to that of Jesus Christ. In doing so, however, he was ... 4.1. sfi u «C vs ”‘1 Cs .‘ ‘ C l; mu .3. more 8 y. s .710 tin'wu 4 HH‘ d eats y, L; 136 attempting to recapture what he considered to be the pro- gressive and revolutionary essence of the early Christian church, an essence which was hopelessly obscured by the Christian practitioners of his era. As far as he was con- cerned, Christ was the leader of a mass movement for the uplift of oppressed people, and so was he. This explains why he could be pro-religious and very often anti-clerical at the same time. Christ's doctrine, he explained, "was simple but revolutionary. He laid the foundations of a pure democracy and established the fact, not a theory, of the Universal Brotherhood of man."10 Sometimes Garvey saw himself as "a John the Baptist in the wilderness," the forerunner of a "greater and more dangerous Marcus Garvey . . . with whom you will have to reckon for the injustice of the present generation."11 And just as he saw himself in the role of messiah, so he saw his doctrine of Black Nationalism as one which would survive and thrive even in the face of persecution. A favorite poetic quotation of U.N.I.A. orators was the 12 The line "Truth crushed to earth shall rise again." more his work was persecuted in one part of the world, the more it spread elsewhere, even a thousand fold. One could just not crucify a principle.13 This spiritual aspect of Garvey's movement dis- tinguished it from the more important contemporary move— ments with similar goals. The universal feeling of _tu 137 oppression and resentment felt by black people at their world-wide subjection to colonialism and oppression can- not be over-emphasized. The decades before the rise of Garvey had given rise to dozens of Pan-African type organizations emanating from various parts of the world. Most of those had enjoyed comparatively little signifi- cant success until Garvey appeared. Garvey's uncanny ability to encompass all this worldwide racial sentiment and the spectacular initial success with which he channelled it into organizational form released emotions of hope and appreciation among black people which knew no bounds. Garvey's followers and admirers regularly hailed him as "the mightiest prophet who has appeared among us in fifty years," a great religious teacher, a John the Baptist, and the like.14 They regularly compared him to Christ. Like Christ he had built his organization (in the United States) from a nucleus of twelve followers plus himself. He, too, had been betrayed for money and con- demned by governments. And his gospel, too, would be preached to every nation and would precipitate an end to barbarism.15 One preacher wrote a book wherein he essayed to show that Garvey had brought the race the U.N.I.A. 16 through the instrumentality of God. And Garvey's faith- ful comrade, John E. Bruce, invoked biblical authority for 17 Garvey's program of African redemption. Garveyites from Colon, Panama, seeking their leader's release from prison 138 in the United States, informed President Coolidge that "We the Negroes of the World look upon Garvey as a super- man; a demigod; and as the reincarnated Angel of Peace come from Heaven to dispense Political Salvation" to an oppressed people. "Yea," this message continued, "we 18 love Garvey next to our GOD." One New York division went so far as to canonize Garvey in his own lifetime, after his expulsion from the United States.19 This tendency to apotheosize Garvey found expression in the U.N.I.A. creed which read in part: "We believe in God, the Creator of all things and people, in Jesus Christ, His Son, the Spiritual Savior of all mankind. We believe in Marcus Garvey, the leader of the Negro peoples of the world, and in the program enunciated by him through the 20 A similar U.N.I.A. . . . the redemption of Africa." creed found its way into a nationalist Scuth African church: "We believe in one God, Maker of all things, Father of Ethiopia . . . who did Athlyi, Marcus Garvey and colleagues come to save? The down-trodden children of Ethiopia that they might rise to be a great power among the nations."21 It was consistent with this veneration that some of Garvey's followers at first refused to believe accounts of his death (due in part to the fact that the first reports of his passing were in fact false) and had to be reassured that Garvey had indeed passed on, but remained 139 in spirit to share the joys and sorrows of his people.22 Garvey did not indulge in religion for its own sake, however, but used it as he did art, for furthering his program of race pride and self-reliance. In so doing he exhibited much originality and was willing to incur the wrath of less radical churchmen and laymen alike, especially in Afro-America. The political use of religion for Garvey began by the simple argument that if, as established Christian churches preached, man was made in the image and likeness of God, then black men should de- pict a God in their own image and likeness, which would inevitably be black. Garvey pointed out that the prac- tice of Western Hemisphere Africans to worship a God of another race had few parallels anywhere else. It was quite normal for men to visualize and depict their gods in their own color. The foisting of a white God onto black people was therefore a white distortion. Garvey's close colleague Bishop George McGuire reinforced this argument by pointing out that Christ was historically reddish brown rather than lily-white. And furthermore, should Christ visit New York, he would not be allowed to live on Riverside Drive, but would have to reside in Harlem because of his color.23 Garvey reiterated this view by the ingenious argument that "Because He came as an embodiment of all humanity, and therefore was coloured," Christ was persecuted.24 140 This facet of Garvey's thought, like most others, was taken to its logical conclusion. At a religious ceremony marking the close of the 1924 International Convention of Negro Peoples of the World, Jesus Christ was canonized as a "Black Man of Sorrows" and the Virgin 25 This convention had also Mary as a Black Madonna. agreed to "The Idealization of God as a Holy Spirit, without physical form, but a Creature of imaginary semblance of the black race, being of like image and 26 likeness." Garvey explained that this did not mean that the U.N.I.A. was embarking upon a new religion. It was simply correcting the mistake of centuries.27 Garvey’s black God elicited rebukes from a cross- section of the types of people who opposed his other pro- grams. The Rev. Everard w. Daniel of the St. Philips Colored Episcopal Church in Harlem considered the idea absurd. Garvey was in his view, holding the race up to ridicule.28 One Bittish Foreign Office official con- sidered that this religious program, in his words, "beats the band." Another Foreign Office official thought that "Bishop McGuire seems to have got some of his ideas from Chartres."29 Professor Kelly Miller of Howard University agreed that God was equally as black as he was white, but thought that the remedy did not lie in "the vindictive 30 alternative of Marcus Garvey." A correspondent to the New York Times expressed a similar view. He pointed out 141 that Indians and Africans in Brazil had long depicted Christ as black, but minus what he considered Garvey's racial animosity.31 Since religion for Garvey was eminently political, the black God of the U.N.I.A. differed from many other Christian gods in so far as he was a God of self-reliance. The God of the U.N.I.A. concerned himself with spiritual matters. He endowed all races equally and left them to their own devices to solve the problem of survival. It appeared as though Garvey, in view of his own religious background, and mindful of the entrenched position of religion in the lives of black people, opted to channel this religious fervor into the path of racial salvation, rather than attempt to launch a frontal assault against it. Therefore Garvey incessantly repeated his message: "We blame God for many things that he doesn't even know about."32 He was convinced that in a thoroughly material- istic world mere religious precepts would not sway the hearts of those in power. He went so far as to jokingly suggest that if he thought religion alone could win justice for the black man he would be a bishop.33 Garvey's religion, then, differed in this critical aspect from the opiate which had traditionally been taught to black persons by white proselytizers.34 This difference between Garvey's religion and In H. 142 white Christianity was not accidental. He considered white Christianity to be synonymous with hypocrisy and assailed black people for giving up the world to the white man for the dubious privilege of receiving Jesus: "The white man has the world and gives up Jesus! Don't you know the white man has a right to Jesus, too? Jesus belongs to everybody so you are foolish to give up the world and take Jesus only."35 Accordingly, when, during the annual International Convention of 1922 in New York a white Bible society pretentiously offered free Bibles to delegates, the offer was graciously declined, with the suggestion that they be sent south to the racists who dwelt in those parts, since all the delegates already possessed their own.36 The bitterness which Garvey felt toward white Christianity is eloquently summed up in a Negro World editorial of his of 1923: The Negro is now accepting the religion of the real Christ, not the property-robbing, gold-stealing, diamond-exploiting Christ, but the Christ of Love, Justice and Mercy. The Negro wants no more of the white man's religion as it applies to his race, for it is a lie and a farce; it is propaganda pure and simple to make fools of a race and rob the precious world, the gift of God to man, and to make it the exclusive home of pleasure, prosperity and happiness for those who have enough intelligence to realize that God made them masters of their fate and archi- tects of their own destinies.37 In 1937, in similar vein, Garvey described himself as a Christian driven from the church by actions such as the pope's blessing of Italian facists en route to their 143 invasion of Ethiopia.38 And to black preachers who un- critically emulated their white counterparts, Garvey was equally hostile. He considered them of little help to the U.N.I.A. since they mostly confined their activities to preaching and collecting money.39 During his American period, Garvey's religious program was reinforced and often implemented by the African Orthodox Church. While the U.N.I.A. never adopted any specific religious denomination, Christian or other- wise, to the exclusion of others, the African Orthodox Church (AOC) was the nearest approximation to such a state of affairs. The dominant figure in the AOC was George Alexander McGuire (also known as George Alexander) a naturalized American, originally a Church of England minister in his native Antigua and elsewhere in the West Indies, and later an Episcopalian and Chaplain-General of the U.N.I.A.40 McGuire was ordained first bishop of the AOC on September 29, 1921 by a functionary of the Russian Orthodox Church, after duly being re-ordained and elevated to the episcopate in the American Catholic Church in . . 41 order to ensure apostolic succeSSion. The Negro World extended its congratulations to Bishop McGuire on this occasion and reminded its readers that this was in keeping with the decision of its recent convention to endorse all churches under race leadership while not allying itself with any. Bishop McGuire _ 144 resigned as Chaplain-General of the U.N.I.A. upon his elevation to the episcopate.42 Despite a tiff with Garvey which caused Bishop 43 the McGuire to temporarily resign from the U.N.I.A., AOC played an important role in disseminating Garveyism in North America, the West Indies, Africa, and elsewhere. It was Bishop McGuire who wrote the race catechism used by Garveyites, and which faithfully reproduced Garvey's (and McGuire's, for they seem to have been mostly the same) ideas on religion and religious history, as well as the fundamental principles of the U.N.I.A. Garveyites, some high-ranking, played important roles within the AOC. In 1924, for example, a former secretary-general of the U.N.I.A. became vicar-general of the African Orthodox Church.44 And during the "united synodal service" of the fourth general synod of the AOC held at Harlem's Liberty Hall in 1924, Bishop McGuire conferred the degree of Doctor of Civil Laws (DCL) on Garvey.45 In 1923, with Garvey incarcerated in the Tombs prison in New York, McGuire's name was mentioned by some as a possible successor in the event that Garvey should be permanently denied bail.46 The work of the African Orthodox Church served often as a supplementary prOpaganda agency for the U.N.I.A. The Negro Churchman, its official organ, regularly pushed such Garveyite ideas as race pride, colonization in Liberia, (I) t3?- 8:: 145 and the like. McGuire's editorials, "Ex Oriente Lux," usually began, "Churchmen of African Descent, Greeting in Christ,"47 which bore obvious similarity to Garvey's own perennial opening gambit, "Fellowmen of the Negro Race, Greeting." The AOC's activities in colonised territories proved no less embarrassing to colonial authorities than those of the U.N.I.A. itself, and indeed the two were sometimes represented in the same individual. An AOC clergyman who doubled as U.N.I.A. head in Santo Domingo was thus reportedly deported from that country for insult- ing the British flag, while another, a Ven Edward Seiler Salmon, was deported, according to the same source, from Trinidad to Jamaica for fomenting riots and strikes there and for stirring up workers in British Honduras against the United Fruit Company. He was Assistant Secretary of the Trinidad Workingmen's Association.48 The source of this information was a renegade AOC clergyman who took it upon himself to inform the British authorities of his church's activities. Among the gratuitous information thus proffered was the fact that the AOC had ordained a bishop, ostensibly of Canada, but who would in fact pre- side from Nova Scotia over the West Indian sections of the church. It was feared that the title Bishop of the West Indies would cause the British colonialists to pre- vent him entry into the islands. The branches of the AOC ‘ 281‘. ‘9 to‘ s-L a re]: Shall 146 in the West Indies were even told by McGuire to change their name if molested by the authorities, if this would allow them to carry on their work. The African Orthodox Church was similarly engaged in various parts of Africa. In 1924, for example, an application for membership was accepted from an "Archdeacon of Pretoria, South Africa" together with his congregation of five hundred. In accepting the application, Bishop McGuire is reported to have suggested that the archdeacon help effectuate Garvey's entry into South Africa, after which Bishop McGuire would consecrate him Bishop of South Africa.49 Shortly thereafter, from Griqualand West, again in South Africa, came word that an AOC clergyman intended coming to New York to attend the next International Con- vention and to be elevated to the episcopate by Bishop 50 In 1929 a branch of the AOC was begun in McGuire. Uganda by Reuben Spartas Mukasa, a nationalist politician who had for some time been in correspondence with BishOp McGuire, and who was also an admirer of Garvey.51 Bishop McGuire was one of Garvey's most trusted colleagues during Garvey's American period, and was recog- nized as such by Garvey. In 1925 he summed up his reli- gious belief in a nutshell: "I believe in God; I believe in the Negro race." And even though the U.N.I.A. was not a religion, he was sure that "the time has come when we shall all espouse it as a great, all-comprehensive, racial 147 missionary movement, a holy cause to which every Negro should give undivided allegiance."52 Not unnaturally, U.N.I.A. meetings were character- ized by many religious overtones. They featured hymns, prayers and sometime processions, and every unit had a chaplain. Christian festivals such as Easter and Christmas were celebrated, but, in keeping with Garvey's reinterpretation of Christianity, they were turned around to the cause of Garvey's program. At a Christmas pageant at Liberty Hall in Harlem, for example, Christ was 53 depicted as a black child. For the period before Easter, the U.N.I.A. produced its own moving picture to replace passion plays where white actors portrayed God.54 At Easter, Garvey made his annual speech on "The Resurrection of the Negro."55 Even the Christian practice of baptism had its counterpart, for the association's catechism stipulated that infants should be brought by their parents to be dedicated by the chaplain of their division not later than three months after birth, "at which time they enter the general membership of the Organization."56 Garvey the irrepressible, not content with being a poet and playright of liberation, turned his hand, too, to political hymn-writing. Among his religious verses there cropped up, inevitably, such titles as "Freedom's Noble Cause--1834-l934" and lines such as "Nevermore, as black foot-stool,/Shall Afic's sons be sold."57 148 Garvey took his religious innovations very seri- ously, and he and his colleagues were intolerant of reli- gious cranks who were attracted to the organization. "The U.N.I.A. is flooded with a bunch of eccentric reli- gionists," said Negro World columnist S. A. Haynes of a 58 lady who complained that the organization was godless. Garvey himself expressed disagreement with Fr. Divine, who proclaimed himself God in Harlem, and his disapproval of the Jamaican folk-religion "pocomania," was surprisingly strong. He considered it the preserve of "ignorant Negroes who have been neglected educationally and cultur— ally" and an expression of "freedom of barbaric expres- I "59 sion. He disapproved also of Jamaican "prophets and prophetesses who are going to fly Heavenward for the solu- 60 tion of the Negro problem," an apparent reference to the Jamaican prophet Bedward, with whom Garvey is on occasion 61 somewhat controversially compared. On another occasion Garvey declared, "They sent poor Bedward to the asylum, but they will have a hard time to send me there. . . ."62 As previously stated, the U.N.I.A. refused to exclusively adopt any single Christian denomination. This reluctance to split the race along denominational lines extended to the avoidance of distinction between different religions. Though adopting Christian forms for the U.N.I.A., (Sarvey considered differences between religions such as Christianity and Islam, inconsequential, since they were U! 1!. 149 but different ways of worshipping God.63 An early copy of the preamble to the U.N.I.A. constitution enclosed in Garvey's correspondence to Booker T. Washington had referred to the promoting of "Christian" worship. This gave way in revised versions to "spiritual" worship.64 This religious tolerance is interesting in the light of the rapid post-Garvey spread of Islam among Afro—Americans. For the U.N.I.A., at least during Garvey's American period, presented the budding Islamic movement with a sympathetic forum. This tolerance towards Islam may have been indirectly due to Garvey's renowned predecessor in the cause of African redemption, Edward Wilmot Blyden. Blyden's career was in many ways similar to Garvey's - West Indian origins, sojourns in the United States, fostering the cause of African coloni- zation by New World Africans, a lengthy sojourn in Liberia. Garvey would undoubtedly have been familiar with Blyden before he first left Jamaica, but if even he was not, he would have come across much information on Blyden in the Africa Times and Orient Review for which he worked in England. In what may be his earliest extant 65 pamphlet, published round about 1915 in Jamaica, Garvey carried a quotation from Blyden's Christianity, Islam and the Negro Race which occupied about half of its few pages. The quotation itself dealt only peripherally with Islam, but the book from which it was taken is a clear 'h ‘vL Sable 3 Q die Or- 150 expression of Blyden's admiration for Islam, despite Blyden himself being a devout Christian. Blyden's favorable attitude towards Islam had influenced, also, Garvey's trusted friend and co-worker John E. Bruce. Bruce had met Blyden (the latter died in 1912) and had been planning a biography of him. In an address to the Boston U.N.I.A. in 1923 Bruce compared Christian and Islamic attitudes to the African race, to the detriment of the Christians. He considered that "Islam hath chosen the better way to reach the hearts and to hold the confidence of these black men in Africa."66 Favorable references to the Islamic faith apgxued quite frequently in the Negro World. An article of 1923, for example, entitled "Crescent or Cross?" was reprinted from the London Islamic Review for the benefit of "The Growing Circle of Our Race Interested in Islamic Culture."67 And some Negro World writers went so far as to occasionally compare Garvey with Mohammed. One such, in 1925, compared "The prophet of Allah, concentrating his inexhaustible incandescent energy on the spiritual-material liberation of his people and the 'Herald of the New Dawn,‘ Garvey, stressing with equal zeal the material-spiritual redemp- "68 tion of his race. Another, in a paean of praise entitled "Sing of Garvey, Glorify Him, Ye Myriad Men of Sable Hue," referred to him as "a child of Allah."69 Even the organization's Universal Ethiopian Hymnal, compiled 151 by Rabbi Arnold J. Ford (a leader of Harlem's Black Jews, no less) contained a hymn "Allah-Hu-Ak Bar" based on African lyrics.70 Among the Muslims who established apparently close contact with the U.N.I.A. during Garvey's American period were adherents of the Ahmadiya movement, a Muslim denomi- nation founded in Northern India a decade or so before the end of the nineteenth century. In 1920 Dr. Mufto Muhammad Sadiq, a missionary from this group, had come to the United States, where he purchased a property at 4448 South Wabash Avenue in Chicago, part of which was con- verted into a mosque, and began proselytizing.71 By 1923 we find Sadiq among the guests on the rostrum during a Liberty Hall meeting.72 Sadiq returned to India in 1923 and was succeeded by one Mohammed Yusuf Khan, also of India, and the Ahmadiya members in Chicago continued to take advantage of the friendliness of the Negro WOrld to spread the word concerning Islam. A letter to the paper in 1924 from Muhammad Diu bearing the same Wabash Avenue address, discoursed on the subject "Has Christianity Failed and Has Islam Succeeded?"73 Diu appeared in the Negro World again in 1925, this time replying to a couple of uncharacteristically questionable editorials by T. Thomas Fortune in which the latter disagreed with Blyden that Islam was preferable to Christianity. Fortune's argument rested on the alleged moral superiority of 152 monogamy over polygamy and the ease of divorce in Islam.74 Diu, described as belonging to the Moslem Ahmadiya Mission, pointed out that illegitimacy and divorce among Christian monogamists undermined Fortune's argument. Fortune remained adamant, however.75 An associate editor of the Negro World favored the Muslim position,76 and even Fortune was by 1926 denouncing "the high-handed way in which the Christian Americans and Europeans are and have been dealing with the African and Asiatic Mohammedans."77 Possibly because, at least in part, of such favor- able exposure in the Negro World, Islam continued to be a subject of interest among U.N.I.A. members in the United States after Garvey's deportation. In 1931, for example, the Cleveland, Ohio, division celebrated a "Mohammed Day" meeting, during the course of which they were addressed by one Dr. Abad M.D. Sty, listed as being from North East Africa.78 The Ahmadiya Muslims apparently did not succeed in building up a mass movement, but those Muslims who did were also associated in some respects with the U.N.I.A. It is sometimes said that Elijah Muhammad, since the 1930's leader of the most successful of these Muslim organizations, the Nation of Islam, was a corporal in the uniformed ranks of the Chicago U.N.I.A. division.79 Whether he was a member of Garvey's para-military unit or not, Muhammad did some of his earliest proselytizing in 153 80 He also Chicago in 1933 from a U.N.I.A. Liberty Hall. apparently encourages, or at least does not object, to having his movement cast in the role of successor to the Garvey movement.81 It is also sometimes suggested that W. D. Fard, who Originated the movement to the leadership of which Elijah Muhammed succeeded, acknowledged Garvey as a forerunner of his movement. A similar claim is made for Timothy Drew (later known as Noble Drew Ali) founder in 1913 of the Moorish-American Science Temples, who is sometimes believed to be a possible inspirer of W. D. Fard. Drew's movement had, for its major theological document a Holy Koran compounded of the teachings of the Bible, Marcus Garvey and the Quran. Garvey was apparently "eulogised at every meeting as the John the Baptist of the movement."82 Indeed, so successful were the Moorish- Americans at attracting Afro-American Garveyites after Garvey's deportation that Philadelphian Garveyites actu- ally wrote the United States authorities in 1935 asking for Garvey's return to combat the usurpation of Garvey by the Moorish-Americans, even to the detriment of orthodox Garveyites. The letter indicated that the Moorish- Americans, were enticing away U.N.I.A. members "under the pretense that they are doing Garvey's work, as he no longer can return." The Moorish-American leaders constantly reminded their converts of the injustices attendant upon Garvey's deportation and went so far as to claim authority 154 from Garvey, while denouncing orthodox Garveyites as crooks who had lost contact with Garvey.83 The essence of religion for Garvey was the impart- ing of race pride, Black Nationalism and self-reliance. In this light, his willingness to encourage Islam and the attraction which he had for Muslims in Afro—America are not difficult to understand. Indeed, even Harlem's Black Jews, as previously noted, could find a home in the U.N.I.A. for the basic thrust of their doctrines boiled down in essentials to a similar message of race pride and self-reliance. And in religion, Garvey was concerned primarily with essentials. Christian and non-Christian religions approved by Garvey all simultaneously predicted and worked hard to effectuate a return of the former glories of the African race. The U.N.I.A. catechism expressed it thus: Q. What prediction made in the 68th Psalm and the 3lst verse is now being fulfilled? A. 'Princes shall come out of Egypt, Ethiopia shall soon stretch out her hands unto God.‘ Q. What does this verse prove? A. That Black Men will set up their own govern- ment inlAfrica, with rulers of their own race.84 NOTES RELIGION 1Negro World, January 30, 1932, p. 1. 2National Negro Voice, July 29, 1941, p. 6. 3Champion Magazine, I, 7, March 1917, p. 334. 4Ibid., 1, 5, pp. 267, 268. 5Amy Ashwood Garvey,'Marcus Garvey: Prophet of Black Nationalism"(n.p., n.d., unpub. manuscript), p. 6. 6J. A. Rogers, World's Great Men of Color, II (New York, J. A. Rogers, 1947), p. 599; R. G. 60, 198940, James L. Houghteling, Commissioner of Immigration, to Senator Theodore G. Bilbo, n.d. [0. Feb. 1938]. 7Negro World, August 9, 1924, p. 7; R. G. 204, 42-793, application for executive clemency, June 5, 1925. 8Philosophy and Opinions, II, p. 128. 9Rogers, p. 599. 10Blackman, November 30, 1929, p. 1. ll Nggro World, May 26, 1923, p. 1. 12Amy Jacques Garvey‘quotes it and the stanza from which it is taken in Philospphy and Opinions, II, p. iii. 13N§gro World, August 24, 1929, p. 2; July 3, 1926, p. l. 155 156 14Arkansas Survey, December 18, 1927, p. 1; Ne ro World, Decémber 24771927, p. 2; ibid., February 19, 92 , p. 8; ibid., March 10, 1923, p. 4; ibid., May 15, 1926, p. 2; National Negro Voice, July 26, 1941, p. l. 15Negro World, April 4, 1925, pp. 2, 5; Bruce Papers 69-6, speechiby Mrs. Bruce, n.d. 16Rev. Zebedee Green, Why I Am Dissatisfied--Part Two (Pittsburg, 1924), p. 6. 17Bruce Papers, D-96, 43-9. 18R. G. 204, 42-793, Colon U.N.I.A. to President Calvin Coolidge, June 20, 1927. 19Negro world, January 1931, p. 3. 20Sixth Anniversary Drive, Cincinnati Division, No. 146, 19277 pp.*14, 15. 21Tony Martin, "Some Reflections on Evangelical Pan-Africanism, or, Black Missionaries, White Missionaries, and the Struggle for African Souls," Ufahamu, I, 3, Winter 1971, p. 84. The church was the Afro-Athlican Constructive Church. 22National Negro Voice, July 19, 1941, p. 1; July 26, 1941, p.25. 23New York Times, August 6, 1924, p. 3. 24Blackman, August 3, 1929. 25Negro World, September 6, 1924, p. 2. 26Ibid., June 7, 1924, p. 1. 27Ibid., September 6, 1924, p. 5. 28New York World, August 23, 1920, p. 12; Ngw York Age, August 28, 1920, p. 1. 157 29F.O. 371/9633 minutes of June 26 and October 20, 1924. 30Pittsburg Courier, August 8, 1924. 31New York Times, August 17, 1924, part VIII, p. 12. 32Negro World, January 26, 1924, p. 6. 33Ibid., February 24, 1923, p. 2. 34See further, ibid., March 3, 1923, p. 2; April 7, 1923, p. 2; January 24, 1925, p. 7; January 30, 1932, p. l; Blackman, September 25, 1929, p. l. 35The Tribune (British Guiana), May 22, 1921, re- printed from the GIeaner (Jamaica), March 26, 1921. Enclosure in C.O. 3187364, Governor of British Guiana to Secretary of State, Colonial Office, June 7, 1921. 36Amy Jacques Garvey, Garvey and Garveyism (Kingston, pub. by A. J. Garvey, 1962), p. 99. 37Negro World, November 3, 1923, p. 1; May 21, 1932, p. l. 3821225453g. II, 5, January 1937, p. 5. 39Negro WOrld, February 2, 1924, p. 5; March 19, 1927, p. 10; Black Man, I, 6, 1934, p. 10. 4°F.o. 371/9633, Rev. E. Urban Lewis to H. M. Consul General, New York, September 24, 1924; Negro WOrld, October 8, 1921, p. 3. 41Negro World, ibid. 42Ibid. 43952§2§2£y V: 3; November 1921, p. 5; F.O. 371/9633. 44Negro World, March 29, 1924, p. 2. 158 45Invitation card to the ceremony in F.O. 371/9633. 46New York Amsterdam News, June 27, 1923, p. 1. 47E.g., Negro Churchman, V, 2, February 1927, p. 2. 48F.O. 371/9633, Lewis to H. M. Consul, New York, September 24, 1924. 49F.o. 371/9633, Lewis to H. M. Consul, November 1, 1924. 50Negro World, February 7, 1925, p. 2. 51Robert I. Rotberg, A Political History of Trppi- cal Africa (New York, Harcourt, Brace and World, I965Y, pp. 340, 341. 52Negro World, December 5, 1925, p. 3. 53Ibid., January 3, 1925, p. 3. 54Ibid., September 5, 1925, p. 6. 55Philoso h and O inions, I, p. 66; Blackman, April 5; 1 ; p. ; Negro Wor , April 7, 1923T—§T_2. 56 Catechism, p. 29. 57Marcus Garvey,Jhr., Universal Negro Improvement Association Convention Hymns (Tfiingstonl, 1934); some of the hymns in Here were by Arnold J. Ford, who compiled the better-known Universal Ethio ian H a1 (Beth B'nai Abraham Pub. Co., , , 3 . 58Negro world, March 19, 1927, p. 4. 59Black Man, I, 12, late March 1936, p. 16. 60£2£g3l II, 5, January 1937, p. 12. 61E.g., Sylvia Wynter, "Garvey and Bedward," Sunday Gleaner, March 12, 1972, p. 20 and related corres- pondence. AV E. .~a ... Q 1.. C 0. 159 62Lenford S. Nembhard, Trials and Triumphs of Marcus Garvey (Kingston, The Gleaner Co. Ltd., 1940), p. 117. GBElESETEE; August 31. 1929. p. 13. 64Philosophyand Opinions, II, p. 38. 65A Talk With Afro-West Indians. 66Bruce Papers, 75-6. 67Negro World, September 8, 1923, p. 10. 6812i9¢r AUQUSt 15; 1925, p. 8. The writer was one Randolph P. Mercurius. 69Ibid., June 4, 1927, p. 3. 70Hymgal, p. 4. 71 A. T. Hoffert, "Moslem Propaganda-~The Hand of Islam Stretches Out to Aframerica," The Messenger, May 1927, pp. 141, 160. 72Negro World, September 1, 1923, p. 3. 73Ibid., January 5, 1924, p. 10. 74Ibid., July 18, 1925, p. 4; September 5, 1925, p. 4. 75Ibid., October 3, 1925, p. 4. 76Ibid., October 17, 1925, p. 5. 77Ibid., July 3, 1926, p. 4. 78Ibid., August 8, 1931, p. 3. 79Leonard E. Barrett, The Rastafarians (Institute of Caribbean Studies, University of Puerto Rico, 1968), 32% h... V” V” ,K 3 nu X. 160 p. 62. The statement was told to Barrett by Mrs. Amy J. Garvey during an interview. 80Muhammad Speaks, Special Issue [n.d., c. June 1972], p. 5. 81See foreword by Daniel Burley, in Elijah Muhammad, Message to the Blackman in America (Chicago, Muhammad Mosque of Islam No. 2, 1965). 82Arna Bontemps and Jack Conroy, They Seek a City (Garden City, N.Y., Doubleday, 1945), p. I75. 83R.G. 60, 39-51-821, Benjamin W. Jones, Secretary of Philadelphia U.N.I.A. to Joseph B. Keenan, Asst. Attorney General, May 21, 1935; for a similar complaint see the Negro World, April 15, 1933, p. 4. 84Catechism, p. 13. CHAPTER VI HISTORY You assume a right to write history within the last 500 years, and simply because you have been able to dump so many tons of your history in the world and other people have not said anything by way of com- plaint, you think your history rests there. But a lot of things your Mr. Wells has said we Negroes treat as bunk. Mr. H. G. Wells may divert civili- zation for the benefit of his Anglo-Saxon group, but that does not make it the fact that the people who laid claims to the civilization he attributed to others are going to give up easily. The black man knows his past. It is a past of which he can be nobly proud. That is why I stand before you this afternoon a proud black man, who would be nothing else in God's creation but a black man. -- Marcus Garvey1 Out of cold old Europe these white men came, From caves, dens and holes, without any fame, Eating their dead's flesh and sucking their blood, Relics of the Mediterranean flood; Literature, science and art they stole, After Africa had measured each pole, Asia taught them what great learning was, Now they frown upon what the Coolie does. -- Marcus Garvey2 Garvey's educational preparation formal and in- formal, for his career of race leadership in the U.N.I.A. was uniquely suited to his destined role. It included an adequate elementary and post-elementary education, 161 162 mastery of the printing trade while still in his teens, elocution lessons, active participation in debating clubs, wide experience in journalism, extensive travel over the African diaspora, a sojourn in law school, and an avid interest in Black History. Garvey's study of history seems to have already assumed significant proportions during his teenage years, while serving his printer's apprenticeship. During this period he interested himself largely in black heroes of the Caribbean, of whom Toussaint L'Ouverture, leader of the Haitian revolution, was his favorite.3 His early articles in the Africa Times and Orient Review and in Champion Magazine, show this keen appreciation of West Indian history. Quite possibly before he first left Jamaica, he began to explore the history of Africa as well as that of Afro-America. His interest in African history was clearly stated in his pamphlet A Talk With Afro-West Indians published in Jamaica before he left for the United States. Here he commended his audience to a study of Edward Wilmot Blyden: You who do not know anything of your ancestry will do well to read the works of Blyden, one of our his- torians and chroniclers, who have done so much to retrieve the lost prestige of the race, and to undo the selfishness of alien historians and their histo which has said so little and painted us so unfairly. Garvey's knowledge of, and appreciation for the history of his race, was reinforced by many of his early 163 contacts. Duse Mohamed Ali, for whom he worked during his first London period, had by then already published his well-known historical work on Egypt, In the Land of the Pharoahs. William H. Ferris, one of the earliest editors of the Negro Wbrld, had previously published his two-volume work on The African Abroad. John Edward Bruce, probably Garvey's most steadfast defender among the Afro-American intelligentsia, had in 1911 been among the founders of the Negro Society for Historical Research in Yonkers, New York, and was its president. This society disseminated historical knowledge and collected rare books and manuscripts on the history of black people. The society's Pan-African thrust was symbolized by the selection of King Lewanika of Barotseland as Honorary President. Duse Mohamed Ali was among its corresponding members, as was Mrs. Marie Du Chatellier of Bocas del Toro, Panama, later an important U.N.I.A. organizer. It antedated by four years the better-known Association for the Study of Negro Life and History founded by Carter G. WOodson. The secretary-treasurer of the Negro Society for Historical Research, Arthur A. Schomburg, commenting on the appearance of Woodson's Journal of Negro History in 1916 considered that this journal was "stealing our thunder in which we are pioneer."5 Wbodson himself many years later became a Negro World columnist. And among Garvey's life-long acquaintances, from his boyhood in 7h. V 164 Jamaica to his last years in England, was another of the leading black historians of the twentieth century, J. A. Rogers.6 History, like everything else for Garvey, was a subject to be used for the furtherance of racial emanci- pation. He used history first to establish a grievance, to show that the black man had been wronged. Many of his writings were historical in this sense. In 1938, for example, he submitted a memorandum to the West India Royal Commission, a British government body which was in- vestigating recent rioting and workers' revolts in the islands. Here he traced the history of the islands since emancipation--the denial of full equality to Afro-West Indians, their resultant migrations in search of work elsewhere, the usurpation of the island economies by alien races-~in order to explain the recent upheaval.7 History, however, could also be used to instill self-confidence. He continually stressed the fact that the African had in former times enjoyed a creditable history, and that this had been acknowledged by historians such as Herodotus who belonged to an era which felt less inclined to establish any myths of African inferiority.8 The African, therefore, had nothing to be ashamed of in the face of allegations of inferiority emanating from the white world. Indeed, black people should move from the defensive and aggressively rehabilitate their past. "The 165 time has come," he declared, "for the Blackman to forget and cast behind him his hero worship and adoration of other races, and to start out immediately to create and emulate heroes of his own. We must canonize our own saints, create our own martyrs, and elevate to positions of fame and honor Black men and women who have made their distinct contributions to our racial history."9 Garvey's stress on the progressive nature of the black past was a reaction to the distortions which he observed emanating from the pens of white historians in his era. He therefore carried on a constant campaign against white historical writing on the black past. In 1929, for example, he declared-that "History is written with prejudices, likes and dislikes; and there has never been a white historian who ever wrote with any true love 10 or feeling for the Negro." He went on to say that‘ White historians and writers have tried to rob the black man of his proud past in history, and when anything new is discovered to support the race's claim and attest the truthfulness of our greatness in other ages, then it is skillfully rearranged and credited to some other unknown race or people. Garvey's rehabilitation of the black past, especially the ancient past, and his acknowledgement of the greatness of black heroes past and present, in no way detracted from his ready admission of the fact that the black man had fallen behind in the preceding few hundred years in the march towards material progress. He incor- porated this into a cyclical theory of history which was 8"” x... “V ‘ul 166 designed to give the black man hope. As in the case of all great revolutionary theories, from Christianity to Communism, Garveyism decreed that the attainment of its ultimate goals was inevitable, the goals in this case being the resurgence of the black race: "In the cycle of things he lost his position, but the same cycle will take him back to where he was once."12 In the tradition of the world's great revolu- tionary philosophies, however, the inevitable success which awaited the black man would have to be activated by the black man's own efforts. In other words, success was inevitable, provided the black man did not become com- placent and did not cease to engage in constant struggle, based on the lines of Garvey's program. As Garvey him— self expressed it, "We are bound to win. Black men and women are bound to go forward; nothing can stop them but death and themselves."13 This same idea was succinctly expressed by Garvey during a debate with a delegate at the Sixth International Convention of Negro Peoples of the WOrld held in Jamaica in 1929. The exchange went like this: Mr. Garvey: You don't believe there is a literal interpretation to Ethiopia stretching forth her hands to God? Mr. Bailey: I do. Mr. Garvey: Then4how can we do it except we attempt it? This idea was also the central theme of Garvey's long 167 poetic saga, The Tragedy of White Injustice. The poem recounted African glories at a time when Europe was steeped in barbarism and catalogued a history of European genocide and rapine. The poem then postulated the black man's inevitable resumption of glory and held out the hope of peace if the white man should mend his evil ways soon. Otherwise, Armageddon would ensue. Garvey's interest in black history differed in one important respect from that of some cultural nation- alists, to whose school of thought he is sometimes linked. For he avoided the pitfalls of living in the past. He used history to establish a grievance, instill black pride and point a way for eventual race emancipation, and that was all. He refused to glory in the past to the extent of letting its exoticism become a hindrance to the struggle in his own time. By 1936 he was able to say, "It is an established fact that the Negro had a glorious past. We need not worry about it now, because outside of inspiring us with confidence and hope it will be of no material value to harp on it, for the present is what con- fronts us along with the future."15 Thirteen years earlier he had expressed similar sentiments: "We may go back three thousand years ago and point to our civiliza- tion of that time. But WE CANNOT LIVE BY THE PAST."16 Garvey's interest in history was reinforced by a feeling of deep empathy with the historical suffering of 168 the black race. Garvey's sense of spiritual mission often expressed itself through this medium. The following expression was typical: My firm purpose, my one purpose in life, is to work for the salvation of my race. Because of the cries from the grave--I hear the cry of 300 years. The cry of my great-grandparents in the cotton and cane fields; I see the hard taskmaster drawing his lash across their backs; I hear them cry out in mortal agony: 'It pains; it pains; it pains.’ I see them fall under the lash; I see them fall to the ground; I see them buried, and I hear the wailing souls from heaven and from regions below. I hear the cry of my mother and father and millions of Negroes who have been brutalized: 'Go on, Garvey! Go on! Go on!‘ And so, fellow men, be- cause of that cry that cry that comes from the grave I have given up all material desires; I have given up all temporal pleasures and have dedicated myself to the sacred principles of the U.N.I.A., the emancipation of the Negro race and a free and redeemed Africa.17 This communion with the past was linked to a strong consciousness on Garvey's part of himself actually being an important historical figure. He often spoke in terms of future generations who would be inspired by his example, as well as the past generations whose sufferings would thereby be rendered not in vain.18 Not surprisingly, in the light of the foregoing, history played an important role in the day to day affairs of the U.N.I.A. The race catechism used by the organiza- tion was largely an encapsulation of historical knowledge concerning the race. The first of its four sections, on Religious Knowledge, succinctly described Africa in antiquity, with particular emphasis on biblical references 169 to Africa and Africans. Readers were informed, for ex- ample, that Africa was mentioned three times in Christ's life--in the person of Balthazar, one of the three wise men; when he fled from Herod and sojourned in Egypt; and on Calvary, when his cross was laid on Simon the Cyrenian, a man of Africa. Several biblical figures, including some of the ancestors of Christ were traced to Africa, as was the wife and father-in-law of Moses, both Ethiopians. The second section, on Historical Knowledge, pro- vided a bird's eye view of Ethiopia, Meroe, Egypt, the slave trade, New World Slavery, Pre-Columbian Africans in the Americas. It also included brief biographical sketches of such famous Africans from the Motherland and the dispersion as Edward Wilmot Blyden, James Africanus Horton and Samuel Lewis of Sierra Leone, Rev. Samuel D. Ferguson of Liberia, Conrad Reeves of Barbados, Toussaint L'Ouverture, Frederick Douglass, Prince Hall, Alexander Crummell and others.19 J. A. Rogers, the black historian, sometimes lectured to U.N.I.A. locals,20 as did the equally eminent 21 Arthur A. Schomburg, on topics of Black History. J. A. Rogers' From Superman to Man was offered as a bonus with 22 subscriptions to the Negro World, and his articles often appeared therein, as well as in Garvey's Jamaican news- papers. The dust jacket of From Superman to Man still bears a Negro WCrld testimonial on its 1971 edition. 170 Carter G. Woodson, sometimes referred to as the "Father of Black History," regularly wrote for the Negro WOrld, and his Association for the Study of Negro Life and History was favorably reported by the paper's writers.23 Woodson himself had actually been the one who took the initiative in writing Garvey requesting permission to publish in his paper.24 Wbodson had a similarly amicable relationship with Garvey's Harlem-based daily paper, the Negro Times. Veteran journalist John E. Bruce, who worked on this paper, was a friend of Woodson and sometimes plugged Woodson's historical efforts in his regular column appearing in the paper, making sure to send on copies of the relevant issues to Woodson. Woodson's Journal of Negro History and his book The Negro in our History were 25 subject to much favorable treatment in the Negro Times. As early as 1920 the Declaration of Rights of Negro Peoples of the WOrld had demanded Black History in schools. And when the organization obtained Liberty University in Virginia, it was envisaged that it would teach the true history, and that the Carthaginean general Hannibal would 26 not be portrayed as Caucasian within its walls. For juvenile readers of the Negro World the lives of famous black figures such as vaudeville star Bert Williams and ex-heavyweight boxing champion Jack Johnson were seri- 27 alized in comic strip form. Black Star Line ships were named after race heroes, as were the Phyllis Wheatley 171 the Booker T. Washington University, both in This interest in race history was not confined nerican Garveyites.28 Garvey himself was a of African art pieces and on one occasion we spending an afternoon with Professor William Leo at the latter's Howard University office re- ictures of ancient Ethiopian culture.29 n important feature of Garvey's makeup which was ad by his use of history was his deep feeling of He took the View that great civilizations in were destroyed by materialism and a submergence values, and he looked forward to an ideal society ld learn from these past mistakes. In this re- saw a chance for the black man to be humanity's For the black man had the double experience of ncient civilizations on the Nile as well as the 's in which he currently lived. The former had royed by materialism and feelings of racial ty. The latter was in the process of disinte- or the same reason. In this situation the black not only emancipate himself, but perhaps save n the process and "salvage the bankrupt civili- white Europe." He could do this because "The the Negro is deep and holy. Misdirected, it has ional and sentimental up to the present, but the of the race in its sublimest thought will give 172 it an urge, direct it toward an end that will bestow great blessings upon mankind."30 NOTES HISTORY 'Marcus Garvey, Speech at Century Theatre, p. 26. > ‘Marcus Garvey, The Tragedy of White Injustice, 3Amy Ashwood Garvey, Marcus Garvgy- Prophet of ;ionalism, pp. 12-16. 1A Talk With Afro-West Indians, p. 3. ’Bruce Papers, Ms 23, Schomburg to Bruce, June? > 5 J. A. Rogers, World's Great Men of Color, p. 610. ’C.O. 950/44, Marcus Garvey, Memorandum to the .a Royal Commission, 24 September 1938. 3E.g., Nembhard, Trials and Trium hs, p. 113; The ;f White Injustice, p. 6; A Talk With Afro-West p. 3. 'Marcus Garvey, African Fundamentalism. This was reprinted several times in the Negro WOrld and 3 and sold as a poster for framing. 'OBlackman, June 20, 1929, p. 1; Philosophy and , II, p. 82. ’lIbid., see also, H. W. Peet, "An Interview with Lrvey," The Southern WOrkman, LVII, 10 October 424; Negro World, April 28, 1923, p. 10; ibid., : 7, 1929, p. l; Blackman, November 28, 1929, p. 173 174 12Black Man, II, 2, July-August 1936, p. 11. 13Negro World, August 18, 1928, p. l. l4Negro World, September 7, 1929, p. 8; for simi- lar sentiments see, A Talk With Afro-West Indians, p. 6. 15§£§E£_flgflr II, 3, September-October 1936, p. 3. 16Negro World, March 24, 1923, p. 10. l71bid., July 25, 1925, p. l. 18E.g., Blackman, April 9, 1929, p. 1; Philosophy and Opinions, II, pp. 183, 276. 19The Universal Black Men Catechism used by the author is a reprint of the original catechiSm. It is mostly the same as the original, though Mrs. Amy J. Garvey has informed the author that some changes have been made. One probable change is the substitution of "Black Men" for "Negro." 2OE.g., Negro World, January 23, 1932, p. 3; U.N.I.A. Central DiviSlon, New York, files, Box 14, f. 4, handbill for a U.N.I.A. meeting of July 21, 1935. 21Schomburg Papers, Box 3, Rev. R. Felix, vice- president, New York division, U.N.I.A. to Schomburg, November 21, 1934 and November 26, 1934. Schomburg spoke on this occasion on "African Cultures in America." 22Negro WOrld, December 24, 1927, p. 6. 23E.g., ibid., June 18, 1927, p. 4. 24Carter G. Woodson Papers, Library of Congress, Box 5, Folder 85, T. Thomas Fortune to WOodson, December 21, 1923, replying to Woodson to Garvey of December 15, 1923. 25Woodson papers, Box 5, Folder 77, Bruce to WOodson, January 17, 1923; Bruce to Woodson, January 20, 1923. 175 26Negro World, August 7, 1926, p. 10. 27E.g., ibid., September 14, 1929, p. 7; November 9, 1929, p. 7. 28E.g., National Negro Voice (Jamaica), August 9, 1941, p. 4. 29Negro World, February 2, 1924, p. 2. 30Black Man, II, 3, September-October 1936, p. 4; Negro World, July 17, 1926, p. l. CHAPTER VII PROPAGANDA The great white man has succeeded in subduing the world by forcing everybody to think his way, from his God to his fireside. He has given to the world, from the Bible to his yellow newspaper sheet, a literature that establishes his right and sovereignty to the disadvantage of the rest of the human race. The white man's propaganda has made him the master of the world, and all those who have come in contact with it and accepted it have become his slaves. The Universal Negro Improvement Association is now calling upon the 400,000,000 members of our race to discard the psychology and propaganda of all other peoples and to advance our own. The white man taught that the best of the world was intended for him, and we now teach that all the beauties of creation are the black man's, and he is heir to all that God has given to man. -- Marcus Garvey1 Garvey sold the Negro to himself. . . . -- S. A. Haynes2 Among Garvey's greatest feats was the thoroughness and success of his propaganda effort. He set out with self-conscious candor to oppose the propaganda of race pride and nationhood to the contrary ideas of white sup- remacy, African inferiority, white man's burden and Caucasian manifest destiny. Garvey almost single-handedly 176 177 took on the official propaganda machines of all the European and North American colonialist powers, as well as the myriad non-official publications, agencies, uni- versities and the like which helped in the dissemination of information inimical to the black man. "We are not afraid of the word prgpaganda," he declared, "for we use the term in the sense of disseminating our ideas among Negroes all the world over. We have nothing stealthy in this meaning."3 As far as Garvey was concerned every- thing--education, religion, history, the news media--was enlisted by the dominant race to the furtherance of pro- paganda designed to perpetuate its continuance in power. The time had come, therefore, for the black man not only to make his own propaganda available, but to refuse to be guided by those who did not suffer and could not empathize with him. He said, "It takes the slave to interpret the feelings of the slave; it takes the unfortunate man to interpret the spirit of his unfortunate brother; and so it takes the suffering Negro to interpret the spirit of his comrade."4 Garvey's propaganda effort was most earnest in the years of his greatest glory, from 1918 to about 1922 in the United States. He considered the war-induced turmoil of the period 1914 to 1922, with its political unrest, its Russian Revolution, and its rumors of self- determination for all peoples, ideal for strident '1'! Zatl' WQre tice as Pl tory Self~. 178 propaganda of his type. By 1924 he thought that the world scene had stabilized to the point where the U.N.I.A. ef- fort would have to shift more towards silent organization with a de-emphasis on loud propaganda. He informed his followers: Remember, the policy of the Universal Negro Improve- ment Association for 1924 and 1925 as far as its objective goes is the same as it was in 1917 and 1918, only that we are using more careful judgment. The things that we could have said in 1914, up to 1920 we cannot say now, but we mean them just the same.5 This attitude was doubtless influenced, too, by the un- precedented attacks on his organization, both from within and without, which manifested themselves in the period up to 1924. Yet, there had been no essential change. The International Convention of 1924, for example discussed, among other things, "the tabooing of all alien propaganda inspired to destroy the ideals of and the enslaving of the minds of the Negro."6 U.N.I.A. propaganda was disseminated in a variety of ways. In fact practically every aspect of the organi- zation had propaganda value. Its artistic productions were, as already described, largely geared towards poli- tical indoctrination. The same could be said for religion as practised within the organization. Its black doll fac- tory and other businesses were designed to instill racial self-confidence and set an example. As Garvey said, you could not tell black people, you had to show them.7 .0: 179 U.N.I.A. printed material such as the race catechism served a similar purpose. The U.N.I.A. was even in the business of moving pictures, some of its parades having been filmed for showing at Liberty Halls. Many of Garvey's speeches as well as selections rendered by the Black Star Line band were available on phonograph re- cords.8 At the 1929 International Convention delegates considered the feasibility of a broadcasting station to further disseminate the message.9 Garvey's ambassadors, too, like all ambassadors, were charged with propaganda functions.10 His travelling commissioners literally toured the whole world spreading his message and dissemi- nating his literature.ll But the most effective of Garvey's propaganda devices were his newspapers. Having been trained as a printer and a journalist, Garvey was uniquely qualified for his role of newspaper propagandist. He founded several papers and journals during his life in several different countries. Round about the years 1910 to 1911 he started Garvey's Watchman in Jamaica, La Nacionale in Port Limon, Costa Rica and La Prensa in Colon, Panama, and he was apparently a co-publisher of the Bluefields Messenger in Costa Rica. All of these were short-lived.12 The weekly Negro WOrld was published in Harlem from 1918 to 1933 (after which it continued for awhile in 1934 under new ownership as Fr. Divine's World Peace Echo). From 'rv 180 1922 to 1924 the daily Negro Times appeared in Harlem. Back in Jamaica after his expulsion from the United States he published the Blackman from 1929 to 1931. This started, as it proclaimed in large type on its front page, as "A Daily Newspaper Devoted to the Uplift of the Negro Race and the good of Humanity." It was later converted into a weekly. Its demise was followed by the appearance in 1932 of the New Jamaican, "A Daily Evening Paper Devoted to the Development of Jamaica." This lasted until 1933, and was followed almost immediately by the Black Man magazine,l3 first published in Jamaica in December 1933, and later in England up at least until 1939. In addition to papers founded by Garvey, he worked on The Africa Times and Orient Review in London during 1912 to 1914. The National Club which he helped found in his early days in Jamaica issued its own fortnightly Our Own and his mentor of this period, Dr. J. Robert Love, published the Jamaica Advocate. The most important of Garvey's papers and possibly his single greatest propaganda device was the Negro WOrld. It appeared in 1918, not long after Garvey abandoned his initial intention of returning to Jamaica. Garvey himself edited it at no charge to the organization in the begin- ning,14 and the earliest issues were often distributed free by Garvey himself pushing them under peoples' doors in Harlem during the early hours of the morning.15 181 The propaganda function of the Negro Wdrld was never concealed. The paper considered itself "a propa- ganda medium published in the interest of the awakened Negro."16 The paper in its earliest period bore the banner headline "NEGROES GET READY" which appeared at the very top of the front page and even dwarfed the paper's title. The title was followed by the explanation, "A Newspaper Devoted to the Interests of the Negro Race With- out the Hope of Profit as a Business Investment."17 Through- out almost the whole life of the paper its front page was devoted to a Garvey polemic. A. Philip Randolph in his campaign against Garvey derided this practice thus: "What sort of a newspaper is the Negro World anyway, which de- votes its front page, the news page of every modern civil- ized, recognized newspaper in newspaperdom, to the vapor— ings, imbecile puerilities and arrant nonsense of a con- summate ignoramus?"18 What Randolph did not know was that Garvey's front page ideological statements served as gospal for black peOple in every corner of the African world. The reading of Garvey's Negro World message was a standard part of U.N.I.A. meetings wherever the organization existed. A Negro World columnist in 1927, for example, explained that "it is translated into scores of dialects twenty-four hours after arrival in Africa and carried by fleet runners into the hinterland, up the great lakes of Southeast Africa, . . ."19 This fact was later corroborated by 182 Jomo Kenyatta, first president of modern independent Kenya. Speaking of the early 1920's, he reported that Kenyan nationalists would gather round a reader of the paper, who would read the desired article two or three times. The others would memorize it and take the message to other communities.20 In Trinidad the governor noted in 1920 that at meetings of the Trinidad Workingmen's Association and elsewhere verbatim quotations were utilized from the Negro WCrld and other Garvey writings.21 Apart from Garvey himself, the Negro Wbrld was helped in its efforts by a succession of some of the finest editorial brains in Afro-America. One of the earliest was W. A. Domingo, who for a short while in 1919 was the paper's "editorial writer."22 He and Garvey parted over his socialistic ideas (according to Garvey) and his disagreements over Garvey's business schemes.23 During 1920-1921 the paper had as a joint editor Hubert H. Harrison, a lecturer-activist and a highly respected member of Harlem's intellectual community. From 1916 to 1919 he had published The Voice, organ of his Liberty League, founded in 1917.24 William H. Ferris, historian and graduate of Harvard and Yale served three years as literary editor and one as associate editor between 1919 and 1923. He claimed that the paper's "bona fide" circu- lation grew threefold within his first year.25 John E. Bruce was for some years a contributing editor up to his 183 death in 1924, as was Eric D. Walrond, a successful lit- erary figure in the Harlem Renaissance. But perhaps the most illustrious of the Negro World editors was T. Thomas Fortune, generally acknowledged dean of Afro-American journalists, who edited the paper from 1923 to his death in 1928. He dictated his last Negro World editorials from his sick bed during the last three weeks of his 26 life. Duse Mohamed of the Africa Times and Orient Review was also at one time associated with the paper.27 In the last years after Fortune, this high editorial standard was maintained under Hucheshwar G. Mudgal, an Indian who came to Harlem via the Trinidad U.N.I.A. The Negro World penetrated every area where black folk lived and had regular readers as far away as Australia.28 It was cited by colonial powers as a factor in uprisings and unrest in such diverse places as Dahomey, British Honduras, Kenya, Trinidad, Cuba and elsewhere. These powers therefore had no illusions concerning the appeal of its message of racial self-reliance and its anti-colonialist tone to oppressed black people. During its entire existence, therefore, the paper was engaged in a running battle with the British, French, United States and other governments, all of whom assiduously sought to engineer its demise, or, failing that, restrict or pre- vent its circulation, especially in Africa, Central America and the West Indies. The attitude of the 184 colonialist powers can be summed up in the words of a British official in Panama: "The whole paper bristles with radical antagonism."29 Garvey and his followers, for their part variously protested these attempts, joked about them, always tried to circumvent them, and, in Garvey's case, waxed poetic about them: We will keep from them the 'NEGRO WORLD' That no news they'll have of a flag unfurled; Should they smuggle copies in, and we fail, We will send the sly agents all to jail. This is the white man's plan across the sea Isn't this wily and vicious as can be?30 In more prosaic fashion the 1920 Declaration of Rights of the Negro Peoples of the World protested the suppression of black papers all over the world,31 while a 1928 Garvey petition to the League of Nations specifically protested the banning of the Negro World and the imposition of penalties in some areas of life imprisonment and even. death.32 Garveyite S. A. Haynes observed laconically, and correctly, "It is read weekly by the British and French Foreign Offices."33 The British authorities were kept especially busy in their war against the paper. In 1923 the British acting governor of Nyasaland explained that "On the grounds that this paper was poisonous and mischievous to a degree which only those who have dealings with the crude African native can properly appreciate, it was placed in March last year on the list of prohibited 185 papers in Nyasaland."34 Four years later a Nyasalander was sentenced to three years hard labor for importing six copies, together with two of a South African workers' paper into Rhodesia.35 In 1923 copies were being confis- cated in Northern Rhodesia.36 Around the same time, the acting governor of Sierra Leone was reporting that the paper "though not absolutely prohibited has been strictly controlled, and only a few copies have been allowed to "37 In the other British colonies in West circulate. Africa--the Gold Coast, Nigeria and Gambia--it was banned outright by this time, however.38 It was still prohibited 39 The British overlords in these areas into the 1930's. were less successful in suppressing elements among the local African press who supported Garvey's program. The Gold Coast Leader in an article of 1928 entitled, "Censor- ship of the Negro WOrld a Sign of Weakness," praised the paper, supported its principles of Pan—African cooperation and actually quoted from the forbidden publication.40 In South Africa, though the paper was not pro- scribed outright, a local agent in Kimberly reported that when he picked up his papers at the local post office, he ran a gauntlet of "kicks, punches, sneers, insults and impertinent questions."41 In the West Indies, too, the heavy hand of British reaction fell upon the paper. Indeed, here the paper was attacked practically from its inception. As early as 186 February of 1919, when U.N.I.A. agents were discovered soliciting membership and selling the paper in Trinidad, 42 In June of 1919 the acting governor it was proscribed. of Trinidad confided to his counterpart in British Guiana that in so doing "the action taken by this Government is 43 not strictly covered by the law." It was not until 1920 that the legal niceties attending its prohibition were attended to.44 Attempts to have the ban lifted during the following years were unsuccessful.45 In British Honduras the paper was withheld from distribution from early 1919 under emergency regulations. When in 1920 the governor received permission to pass permanent legislation against it he decided that maybe he did not want to follow this course of action after all, since he was afraid of the racial feeling that still existed after the rioting staged by the black populace in July 1919.46 Garveyism was considered to be a factor in these disturbances. British Guiana followed the same pattern. Here, too, the paper was first banned early in 1919 and only afterwards was the question of legislation to legitimize the fait accompli considered. On June 20, 1919 the colony's executive committee unanimously agreed to recomr mend prohibition of the Afro-American publications Crusader, Monitor, Recorder and Negro Wbrld. The Negro WOrld, by this time already prohibited, was singled out 187 by the white colonial overlords of this black colony as being of "grossly offensive character."47 When the bills were actually ready to be introduced before the colony's Court of Policy there was so much protest from the black population that the governor considered it necessary to telegraph for a warship to stand by. The governor then deferred to public sentiment to the extent of introducing the bill banning foreign "objectionable" publications but curtailing the operation after its second reading. The idea was that in case of emergency, the last stages of the bill could be rushed through and it could become law in a very short time.48 Black agitation continued, nevertheless, and a petition requesting the lifting of the embargo was presented not long afterwards to the British-appointed Wood Commission which was investigating conditions in the area.49 Accordingly the governor in 1922 seriously considered acceding to these requests, but explained, in a despatch to Winston Churchill, that his executive committee was totally against the idea, and it would anyway be unwise while the ban continued in Trinidad.50 The Trinidad government, in response to an inquiry from Churchill reiterated its refusal to discon- tinue its embargo,51 despite the fact that the British _ Guiana governor thought the paper no less objectionable than radical white magazines which were admitted, and was also convinced that the paper's tone had by 1922 grown 188 appreciably less strident than in 1919.52 The paper was also "promptly suppressed" in 1920 in Bermuda,53 and in Grenada in the same year such a course was considered to stem its growing circulation.54 In the late 1920's the paper was banned for a 57 while in Cuba, and in the mid-1920's in Liberia, as a follow-up to the independent African republic's embargo on the U.N.I.A. generally.58 The paper fared no better in French colonies, for it was banned in all of them from at least as early as 1922,59 though it appears to have been available in the Ivory Coast in 1932.60 For much of the paper's life, of course, sections were printed in French and Spanish, in addition to English.61 Against this onslaught on his major propaganda organ Garvey replied with a well-organized smuggling net- work which, at least in the beginning, proved very effec- tive in circumventing authorities, though at great cost to the organization, for consignments which were discovered were invariably destroyed. And heavy penalties for pos- session of the paper in some areas caused the greater concentration of U.N.I.A. effort to be placed on getting the message across through the clandestine circulation of the paper, rather than on any profitability which might have resulted from normal distribution. This idea was ex- pressed in the front page declaration of the paper, quoted above. 189 The most important link in the clandestine Negrg Egrlg_distribution network was provided by black seamen, but one West Indian worker at the Panama Canal remembers being first introduced to the paper in 1918 by Japanese sailors who used to deposit them on their way through the canal.62 The success of these smuggling efforts was at- tested by the colonial authorities themselves. The governor of British Honduras, for example, confessed that despite his embargo on it from early 1919, "I had every reason to believe that the newspaper was being smuggled into the Colony through Mexico and Guatemala, in larger numbers than before the ban was placed on it."63 The governor of Trinidad, too, in 1920 reported a large cache of the paper, together with U.N.I.A. leaflets, including a pamphlet written by Garvey specially to the people of Trinidad, hidden in between the cargo of a ship from New York.64 C.L.R. James has said that despite the ban, he managed to buy a copy every Saturday morning in Port-of- Spain.65 The police in Trinidad, and doubtless elsewhere, were kept busy looking for the paper, and houses were liable to be searched by detectives.66 The United States government, although it never actually banned the Negro World, was nevertheless keeping it under close surveillance from the beginning. Officials of the Post Office, and the Justice and State Departments in particular were constantly being advised of its radical «v nature 6- cualifie: E P; F‘ U) . LA with in rt 5; Partment 5 advice of ObjECtiona Negroes now due to the 1 Man 190 nature and were often called upon to decide whether it qualified for being denied the use of the United States mails. In addition, Attorney-General A. Mitchell Palmer of "Palmer Raids" communist hunting fame, in 1919 gave the Negro World pride of place in his Department of Jus- tice report on "Radicalism and Sedition Among the Negroes as Reflected in their Publications." The Negro WOrld was the first of the several Afro-American publications dealt with in the report. By July of 1919 officials of the Post Office De- partment were conferring among themselves and seeking the advice of their solicitor as to whether the paper was objectionable enough to be proceeded against. They were particularly alarmed at pro-Bolshevick and race-first articles, both of which were apparently considered equally dangerous.68 Apart from the department's own observations, the occasional public spirited American citizen sought to draw their attention to the radical effects of the paper. One such, a resident of Tower Hill, Virginia, and ap- parently white, sent the Post Office Department copies of the Negro World and Chicago Defender, to show what kind of matter was benefitting from the United States mails. He drew the attention of the officials to the fact that Negroes now would not work for white folks,69 presumably due to the influence of these papers. Many communications of this nature emanated from nails 5 version gove {7.26 191 American consular agents abroad, who generally shared the feelings of their host governments that the United States mails should not be used for what they considered the sub- version of friendly governments. In May of 1919, for example, the American consul in Georgetown, British Guiana, reported that the local Inspector of Police had called on him. This goodly British official explained that his government was desirous of preventing the receipt and dis- tribution of four publications--the Negro WOrld, Crusader, Monitor (published in Omaha, Nebraska), and the Christian Recorder (official organ of the African Methodist Episco- pal Church--apparently the combination of black and American was enough to cause fright among British colonial officialdom). The British official explained, in the words of the consul, that "owing to the fact that the black population is several times that of the white and includes some prominent persons such as officials, lawyers, doctors and ministers, they are uncertain as to the advis- ability of taking the necessary steps here to prevent their circulation." They therefore preferred for the United States to stop them at source, presumably, if not by banning them outright, then by denying them the use of the mails. The consul reported that of the four, only the Negro WOrld and Crusader were dangerous.70 Two years later the Post Office solicitor got around to declaring that a publication could not be subject to a blanket 192 denial of mailing privileges. Each issue would have to be separately ruled upon.71 The British authorities in London itself, in a document of that same year entitled "Unrest Among the Negroes" sought to carry the proverbial coals to Newcastle by informing Uncle Sam that there were radical black organizations in the United States. The U.N.I.A. and the Negro World were mentioned in the report, and its British drafters were careful to point out that "It is certain that the various negro [gig] organizations in the United States will not leave the British colonies alone."72 In the case of Trinidad, the American Consul took the initiative in suggesting that the paper be stopped at source. He explained that "altho [gig] the local Postal Authorities burn every copy they can find of this publi- cation, which is obviously intended as propaganda to cause race troubles, and general anarchy, nevertheless it is believed that many copies escape destruction, and are circulated in a surreptitious way throughout this Colony." He enclosed several wrappings in which papers had been mailed by Garvey to persons in Trinidad, to "show how the United States mails are being used for the purpose of forwarding to a friendly country, papers directly inciting the negro [gig] population to acts of murder and anar- .73 chy. Baker kept up his campaign against the paper in other despatches.74 1 I itse-- coaliti a:- the H was a A Central 1 Lu duri had b (D ...! banana 'Y1 a t() '1 H. O K ’ l (9 ha LL rd ((1 H In Segtez Fruit Co: Sample C< journ in for it We explaine; a tYpicaj has bEen too, tha British < at the he been Bria Fruit CO: mEnt Of C 193 From Costa Rica, the Post Office Department found itself being prodded into action by an anti-Negro World coalition of the United Fruit Company, the British consul and the Costa Rican authorities. The United Fruit Company was a huge employer of agricultural labor throughout Central America and the Caribbean area. Garvey himself, during his Central American wanderings some years before, had been in their employ for a while as a timekeeper on a banana plantation in Costa Rica. Large numbers of their agricultural labor force were British West Indians who had migrated throughout the whole area in search of work. In September 1919 the washington counsel for the United Fruit Company wrote the Secretary of State and enclosed sample copies of the Negro World. Garvey's earlier so- journ in Costa Rica had evidently not been uneventful, for it was clearly remembered by the company. The letter explained that Garvey "left Limon in 1912 and that he is a typical noisy Jamaican, and if allowed to go on as he has been doing, there is a possibility of his attempting to repeat the French experience in Haiti." He reported, too, that the governor of Limon, with the agreement of the British consul, was planning to deport all those present at the next U.N.I.A. meeting (who would probably all have been British citizens from the West Indies). The United Fruit Company counsel suggested, finally, that the Depart- ment of Justice assign its secret service to the case, since ‘ I V1013 n Unites Costa 1 Carribt From 5: more of of U.N.i 194 since the U.N.I.A. was inciting revolution and thereby violating the neutrality of countries at peace with the United States.75 Similar correspondence was received from Costa Rican officials who, after banning the Negro World, requested the New York post office not to allow it to be mailed to Costa Rica.76 The Negro World propaganda spreading over the Carribbean area did not bypass United States colonies. From St. Croix in the United States Virgin Islands came more official recognition of the power and ubiquitousness of U.N.I.A. propaganda, and a reminder to Washington of its unsavouriness to officialdom. Casper Holstein, a prominent figure in the United States-based.Virgin Islands nationalist movement, was a regular contributor to the Negro World, where he found a cooperative medium. His brother-in-law, D. Hamilton Jackson, was president of the St. Croix Labor Union. After a short spell in the United States, Jackson was by 1923 back in St. Croix agitating, among other things, for universal suffrage. Officials became alarmed at the propaganda value of articles appearing in the Negro WOrld praising Jackson's efforts. One judge ventured the opinion that "all the poisonous articles published in the Negro WOrld by Holstein are inspired by Jackson."77 The course of events in the United States suggests that the United States authorities apparently preferred 195 to move against Garvey himself, rather than possibly create an equally great furore by moving merely against the paper. Indeed, a move against the paper may have been very unpopular with the same establishment black leaders who were actually anxious to see the government move against Garvey himself, since many of them were in- volved in publications of their own and were sensitive to any precedents establishing press censorship. This had been the lesson of Attorney-General Palmer's 1919 report against the Afro-American press. Some of Garvey's bitterest enemies (such as A. Philip Randolph and Chandler Owen of the Messenger, and Cyril Briggs of the Crusader) were indicted along with Garvey and the Negro Wgrig in that report, while even the Crisis, edited by W. E. B. DuBois, though disclaiming any brief for the Nggrg Wgrig and other publications, still came out in defense of their right to speak.78 Similarly, in 1920, a Graham Sedition Bill was killed in Congress with the support of the conservative black New York Agg and the N.A.A.C.P. This bill had sought to muzzle and render non-mailable radical black publications.79 A move against Garvey him- self involved no such entanglements for the United States government, since the most important recognized leaders outside of the U.N.I.A. were near totally arrayed against him. The nearest that United States officialdom came to banning the Negro world was during and soon after Garvey's '(7 H 196 trial in 1923 for alleged mail fraud, when they could have moved under the cloak of Afro-American establishment opposition to Garvey which had reached its zenith. Garvey mentioned in an application for executive clemency that the prosecutor threatened to close both the Negro WOrld and the daily Negro Times during and after the trial. He also illegally seized the subscription lists for the Negro World, and subscribers soon began receiving‘enemy papers. The purpose of the threats was to scare the editors into not reporting the prosecutor's conduct during 80 the trial. There is no reason to suppose that Garvey's statement is not correct. The Negro WOrld reporting of the trial was, indeed, unusually subdued. If the Negro WOrld was the greatest single pro- paganda device that the U.N.I.A. possessed, it had a close rival in Garvey himself. A handbill announcing a Garvey lecture in Atlanta, Georgia, in 1917 referred to him as "an orator of exceptional force."81 Ere long, handbills would proclaim him "the World's Greatest Orator."82 A U.N.I.A. circular advertising a speech of his at the Albert Hall in London in 1928 proclaimed that the world's greatest orator was "to deliver one of the greatest speeches ever heard in any period of the world's history." Readers of the circular were assured that "Such a chance 83 comes sometimes but once in a lifetime." The most sur- prising thing about these statements is that few people Q ~ u— 140' C u. "...e e C a 197 would have quibbled with them. The excellence and power of Garvey's oratory was probably the single most uncon- troversial of his attributes. Indeed it is difficult to think of any other fact concerning Garvey on which such diverse persons as Communist leaders, J. Edgar Hoover of the Department of Justice, N.A.A.C.P. anti-Garveyites, British colonial police officers and Garvey's followers all agreed. In their efforts to capture the feel of a Garvey oration, those who witnessed this singular experience often summoned up equally exquisite language to describe what they had witnessed. U.N.I.A. organizer Marie Duchatellier, in a letter to John E. Bruce said, on the subject of Garvey's oratory, I have noted what you say in your letter in re my writing to Mr. Garvey to bridle his language, but I think I have told you before that you ask of me an impossible thing. I told you I had just as well stop the flowing waters of Niagara Falls. You say you have written to Mr. Garvey on the subject, so that will have to suffice. All that you say is true and if Mr. Garvey was less Radical [gig] it might be better, but you had just as well hope for the 'Ethiopian to change his skin or the leopard his spots' as to ask Garvey to change his method or pro- cedure. I am convinced that it is the outpouring of the pent up feelings of generations of his ancestors who have borne the oppression and injustice of the white man for centuries. The cry has come ringing down the ages and he is giving voice to the cumula- tive agonies our people have suffered during their slavery and since their emancipation. We are the 'heirs of the ages.'34 A reporter of the Panama—American expressed it this way: He would probably pass unnoticed in a crowd--unti1 198 he speaks. He has the most precious of all bounties, the gift of eloquence; and as he speaks his small, dark brown eyes seem to grow, his even white teeth flash through black lips. His speech is smooth and unctuous, without any touch of the American twang despite his long residence in the United States. His English is that of an Oxford scholar and when he speaks--his hearers listen.85 Even a British colonial police officer, detailed to ob- serve a Garvey meeting in British Honduras, could not totally obscure his appreciation of Garvey's fine oratory behind his obvious contempt: Marcus Garvey was introduced by the Chaplain and commenced his 1-1/4 hours address. When he waxed hot I was reminded of Rider Haggard's 'Winstopogoas' in his moments of animal feriousness [sic] but he nevertheless knew how to get his hearers and was cheered heartily time and again. Garvey in his serious moments did not lack humour which was ap- preciated. . . . There were moments of enthusiastic madness into which he worked himself while speaking when I thought the aid of a medical man would be ab- solutely necessary but, such was not to be.86 A newspaper report of a Garvey speech in Jamaica said, ”Towards the end of his speech Mr. Garvey applied the well known prank of the platform speaker, 'I think I have kept you long enough for tonight,’ he said, and the crowd roared for him to continue."87 An apparently white United States paper said of his equally apparently black audience on one occasion, "they cheered almost his every word. Men shouted and some even gave vent to an emotional 'amen.'" This article noted, "He pronounced such words as 'master' with the use of a long 'R' but ordinarily his flow of language was that of the educated southern negro 199 [gig]."88 Herbert J. Seligman, director of publicity of the N.A.A.C.P., also commented on his "slightly English intonation that falls strangely upon the ears of Americans unaccustomed to natives of the British West Indies."89 Robert Minor, covering Garvey's 1924 International Conven- tion for the Workers (Communist) Party of the U.S.A. said, "I heard Garvey speak last night. He is one of the most powerful personalities that I have ever seen on the plat- ."90 After a speech at Howard University in 1924, form the head of the department of public speaking and dramatic art considered it one of the few good speeches he had ever heard. Dean Kelly Miller considered it one of the best ever delivered in the University Chapel. J. Edgar Hoover of the Department of Justice, soon to become head, for almost half a century, of the Federal Bureau of Investi- gation, was less effusive. He wrote in 1919, "He is an exceptionally fine orator. . . ."92 The excellence of Garvey's early training as a printer and journalist was matched by his long and system- atic study and practice of elocution. Seldom has the education of a race leader been so uniquely fitted to his subsequent career. As a youth in Kingston, we are told that Garvey visited various churches to study and learn from the speaking styles of ministers.93 During this period he also is said to have taken elocution lessons from his early mentor Dr. J. Robert Love.94 By 1910 200 Garvey was participating in eolcution contests and him- self training young orators and promoting such contests in West Kingston. A former president of the Jamaica Union of Teachers recalled having seen Garvey perform about this time during the finals of an all-Jamaica elo- cution contest. Each finalist recited two items. Garvey's first item, a poem, left him in first place at the end of the first round. During the second round he was heckled by someone in the audience. This occasioned much laughter. Garvey's performance was as a result ad- versely affected and he placed third in the overall standings.95 During his first London years (1912-1914) he often spoke at "Speaker's Corner" in Hyde Park96 (as indeed he did during all his other periods in London). Back in Jamaica in 1914 he frequented and participated in the weekly literary debates at the Baptist Church Hall in Kingston.97 Indeed, as late as 1932, he was still orga- nizing elocution contests in Jamaica.98 By the time he burst on the American scene, then, Garvey's preparation in the art of oratory had been long, varied and thorough. And his oratorical skill was put to the fullest advantage as a propaganda medium for the or- ganization. More so than a writer, Garvey was first a speaker. A corps of very efficient shorthand writers copied his speeches verbatim and they filled many pages of the Negro world and his other papers. He was 201 constantly on tour, so that in an age before television his followers, especially in the United States, but to some extent also in Canada, the West Indies, Central America and Europe, had fairly ample opportunities to see and hear him in person. Among Garvey's subordinates there were also several outstanding orators. They also spent much time on tour, sometimes travelling with Garvey. Some of these were fine enough, indeed, to make a British colonial police officer's report of a U.N.I.A. meeting read almost like a Negro WOrld article: "S. A. Haynes then rendered a most inspiring address and was very ap- plauded [gig]." Again, "Miss Davis a very excellent speaker rose and in the course of her address gave some vivid examples of the oppression of the negro [gig]."99 Garvey's prOpaganda, as has been mentioned, and as will be discussed in greater detail later, caused, or was implicated in, nationalist and anti-colonial mani- festations all over the world. Many of the concessions to colonized people that followed were traced by Garvey ultimately to his propaganda. In 1925 he said that "In the West Indies black men have been elevated to high positions by the British Government so as to offset and counteract the sweeping influence of the Universal Negro Improvement Association. Several of the colonies have been given larger constitutional rights." He claimed some credit for similar concessions to the race in Africa 202 and America.100 He also credited his propaganda and the example of the Negro WOrld with bringing about an improvement in the tone of Afro-American journalism. He said, "When I arrived in this country in 1916, I discovered that the Negro press had no constructive policy. The news pub- lished were all of the kind that reflected the worst of the race's character in murder, adultery, robbery, etc. . . . other features played up by the papers were dancing and parlor socials of questionable intent, and long columns of what is generally called 'social' or 'society' news" of the Mr. John Brown entertained Miss Minnie Baker variety. "Miss Minnie Baker probably was some Octoroon of questionable morals, but made a fuss of because of her 'color'. . . ." After a few years of the Negro WOrld he thought that this trend was changing: 'The Negro World' has rendered a wonderful service to Negro journalism in the United States. It has gradually changed the tone and make-up of some of the papers, and where in 1914-15-16 there was no tendency to notice matters of great importance, today several of the papers are publishing inter- national news and writing intelligent editorials on pertinent subjects.10l One interesting result of Garvey's propaganda was to call forth an extensive counter-propaganda effort from colonial powers. They evidently felt that their efforts in banning the Negro WOrld and imprisoning and deporting Garvey's agents were not enough, so they set out, wherever 203 they could, to deliberately counter Garvey's message. In New York in 1923 the British Consul General actively pro- moted a pro-British magazine, The British West Indian Review to, in his own words, "offset, to some extent, the vicious propaganda being carried on by Garvey and the Universal Negro Improvement Association."102 In Panama the head of the British legation in 1925 announced that he had mounted his own propaganda campaign among the West Indian population to counter Garvey's propaganda. He had enlisted the support of ministers with large West Indian congregations and was organizing the boy scouts as a medium for getting across pro-British and anti-Garvey sentiments.103 A writer in the white South African Cape Arggs, in 1923 came to the same conclusion concerning the need to organize active anti-Garvey propaganda: No doubt the government will watch very carefully the spread of this and other anti-white propaganda in the Union, but it will easily be realized that mere suppression of these movements as they arise will not be sufficient. The native people are growing up, and some healthy counteracting methods to enable them to express their growing ideals will be necessary.104 For Garvey to have had the great British propa- ganda machine on the defensive must rank among his great- est feats. While the black W. E. B. DuBoises and A. Philip Randolphs of America called him a clown and a buffoon and helped engineer his downfall, the arbiters of the fate of black people in Washington and London were 204 disposed to be more realistic. As early as 1919 the British government had informed Washington that the U.N.I.A. program was "being carried on by clever propa- ganda directed principally by Marcus Garvey, a West Indian negro [sic] . . ."105 They had no illusions about the threat that Garvey posed to the maintenance of equilibrium in their colonies. Garvey was aware of the existence of a counter- propaganda effort. Round about the same time as the British Consul General in New York was overseeing the first edition of the counter-prOpaganda British West Indian Review, Garvey was declaiming in Liberty Hall against "counter-propaganda to distort and disrupt the minds and intentions of those who are behind the pro- gram."106 In 1929 he issued a statement on the situation: Just at this time there is a well organized pro- paganda and conspiracy engineered by a combination of forces known and unknown, seen and unseen, in the United States of America, and different parts of the world, to undermine the powerful influence of the Universal Negro Improvement Association in uniting Negroes everywhere This prOpaganda and conspiracy is being conducted on the one hand by some of our one-time slave masters, who have never been able to outlive the idea that the Negro should be anything else but a slave, and on the other hand by a cheap, brainless, conscienceless, treacherous, disloyal brand of Negro reprobates who, like traitors of all causes, national, secular and religious, are ever willing to sell themselves for the thirty dirty pieces of silver. It is difficult for me to explain thoroughly and as clearly as I would like to the complete make-up of the combinations that are now organized to fight the Universal Negro Improvement Association. . . .107 205 Garvey's propaganda did not die with him. A sur- prisingly ample number of leaders in Africa and the diaspora in the 1960's, the era of independence and Black Power, acknowledged his influence. Kwame Nkrumah and Nnamdi Azikiwe in West Africa, and Malcolm X and Elijah Muhammad in Afro-America, are but a few of the better- known.108 NOTES PROPAGANDA lNegro World, November 3, 1923, p. l. 2Ibid., May 6, 1933, p. 4; Garvey and Garvgyism, p. 214. 3Blackman, April 16, 1929, p. 2. 4Ibid., May 21, 1929, p. l. 5Negro World, November 22, 1924, p. 5; see also ibid., August 1, 1925, p. 1; Black Man, III, 10 July 1938, p. 12. 6Negro World, June 7, 1924, p. l. 7Ibid., November 22, 1924, p. 5. 8For a list of these, see ibid., October 8, 1921, 9Blackman, August 31, 1929, p. 3. l0E.g., R.G. 59, 882.00/705, Cyril A. Crichlow, Resident Secretary, Monrovia to Garvey, June 24, 1921; Negro World, January 26, 1924, p. 2. llE.g., C.O. 318/356, Governor Wilfred Collet of British Guiana to Viscount Milner, October 8, 1920. 12Garvey and Garvgyism, pp. 7-8; Crisis, XXI, 2, December 1920, p. 58. 206 207 13This was sometimes written Blackman, but the Black Man rendition is used in this work to distinguish it from the newspaper. 14Philosophyrand Opinions, II, p. 129. 15Marcus Garvey - Prophet of Black Nationalism, pp. 138-139. l6Negro World, August 10, 1929, p. 3. l7Ibid., July 19, 1919, p. l. 18A. Philip Randolph, "Reply to Marcus Garvey," Messenger, August 1922, p. 468. What would Randolph have said of the London Times' use of its front page for ad- vertisements? 19Negro World, August 20, 1927, p. 4. 20C. L. R. James, Black Jacobins (New York, Vintage, 1963), pp. 396-397. 21C.O. 318/356, Governor Chancellor to Viscount Milner, November 30, 1920. The editors placed such a high premium on Garvey's messages that when he was away on tour after he had left the country they sometimes re- printed old speeches of his if his message did not arrive in time for going to press. Apparently there were even times when, in an emergency, they concocted their own mes- sage and placed Garvey's name to it, a practice which did not please Garvey--Trials & Triumphs, p. 77; Philosophy and Opinions, II, p. 200; Black Man, I, 1 December 1933, p.'I9. 22Negro World, July 19, 1919, p. 2. Editors or editorial writers wrote regular editorials in addition to Garvey's front page statements. Garvey was officially designated managing editor. Editions of June 7 and 14, 1919 bear only Garvey's name on the editorial staff. Domingo's name appears in issues for July 1919. The writer came across only occasional copies of the paper for 1919. 23Messenger, September 1919, p. 32. 208 24Hubert H. Harrison, When Africa Awakes (New York, The Porro Press, 513 Lenox Ave., 1920), pp. 8, 10; Who's Who in Colored America, 1927, p. 87. 25William Ferris, "The Spectacular Career of Garvey," New York Amsterdam News, February 11, 1925, p. 1. He says here the circulation grew from 17,000 to 60,000. Elsewhere he gives the latter figure as 50,000--see, Favorite Magazine, IV, 6, July 1920, p. 396. 26Negro WOrld, June 9, 1928, p. 4. 27igig., April 15, 1933, p. 4, article by S. A. Haynes. 28Woodson papers, Box 5, G 86, A. Goldsmith (a black Australian) to Woodson, September 6, 1920. The Negro World was not the only Afro-American publication read by this race-conscious individual. 29C.O. 554/66, Braithwaite Wallis, British lega- tion, Panama, confidential memo to Austen Chamberlain, November 4, 1925. 30Tragedy of White Injustice, p. 12. 31Philosgphy and Qpinions, II, p. 139. 32Marcus Garvey, Renewal of Petition of the Universal Negro Improvement Assodiation and African Come munities League, to the Leagxaof Natian (London, Vail & Co., 1928), para. 54. 33Negro World, August 20, 1927, p. 4. 34C.O. 525/104, Acting Governor R. Rankine to His Excellency the Governor General and High Commissioner, Cape Town, May 15, 1923. 3SNegro World, August 20, 1927, p. 2; Kadalie, My. Life . . ., p. 125. 36C.O. 417/693, Richard Goode, Acting Administra- tor, Livingstone, to Prince Arthur of Connaught, High Commissioner for South Africa, Cape Town, May 2, 1923. 209 37C.O. 267/600, Acting Governor, Sierra Leone, to Duke of Devonshire, May 28, 1923. 38Public Record Office, London, Colonial Office records, Gov/28913, synopsis of a destroyed record, Regis- ter of Correspondence for the Gold Coast, 1923; Negro World, April 21, 1923; c.0. 554/64, "The Universal Negro Improvement Association and African Communities League," memo by Colonial Office, March 7, 1924. 39C.O. 318/399/76634, "Memorandum - Marcus Garvey and the Universal Negro Improvement Association and African Communities League" [1930]; U.N.I.A. Central Division (New York) files, Box 3, a 33, K.E.E. Baidoo, Abidjan, Ivory Coast to Negro World, November 16, 1932. 40Reprinted in Negro World, December 1, 1928, p. 5. The original article was from the Leader of October 17. 41Negro World, September 13, 1924, p. 10. 42C.O. 318/356, Governor J. R. Chancellor to Viscount Milner, November 30, 1920. 43C.O. 295/521, W. M. Gordon to Governor of British Guiana, June 10, 1919. 44R.G. 844 9. 04417, Henry D. Baker, American Consul, Trinidad, to Secretary of State, March 5, 1920. 45E.g., Negro World, October 4, 1924, p. 6. 46F.O. 371/4567, Governor Eyre Hutson of British Honduras to Secretary of State, Colonial Office, May 10, 1920. 47C.O. 111/624, Officer Administering the Govern- ment (OAG) C. Clementi, British Guiana, to Viscount Milner, P.C., G.C.B., G.C.M.G., etc., etc., September 2, 1919, confidential. 48C.O. 111/630, Sir Wilfred Collet, Governor of British Guiana to Milner, April 14, 1920. U0};IIOR. "‘. Churcnl. Trinidai secret 1 Trlnlca: 27. 192 Grenada Limon , 1919 of Stat Senegal World I HS??? *1. May 16 210 49C.O. 318/373, petition from British Guiana U.N.I.A. to Major E. F. L. Wood, n.d. 50C.O. 318/371, Collet to Rt. Hon. Winston S. Churchill, July 6, 1922. 51C.O. 318/371, Churchill to Governor Wilson of Trinidad, August 22, 1922, secret; Gov/51931, destroyed secret file of September 29, l922--headnote refers to Trinidad's refusal to lift the ban. 52c.o. 318/371, Collet to Churchill, July 6, 1922. 53 27, 1920. C.O. 318/356, OAG, Bermuda, to Milner, November 54C.O. 318/358, Governor G. Haddon-Smith of Grenada to Milner, October 8, 1920. 55R.G. 59, 818.4016/ orig., American Consul, Port Limon, to Secretary of State, Washington, D.C., August 24, 1919. 56F.O. 372/2257, H.M. Consul, Colon to Secretary of State, February 5, 1926. 57F.O. 371/7286, H.M. Consul-General, Dakar, Senegal to Secretary of State, August 17, 1922; Ne ro World, January 10, 1925, p. 7 (speech by Garvey at Liberty HaIl). 58PhiloSOphy and Opinions, II, p. 385; Negro Wbrld, May 16, 1925, p. 4. 59F.O. 371/7286, H.M. Consul-General, Dakar, Senegal to Secretary of State, August 17, 1922; Nggro WOrld, January 10, 1925, p. 7 (speech by Garvey at Liberty Hall). 60U.N.I.A. Central Division (New York) files, Box 3, a 33, K.E.E. Baidoo, Abidjan, Ivory Coast to Negro WOrld, November 16, 1932. 61When Fr. Divine acquired the paper in 1934 (re- named the WOrld Peace Echo), he reproduced his speeches in a variety of other languages, including Russian, for no obvious reason. 211 62Interview with Detroit Garveyites in 1967 by V. A. Chavous. 63F.O. 371/4567, Governor Hutson to Secretary of State, Colonial Office, May 10, 1920. 64C.O. 318/356, Governor Chancellor to Milner, November 30, 1920. 65C. L. R. James, "Document: C.L.R. On the Origins," Radical America, II, 4, July-August 1968, p. 24. 66"Trinidad News Letter," Crusader, III, 5: January 1921, p. 23. ' 67Investigation Activities of the Department of Justice, Vol. XII of Senate Documents, no. 153, 66th Congress, lst Session, 1919 (Washington, D.C., Government Printing Office, 1919), pp. 162-165 and passim. 68R.G. 28, Box 56, Unarranged, #500, memorandum by the Third Assistant Postmaster General, July 11, 1919; ibid., U. S. Post Office, Translation Bureau, to William H. Lamar, Solicitor, Post Office Department, July 24, 1919; ibid., U. S. Post Office, New York, N.Y., Bureau of Trans- lations & Radical Publications to Lamar, October 31, 1919. 69R.G. 28, Box 53, Unarranged, #398, G. C. Wharton, Tower Hill, Virginia, to Third Assistant Postmaster Gene- ral, January 5, 1920. 7OIbid., American Consul, Georgetown to Secretary of State, May 9, 1919; also George Ball-Greene, Acting Colonial Secretary, British Guiana to U. S. Consul, May 3, 1919. 71Ibid., John H. Edwards, Solicitor to R. C. Bannerman, Chief Special Agent, Department of State, August 5, 1921. 72Ibid., "Unrest Among the Negroes," October 7, 1919. 212 73R.G. 28, Box 56, Unarranged, #500, American Consul, Trinidad, Henry D. Baker to Secretary of State, October 5, 1919. 74E.g., R.G. 59, 8449. 5045/3, Baker to Secretary of State, December 5, 1919; R.G. 59, 8449. 04417, Baker to Secretary of State, March 5, 1920; R.G. 28, Box 53, Unarranged, #398, Baker to Secretary of State, March 5, 1920. ' 75R.G. 28, Box 56, Unarranged, #500, Walter S. Penfield to Robert Lansing, Secretary of State, September 25, 1919. 76Ibid., Acting Second Assistant Postmaster Gene- ral to SoliCitor, Post Office Department, January 8, 1920; ibid., Assistant Secretary, Department of State to Post- master General, October 27, 1919. 77R.G. 59, 811 G. 00/37, C. E. Rappolee to Gover- nor, U.S. Virgin Islands, "Report on activities of one D. Hamilton Jackson," February 10, 1923; ibid., W. Jensen, Acting Judge of District Court to Government Secretary, February 10, 1923; ibid., Charles H. Gibson, Government Attorney, St. Croix, to Despatching Secretary, February 9, 1923. 78Crisis, editorial, XIX, 2, December 1919, p. 46. 79New York Age, January 13, 1920, p. 4; February 7, 1920, p. 4. 80R.G. 204, 42-793, Garvey's application for ex- ecutive clemency, June 5, 1925; Philosophy_and gpinions, II, p. 257. 81Reprinted in Amy Jacques Garvey, Black Power in America (Kingston, A. J. Garvey, 1968), p. 13 82E.g., handbill for International Convention of Negro Peoples of the World, 1922. 83C.O. 554/78, Circular from U.N.I.A. dated May 1928. 213 84Bruce papers, Ms 189, Etta [Marie Duchatellier] to Bruce, Panama City, January 12, 1920. 85Sidney A. Young, ed., Isthmian Echoes (Panama, R.P., Benedetti Hnos [1928]), pp. 244-245. 86F.O. 371/5684, Report of Assistant Superinten- dent of Police, British Honduras, Mr. H. McDonald, July 5, 1921. 87C.O. 318/364, enclosure from the Tribune, May 15, 1921, in Governor of British Guiana to Colonial Office, June 7, 1921. 88N.A.A.C.P. Administration Files, Library of Congress, Box C-304, clipping, no title, no date. 89New York Age, December 10, 1921, p. l. 90Daily WOrker, August 13, 1924, p. 3. 91Negro World, February 2, 1924, p. 2. 92R.G. 60, 198940, J. Edgar Hoover, "Memorandum for Mr. Ridgely," October 11, 1919. 93Garvey and Garveyism, p. 7. 94Graham Knox, "Political Change in Jamaica (1866- 1906) and the Local Reaction to the Policies of the Crown Colony Government," in F.M. Andic and T. G. Matthews, eds., The Caribbean in Transition (Institute of Caribbean Studies, University of Puerto Rico, 1965), p. 161. 95Rev. C. A. Wilson, Men of Vision (Kingston, The Gleaner Co., 1929), pp. 129-130; Garvey and Garveyism, p. 7; for Garvey's contest performance see J. J. Mills - His Own Account of His Life and Times, pp. 108-111. 96Marcus Garvey - Prophet of Black Nationalism, p. 24. 97Ibid., p. 41. 214 98New Jamaican, August 22, 1932, p. l. 99F.O. 371/5684, Report of Assistant Superinten- dent of Police McDonald, British Honduras, July 5, 1921. 100 1929, p. 8. Negro World, July 25, 1925, p. 1; August 24, lOlPhilosophyand Opinions, II, pp. 78-79. 102F.O. 371/8513, H.M. Consul General, New York, to H.M. Ambassador, Washington, April 18, 1923. 103C.O. 554/66, Braithwaite Wallis, British Lega- tion, Panama, confidential memo to Austen Chamberlain, November 4, 1925. 104Pathfinder, "Propaganda Among the Natives," The Cape Argus, January 5, 1923. 105R.G. 28, Box 53, Unarranged, #398, "Unrest Among the Negroes," October 7, 1919; a copy is also in R.G. 59, 811.4016/27. 106Negro World, February 24, 1923, p. 2. 107Ibid., August 17, 1929, p. 1. 108See Black Power in America, op. cit. CHAPTER VIII U.S.A. vs U.N.I.A. Garvey is a West-Indian negro [gig] and in addition to his activities in endeavoring to establish the Black Star Line Steamship Corporation he has also been particularly active among the radical elements in New York City in agitating the negro movement. Unfortunately, however, he has not as yet violated any federal law whereby he could be proceeded against on the grounds of being an undesirable alien, from the point of view of deportation. It occurs to me, however, from the attached clipping that there might be some proceeding against him for fraud in connec- tion with his Black Star Line propaganda. . . . -- J. Edgar Hoover1 Only crooks and thieves and cowards fear to go to prison. Men with principles don't care about jails. -- Marcus Garvey2 Garvey's most productive years, from 1916 to 1927, were spent in the United States. The United States pro- vided him with the large black population base, the finan- . cial and technological resources, and the strategic location at the center of world and Pan-African affairs that were the objective conditions against which he could rise to world prominence. The timing of Garvey's appearance in the United 215 216 States contributed both to his success and to the opposi- tion which his movement evoked. The time was propitious because the WOrld War had accelerated the flow of black Southern migrants to industrial centers of the North. These new urban arrivals, forced into ghettos and the victims of numerous race riots and sundry discriminations, were forced by these contradictions in the land of mate- rial opportunity, into a highly politicized state which was ready for radical race propaganda as skillful as Garvey's. Garvey's success in capitalizing on this objec- tive readiness must not, of course, be minimized. For despite the objective readiness of the black masses, neither the Communists, nor the black socialists, nor the N.A.A.C.P., nor any of the other purported race leaders of the time were able to channelize it to the extent that Garvey did. Garvey's timing was propitious, too, because the treatment of Afro-American soldiers had further crystal- lized black resentment and hatred against the American system of racial oppression. The army's attempts to get rid of the highest-ranking black officer, Colonel Charles Young, at the beginning of hostilities; the early reluc- tance to train black officers; the hanging and imprison- ment of large numbers of black soldiers after the Houston 3’ I Riot of 1917; the ill-treatment of black soldiers in France; and the lynching of black soldiers in the United ; 217 States by mobs of white citizenry infuriated at the sight of Afro-Americans in military uniform; all this and more made the black masses in Afro-America ready for militant race struggle. This readiness was heightened by the con- tradiction that, thanks to the war-induced labor shortage, Afro-American workers were often in a better financial position than they had been before the war. All of the above conditions applied, not only to southern immigrants to the north, but also to many thou- sands of West Indians whose migration was simultaneous with that of the southerners. The West Indian immigrants settled overwhelmingly in New York City, and they pro- vided much solid support for Garvey's earliest attempts at organization in America. But if the times were favorable, they were also sensitive and highly dangerous for radicalism in all its forms in the United States. Garvey's advent in the United States coincided with savage official repression against radicals, as personified especially in the Industrial Workers of the world. Raids on their property, tamperings with their mail, mass arrests of their leaders, deportation of some of the foreign-born among them, all this could have given Garvey an idea of what might, and as it turned out did, happen to his own organization and to himself. In the face of all this danger Garvey showed a characteristic disdain. By the time he arrived in America / 218 in 1916 he had already established in Jamaica a reputa- tion as what officialdom like to call an "agitator," and before long he had plunged into purely domestic Afro- American politics. For as early as 1917 we find him, in a pamphlet distributed by the U.N.I.A. (housed at this time at 235 West lBlst Street, New York) denouncing the East St. Louis pogrom against the black community.3 The pamphlet consisted of the text of a speech delivered by Garvey on July 8, 1917. The introduction contained, with- out comment, the information that the speech had been delivered "before a large and enthusiastic gathering of Negro Americans and West Indians, at which the Police Captain of the Borough Precinct attended by more than ten detectives, police lieutenants, and secret-service men were present."4 Such official interest in Garvey and his movement was to continue to long after he had been de- ported from the United States. Such immediate official interest in Garvey is not difficult to explain. First of all, Garvey was provoking officialdom at a time when government facilities in Washington, D.C. were as rigidly segregated as anywhere else in the American South. What this meant was that white officialdom was by no means uniformly convinced that the black man was inherently equal to anyone else or that he deserved to be treated like a human being. The official mind usually saw, in the desire of black people 219 to be free and equal, a problem of law and order, and precious little else, except the shadowy manipulations of a Communist bogey which was presumed to be behind most manifestations of Afro-American resistance to oppression. To this kind of mentality, even the National Urban League, the N.A.A.C.P. and black Republicans trying to enfranchise members of the race, could on occasion be viewed as threats to the peace.5 The general attitude of American officialdom can be summed up in the words of a memorandum submitted by Secretary of State Charles E. Hughes to the President of the United States in 1924. The U.N.I.A. in America was here described as "extremely radical" and "subversive to good government" not to mention the inevitable "strong communist angle."6 To all intents and purposes the mere expression of resentment, or the promise of self-defense against oppression was all it took to qualify for inclu- sion among the ranks of subversives. Even where the official mind acknowledged that the black man had been wronged, its insensitivity and callousness prevented it from making any effort to eradicate the root causes of oppression and resentment. The solution lay in appeals to law and order. These attitudes were clearly and un- equivocally expressed by Attorney-General A. Mitchell Palmer in his report on "Radioalism and Sedition Among the Negroes as Reflected in their Publications." He said, 220 . . . there have occurred the several race riots in Washington, Knoxville, Chicago, Omaha, and Arkansas, and the more radical Negro publications have been quick to avail themselves of the situation as cause for the utterance of inflammatory sentiment - utter- ances which in some cases have reached the limit of open defiance and a counsel of retaliation. Every indication given in previous expressions of insub- ordination has been amply fulfilled in subsequent publications, until, at this time, there can no longer be any question of a well-concerted movement among a certain class of Negro leaders of thought and action to constitute themselves a determined and persistent source of a radical opposition to the government, and to the established rule of law and order.7 Amongst the instances of Garvey's radicalism men- tioned in this report was an address of his "which preached a doctrine of the negro [gig] for the negro."8 These at- titudes can also be illustrated in the report of the Lusk Committee of New York State into "Revolutionary Radicalism." Their acknowledgement of the oppression of Afro-Americans was even more explicit: "The most interesting as well as one of the most important features of radical and revolu- tionary propaganda," they stated, "is the appeal made to those elements of our population that have a just cause of complaint with the treatment they have received in this country." This admission notwithstanding, the eradication of racism was predictably passed over in favor of a law and order solution: The very fact that the negro [gig] has many just causes of complaint adds to the seriousness of the propaganda, and should encourage all loyal and thoughtful negroes in this State to organize to op- pose the activities of such radicals, which cannot but lead to serious trouble if they are permitted 221 to continue the propaganda which they now disseminate in such large volume. The same ideas cropped up in the opinions of the American consul at Kingston, Jamaica, who saw Garvey as a "clever scoundrel" whose civil rights activity made him a menace. In the words of this official: While he is clever enough to temper his propaganda with statements that he is for the negro [sic] rather than against the white man or any Government, his speeches are not lacking in many references to fight- ing for negro rights and I believe that a tendency of his propaganda is to alienate the loyalty of American and British negroes to his Association. . . .1 Thus did fighting for the black man's rights become a crime. Garvey, for his part, did precious little to calm the fears of United States officialdom. Though from the early 1920's onwards he made much of the fact that the period of strident propaganda was over, and though he in- creasingly claimed, as the above quotation suggests, that he was not preaching disloyalty to individual alien governments within whose jurisdiction black people found themselves, his basic philosophy and tactics remained in essence unchanged, and United States officialdom, right up to the 1930's, was not fooled. Throughout practically all of his public career, but especially during his American period, Garvey re- mained embarked upon a calculated risky course of provo- cation of United States officialdom. It could not be 222 otherwise. For in order to reach and stir the black masses the way Garvey did, he had to say the things that other leaders may have felt but may have been more dis- creet about broadcasting. And most of these things were not necessarily what United States officialdom liked to hear. In his 1917 denunciation of the East St. Louis pOgrom, for example, his language gave no indication of the fact that he was an alien in the country for little more than a year, addressing an assemblage that contained a goodly share of police officers, in the era of deporta- tion for foreign-born radicals. He condemned the collu- sion of civil authorities in the massacre as a crime against humanity. "For three hundred years," he said, "the Negroes of America have given their life blood to make the Republic the first among the Negroes of the world, and all along this time there has never been even one year of justice but on the contrary a continuous round of oppression."11 Many of his early speeches, too, urged black men not to participate further in white men's wars, after the vain sacrifices of the World War. In a speech delivered not long after the termination of hostilities he declared, "The first dying that is to be done by the black man in the future will be done to make himself free. And then when we are finished, if we have any charity to bestow, we may die for the white man. But as for me, I think I 223 have stopped dying for him." This speech scandalized the New York State Lusk Committee looking into "Revolutionary Radicalism." Their comment was not unexpected: ”These extravagant and bombastic utterances may look trivial in cold print, but the continuous utterance of such senti- ments has a very disquieting and pernicious effect upon the untutored element of the negro [gig] population."12 Not least of Garvey's provocations to United States officialdom were his ambiguous flirtations with Communism. Like many other black leaders he resolutely prevented the Communists from co-opting his organization while at the same time hesitating to condemn them and, at times, openly endorsing the system of government in Russia. Many columns of the Negro World were devoted to such an endorsement in 1924 when Garvey delivered his panegyric on the death of Lenin.l3 Nor was he loathe to portray United States operations in places like Haiti and Brazil as imperialistic adventures which would redound to the detriment of the inhabitants of these areas. One such speech led the Communist Daily WOrker to announce with cautious approval, "Negro Leader Condemns U. S. Imperial Rule."l4 In many other ways Garvey seems to have gone out of his way to harass United States officialdom. The Washington Conference of the Limitation of Armament, for example, was greeted by a Liberty Hall speech pointing 224 out the farcical aspects of disarmament while half of the world was unfree: "When all the burglars and all the rob- bers are put in jail, and we know they are in jail, then we will throw away our guns." This was followed up by a telegram to the conference reminding them that 400,000,000 black people were unrepresented, and commending to them President Harding's promise of democracy for black folk.15 Again, in 1922, Garvey wrote Secretary of State Charles E. Hughes asking for a State Department representative to attend the session on colonialism at his International Convention. The offer was declined.16 There was little about Garvey's program that could not be construed as a threat, direct or indirect, to the United States. His doctrines of militant racial strug- gle could often be, and indeed frequently were, transferred into strikes against such powerful United States corpora- tions as the United Fruit Company, in several Latin American countries. His African program too, with its anti-imperialist and nationalistic implications would, if successful, augur ill for American financial interests. This was especially true for Liberia, which, despite its nominal independence, was often but one remove from being a United States colony. Garvey took the position that American capital would seek to expand its influence in Africa. In 1929, for example, he wrote, "Europe today is bankrupt and 225 cannot advance much capital for the develOpment of African industries, and therefore they are trying to interest American capitalists in the exploitation of the wealth of the great Continent."17 Almost ten years earlier, U.N.I.A. plans in Liberia had collided with American government finance in the republic. For in 1920 Garvey had despatched a commissioner to Liberia to explore the feasibility of setting up a U.N.I.A. colony there. The commissioner, Elie Garcia from Haiti, had reported secretly to Garvey that Liberia, in the midst of one of its perennial financial crises, had been offered a credit of five million dollars by,the United States government. Garcia considered the United States offer to be embodied in "the most insulting and.humiliating document ever pre- sented to a free people for ratification." To obtain the money, he explained, Liberia would have to accept an American Receiver General who would collect and disburse all revenues free from the control of any Liberian offi- cial. For the duration of the contract the Liberian senate would have no power to grant concessions or vote contracts without approval of the Receiver General. Garcia observed that "The adoption of this contract for ten years if signed by the Government will mean the elec- tion of a white king over Liberia, and will be a great inconvenience to the U.N.I.A." He added that he had been informed that the Liberian delegate to the 1920 226 International Convention (Gabriel Johnson, mayor of Monrovia) had been secretly empowered by the Liberian government to see what financial assistance the U.N.I.A. might be able to provide, by way of counteracting the United States offer.18 When, some time later, Garvey's plans to establish U.N.I.A. settlers in Liberia were rudely thwarted by the Liberian government in 1924 and large concessions granted to the Firestone Rubber Corporation instead, Garvey saw collusion between United States big business and the United States government as partly responsible for his reversal. He recalled that two and a half years pre- viously the capitalists Firestone, Ford and Edison had been for a walk in the woods with President Harding right after the appointment of an anti-Garvey consul to Liberia. The same trio, he explained, had recently sojourned in Vermont around the same time as President Coolidge, and about the same time, too, as his enemy W. E. B. DuBois had been sent as a United States representative to Liberia to engineer his downfall.19 His imprisonment shortly thereafter, he thought, was facilitated, in part at least, by the friendship between capitalist Firestone and Herbert Hoover, Secretary of Commerce.20 Having determined, practically from the inception of his sojourn in the United States, that Garvey was a dangerous character, various governmental, police, 227 quasi-official and corporate agencies subjected Garvey and the U.N.I.A. to a constant surveillance of inter- national proportions. Where possible their surveil- lance was supplemented by infiltration into the U.N.I.A. Garvey's charge that "agents of governments, organiza- tions, corporations and individuals, interested in the exploitation of Negroes operated among the membership and officers of the Association in several cities" was hardly an exaggeration.21 Garvey thought that as many as twenty to twenty-five per cent of his employees may have been secret service agents of the United States government. One U.N.I.A. counsel-general, Garvey noted, upon whom he depended for legal advice, was appointed an assistant United States attorney general 22 after his conviction. White reporters who inter- viewed Garvey were also suspected of being intelligence men.23 At a welcoming speech in Jamaica after his deportation from the United States in 1927, Garvey declared: "The Great United States Government got men to investigate me; all manner of Secret Service people were set after me, and 20 per cent of my employees were United States Secret Service. I believe I must have cost the United States Government about five million dollars in ten years."24 228 Sometimes official surveillance took the form of an obvious police presence. Garvey's acknowledg- ment of the large police and secret service turnout at his July 1917 meeting has been noted. In 1918 Garvey returned to New York from a trip to Detroit and Virginia to find policemen at the U.N.I.A. headquarters. They claimed to be investigating the solicitation of funds by his secretary (later his first wife) Amy Ashwood, for what they considered a nonexistent move- ment. Ashwood later recalled being summoned to the office of the district attorney on seventeen occa- sions.25 On one instance, in New Orleans, a large police contingent turned up at the Longshoremen's Hall to oversee a Garvey speech. The chief of police averted a showdown with U.N.I.A. members by submitting when ordered to sit down by Garvey.26 Evidence of official surVeillance of Garvey sometimes cropped up in unexpected places. At hearings before a Congressional Subcommittee on Appropriations for 1921, for example, the question came up of over- load pay for a black Treasury Department employee. The case for such payment stated that he had been hired to transcribe proceedings at "some radical Negro meetings." A first class stenographer was required and a white 229 one would not do since he would be liable to be thrown out of the meeting or killed. A qualified black steno- grapher had been sought outside of the government service, but in vain. The Department of Justice, who commissioned his work, therefore had to use a govern- ment employee. These meetings took place in Washington, D.C., in July and September of 1920. The stenographer's task was described by a chief clerk of the Treasury Department as "very important and confidential steno- graphic work" consisting of "discreetly taking verbatim reports of the proceedings of negro [gig] radicals."27 It transpired that this person had previously been employed as early as 1918, to cover a U.N.I.A. meeting in Baltimore, Maryland.28 The role of the Department of Justice in this case was not an isolated event. For much of the offi- cial surveillance of Garvey emanated from this depart- ment. In 1919, for example, officials of the Panama canal contacted the department's Bureau of Investiga- tion on the question of the Garvey threat to both areas.29 The correspondence soon found its way to the Bureau's J. Edgar Hoover who demonstrated a more than passing acquaintance with Garvey. He expressed genuine regret over the fact that Garvey had not yet 230 violated any federal law making him liable to deporta- tion. He suggested, however, that proceedings might be sustained against him for fraud in connection with the Black Star Line. (When Garvey was eventually jailed in 1925 it was indeed on this very charge, and he was in fact deported thereafter.) Hoover did not fail to acknowledge his adversary's mettle, describ- ing him as ”one of the most prominent negro [gig] agitators in New York" and "an exceptionally fine orator, creating much excitement among the negroes through his steamship proposition." Hoover concluded his observations in predictable fashion: "In his paper the 'Negro World' the Soviet Russian Rule is upheld and there is Open advocation of Bolshevism."30 By 1920 British officials, who regularly shared in- formation with their American counterparts on the subject of Garvey, were cognizant of the fact that the Justice Department's agents were watching Garvey closely.31 The Justice Department's surveillance extended, as one might expect, to Garvey's economic undertakings, On August 31, 1921, for example, the director of the department's Bureau of Investigation, William J. Burns, informed his counterpart at the Bureau of Investigation 231 of the United States Shipping Board that he had been advised "by a strictly confidential source" that Garvey was negotiating for the purchase of a ship.32 As a result of this communication the Shipping Board was reminded that its prospective client was "President of the Universal Negro Improvement Association, the communist party which is affiliated with the Russian Soviet Government" and a radical agitator of long standing. Furthermore, he was a person who "advocates and teaches the over-throw of the United States Government by force and violence." It was therefore recommended that sale of a vessel to Garvey be can- celled.33 The director of the Justice Department's Bureau of Investigation even attempted to influence the manner in which the prosecutor conducted the case against Garvey, following the latter's arrest in 1922.34 Garvey was made painfully aware of the Justice Department's surveillance of him through the zeal of a black agent of the Bureau of Investigation's New York office, special agent James E. Amos, an ex-bodyguard of former President Theodore Roosevelt. Garvey, in an application for pardon after his imprisonment in 1925, catalogued a long list of grievances against 232 Amos. He charged that "one Amos, a colored man of the Department of Justice, who brags he can have anything done because he was bodyguard to the honored and deceased President Theodore Roosevelt, unconsti- tutionally and wickedly went from home to home and place to place among colored people--and he is still doing so--stirring up hatred and adverse feeling against me, and inspiring individuals to so act as to bring about my conviction and downfall.” Garvey also charged Amos with advising defense lawyers at his mail fraud trial not to help him (Garvey afterwards defended himself) and of attempting to intimidate GRrvey's own lawyer. Garvey's charges against Amos continued lengthily--that he and other enemies of Garvey had indulged in scenes of unrestrained glee following the prosecutor's summation; that on the opening day of the trial he was heard to say, after the prosecutor's opening address, "See, I have started my fireworks" that he and Garvey's adversary, W. A. Domingo, were constantly together before and during the trial plotting Garvey's downfall; that they both were responsible, together with others, for anonymous letters allegedly threatening the judge, prosecutor and jury, proportedly on Garvey's 233 behalf; that reports of these letters were carefully times to appear in the press during the last days of the trial, to prejudice Garvey's case; that Amos let it be known long before the case was over, that Garvey would be convicted; that he bragged that he would get Garvey's neck; that he falsely swore to an affidavit that Garvey had never applied for and secured his first paper of citizenship; that he personally insti- gated much civil litigation against Garvey, occasioning much financial loss to the U.N.I.A. and allied concerns; that he personally attended many of these cases and would often be seen coming out of chambers in the company of judges and other court officials involved in these cases, while the cases were still in progress; that Amos controlled entry into the courtroom during the trial and excluded Garvey's supporters, while packing the room with anti-Garvey demonstrators; that Amos and others got a person serving three years for burglary to falsely swear that Garvey stbred arms and ammunition in Liberty Hall, in order to publicize this news and prejudice the case against Garvey; that the day after Garvey's conviction, "Amos led a contingent of Secret Service men, marshals and policemen" to Liberty Hall and one of Garvey's Offices, ”and discovered not even a wooden pistol"; that "a 234 peculiar relationship" existed between Amos, the prosecu- tor and an attorney of a firm that specialized in prose- cuting civil claims against Garvey's organizations, they having already secured judgments aggregating over $60,000.00; that Amos bragged that Garvey had been ar- rested during his 1924 International Convention on an income tax charge in order to discredit him before the assemblage and break up the convention; that Amos was under the influence of the rival N.A.A.C.P., of which he was a member; that "for the purpose of humiliating me and gloating over my condition and predicament, Amos has un- warrantedly, improperly and unnecessarily busied himself in being vindictively and maliciously active at my arrests, by posing and demonstrating grimaces, actions, demeanor, passing remarks and staring me in the face with bravado and glee;" that Amos was responsible for the crude show of force when Garvey was arrested at the 125th Street station in Manhattan, on his way to surrender after his appeal was turned down; that Amos accompanied the lone marshal who escorted Garvey to the Tombs prison; that the next day's newspapers proclaimed that Garvey had been ap- prehended by Amos; and that Amos had been heard to con- fide that the greatest pleasure of his life would have been to escort Garvey to the Atlanta penitentiary.35 Amos transferred his main efforts to Garvey's wife, Amy Jacques Garvey, once he had safely seen Garvey 235 to jail. In 1926 we find J. Edgar Hoover, by now Director of the department's Bureau of Investigation, sending on a secret report on the activities of Garvey and his wife, sent to him from New York by Amos. Amos now alleged that Garvey was instructing his wife from jail to collect monies in circumstances amounting to a use of the mails to defraud. The warden of the jail doubted the accuracy of this allegation and Garvey considered it an outrage against his wife. Funds were being solicited for newly- acquired Liberty University, but he pointed out that therein lay no crime.36 Hoover and the Bureau of Investigation maintained their interest in Garvey even after he was deported. In 1928, for example, he received a report of Garvey's doings in England from "a confidential source."37 In 1929, presumably because of his interest in Garvey, Hoover's aid was enlisted in the case of John 0. Garrett vs. the United States, where an attempt was being made to recover portions of the $22,500.00 of Black Star Line money still impounded by the United States Shipping Board.38 As late as 1930, Hoover was still dealing with the U.N.I.A., this time proferring information to the State Department which was investigating the activities of a Trinidadian in Chicago suspected of being in some way connected with 39 Garvey's movement. United States surveillance of Garvey’s activities 236 abroad was as diligently pursued as surveillance at home. American consular agents and "confidential sources" from Sweden to Liberia, from Canada to Trinidad, kept a close watch on Garvey, his organization and its ramifications in their respective areas. In 1919, for example, the American embassy in Stockholm, Sweden, informed Washington by telegram that a Swedish paper had published a "sensational despatch" from London on the Black Star Line and Garvey's boast of immi- nent race war.40 Reports came from elsewhere in Europe, too, such as a 1930 report from the ambassador to France on the radical black movement in France and an instance of its connection with Garvey.41 From London, too, came evidence of United States government interest in Garvey and his associates. When in 1919, for example, the em- bassy there passed on to Washington a British secret in- telligence report on "Unrest Among the Negroes"42 (including data on Garvey and his associates), the State Department was highly appreciative of British attention to "the problem of negro [gig] unrest throughout the world" and expressed a desire to obtain all possible in- formation from London.43 This is interesting since much of the British information was obtained through surveil- lance of their own carried on inside the United States. In 1920 the presence in London of Garvey's ex-spouse, Amy Ashwood Garvey, on her way to Liberia, occasioned a 237 telegram from the United States embassy to ascertain from the State Department whether she was involved in "Garvey's anti-white activities." The State Department thought she was not.44 In 1921 United States officials in London, acting on State Department advice, refused temporarily to allow Garvey's old associate and former employer, Duse Mohamed Ali to obtain a visa to enter the United States, despite Mohamed's willingness to say uncomplimentary things about Garvey when interviewed by the United States Consul- General in London.45 This incident took place at the same time as similar efforts were being made to prevent Garvey from re-entering the United States, after a trip to the Caribbean. As late as 1928, after Garvey's deportation, United States officials in England were still on his trail. This time they were investigating white Englishman Dr. Charles Garnett, who had aroused their suspicion by virtue of having chaired Garvey's Royal Albert Hall meeting.46 Since Garvey's activities impinged largely on African, and especially Liberian affairs, United States surveillance extended to this area too. Liberia, espe- cially, enjoyed a special relationship with the United States, having been founded in the nineteenth century with United States private and public money as a refuge for Afro-American emigrants. At times during Garvey's public career Liberia was reduced to a virtual colony of the United States, with its chronically troubled financial 238 affairs under United States control. The development and eventual consummation of interest in Liberia on the part of Firestone Rubber Company in the 1920's ensured the permanency of United States interest in the area. The State Department's interest in Garveyism in Liberia could not have been more explicit. In May 1921, the United States Minister Resident and Consul General was instructed "to watch closely and report fully all activities" of the U.N.I.A. His instructions continued, "The Department de- sires to know the names of persons in Liberia connected with this apparently subversive movement and wishes to be informed especially with regard to Gabriel Johnson, Mayor of Monrovia, who is reported to have taken an active part in furthering the aims of this movement."47 This United States representative was in the happy position of being able to report to Washington that he had already embarked on the Garvey trail, even before being ordered to do 30.48 Reports on Garveyism also reached the State Department from United States officials in Sierra Leone.49 After Garvey's deportation from the United States he visited Canada on several occasions, making speeches, holding conventions, and conducting classes. Many of his supporters crossed the border, especially from Detroit, to be with him on these occasions. Not unnaturally, he did not escape the ubiquitous gaze of Uncle Sam's repre- sentatives on these occasions. In late October of 1928, 239 for example, less than a year after his expulsion from the United States, Garvey arrived in Canada and spoke in favor of Al Smith, Democratic presidential candidate in the im- minent United States elections. He was promptly arrested by Canadian immigration authorities shortly before he was due to address a Montreal audience. He was brought before a board of enquiry of the local immigration authorities in Montreal and ordered deported under regulations prohi- biting political agitators. Upon explaining that he was in transit anyway, he was placed on a $100.00 bond, given until November 7 to leave, and ordered not to indulge in 50 any more public statements. The Negro World presumed that all this must be the handiwork of the Republican Party,51 and as usual they were not too far from the truth. For the American consul general in Montreal un- known, of course, to the public, claimed credit for the action of the Canadian authorities. Writing to Washington on the day after the deadline for Garvey's departure, he informed his superiors that Garvey had arrived in Canada two weeks previously and delivered his speeches in support of the Democratic Party. Garvey then, for some unexplained reason, called at the consul general's office but left before he could be interviewed. At this stage the consul general's office contacted the Canadian immigration authorities and informed them that Garvey was an ex-con— vict and inadmissable into Canada. Whereupon the Canadian 240 authorities, in this official's words, acted "quietly and promptly" in arresting and muzzling him.52 From the anglophone West Indies came periodic observations on Garvey and Garveyites, from such places . 53 as Jamaica and the United States Virgin Islands, where no less a person than the President of the United States in 1923 requested a report on a local political figure suspected of being a Garveyite.54 Surveillance in this area was particularly keen in Trinidad, especially in the two years or so immediately after the World War. This was due largely to the serious character of the upheaval and riots which occurred there in 1919. The American consul in Port-of-Spain conferred regularly and swapped information on Garveyite influence with the British governor and police authorities. Not much escaped his attention. Characteristic of his zeal was his request from the local police authorities in 1920 of confidential character sketches of two young Trinidad- ians mentioned in a local black newspaper as hopefuls for 55 The consul in employment in the Black Star Line. Trinidad was among the strongest critics of what he con- sidered Washington's tolerance in allowing Garvey's pro- paganda to leave New York for the islands. In 1920, for example, he admonished the State Department: I have several times lately in despatches to the Department, mentioned the pernicious effects here already of this propaganda from New York, which 241 was probably largely responsible for the recent riots in Trinidad and Tobago. I cannot too strongly express my own opinion to the effect that this pro- paganda from New York should not be tolerated by our government.5 This worldwide surveillance extended inevitably into Latin America, where some of the strongest U.N.I.A. branches existed. Reports flowed regularly into the State Department from such places as Costa Rica,57 Panama,58 and Cuba, where in 1921 the American chargé d'affaires requested an informal investigation of the U.N.I.A. and the nationality of its officers.59 In Santo Domingo, then an occupied country, United States marines at the beginning of the 1920's suppressed the U.N.I.A. and arrested its leaders.60 In Latin America, State Department surveillance was supplemented by that of the United Fruit Company, a huge employer of U.N.I.A. labor, and one-time employer of Garvey himself. In January 1920, for example, Marie Duchatellier, writing from Panama City where she was en- gaged on a promotional tour for the U.N.I.A. and Black Star Line, explained that the United Fruit Company had used its influence with the governments of Panama and the Canal Zone to try and prevent the U.N.I.A. delegation from landing. She reported that the local blacks together with the West Indians and led by a radical Spanish Panamanian, Morales, forced the hand of the authorities by threatening to strike on the Canal and burn down the 242 city of Colon.61 The company also kept a check, on oc- casion, of monies remitted by its workmen to Garvey's organizations. Such information was turned over to the local United States consul.62 The United Fruit Company was not the only non- governmental or quasi-governmental body supplementing official surveillance. Another was the National Civic Federation, a powerful pressure group consisting of big businessmen, conservative leaders of organized labor and various public figures. In August 1920, in the midst of Garvey's epochal First International Convention of Negro Peoples of the World, the federation embarked on a novel means of ascertaining Garvey's position. A representative simply visited and interviewed several of the most impor- tant Afro-American political figures over the period of a few days.63 The first person visited by the interviewer, Charles Mowbray White, was none other than Garvey himself. On August 18 he interviewed Garvey at the Black Star Line offices. Garvey presented him with a copy of the Decla- ration of Rights of the Negro Peoples of the World and regaled him with stories of U.N.I.A. sympathy with com- munists and Irish liberationists. Garvey also explained that he did not advocate the return of all black people to Africa and relegated W. E. B. DuBois to the status of “ante-bellum Negro." To Garvey's intimation of an inten- tion to visit Africa soon, White responded by appending 243 to his report a warning that the British government should be warned to keep him out of that continent. Two days later White was at the offices of the Messenger, radical organ of New York's black socialists A. Philip Randolph and Chandler Owen. Owen did most of the talking but White reported that Randolph concurred in his partner's sentiments. From these purported socialists White learned that Garvey could not possibly be Bolshevik because "he has made no effort to study the socialist movement headed by us." Garvey, they said, was an unedu- cated ignoramus who knew nothing about the Afro-American, being leader of a "purely West Indian" movement. Owen and Randolph even advanced the hypothesis that Garvey might be working with the Department of Justice to destroy black solidarity by siphoning away money from rival orga- nizations. They also expressed the conviction that Garvey's slogan of "Africa for the Africans" was unscien- tific, whereas they were scientific internationalists. They predicted that Garvey's schemes would collapse within three months. This was followed two days later by a visit to W. E. B. DuBois. DuBois, like Randolph and Owen, con- sidered the U.N.I.A. a West Indian rather than an Afro- American movement. According to White's transcript, DuBois attributed a large following to Garvey not only in the Caribbean but also in the East Indies. DuBois thought 244 that Garvey was allied with Bolsheviks and Sinn Feiners, and predicted a not too distant demise for the U.N.I.A. White's mission took him next (on August 23) to Frederick Moore of the well-established black weekly, the New York Age. He, too, considered the U.N.I.A. a West Indian affair. He boasted about how nice and conservative his paper was, and expressed puzzlement at the authorities' reluctance to pounce on the "mountebank" Garvey, whom he accused of utopian and socialistic preachings. The line between surveillance and harassment of Garvey and the U.N.I.A. was a thin one. Official surveil- lance obviously was not an end in itself. It was predi- cated on the assumption that Garvey was a subversive character whom the United States would be better off without. Official surveillance, therefore, was merely the backdrop against which a protracted war of attrition was enacted as a result of which, over an eleven year period, Garvey and his organizations were relentlessly harassed, culminating in the arrest, trial, imprisonment and depor- tation of Garvey himself. This process started, as has been hinted above, not long after Garvey's arrival in the United States. Reference has already been made to Amy Ashwood's summonses before the District Attorney in 1918. In 1919 Garvey himr self had a series of confrontations with public officials in New York. The Negro World of June 14, 1919, for example, 245 carried a Garvey account of his recent appearance before an official described as a State Attorney of New York at the latter's behest. On this occasion Garvey claimed that some "political grafters and conscienceless crooks," members of the race, had informed the New York police authorities that the Negro WOrld was responsible for mailing bombs through the post to certain persons. These charges were not proved and the informers were expelled from the U.N.I.A.64 During this same month Garvey's tribulations in- volving Edwin P. Kilroe, Assistant District Attorney of the county of New York, began. This time he was sub- poenaed to the District Attorney's office together with Amy Ashwood, then secretary of the ladies' division of the U.N.I.A. and compelled to produce the books of the Black Star Line. Once again the cause had been com- plaints by recalcitrant members of the U.N.I.A. Other meetings followed, both as a result of complaints by U.N.I.A. rivals and Kilroe's own objections to matter ap- pearing in the Negro World. Out of the conflict between the two came a libel action brought against Garvey by Kilroe. A retraction followed in the Negro World. Garvey afterwords claimed that his would-be murderer during an assassination attempt in 1919 informed him, before shoot- ing, that he had been sent by Kilroe.66 One of the more interesting United States 246 offensives in the continuing campaign against Garvey was the attempt by the State Department to prevent Garvey from re-entering the United States after a visit to the West Indies and Central America in 1921. For all its seriousness, the case was heavily overlaid with melodrama, as Garvey and the State Department and its consular re- presentatives literally played hide and seek all over the Caribbean for five months. Garvey left New York in February of 1921, jour- neyed by train to Florida, from which he proceeded by sea to Havana, Cuba. He made a triumphant tour of Cuba and 67 was received by the island's president. From Cuba he boarded the 8.8. Antonio Maceo of the Black Star Line for Jamaica. Then the plot thickened. On March 1, American Consul Charles L. Latham, writing from his post in King- ston, Jamaica, informed the Secretary of State in Washington that the Daily Gleaner of that date had announced Garvey's impending arrival. He requested in- structions concerning the visaing of Garvey's passport, should he intend returning to the United States, this in view of what he considered Garvey's subversive record.68 On March 25, the State Department despatched its reply: "In view of the activities of Garvey in political and race agitation, you are instructed to refuse him a visa and to inform at the same time the Consul at Port Antonio 69 [Jamaica] of your action." On April 11 Garvey duly 247 presented himself at Latham's office and requested a visa to travel to the United States Canal Zone and then back to the United States. He was accompanied by Cleveland Augustus Jacques and Amy Euphemia Jacques (later his second wife), the latter described by Latham as secretary to the Negro Factories Corporation. All three had already booked passages for the same afternoon. Latham informed Garvey that he could not grant him a visa without time for due consideration and advised him to return the fol- lowing day. He issued visas to Garvey's two companions, however. All three therefore cancelled their bookings for the Canal Zone and sailed the next day for Port Limon, Costa Rica, instead. Latham informed Washington of all this and of the fact that all American consular officials in Caribbean ports had been notified by mail that Garvey was not to be granted a visa.70 More details of this notification were despatched to the State Department the following day (April 13) from Jamaica. Washington was advised that the consul-general at Panama had been telegraphed, since Garvey might yet attempt to land there. In such a case the view was ex- pressed that "he would arouse considerable racial anta- gonism among the negroes [gig]" in the Canal Zone and the Republic of Panama, should he succeed.71 Once in Costa Rica Garvey attempted, as the United States officials had predicted, to obtain a visa 248 for Panama. Secretary of State Charles E. Hughes on April 26 informed his legation in San Jose, Costa Rica by telegram that Garvey must not be granted a visa.72 On May 2, the legation at San Jose replied advising Hughes that Garvey had already left for Bocas del Toro, Panama, by the time that Hughes' communication had arrived. He had entered Panama with a visa from the Panamanian consul in Boston.73 In Panama he was again refused entry into the United States Canal Zone. He therefore boarded a launch and set out from Panamanian territory for Colon, where he arrived in full view of the American authori- ties.74 (This was risky but feasible, since Colon, though a virtual enclave separated from the rest of Panama by the United States Canal Zone and the sea, is nevertheless not within the jurisdiction of the United States Canal Zone. Under normal circumstances Garvey would have travelled by train from Panama through the Canal Zone to Colon.) From Panama Garvey returned to Jamaica and by May 7 American consul Latham.was informing Washington that Garvey might attempt to enter the United States as a crew member of the Black Star Line's Kanawha (as the Antonio Mgggg_was still officially known).75 On May 10 a secret urgent note was despatched from Secretary of State Hughes in Washington, "Refuse visa crew list SS Kanawha, if Garvey's name appears thereon, unless his name is removed 76 therefrom." Meanwhile the officials of the Black Star 249 Line in New York contacted the State Department on the question of their refusal to allow Garvey back.77 Latham's perturbation increased shortly there- after when he was informed that Garvey, on his earlier journey from Santiago de Cuba on the Black Star Line ves- sel, had shipped as purser without the knowledge of the American consul there. He thought this "very extraordi- nary." He suspected that Garvey might again be leaving for Port Limon on this vessel on or about May 20, and telegraphed instructions as to preventing Garvey from shipping as a member of the crew or a passenger.78 The Secretary of State's telegraphed reply on May 20 admitted that the State Department could not prevent Garvey from travelling to Costa Rica, but the American consul at Port Limon was reminded to refuse Garvey a visa for the United States if he should show up there.79 In the United States, meanwhile, a U.N.I.A. attorney had obtained a hearing at the State Department and had requested Garvey's return on the grounds that he was needed to transact Black Star Line business.80 A week and a half after this interview, however, a memoran- dum from the office of the Solicitor of the State Depart- ment was still referring to Garvey as a troublemaker and suggesting “that he should be kept out of the United States if possible," though expressing doubt about the legality of refusing a bill of health to the Antonio 250 Mgggg_(Kanawha) as suggested by Latham, if Garvey should attempt to ship to the United States as a crew member. In such a case though, it would be sufficient to refuse to visa the crew list to ensure that all aliens would be kept on board if it arrived without a visaed crew list.81 Nevertheless, by this time this elaborate farce was about to play itself out. On June 22 Garvey, still in Jamaica, despatched a telegram to Secretary of State Hughes requesting that he instruct his consul to visa his passport.82 By this time, fortunately for Garvey, a new person had assumed Latham's position in Kingston. Garvey presented this new consul on June 23 with a request from the directors of the Black Star Line in New York that his passport be visaed.83 By some coincidence the State Department found itself temporarily with an acting Secre- tary of State replacing Hughes at the same time as a new face appeared at the Kingston consulate. This new combi- nation of actors first authorized the granting of Garvey's visa on June 25 and then finally issued it to him in Kingston on June 28.84 Still, Garvey's problems were not yet over. On arrival in New Orleans on a banana boat by way of Guate- mala, he was detained by the immigration authorities who were surprised at his valid passport and were evidently playing for time while they could devise some new scheme to hinder him further. He was finally allowed to enter 251 the country after despatching telegrams to the President and the Secretary of State on July 13, 1921.85 As has been mentioned before, Secretary of State Hughes was refusing a visa to Garvey's long time associate Duse Mohamed Ali in London at the same time as he was playing hide and seek with Garvey in the Caribbean. The reason for the sudden granting of Garvey's visa is not clear. Certainly the presumption is strong that the sud- den fortuitous and simultaneous change of personnel handling his case both in Kingston and in Washington may have been the stroke of good fortune that saved Garvey from an indefinite enforced stay outside of the United States. Garvey's escape may have been a narrow one in- deed. The opinions of Hughes, Latham and others were too clearly expressed on their resolve to keep Garvey out of the United States to leave any room for doubt. The attempt to stall him in New Orleans, even after he received his visa, was certainly consistent with the other actions of the State Department. Garvey himself, obviously not fully aware of the nature of the correspondence which was emanating from Washington during these months concluded, and not necessarily wrongly, that his black enemies had 86 but that the real goaded Washington into the action, culprit was the consul in Kingston, Charles Latham. Being thus cast into the role of villain displeased Latham and he complained to Washington that New York papers were 252 carrying Garvey's opinions that it was his recourse to the State Department that led to a reversal of Latham's in- tentions to prevent his re-entry. Latham reminded the 87 and his State Department of its role in the affair, pique was understandable. Amy Jacques Garvey, discussing her husband's imprisonment in 1927, thought that the British government was implicated in the episode.88 Official harassment also included annual efforts to disrupt Garvey's annual conventions in New York. The first conference in 1920, with its overflow audience of 25,000, had ensured Garvey's permanence as a world figure who could not be ignored. The propaganda victory accruing to Garvey as a result of the conference had also increased his position as an irritant to the United States govern- ment. Accordingly, subsequent conventions became targets for attack. The State Department effort to keep Garvey out of the United States in 1921 almost succeeded in causing him to miss the convention for that year. He managed to obtain re-entry into the country just over two weeks before the convention was due to begin, and this after being away, mostly by force, for five months. The refusal of a visa to Duse Mohamed Ali in April may pos- sibly have been influenced by a fear that he might attend the convention. Certainly, this was a motive in attempts by immigration authorities some weeks before the conven- tion began, to deny entry to the Mayor of Monrovia, 253 Liberia, Gabriel M. Johnson.89 Johnson had been elected ceremonial head, or Potentate, of the U.N.I.A. in 1920, and was returning for the second convention. The 1923 convention had to be cancelled altogether due to a refusal of bail to Garvey after his conviction for alleged mail fraud. The trial ended over a month before the conven- tion, but though Garvey lodged an appeal bail was refused, the refusal being compounded by the fact that the prose- cutor and chief witness for the prosecution sailed for Europe immediately after its conclusion.90 On August 4, 1924 with that year's convention barely begun, a grand jury indicted Garvey for an allegedly fraudulent income tax return for 1921. The indictment also contained a count of perjury.91 Garvey was arrested while presiding over the assembly but this time managed to obtain release on bail and was able to continue the conference. Garvey considered the indictment a fraud since it was based on imaginary income for the period when he was forcibly kept out of the country.92 Garvey's nemesis, special agent Amos of the Department of Justice, bragged that the arrest 93 had been a deliberate attempt to embarrass the convention, and the communist Daily Worker, which was covering the 94 convention, charged as much. It was not uncommon for U.N.I.A. halls to be raided by the authorities. Several Liberty Halls, includ- ing that of Garvey's headquarters in New York, were 254 subjected to this treatment. Possibly the most serious of these episodes was one which came to be known in U.N.I.A. circles as the Chattanooga Outrage. The inci- dent took place on August 4, 1927, when, in the words of the Negro World, "a mob of white devils raided a peaceful meeting of the Chattanooga, Tenn., division and killed, wounded and imprisoned several Garveyites."95 Apparently the police had previously prohibited U.N.I.A. meetings (street meetings only, according to the Negro WOrld). On the night in question the police invaded an indoor meeting. Members of the Universal African Legions stationed at the door requested the police to produce warrants authorizing their entry, whereupon the police refused and opened fire. The legionnaires returned the fire. The result was a number of casualties on both 96 sides. The Baltimore Afro-American, normally hostile to Garvey, expressed its indignation at the action of these southern police. It editorialized: The Chattanooga riot represents the typical Southern white reaction to colored organizations provided with military uniforms and weapons. In Tennessee a Negro cannot join the State Militia, but he can join the African Guards of Garvey, and the women are re- cruited as Black Cross Nurses.97 Four U.N.I.A. members were subsequently tried and con- victed on charges arising out of this incident. They were assisted by a U.N.I.A. defense fund set up to meet the 98 emergency. 255 In Fort Smith, Arkansas, the charter of the local division was seized and seven of its officers fined and 99 A year earlier, in the wake of the imprisoned in 1924. shooting death of ex-Garveyite J. W. H. Eason, a Depart- ment of Justice sponsored raid took place on a mass meeting of the New Orleans division. The New York Amsterdam News reported that twenty-one persons present 100 were arrested. The records of the division were seized and a nationwide anarchistic plot among black people was supposedly uncovered. The Department of Jus- tice announced that it would examine all of the two to eight thousand persons they suspected were members of the 101 Garvey immediately despatched a New Orleans division. telegram and a letter to the United States Attorney- General protesting the raid and informing him that the U.N.I.A. was not only not anarchistic, but actually loyal.102 A top national official of the U.N.I.A., Thomas W. Anderson, Assistant Secretary-General, expressed the satisfaction of martyrdom felt by Garveyite victims of such raids: We have been to prison for the Universal Negro Improvement Association, thank God! If our going to prison or even suffering death would advance the cause of Negro freedom, as advocated by the Universal, we would as willingly enter the prison cells or the vale of death as we would take a drink of water when thirsty.103 The official campaign against Garvey reached into his private life. Garvey charged, for example, that the 256 prosecution for his mail fraud trial had brought his divorced first wife, "one Amy Ashwood, who sometimes uses the name of Amy Ashwood Garvey," as he put it, back into the country, even waiving some immigration procedures, to enlist her aid in an anti-Garvey campaign.104 This first short-lived marriage, together with Garvey's subsequent courtship and marriage of Amy Jacques, also provided some enterprising persons, in the period while Garvey was still courting prior to each marriage, with the idea that he could be charged under some immorality statute such as the Mann "White Slavery" Act (which prohibited the inter- state transportation of women for immoral purposes). In 1919, a few months prior to his marriage to Amy Ashwood, an anonymous writer to the Justice Department had sug- gested he be charged with violating the Mann Act since Ashwood had accompanied him on tour across state lines.105 The United States consul in Kingston, Charles Latham, made a similar suggestion to the State Department concerning his then secretary Amy Jacques a mere month after Garvey had slipped away from him and re-entered the United States 106 in 1921. In July of that same year a telegram to the State Department originating in New York had again men- tioned the Mann Act as a possible means of proceeding against Garvey, because of his courtship of Amy Jacques.107 Garvey himself was aware of such schemes to frame him on a ”white slavery" charge.108 257 The post office, a long standing tool in the fight against radicals, sometimes figured in the official struggle against Garvey. As early as 1919 a copy of the British espionage report "Unrest Among the Negroes" had been forwarded by the State Department to the Postmaster- General for any action the latter might deem advisable.109 Garvey's arrest in 1922, and subsequent conviction, im- prisonment and deportation stemmed from a charge of using the mails to defraud. But Garvey's tribulations at the hands of the post office continued, and in some respects even escalated after his deportation in 1927. Towards the end of 1928, for example, it was reported that the postal authorities were investigating what was described as a census of the Afro-American population. Garvey was said to be directing this alleged census from Jamaica and 40,000 letters were said to have already been sent out by him.110 Very shortly thereafter a group of persons signing themselves "Sufferers" wrote to the Attorney-General requesting that a stop be put to monies destined for Garvey since he was still, in their opinion, fraudulently fleecing black 111 It was not until 1932, people in the United States. though, that the postal authorities finally clamped down on Garvey's mail. On May 28 a postmaster in Yonges Island, South Carolina, wrote the Post Office Department at Charleston, South Carolina, informing them that for 258 the previous four to six weeks a large amount of first class mail had been coming in. It was all addressed to ”negroes" [gig] and in care of a gentleman who did "not do any manual labor" but made a living as an organizer ”among the more ignorant negroes in their various societies."112 A remarkably rapid correspondence ensued between Yonges Island, Charleston and Washington, D.C., and a mere five days later the Postmaster-General in Washington issued a fraud order by virtue of which all of Garvey's mail was to be stamped "fraudulent" and returned to Jamaica undelivered. Also, no money orders issued to Garvey or any of his concerns was to be issued, certified or paid.113 It transpired that Garvey had on this oc- casion indeed unknowingly infringed the rules since some of the offending letters contained raffle tickets, the sending through the mails of which was illegal without official permission. As always, Garvey and his supporters in the United States embarked on the accustomed path of protest letters to the authorities, since the ban involved all mail to and from Garvey. The order was finally re- voked two years later, in April of 1934.114 This two year embargo on Garvey mail thus accomplished what the Post Office Department had often been urged to do from at least a decade and a half earlier, when American consuls in the Caribbean, as well as various government officials and other persons in the United States, had urged a denial 259 of the mails to the Negro WOrld.115 The means by which the United States was finally able to remove Garvey from the American scene once and for all was through the mechanism of the courts, and more specifically through the celebrated mail fraud trial in New York in 1923. The conviction handed down at this trial was affirmed by the United States Circuit Court of Appeals in 1925. This case was the most important, but by no means the only one involving Garvey in the United States. From fairly early in his American period he and his concerns were practically continuously involved in litigation of one sort or another. There were libel cases against him, such as those brought by Assistant District Attorney Kilroe and communist Cyril Briggs, as well as libel cases brought by Garvey against such people and concerns as the Robert S. Abbott Publishing Company (publishers of the Chicago Defender) and black socialist W. A. Domingo. There were divorce suits and counter- suits involving Amy Ashwood Garvey. There were suits brought by the Black Star Line against persons and com— panies who had defrauded the corporation. There were numerous suits brought by Black Star Line and other em- ployees for arrears of pay. There was the income tax case which was not officially declared nolleprosegui until 1932. There were cases against former employees for embezzlement or other dishonesty. Garvey had no 260 friend in the courts, as almost all these cases were determined in a manner unfavorable to him.116 The 1923 case marked the denouement in the long struggle between the United States and Garvey. The trial began one year after Garvey had been arrested on the charge of using the mails to defraud, in connection with promotion of the Black Star Line.117 Garvey had initially been indicted alone, after which the books and records of the Black Star Line and the U.N.I.A. had been seized by the authorities. The prosecution had used the lists of stockholders thusly Obtained to send out circulars to them soliciting complaints against the corporation. Garvey alleged that Negro World subscribers also mysteri- ously began receiving rival black newspapers at this time. Upon realizing that the Black Star Line was a corporation rather than a private firm, the original indictment against Garvey alone was withdrawn and two new ones sub- stituted. These named Garvey as President, Orlando Thompson as Vice-President, Eli Garcia as Secretary, and George Tobias as Treasurer respectively of the Black Star Line. This was apparently nothing more than a procedural move to safeguard the prosecution's case from dismissal on a technicality. Garvey was quite obviously the target, and his three co-defendants were eventually acquitted. The case attracted much sensational publicity. Garvey himself attracted much of this when, very early in 261 the trial he accused his lawyer of counselling a deal inimical to his client's best interests. Garvey fired his lawyer at this point and thereafter defended himself. Garvey, being a colorful character, could not help but defend himself in flamboyant fashion. The case itself was marked by many apparent ir- regularities, all working against Garvey. Right at the beginning, for example, application was made by Garvey to the trial judge, Judge Julian Mack, to disqualify himself, on the grounds that he was a member of or contributor to the N.A.A.C.P. This organization, of course, was hostile to Garvey, and its organ, the Crisis, had devoted much space to attacks on Garvey. Many of its high-ranking members had for many months been holding public meetings as part of a "Marcus Garvey Must Go" campaign and had actually written the Attorney-General of the United States asking him to get rid of Garvey.118 Judge Mack admitted his connection with the N.A.A.C.P. but did not consider himself biased thereby and denied the motion. Again, under cross examination by Garvey, a government witness, Schuyler Cargill, who claimed to have worked for the Black Star Line from 1919 to 1921, could not name a single fellow employee or the timekeeper during this period. He even admitted in answer to questions by Garvey and the judge, that he had been told by the prose- cutor to testify to these dates of employment. When this 262 witness further could not give the location of the College Station post office where he claimed to have regularly mailed Black Star Line letters, he admitted having been told to give his testimony by Post Office Inspector Shea. Prosecution witnesses in general were characterized as "for the most part dishonest, dismissed and disgruntled ex-employees" of Garvey.119 Garvey's case was further prejudiced by the appearance in New York newspapers during the duration of the trial, of unsub- stantiated stories of threatening letters being sent to the judge, prosecutor and jury. The prosecutor, for his part, concluded his remarks to the jury with the plea, "Gentlemen, will you let the tiger loose?" The tiger, of course, was Garvey. The co—defendants were ignored. The two indictments contained thirteen counts and alleged a scheme to defraud by means of sending certain letters through the mail. Some counts also alleged a conspiracy on the part of the defendants to implement the same scheme. Garvey was convicted on only one count, namely that for the purpose of furthering his scheme, he caused to be sent, on or about December 13, 1920, "a cer- tain letter or circular enclosed in a postpaid envelope addressed to 'Benny Dancy, 34 W. 131 St.'" in New York City. The prosecution produced an empty envelope bearing the Black Star Line stamp, and claimed that a particular letter promoting the Black Star Line had been posted in 263 it. Dancy, a Pennsylvania station cleaner, testified that government agents had come to his house and he had handed over the envelope to them there. He could not remember what had been in that particular envelope though he often received mail from the Black Star Line, the U.N.I.A. and the Negro Factories Corporation. Some of this mail he did not read, but some of what he read, he was sure "said invest more money in the Black Star Line for the case [sic] of purchasing bigger ships and so forth." Garvey's lawyers, in setting forth their grounds for appeal, summarized their objections to the Dancy evi- dence and to the case and verdict in general as follows: And when we seek to understand how it was that the jury, by some inexplicable, absurd process found that Garvey was guilty of mailing a circular or let- ter to Dancy, when there was not in the evidence any such circular or letter, and when there was not in the evidence any means by which the circular or let- ter could be identified, and when the sole exhibit consisted of an envelope, that did not even appear to have been addressed by Garvey, or through his procurement, then we feel fully justified in stating that the verdict was unjust, that it was the result of speculation, if not of passion or prejudice.120 With the conclusion of the trial Garvey was on June 21 given the maximum sentence of five years, together with a $1,000.00 fine. He was also ordered to pay the 121 The trial had been a long entire cost of the trial. one, and this fact had apparently added to the judge's irritation, since he had other business to attend to. At 264 the close of the second week, for example, Judge Mack had requested the attorneys for both sides to speed up pro- ceedings so that he could charge the jury at the end of the third week since he wanted to attend an international Jewish convention in Chicago. Garvey's response was to jump up and shout, "What? And jeopardize the liberty and 122 freedom of Marcus Garvey!" During the trial Garvey's weekly Negro WOrld and his daily Negro Times reported the proceedings in unchar- acteristically restrained fashion, due, Garvey said later, to threats from the prosecution to close down both papers.123 It was not until Garvey was irrevocably lodged in jail after his unsuccessful appeal that articles de- nouncing the political nature of the trial began to appear frequently in the Negro World (the Negro Times having meanwhile ceased operations). Garvey's problems did not end with his conviction. Despite his notice of appeal he was lodged in the Tombs prison and denied bail. Prosecutor Mattuck further argued that if even bail were set it should be in a high amount, since the monies of the U.N.I.A. were being used for the purchase of guns and ammunition for the Universal African Legions who would go to any means necessary to 124 Garvey's followers spared no secure Garvey's release. pains in their efforts to secure his release on bail. A Marcus Garvey Committee on Justice was immediately set up. 265 Some members of this committee journeyed to the Department of Justice to request bail for Garvey. During their dis- cussions with department officials, Assistant Attorney- General W. G. Crim became irritated and expressed the desire to see a quick appeal so that Garvey could be sent to the federal jail in Atlanta.125 In a subsequent ap- plication for pardon Garvey related that "before my trial and before the disposition of my case, one Mr. Crimm [gig] of New York politics, and of the Department of Justice of Washington, was heard to state in words most hateful and uncomplimentary that they are going to lock me away in Atlanta for five years or some such period, the exact language of which I am unable to recall just at this time."126 When bail was finally allowed after three months it was set in the high figure of $15,000.00. The extra three months incarceration pending bail was not afterwards deducted from his five year sentence.127 Even after bail was granted Garvey's supporters were still faced with unusual frustrations, for no bonding companies would handle Garvey's bail and the $15,000.00 had to be 128 In a further effort to harass the raised in cash. organization the bail was forfeited by Prosecutor Mattuck in February of 1925 when he issued a bench warrant for Garvey and had him arrested at the 125th Street station 129 in Manhattan. Garvey was on his way from Detroit to surrender to the authorities after being informed by 266 telegram that his appeal had been lost. He had been caught unawares because the appeal had suddenly been brought forward from the previously intimated date. The arrest and forfeiture of bail took place despite an agree- ment between Garvey's lawyer and the District Attorney that Garvey was on his way to surrender and would be pro- 130 duced on the following morning. The forfeited bail money was only returned after several more months of legal battles.131 Garvey's conviction received its ultimate seal of finality when the Supreme Court in March of 1925 refused to review his case without bothering to proffer any reason 132 Of this whole legal episode GarveY'S for its refusal. counsel (whom he had retained to advise him after he assumed his own defense during the 1923 trial) remarked, ”In my twenty-three years of practice at the New York Bar, I have never handled a case in which the defendant has been treated with such manifest unfairness and with such a palpable attempt at persecution as this one."133 With the resolution of his appeal Garvey was des- patched to the federal penitentiary in Atlanta, never to return to New York. But even the question of which prison he should go to involved behind the scenes official de- liberation. After passing sentence Judge Mack had agreed to a change of prison from Atlanta to Leavenworth in Kansas if possible, since the southern prison might be 267 unbearably racist for somebody of Garvey's reputation. Garvey himself expressed a preference for Leavenworth. The court being advised that special authority would have to be sought from the Attorney-General, such authority was requested. The request was turned down by Washington on the grounds that the request stated as its only reason the fact of Garvey's color.134 With Garvey in Atlanta, a defense committee was quickly formed and from the time of his incarceration until his eventual deportation in 1927 an intense pressure was brought to bear on United States officialdom for the release of Garvey. U.N.I.A. branches from all over the world despatched tens of thousands of signatures, peti- tions, letters, resolutions, telegrams and the like to various government departments and to the President of the United States requesting Garvey's release without deporta- tion. Thousands of these are still lodged in the National Archives of the United States. Mass rallies were held in Harlem and elsewhere for the same purpose. On such occa- sions throngs of people would march behind an open car carrying Garvey's robes and a huge portrait of the im— prisoned leader. Many black churches regularly celebrated "Marcus Garvey Sunday" when prayers were offered for his release. Many black, and some white newspapers lent their editorial columns to protests against the irregular as- pects of the trial and the need for justice to be seen to «:2 {17' (I; 2 69 be done. The U.N.I.A. despatched delegations to various persons, including one to Pardon Attorney James A. Finch.135 At headquarters Liberty Hall in Harlem Garvey's chair was left empty at meetings with his robes of office draped over it. Some middle of the road black intellec- tuals denounced the imprisonment of Garvey as politically motivated. Dean Kelly Miller of Howard University wrote, "It is a dangerous principle to impose legal punishment upon men for their belief rather than for their behavior. This trick is as old as political cunning and chica- nery. . . . Did they not treat Socrates, Jesus and John Brown so?"136 Professor W. H. H. Hart of the Howard University law school showed that Garvey was wrongly in- carcerated.137 Even some of Garvey's bitterest enemies, such as William Pickens of the N.A.A.C.P. who had agi- tated for his imprisonment, had second thoughts in the light of the injustice which had been perpetrated. To cap it all, in January 1927 nine of the twelve jurors who had returned the verdict of guilty against Garvey signed a declaration stating that Garvey was by then in their opinion sufficiently punished. Two of the jurors could not be located and one declined. One juror, a Martin J. Cregan, admitted that he had held out for a long time in the jury room against the conviction of Garvey. He had preferred convicting co-defendant Orlando Thompson instead but was eventually dissuaded by his fellow jurors.138 270 Garvey, of course, agreed concerning the politi- cal nature of his conviction. While still lodged in the Tombs prison in 1923 he declared, "I am here because I dared to tell the Negro that the time has come for him to "139 lift up his head and be a man. He never ceased refer- ring to his trial as a frame-up by the United States government because of his influence.140 And from jail Garvey despatched several applications for pardon and letters to influential persons. In February of 1925, for example, he solicited the aid of a Senator James E. Watson for a review of the inequities in his case, adding, "It will make interesting American history." The senator took the matter up with the Justice Department but was informed that there was no basis for Garvey's com- 141 plaint. Garvey also despatched applications for exe- cutive clemency in 1925, 1926 and 1927.142 In jail, meanwhile, the authorities tried to shield Garvey from the curious, such as a stranger who wanted to interview him for a book he was writing, from his enemies, such as the Baltimore Afro-American, which requested information on what work was assigned to Garvey, what kind of food he was eating, etc., no doubt for yet another sensational article, and from his more solicitous friends, who requested a medical certificate showing 143 Garvey's current health condition. The most important consequence of Garvey's trial 271 and conviction, in terms of the protracted struggle waged against him by the United States government, was that it finally cleared the way for his deportation. In 1921 the government had almost succeeded in keeping Garvey out of the country, and official circles had been considering ways and means of getting rid of him through deportation even before that. As early as August 1919 Assistant Attorney-General R. P. Stewart transmitted an anonymous letter he had received informing on Garvey's allegedly unlawful activities to the Secretary of Labor inquiring whether any action could be taken under the immigration laws. The Department of Labor promised to look into the matter.144 Two months later, on October 11, 1919, J. Edgar Hoover of the Department of Justice penned his "Memorandum for Mr. Ridgely," in which he regretted that Garvey had not yet violated any federal statute making him liable to deportation as an undesirable alien.145 On October 15, 1919, R. P. Stewart forwarded further infor- mation to the Department of Labor. He informed the department that if they could not see fit to deport Garvey, then he would suggest turning the information over to the Post Office Department to determine whether Garvey was guilty "of using the mails in furtherance of 146 It will be remembered that a scheme to defraud." Hoover's memorandum contained a similar suggestion. Garvey's narrow escape from unofficial deportation 272 in 1921 brought home to him in a most pertinent manner the vulnerability of his position as a British subject. Immediately upon re-entry into the United States he there- fore obtained his first citizenship papers in New York City and looked forward to obtaining his full citizenship 147 But before his citizenship could be- two years later. come final he was arrested, indicted, tried and convicted. The result of all this was that with a crime involving "moral turpitude" now against his name, he was not only hindered in his bid to obtain full citizenship, but be- came immediately exposed to the danger of deportation. Thus Garvey argued in an application for pardon in June 1925 that not only had he been framed on the mail fraud charge, but that the 1924 income tax charge had been in- troduced as a standby in case the mail fraud case should fail. And if they both failed, Garvey thought that he would still be charged with "white slavery" under the Mann Act or on some other charge which could render him deportable.148 The official attempt to move against Garvey before he could become a United States citizen was facili- tated by the simultaneous clamour for his deportation raised by his black detractors of the "Marcus Garvey Must Go" campaign. Chandler Owen, for example, co-editor with A. Philip Randolph of the supposedly socialist Messenger, pushed the case for Garvey's deportation. In an article 273 of 1922 he sought to distinguish between his magazine's objections to the deportation of foreign-born European radicals on the one hand, and its advocacy of deportation for black Garvey, by arguing that radicals should only be against the deportation of class war prisoners, which Garvey in his opinion was not. He then examined the several clauses of the immigration laws to show their ap- plicability to Garvey. The laws rendered deportable, for instance, "Persons who are directly or indirectly members of or affiliated with any organization entertaining and teaching disbelief in or opposition to organized govern- ment." He argued that Garvey's association with the Ku Klux Klan qualified him here. Garvey also qualified, in his opinion, under a clause relating to people likely to become a public charge, in view of his Black Star Line dealings. Again, the law referred to "all idiots, im- beciles, feeble-minded persons" and the like. Here, too, he thought that Garvey would qualify.149 Accordingly, no sooner was Garvey's conviction upheld on appeal in 1925, than the government's intention to deport him after the expiry of his jail term was made 150 And shortly after his arrival in Atlanta he known. was brought before the immigration authorities there for a hearing as a result of which a warrant of deportation was issued against him, ready to be executed whenever he should be released from jail.151 274 The question of the legality of Garvey's deporta- tion is shrouded in considerable uncertainty. According to immigration authorities Garvey was deported (on Decem- ber 2, 1927) on the grounds: That he was a person likely to become a public charge at the time of his entry; and That, subsequent to May 1, 1917, he has been sentenced to imprisonment for a term of one year or more because of conviction in this country of a crime involving moral turpitude committed within five years after entry, to wit: using the mails to defraud.152 This was, of course, nothing but a recitation of the pro- visions of the relevant statute. Garvey's date of entry into the country was given here as 1921, which did not make too much sense since the crime he was accused of having committed (sending the Black Star Line circular through the mails) was allegedly committed in December 1920, even though he was not arrested until 1922. Thus, according to this statement the crime was committed not within five years of entry, but before entry. The 1921 date, of course, was the date of last entry, Garvey having initially entered in 1916. Perhaps because he considered his deportation in- evitable, Garvey seems not to have offered any objections during the deportation hearings in March of 1925, even 153 This is borne though he testified on that occasion. out by his willingness, expressed in the following month, to waive his right to remain in the country although 275 under protest since he was sure he was not in a legally deportable category. He wrote on this occasion (as part of an application for clemency): That I am cognizant of the fact that I do not fall under the deportable statute, yet for the purpose of satisfying my enemies who are politically power- ful enough to frame, indict and convict me without ordinary hope of redress and for showing my will- ingness to obey the laws as interpreted by those in authority, I have waived my rights to contest, beyond the allotting of a reasonable time for me to straighten out all my many business affairs in the interest of my race in America, by signifying my willingness to leave the country, the land of the Pilgrims and of Liberty. . . . 54 He wrote in similar vein to the Pardon Attorney in Decem- ber 1925. Here he gave ill—health (asthma) as the reason for his renewed application. He recounted the fact that his earlier application for clemency had been refused and was not submitted to the President. Since, he said, he heard that he was to be deported he would leave on his own accord if given two weeks to gather his belongings and remove his family. "This I respectfully request," he stated, "so as to save the further humiliation of ar- rest by the Department of Labor and deportation as a criminal to my home where I have never committed crime and where my character is unimpeached."155 Yet by late 1926 we find him complaining that since he has been in jail his enemies have visited the Department of Labor to 156 press for his deportation. Garvey's uncertainty over what position to adopt 276 concerning his deportation was matched by a similar uncer- tainty in at least some official quarters. In January of 1926, for example, Attorney-General John Sargent briefed the President on Garvey's application for commutation of sentence. He pointed out that Garvey, as an alien, was ineligible for parole and was in any case under a depor- tation order. Assistant United States Attorney Mattuck, the prosecutor in the mail fraud case, was still, Sargent wrote, opposed to deportation. Judge Mack, however, was not opposed to commutation with deportation, but not be- fore Garvey should have served two years of actual im- prisonment. The Attorney-General then went on to state his own very unique Objections to deportation: Garvey undoubtedly holds today an important and controlling influence over many thousands of the Negro race in the United States, and while it may be that his further imprisonment will result in dissatisfaction to a greater or less extent, his release and deportation would by no means elimi- nate him as a menace. While a prisoner, his activities are subject to control, but with un- restricted freedom in another country to continue his propaganda, he might become even a greater . . 157 menace to his own race and to SOCiety generally. He therefore counselled denial of Garvey's application. His argument is rendered doubly interesting by the fact that the British acting governor of Jamaica, Garvey's own country, shortly afterwards inquired of the Foreign Office in London whether it would be feasible to ask the American authorities not to deport Garvey back to Jamaica, presumably because he feared the effect that Garvey would 277 have in that island, from which place he obviously could not be deported. The Foreign Office thought that any such representations would serve no useful purpose.158 However, with the chorus of voices clamoring for Garvey's release building up to a crescendo, the Attorney- General by 1927 was ready to change his mind. In a memo- randum to President Coolidge dated November 12, 1927, he counseled immediate commutation together with deportation. This time his advice was based on the "most unusual" and "by no means . . . healthy condition of affairs" induced by the Garvey case. He pointed out to the President that far from the imprisonment of Garvey serving as a deterrent to wrongdoing, the black population was regarding his con- tinued incarceration as "an act of oppression of the race in their efforts in the direction of race progress." He pointed out that his advice would have been different were 159 So whereas in Garvey to remain in the United States. 1926 he had been fearful of the influence which Garvey might continue to have from abroad, by 1927 the Attorney- General considered the situation caused in the United States by Garvey's continued incarceration so critical that it was imperative to get him out of the country im- mediately. President Coolidge accordingly commuted Garvey's sentence on November 18, 1927. The official wording of the relevant parts of the document was as follows: Whereas it has been made to appear to me that the 278 ends of justice have been sufficiently met in this case by the imprisonment already served: I, Calvin Coolidge, do hereby commute the sentence of the said Marcus Garvey to expire at once.160 Under normal circumstances Garvey's sentence would have expired on October 14, 1928 with good conduct.161 Despite the fact that the President commuted the sentence on November 18 "to expire at once" it wasn't until November 21 that the Pardon Attorney got around to writing the warden of the prison to this effect. He en- closed the original warrant of commutation but told the warden not to deliver it until the immigration authorities 162 The called to take charge of Garvey for deportation. warrant of commutation, of course, made no mention of de- portation. Garvey meanwhile remained in jail totally ignorant of the fact that his sentence had several days previously expired "at once," and indeed several months after his release he seems to have believed that it was commuted on November 24, even though he claimed not to have been notified until even after that date.163 While Garvey was being held in jail despite his commutation of sentence, his wife and lawyers were making feverish attempts to obtain at least a temporary respite for him to settle his affairs in New York. Armin Kohn, Garvey's lawyer, recalled his efforts in a long letter to Mrs. Amy Jacques Garvey.164 On February 24, 1927 Kohn and Mrs. Garvey had journeyed to Washington, D. C. where 279 on February 25 Kohn, in the presence of Mrs. Garvey, pre- sented arguments before Attorney-General Sargent for the commutation of Garvey's sentence. From 9 a.m. to 12 noon and from 2 p.m. to 3 p.m. were taken up with these argu- ments. This was followed by a long conference with Mr. Finch, the Pardon Attorney. A supplemental brief was submitted to Finch on behalf of Garvey. The following day Kohn submitted yet a third brief to Finch. Yet Kohn's first intimation of the President's commutation of Novem- ber 18 came on November 23 when evening papers carried the story. Kohn thereupon despatched a telegram to Atlanta penitentiary asking for further information. He was re- ferred to the Immigration Department, to which he des- patched a telegram which remained unanswered. He nevertheless presented himself a few days later at a hearing of the Board of Review of the Department of Labor, Immigration Division. There he was able to peruse the files on the Garvey case. Among the material in the files was a telegram from the Commissioner of Immigration at New York advising that Garvey's port of departure be changed from New York to New Orleans. The files showed also that on November 25 (a day or two previously) the Immigration Department had reconsidered a previous deci- sion to release Garvey on $1,000.00 bail. Instead they would detain him for immediate deportation. 280 Later that same day Kohn presented his arguments to the Board of Review. The chairman of the board, in replying stated that he could not release Garvey on bail because the President's commutation was dependent on im- mediate deportation. (Kohn did not yet know that the warrant of commutation did not in fact bear any such pro- viso.) Kohn's letter continued, "After a lengthy pro and con, in which it appeared that the Chairman of the Board was the attorney arguing in opposition to the application, a decision upon the application was reserved." This ap- peared to be a delaying tactic and Kohn objected, apparently in vain. He therefore hurried to New Orleans hoping to lodge a writ of habeas corpus and argue against the government's right to deport Garvey. His argument would be based on the fact that Garvey's residence in the United States should date from 1917 [gig] rather than 1921 (the year of his re—entry after his enforced stay in the Caribbean) as the government alleged. He would argue that Garvey in 1921 had been issued a green tax clearance receipt stating that he would be returning soon. This, Kohn would argue, was tantamount to acceptance as a resi- dent alien and thus Garvey's return did not constitute re-entry within the meaning of s. 4298 1/3 of the United States Revised Statutes which provided, inter alia, that an alien resident of five years or less was deportable upon commission of a crime. He would argue that since 281 Garvey arrived in 1917 [gig] and was convicted six years later in 1923, he was not within the provisions of this law. (He does not seem to have addressed himself to the fact, which may have defeated his argument, that Garvey's alleged crime was in fact committed in 1920, well within the five year period based on 1917, even though the con- viction came in 1923; or, for that matter, the contrary consideration which may have reduced the government's case to an absurdity, namely that if, as they alleged, Garvey's entry into the country could only date from 1921, and if the five year period began with that date, then he could hardly be deported for a crime committed before entry.) Presumably on his way to Louisiana, Kohn stopped in Atlanta and visited Garvey where he was held at a United States Immigration station. For some strange rea- son Garvey decided against the habeas corpus attempt because he did not want to obstruct the Immigration Depart- ment. Garvey's action may possibly be explainable by the fact that both he and Kohn still thought that the warrant of commutation was explicitly contingent upon deportation. For immediately prior to his deportation he did despatch telegrams of protest to the President and the Secretary of Labor.165 He may possibly already have boarded the ship at New Orleans when he despatched these telegrams, for he explained a few months later that it was only then 282 that he learned the true conditions of his commutation.166 With Garvey against the habeas corpus procedure, therefore, Kohn decided that his last chance lay in per- suading the "authorities at Washington to voluntarily and without court order give Garvey a reasonable respite" to visit New York and settle his affairs. So he left Atlanta immediately for Washington. Here he argued his case before a Judge Smeltzer at the Department of Labor. The judge refused a short release on bail, citing the alleged presidential deportation stipulation. Kohn next headed for the Department of Justice where he met with no success. What happened next is best related in his own words: However, at this office, the writer saw the capy of the commutation of the President and not a single word is set out in that commutation for deportation. In other words, the commutation of sentence is a clear-cut unconditional commutation and is not, as was stated repeatedly by various officials in the Immigration Department, subject to immediate depor- tation. [Emphasis in original.) The authorities, of course, were fully aware of their deception. A "Memorandum In Re Marcus Garvey" lodged in the files of the office of the Pardon Attorney and dated December 14, 1927, explains that the commutation was indeed unconditional but points out that Garvey in an ap- plication for clemency had expressed his desire to leave voluntarily after some time to arrange his affairs in New 283 York. The memorandum concluded, however, that the depor- tation was effected "by operation of law" rather than through the President or the Department of Justice.167 Presumably this was a reference to deportation for crime committed within the five year period. The question remains as to why the Immigration Department lied to Kohn if the "operation of law" would have secured Garvey's deportation in any event. The ans- wer may be that they were not unaware of possible flaws in the "operation of law" argument, based as it was on the possibly unsound premise that Garvey had entered the United States in 1921, rather than in 1916. Had Kohn seen the warrant of commutation in time there might well have ensued a lengthy legal battle during all of which time Garvey would have been free. Such freedom may have been in time to arrest the splits which were beginning to develop within the U.N.I.A. Certainly, in view of the mantle of martyrdom (which Garvey knew to exploit so well) and in view of the broadly-based support for his release, he might have pushed the U.N.I.A. in America on to deeds rivalling its early years. One point worth making, however, from the point of view of officialdom, is that the presidential commutation, though devoid of any reference to deportation, was pro- bably not necessarily any indication of presidential opposition to deportation. It may even have been an 284 oversight, since the President had been advised by the Attorney-General that commutation plus immediate deporta- tion was the best course. Still, it would appear that by taking no chances and lying about the warrant of commuta- tion the authorities bought barely enough time to get Garvey out without what whould have been a much more formidable fight. So that in 1927 the United States succeeded as narrowly in deporting Garvey as he himself had narrowly succeeded in worming his way back into the country in 1921. Attempts to enable Garvey to re-enter the country were made throughout the rest of his life, up to shortly before his death.168 These attempts were made both by U.N.I.A. members and white segregationists such as Senator Theodore G. Bilbo of Mississippi. A report of 1929 stated that black Chicago congressman Oscar de Priest and Robert L. Ephriam, president of the Chicago U.N.I.A. had met together with others to discuss the possibility of bring- ing Garvey back to the United States. Garvey at about the same time, said that he would not want to return to the United States except as a private citizen, since rotten United States politics had been a source of great trouble to him.169 In 1931 the Negro World started a campaign for 100,000 signatures to support a petition for Garvey's return.170 The move was opposed by veteran black anti- Garveyist George S. Schuyler and the conservative New 285 York Age which thought that Garvey's return would be a 171 calamity. In January of 1935 Garvey himself wrote the Secretary of State and the Attorney-General informing them that he wished to spend thirty-five days in transit in New York on his way to England. He wished to obtain medical treatment for diabetes and see friends while there.172 For several months in 1934 and 1935 the secre- tary of the Philadelphia U.N.I.A. sent a steady stream of letters to President F. D. Roosevelt, the Department of Justice and the Department of Labor's Immigration and Naturalization Service asking for Garvey's return in spite of his conviction, or failing that then that his convic- tion be set aside to facilitate his return. He was met by stony official assurances that Garvey's conviction for a crime involving "moral turpitude" made him mandatorily excludable. He therefore found it necessary to remind the Assistant Attorney-General who was answering his cor- respondence that "Regardless of whether Mr. Garvey be allowed to return, the programme will still go on, for Africa shall still be redeemed even if the Divine Creator has to raise up supermen in our stead; or use the elements in our behalf as in the days of Pharoah. . . ." However, neither his assurances that Garvey had been framed nor the reminder that black people had voted Democrat nor anything else could make any impression on official . 173 stoniness. 286 Other elements within the U.N.I.A. kept up the effort, however, and in 1937 consideration was even given to having a special bill introduced if all else failed.174 Out of these attempts in 1937 and 1938 arose the Second Regional Conference Committee on Mr. Marcus Garvey's Visit to America, chaired by Thomas W. Harvey. This come mittee wanted a temporary permit which would allow Garvey to remain in the United States from June 1 to August 31 in order to hold an International Convention from August 1 to 17. These efforts also failed, despite the assist- ance of Senator Bilbo and some of his fellow segrega- tionists, and despite the blessings of Garvey himself.175 Representations were still being made to government officials in the latter part of 1939, but by this time Garvey was less than a year away from his grave. Only death could extinguish the hopes of his faithful followers in the United States that he might yet one day return to rescue them from their misery. NOTES U.S.A. vs U.N.I.A. 1R.G. 60, 198940, J. E. Hoover, "Memorandum for Mr. Ridgely," October 11, 1919. 2Daily_Worker, August 18, 1924, p. 3. 3Marcus Garvey, Conspiracy of the East St. Louis Riots (New York, U.N.I.A., 1917). 4Ibid., p. 2. 5E.g., National Civic Federation papers, Box 152, memo on black radicals dated August 1920. 6R.G. 59, 882.5511/10, Memo of September 6, 1924, in Charles E. Hughes, Secretary of State to President. 7"Radicalism and Sedition Among the Negroes . . .," pp. 161-162. 8Ibid., p. 163. 9RevolutionaryR Radicalism, Report of the Joint Legislative Committee Investigating Seditious Activities, FiledApril 24! 1920, In the Senate of the State ofiNew York (Albany, N. Y., J. B. Lyon, 1920), p. 1476. 10R.G. 59, 811.108 G 191/24, Consul Latham to Secretary of State, August 24, 1921. 11East St. Louis Riots, pp. 2-3. 12RevolutionaryjRadicalism, p. 1514. 287 288 l3Negro World, February 2, 1924, p. 3. l4Dailij’orker, July 30, 1924, p. l. 15Philosophy and Opinions, II, pp. 110-117. 16R.G. 59, 811.108 G 191/28, Garvey to Hughes, May 3, 1922; William H. Beck, private secretary to Hughes to Garvey, May 13, 1922. l7Blackman, September 4, 1929, p. l. 18Philosophy and Opinions, II, pp. 402-403. 19Negro World, September 6, 1924, p. 3. 20Speech at Royal Albert Hall, p. 20. 21PhilOSOphy and Opinions, II, p. 406. 2ZSpeech at Royal Albert Hall, pp. 13-14. 23Told to the author by Amy Jacques Garvey. This tactic was by no means unusual, and has been documented in the case of the Lusk Committee. See, J. M. Pawa, "Black Radicals and White Spies: Harlem, 1919," Negro History_Bulletin, XXXV, 6, October 1972, p. 130. 24Negro World, January 7, 1928, p. 2. 25prgphet of Black Nationalism, pp. 112-113. 26Negro WOrld, June 23, 1928, p. 4; speeches by Queen Mother Moore heard by author in Youngstown, Ohio, and Flint, Michigan, 1971; also, told to author by Mrs. Amy Jacques Garvey. Each of these reports of the inci- dent varies slightly in some details. According to Queen Mother Moore, Garvey's supporters drew their wea- pons when the Chief of Police interrupted Garvey's speech with threats of arrest. 27R.G. 60, 198940, "For Payment to Woolsey W. Hall for Reporting Proceedings"--extract from "Hearings 289 before Subcommittee on Appropriations . . . First Defi- ciency Appropriation Bill for 1921," p. 630, January 10, 1921; Sims Ely, Chief Clerk and Administrative Assistant to Secretary of Treasury, February 21, 1923. 28Ibid., W. H. Cowles, Chief M.I. 4, War Depart- ment, Office of the Chief of Staff, Washington, to the Secretary of the Treasury (Division of Appointments), August 29, 1922. 29Ibid., A. L. Flint, Chief of Office, The Panama Canal, Washington Office to The Chief, Bureau of Investi- gation, Department of Justice, October 9, 1919. 30Ibid., "Memorandum for Mr. Ridgely," op. cit. 31F.O. 371/4567, minute on report on Garvey, September 15, 1920; c.0. 318/358, Foreign Office to Colonial Office, October 1, 1920. 32R.G. 32, 605—1-653, William J. Burns, Director, Bureau of Investigation, Department of Justice to Frank Burke, Director, Bureau of Investigation, United States Shipping Board, August 31, 1921. 33ipig,, Burke to A. J. Frey, Vice-President in Charge of Operation, Inter-office Memorandum, September 1, 1921. 34R.G. 60, 198940, resume of memo from Director, Bureau of Investigation, to Assistant Attorney-General Crim [the memo is "restricted" and is not in the file], and Assistant Attorney-General, United States, to Attor- ney for State of New York, March 27, 1922. 35Philosophy and Opinions, II, pp. 242-259. 36R.G. 60, 198940, Director, Bureau of Investiga- tion, to Assistant Attorney-General Luhring, November 6, 1926, enclosing report of special agent at New York City of October 26, l926--[only a brief resume is in the file, since it is "restricted"]; H. C. Heckman, Administrative Assistant to John W. Snook, Warden, U.S. Penitentiary, Atlanta; Snook to Heckman, Assistant Superintendant of Prisons [gig], Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., November 16, 1926; Garvey to Snook, c. November 16, 1926 [date hidden by file binding]. 290 37R.G. 59, 811.108 G 191/47, Robert F. Kelley, Division of Eastern European Affairs, Department of State, to J. Edgar Hoover, Director, Bureau of Investigation, July 19, 1928, confidential, enclosing memo "To Mr. Hoover, Justice," from U.S. Embassy, London, July 6, 1928. 38R.G. 32, 605-1-653, statement re delivery of documents served on the U.S. Shipping Board in re John 0. Garrett vs the U.S.--May 3, 1929 (in the Court of Claims). 39R.G. 59, 800.00B—-International Negro Improve- ment Association of the World/4, Hoover to Kelley, Decem- ber 17, 1930. 40R.G. 59, 811.4016/28, Telegram, American Embassy, Stockholm to Secretary of State, November 3, 1919. 41R.G. 60, 198940, "Excerpt from Despatch No. 585, 'Alleged Negro Revolutionary Organization in Paris' from Ambassador Walter E. Edge, Paris, May 29, 1930." 42R.G. 59, 811.4016/27, Secret document "Unrest Among the Negroes," Special Report No. 10, Directorate of Intelligence (Home Office), Circulated by the Home Secre- tary--October 7, 1919. 43Ibid., William Phillips, for the Secretary of State to John W. Davis, American Ambassador, London, November 14, 1919. 44R.G. 59, 811.108 G 19l/-, Telegram, "Davis," London, to Secretary of State, July 24, 1920; "Colby," Department of State, to American Embassy, London, July 27, 1920. 45R.G. 59, 811.108 G 191/3, Telegram, U.S. Embassy, London, to Secretary of State, April 6, 1921; Secretary of State Hughes to U.S. Embassy, London, April 8, 1921; R.G. 59, 811.108 G 191/4, Embassy to Secretary of State, April 9, 1921. Ali was allowed in later that year. See, Crusader, V, 3, November 1921, p. 16. 46R.G. 59, 811.108 G 191/51, Secret memorandum to State Department from U.S. Embassy, London, June 16, 1928. 291 47R.G. 59, 882.00/703A, Robert Woods Bliss for Secretary of State to Joseph L. Johnson, Minister Resident and Consul General, Liberia, May 25, 1921; also R.G. 84, American Legation, Monrovia--Diplomatic Correspondence, 1921, Vol. II, file no. 840. 48R.G. 59, 882.00/705, Johnson to Secretary of State, July 16, 1921. 49R.G. 59, 648p. 00 2/1, C. C. Roberts, Port Superintendent Engineer, U.S. Shipping Board, Freetown, Sierra Leone, to State Department, September 15, 1924. 50C.O. 318/399/76634, Memorandum, [1930]; New York Times, November 1, 1928, p. 31, November 8, 1928, p. 26; Negro Champipn, I, 19, November 3, 1928, p. 8; Negro World, November 10, 1928, p. 2. 51Negro World, November 17, 1928, editorial. 52R.G. 59, 811.108 G 191/so, Wesley Frost, Ameri- can Consul General, Montreal to Secretary of State, Novem- ber 8, 1928. 53E.g., R.G. 59, 811.108 8 191/l, Charles L. Latham, American Consul, Kingston to Secretary of State, September 12, 1920; R.G. 60, 198940, José de Olivares, American Consul, Jamaica, to Secretary of State, September 27, 1929; ibid., Paul C. Squire, American Consul, Jamaica, confidentiaI, "Subject: Garvey, Marcus: Whereabouts and Activities" to Secretary of State, [1932?]. S4R.G. 59, 811 G.00/37, Henry H. Hough, Governor, U.S. Virgin Is. to Secretary of State, February 23, 1923; Hough to President of U.S., February 24, 1923. 55R.G. 84, American Consulate, Port-of-Spain, 1920 Correspondence, 840.1/2052, American Consul Henry D. Baker to Inspector Costello, Constabulary headquarters, February 16, 1920, enclosing clipping from Argos of February 13; see also, 840.1/2053, Costello to Baker, February 18, and 840.1/2054 Sgt. Sylvester to Detective Inspector, February 18. 56R.G. 59, 811.108/929, Baker to Secretary of State, February 7, 1920. 292 57E.g., R.G. 59, 818.4016/Orig., American Consul, Port Limon to Secretary of State, August 24, 1919. 58E.g., R.G. 59, 811.108 G 191/24, American Minis- ter, Panama to Secretary of State, May 18, 1921. 59R.G. 59, 837.504/218, Philander C. Cable, American Chargé d'Affaires ad interim, Havana to Secretary of State, September 30, 1921. 60Cyril V. Briggs, "Lessons in Tactics," Crudader, V, 3, November 1921, p. 16. 61Bruce papers, Ms 189, Etta [Marie Duchatellier] to Bruce, Panama City, January 12, 1920. 62R.G. 59, 811.108 G 191/27, American Consul, Guatemala City to Secretary of State, March 9, 1922. 63National Civic Federation papers, Box 152. 64Negro World, June 14, 1919, p. l. 65Negro World, June 28, 1919, p. 3; New York Times, August 11, 1920, p. 9; New York Amsterdam News, May 23, 1923, p. 6. 66Negro World, December 8, 1923, pp. 1, 10; Philosgphy and Opinions, II, pp. 130, 197. 67Garvey and Garveyism, p. 58. 68R.G. 59, 811.108 G 191/2, Charles L. Latham, American Consul, Kingston to Secretary of State, March 1, 1921. 695prg., Wilbur J. Carr for Secretary of State to Latham, March 25, 1921. 7°R.C. 59, 811.108 G 191/8, Latham to Secretary Of State, April 12, 1921. 71R.G. 59, 811.108 G 191/5, ”Gray," Kingston to Secretary of State, April 13, 1921. 293 72R.G. 59, 811.108 G 191/9, Hughes to American Legation, San José, April 26, 1921. 73R.G. 59, 811.108 G 191/11, American Legation, San José to Secretary of State, May 2, 1921. 74Garvey and Garveyism, p. 59. 75R.G. 59, 811.108 G 191/10, Latham to Secretary of State, May 7, 1921. 76ipig., Hughes to Latham, Urgent, Secret, May 10, 1921. 77R.G. 59, 811.108 G 191/33, Affidavits "In the Matter of Marcus Garvey Returning to the U.S.," submitted by William C. Matthews, Assistant Counsel-General, U.N.I.A., May 9, 1921. 78R.G. 59, 811.108 G 191/12, Latham to Secretary of State, telegram, May 18, 1921. 79Ibid., Hughes to American Consul, Kingston, tele- gram, May 20, 1921; Hughes to American Consul, Port Limon, telegram, May 20, 1921. 80R.G. 59, 811.108 G 191/29, William c. Matthews to State Department, June 11, 1921, attention Mr. McBride. 81R.G. 59, 811.108 G 191/31, "Memorandum," Depart- ment of State, Office of the Solicitor, June 21, 1921. 82R.G. 59, 811.108 G 191/3o, Garvey to Hughes, June 22, 1921, telegram. 83R.G. 59, 811.108 G 191/l9, Heard [no first name given] to Secretary of State, June 23, 1921. 84Ibid., Acting Secretary of State Fletcher to American Consul, Kingston; Heard to Secretary of State, June 28, 1921; R.G. 59, 811.108 G 191/24, Latham to Secre- tary of State, August 24, 1921. 85Garvey and Garveyism, p. 60; Negro WOrld, August 294 23, 1924, p. 19; R.G. 59, 811.108 G 191/32, Garvey, c/o Immigration Authorities, New Orleans to Hughes, July 13, 1921, telegram. 86Negro world, August 23, 1924, p. 19. 87R.G. 59, 811.108 G 191/24, Latham to Secretary of State, August 24, 1921. 88Negro World, August 27, 1927, p. 5. 89Bruce papers, BL 9 Bruce to the editor of an unnamed paper, July 18, 1921; and see note 47 above. 9ONegro World, August 23, 1924, p. 2; Daily worker, August 20, 1924, p.1. 91Federal Court Records, New York, FRC 539461, Grand Jury Indictment 38/771, U.S. vs Marcus Garvey, filed August 4, 1924, Southern District of New York; complaint, U.S. vs Marcus Garvey, filed March 30, 1925; nolle prosequi, C 38-771, May 1932. 92R.G. 204, 42-793. 93 . . . Philosgphy and Opinions, II, p. 256. 94Daily Worker, August 6, 1924, p. 2; August 18, 1924, p. l. 95 Negro World, January 14, 1928, p. 4. 96Ibid., August 20, 1927, p. 2; Indianapolis Recorder, August 29, 1927, reprinted in Negro World, September 3, 1927, p. 2. 97Afro-American, August 13, 1927, quoted in Negro WOrld, August 20, 1927, p. 2. 98Negro World, December 24, 1927, p. 3; March 3, 1928, p. 3. 99R.G. 60, 198940, J. W. Ross to Charles E. Hughes, Secretary of State, January 8, 1925. 295 100New York Amsterdam News; January 24: 1923: P; 101New York Times, January 20, 1923, p. 6. 102R.G. 60, 198940, Garvey to Hon. Harry M. Daughterty, U.S. Attorney-General, telegram, January 22, 1923; ibid., Garvey to Daughterty, January 24, 1923; New York Times, January 21, 1923, p. 5. -__' 103Negro World, March 10, 1923, p. 7. 104Philosophy and Opinions, II, p. 253. 105R.G. 60, 198940, Anonymous to Department of Justice [August 1919?]. 106R.G. 59, 811.108 G 191/24, Latham to Secretary of State, August 24, 1921. 107R.G. 59, 811.108 G 191/21, William Smith, New York to Secretary of State, July 1, 1921. 108philosgpny and Opinions, II, p. 255. 109R.G. 28, File No. 398, Box 53, Unarranged, "Unrest Among the Negroes," enclosure in Assistant Secre- tary, Department of State, to Postmaster-General, November 17, 1919. 110New York Times, December 29, 1928, p. 6. 111R.G. 60, 198940, "Sufferers" to U.S. Attorney- General, c. January 17, 1929. 112R.G. 28, Fraud Order Jacket 5929, John W. Geraty, Postmaster, Yonges Island, S.C. to F. A. Ricky, Inspector, Post Office Department, Charleston, S.C., May 28, 1932; Ricky to Geraty, May 28, 1932; Geraty to Chief Post Office Inspector, Washington, D.C., May 1932. 113Ibid., Fraud order of Postmaster General, Walter F. Brown, June 2, 1932; fraud order to solicitor, Horace J. Donnelly, June 3, 1932. 296 114‘Ibid.,, Garvey to Karl A. Crowley, Solicitor, Post Office Department, Washington, D.C., March 28, 1934, and enclosed memorandum, Harlee Branch, Acting Postmaster General, April 23, 1934; R.G. 60, 198940, Nugent Dodds, Assistant Attorney-General to Postmaster General, January 16, 1933; R.G. 60, 39-51=821, Benjamin W. Jones, Secretary of U.N.I.A., Philadelphia to President F. D. Roosevelt, September 17, 1934. 115This has been noted before (Ch. 7). See, e.g., R.G. 59, 818.4016/-, Secretary of State to Postmaster General, September 20, 1919; R.G. 59, 818/4016/1, Post- master General to Secretary of State, October 8, 1919; R.G. 28, Box 56, Unarranged #500, U.S. Post Office, New York, New York, Bureau of Translations and Radical Publi- cations to William H. Lamar, Solicitor, Post Office Depart- ment, Washington, personal, October 31, 1919; R.G. 28, Box 53, #398, John H. Edwards, Solicitor to R. C. Bannerman, Chief Special Agent, Department of State, August 5, 1921. 116For more on these cases, see, e.g., Federal Court Records, New York, FRC 536150, FRC 536137; New York Amsterdam News, January 24, 1923, p. 2; March 14, 1923, p. I? March 21, 1923, p. 3; July 11, 1923, p. 1; October 17, 1923, p. 1; February 4, 1925, p. l. 117Most of the following information on the trial and appeal, except where otherwise stated, is taken from "United States of America vs. Marcus Garvey: Was Justice Defeated?,” Philosophy and Opinions, II, pp. 144-179. 118Philosophy and Opinions, II, pp. 293-309. 119Ibid., p. 147. 120Ibid., p. 169. 121Negro World, August 27, 1927, p. 5. 122Ibid., September 3, 1927, p. 2. 123R.G. 204, 42-793, Garvey's application for executive clemency, June 5, 1925; Philosophy and Opinions, II, p. 257. 124Negro WOrld, June 30, 1923, p. 2. 297 125R.G. 60, 198940, D. E. Tobias of the Marcus Garvey Committee on Justice to Augustus T. Seymour, Assistant Attorney-General, July 27, 1923. 126Philosophyand Opinions, II, p. 255. 127Negro WOrld, August 27, 1927, p. 5. 28Garv_ey and Garveyism, p. 118. 129New York Times, February 6, 1925, p. 20. 130Garvey and Garveyism, p. 154. 131Ibid., p. 155. 132New York Times, March 24, 1925, p. 40. 133Philosophy and Opinions, II, p. 150. 134R.G. 60, 198940, William Hayward, U.S. Attorney, New York to Attorney-General, Washington, D.C., June 22, 1923; Mabel Walker Willebrandt, Assistant Attorney-General to Hayward, June 28, 1923; Hayward to Attorney-General, July 10, 1923. 135Negro WOrld, May 1, 1926, p. 2. 136Ibid., September 3, 1927, p. 2. 137New York Amsterdam News, March 18, 1925, p. l; Negro World, March 28, 1925, p. 4. 138R.G. 204, 42-793, affidavit, George Featherstone, January 14, 1927, and attached statement. 139Evening_World, June 29, 1923. 140E.g., Negro World, October 27, 1928, p. 7. 141R.G. 60, 198940, Garvey to Senator James E. Watson, February 28, 1925; H. C. Heckman, Acting Superin- tendent of Prisons, "Memorandum for Colonel Donovan," 298 March 13, 1925; William J. Donovan, Assistant Attorney- General to Watson, March 14, 1925. 142R.G. 204, 42-793, application for executive clemency, June 5, 1925; Garvey to President Coolidge, January 17, 1927; Garvey to Attorney-General John G. Sargent, January 17, 1927; Negro World, February 6, 1926, p. 2. 143R.G. 50, 198940, A. H. Shannon to Superinten- dent of Prisons, October 20, 1926; W. T. Hammack, First Assistant Superintendent to Shannon, October 21, 1926; Shannon to Hammack, October 25, 1926; Perry W. Howard, Department of Justice to Attorney-General, February 16, 1925; H. C. Heckman, Acting Superintendent of Prisons, "Memorandum for Mr. Martin," February 20, 1925; Eugene J. Sartorius, attorney to Attorney-General, June 23, 1927; A. H. Connor, Superintendent of Prisons to Sartorius, July 1, 1927. 144R.G. 60, 198940, Assistant Attorney-General, R. P. Stewart to Secretary of Labor, August 15, 1919 and reply from Louis Post, Assistant Secretary, Department of Labor to Attorney-General. 145R.G. 60, 198940. 146 15, 1919. Ibid., Stewart to Secretary of Labor, October 147Schomburg papers, Box 3, "Petition for Pardon of Marcus Garvey," enclosed in Amy Jacques Garvey to Schomburg. 148Philosophy and Opinions, II, p. 255. 149Chandler Owen, "Should Marcus Garvey Be De- ported?," Messenger, September 1922, p. 479. 150New York Times, February 3, 1925, p. 22. 151Ibid., August 3, 1925, p. 3. 152R.G. 60, 39-51-821, Edward J. Shaughnessy, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Labor, Immigration and Naturalization Service to Attorney-General, October 17, 1934. 299 153R.G. 204, 42-793, Garvey to James A. Finch, Pardon Attorney, December 24, 1925. 154R.G. 204, 42-793, Garvey's application for executive clemency, June 5, 1925. 155Ibid., Garvey to Finch, December 24, 1925. 156R.G. 50, 198940, Garvey to J. W. Snook, Warden of Atlanta jail, c. November 16, [date hidden by file binding] 1926. 157R.G. 204, 42-793. John Sargent: Att°rney' General to the President, "In the Matter of the Applica- tion for Commutation of Sentence of MARCUS GARVEY," January 27, 1926. 158DAG/8674, summary of destroyed correspondence of March 31, 1926; F.O./ 8674, summary of destroyed cor- respondence of May 6, 1926, Colonial Office records, Public Record Office, London. 159R.G. 204, 42-793, Sargent to the President, "In the Matter of the Application for Commutation of Sen- tence of Marcus Garvey," November 12, 1927. 160Copy of warrant of cummutation in Amy Jacques Garvey papers. 161R.G. 204, 42-793, James A. Finch, "Memo for the Attorney-General," November 22, 1927. 162Ibid., Finch to John W. Snook, Warden, U.S. Penitentiary, Atlanta, November 21, 1927. 163Speech at Royal Albert Hall, p. 20. 164Armin Kohn to Amy Jacques Garvey, December 2, 1927, copy in Amy J. Garvey papers. Also reprinted in Negro WOrlg, December 10, 1927 and Jamaica Gleaner, December 15, 1927. 165R.G. 60, 198940, James L. Houghteling, Commis- sioner of Immigration to Senator Theodore G. Bilbo, n.d. [c. Feb. 1938]. 300 166Speech at Royal Albert Hall, p. 20. 167R.G. 204, 42-793, "Memorandum In Re Marcus Garvey," December 14, 1927. 168Ibid., Daniel M. Lyons, Pardon Attorney to Hon. George Gordon Battle, July 12, 1939. 169Blackman, June 22, 1929: P- 123 August 16' 1929' p. 7. 170Negro World, August 1, 1931, p. 3. 171Ibid., pp. 1, 4. 172R.G. 60, 198940, Garvey to Secretary of State, January 7, 1935. 173R.G. 60, 39-51-821, Benjamin W. Jones, Secretary, U.N.I.A., Philadelphia to President F. D. Roosevelt, Sep- tember 17, 1934; Edward J. Shaughnessy, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Labor, Immigration and Naturalization Service to Attorney-General, October 17, 1934; Keenan to Jones, October 22, 1934; Jones to Keenan, October 27, 1934; Jones to Roosevelt, October 27, 1934; Jones to Roosevelt, January 4, 1935; Keenan to Jones, January 28, 1935; Jones to Keenan, June 3, 1935, and other letters in this correspondence. 174U.N.I.A. Central Division (New York) files, Box 16, h. 10, A. L. King to Thomas Harvey, November 9, 1937. 175Ibid., Garvey to Harvey, January 5, 1938; Earnest SeVier Cox to Garvey, February 17, 1938; Cox to King, February 18, 1938; Bilbo to King, February 23, 1938; Harvey to King, March 31, 1938; Harvey to King, May 11, 1928; Ethel Waddell to King, December 1, 1938. R.G. 60, 198940, Harvey to Senator George McGill, April 8, 1938. CHAPTER IX GARVEY AND THE COMMUNISTS We have sympathy for the Workers Party. But we belong to the Negro party, first, last and all the time. We will support every party that supports us, and we appreciate the attention the Workers Party has given us in sending this friendly communication. But the Communists have a long time ahead of them before they can do anything for themselves in this country. When they get there we will be for them. But mean- time we are for ourselves. -- Marcus Garvey1 We are working with the Universal Negro Improve- ment Association not because its President, Marcus Garvey, has improved enuf [sic] or even changed at all in the last two years to suit our view of what the American Negroes must do to win their freedOm. As a matter of fact, the reason for our working with the Universal Negro Improvement Association is because we desire to win over the masses, organiza- tionally and ideologically, following this associa- tion for the Communist program. -- The Daily Worker2 The Russian revolution took place in 1917, one and a half years after Garvey's arrival in the United States. The Communist (or Third) International was formed in of the Communist movement in the United States. March 1919, and was followed six months later by the birth 1919 was Garvey's first year as a fully-fledged international 301 302 headache for white governments in North America and Europe. After two years of persecution and factionalism, a large portion of the American Communist movement surfaced as the Workers Party in 1921. By this time Garvey was an established leader of an unprecedented mass movement among African peoples all over the world. The bulk of Garvey's followers in the United States, as elsewhere, were workers and peasants. For while the largest and most powerful of the U.N.I.A. divisions in America were rooted in the recently proletarianized black communities of such major cities as New York, Philadelphia, Detroit and Chicago, vast numbers of branches also existed in tiny rural areas all over the American SOuth and West and elsewhere. These were the types of people upon whom the Communists would necessarily hope to build a mass move- ment. The necessity of winning over the black workers and peasants would assume even greater importance for the Communists when they belatedly awoke to the realization that the black masses, as the most exploited section of American society, would have to occupy a critical position in their thinking if they were ever to seriously entertain any hope of overthrowing American capitalism. But between the Communists and the American black masses there stood Garvey. They tried to infiltrate the U.N.I.A. by "boring from within,” they attempted to woo and win over Garvey himself, they tried launching frontal assaults against him 303 in their press, they discussed him at their meetings from Moscow to Chicago, they even tried to plagiarize and adopt as their own, facets of his nationalistic philosophy, but they could not prevail. Garvey, displaying great tact and political cunning, would not be compromised. He usu- ally refrained from open denunciation of the Communists, but he would not be co-Opted. Long after Garvey had been deported from the United States, his followers continued to provide a formidable obstacle to Communist recruitment in black communities. There seems to be no evidence of black participa- tion in the founding of the American Communist movement in 1919.3 The program adopted by the Communist Party of America, one of the two founding factions, nevertheless included a paragraph on what was at that time called the Negro Question. The paragraph read, "The Negro problem is a political and economic problem. The racial oppression of the Negro is simply the expression of his economic bondage and oppression, each intensifying the other. This complicates the Negro problem, but does not alter its pro- letarian character."4 This statement, with its attempt to subordinate race to class, but with its uneasy realization that the racial factor complicated the Negro Question, con- tained the basic elements in the central dilemma which confused Communists in their approach to black non- Communist organizations in general, and to Garvey and the 304 U.N.I.A. in particular. The question was not an easy one, and the difficulty faced by the Communists in resolving it was understandable, especially since the analysis of these early American Communists was restricted by a narrow adherence to the orthodox Marxist doctrine of the primacy of class struggle. This inbuilt rigidity in American Communist analysis made difficult an objective analysis of the nationalist and racial components in a successful ideology such as Garveyism. The solution to the race problem was seen as an automatic by-product of a socialist revolution, and that was all. In 1920 the United Commun- ist Party (representing a merger between one of the 1919 factions,the Communist Labor Party, and a split-off from the other faction, the Communist Party of America),5 showed this tendency in its program. It recognized that the Afro-American population was a super-exploited one and declared, The United Communist Party will actively support the negroes [sic] in their desperate struggle against these hellish conditions. It points to the only possible solution of the negro problem, namely: the abolition of wage slavery through the overthrow of the capitalist State and the erection of a Communist society. The task of the United Communist Party is to break down the barrier of race prejudice that separates and keeps apart the white and the negro workers, and to bind them into a union of revolugionary forces for the overthrow of their common enemy. The Workers Party, the ”legal" manifestation of American Communism which surfaced late in 1921, resolved in similar vein at its formation to show black people that "the 305 interests of the Negro workers are identical with those of the whites."7 Nevertheless, by this time the first feeble recog- nition in Communist circles that-the race question affect- ing black people possessed a character other than a purely class one, was manifested, not in America, but in Russia. For at the second congress of the Communist International (Comintern) held in 1920 a white American delegate, journ- alist John Reed, volunteered some remarks on the national character of the Afro-American struggle. His remarks were prompted by a discussion of Lenin's ideas on ”The Negroes in America," which formed part of his draft "Theses 8 Reed's considera- on the National and Colonial Question." tion of the national question, however, was merely to repudiate it. He said, ”The Negroes have no demands for national independence. All movements aiming at a separate national existence for Negroes fail, as did the 'Back to Africa Movement' of a few years ago. They consider them- selves first of all Americans at home in the United States. This makes it very much simpler for the Communists."9 Reed therefore was here repeating the American Communist line that Afro-Americans were faced basically with a class question which was not fundamentally altered by their peculiar racial experience. It is not clear whether his "Back to Africa" reference was to Garvey (whose movement certainly had not failed, and certainly was not a thing 306 of the past in the summer of 1920 when Reed was speaking), or perhaps to Garvey's West African forerunner, Chief Alfred Sam (whose repatriation scheme had run into trouble around the beginning of Wbrld War I). What is interesting about Reed's opinion is that Lenin ignored it and incorporated into his final theses a statement which was far in advance of the position then being held by American Communists. Because of the contro- versy which has surrounded this very brief reference it will be quoted together with the whole paragraph from which it came, as well as the paragraph which came afterwards: Offences against the eguality of nations and violations of the guaranteed rights of national minoritigg, repeatedly committed by all capitEIist States despite their "democratic" constitution, must be inflexibly exposed in all the propaganda and agitation carried on by the communist parties, both inside and outside parliament. But that is not enough. It is also necessary: first, to make clear all the time that only the Soviet system is able to ensure real equality for the nations because it unites first the proletarians, and then all the masses of the working people, in the struggle against the bourgeoisie; secondly, commun- istparties must give direct support to the revoIGr tionary movements among_the dependent‘rations and those without egual rights (e.g., in IreIand, ahd among_th§ American Negroes, etc.): aid in the coIOnies. Without this last particularly important con- dition the struggle against the oppression of the dependent nations and colonies, and the recognition of their right to secede as separate States, remains a deceitfuI—pretence, as it is in the parties of the Second International.10 [Emphasis mine.) It seems quite clear that Lenin was referring to the Afro- American population here, if not as a nation, then at 307 least as a national minority denied equal rights, and possibly having a right to secede. That he should have taken such a position concerning Afro-Americans is not surprising since he had for some time leaned in this direction in regard to national minorities in the Soviet Union. This may well explain why, as will be seen, Garvey could maintain an admiration for Lenin while simul- taneously fighting the American Communists. Lenin followed up these themes with advice to his American comrades on the urgency of the need for propaganda and organizational work among Afro-Americans.11 The fleeting nature of Lenin's reference to the national character of the Afro-American position and its unavailability in translation for some time ensured that there would be no immediate follow-up of this idea. 'Dur- ing the final session of the third congress in 1921, for example, the South African delegation proposed that the Executive Committee should study "the Negro question or the proletarian movement among the Negroes as an important aspect of the Eastern problem."12 The Negro Question was accordingly considred by the fourth congress in 1922. The theses were introduced by Otto Huiswoud, a black member of the party in the United States, who operated under the pseudonym "Billings."l3 They were adopted unanimously and revealed no change from the normal American approach. The Negro Question was seen 308 as primarily economic, though the racial question still played an important role. Huiswoud considered the "Negro problem" to be "a vital questionmfi'the world revolution" and the cooperation of black peoples to be essential for proletarian success. He suggested a world organization of the black race which sounded suspiciously like a 14 Huiswoud considered the Afro- Garveyless U.N.I.A. American population to be a likely source of manpower for the counter-revolution, in the event of an uprising, not an uncommon opinion in early American Communist circles, where the phrase "reserve of capitalist reaction” was once used to describe the Afro-American population.15 An article appearing in the Soviet paper Izvestia two weeks before Huiswoud presented his theses expressed a similar view. The black race was here seen as "an obedient weapon" in the hands of international capitalism and hence a threat to the white proletariat.16 Comintern congress discussions of the Negro Ques- tion continued at the fifth congress in 1924. This time the national characteristics of the Afro-American struggle intruded into the discussions. An American delegate was reported as having argued that the problem confronting Afro-Americans was psychological as well as economic and transcended class lines. It was therefore futile, he argued, to direct the same literature towards black and 17 white workers. The program commission of the congress 309 grappled with this problem, too, and concluded that it was impossible to define the concept of nation in such a way as to adequately cover every national situation. None of this prevented American delegate John Pepper from denounc- ing the Garvey movement in typically unrealistic fashion as "a Negro-Zionist movement in America which wishes t0' go to Africa” despite the desire of Afro-Americans for social equality.18 The most concerted attempt to clarify the Communist position on the race question came at the sixth congress of the Comintern held in Moscow in 1928. By this time Garvey had recently been deported from the United States, and the Communists, with little to show for their previous efforts, were now anxious to join the general rush as Muslims, Father Divine, and all manner of race uplift, emigration- ist, and other groups scrambled for the allegiance of Garvey's followers in the United States. Much of the earlier confusion manifested itself but this time the debates culminated in the laying down of a definite policy. Stalin, as a longstanding Soviet expert on the question of national minorities and himself a member of such a minor- ity, was largely responsible for the importance attached to the question. His interest had apparently manifested itself as early as 1925 when he explained to a group of black students from the United States that the American attitude to the question was all wrong. Afro-Americans, 310 he said, were a national minority with some of the characteristics of a nation.19 Preparatory work for the 1928 examination of the black race question had begun well in advance and refer- ences to the question appeared regularly from the earli- est sessions. John Pepper admitted at the very beginning 20 that American Communists had made some mistakes, while another American retracted the idea that Southern black people were a reserve of capitalist reaction.21 Never- theless, the views expressed in the debates varied widely. Weinstone of the United States thought that the question could be solved by advancing slogans of full social and political rights for Afro-Americans.22 Pravda of August 24, 1928 quoted Jones, a black United States delegate, as saying that two tendencies had been expressed in the Negro Commission of the congress. One argued that Afro-Americans in the United States were a racial minority, while another denied the national unity of the Afro-American and pointed to increasing class stratification within the race, especially since the World War. This delegate also addressed himself to the suggestion for an independent Soviet-Socialist Republic for Afro-Americans. He did not object to this idea but considered a slogan for equal rights to be more fundamental at that particular time.23 Afro-American James W. Ford referred to United States blacks as "an economically backward national minority, having no 311 territory of their own." This did not prevent him from arguing that the interests of black and white workers coincided, as did those of the black and white bourgeoisie. He therefore opposed "at present any national movement among the Negroes" since it would "only be a trump in the hands of the bourgeoisie" and would "trammel the revolu- tionary class war of the Negro masses, and still more deepen the gulf between the whites and the oppressed groups."24 Out of such debate came eventually the new Comin- tern line of self-determination for the black population in the "Black Belt” of the southern United States. The new line was stated at length in a resolution of the Comintern's Executive Committee shortly after the end of the congress. It pointed out that 86 per cent of the Afro-American population lived in the South and that approximately half of these lived in the "Black Belt" where they were over fifty per cent of the entire popula- tion. From this it argued that "The Various forms of oppression of the Negro masses, who are concentrated mainly in the so-called 'Black Belt,‘ provide the neces- sary conditions for a national revolutionary movement among the Negroes. . . . The great majority of Negroes in the rural districts of the South are not 'reserves of capitalist reaction,‘ but potential allies of the revolu- tionary proletariat.” This belated recognition of the 312 national character of the Afro-American struggle was thus limited to a question of territorial autonomy in this one area. Furthermore, the slogan of "full social and poli- tical equality” would remain the "central slogan." The implications of black nationalism for those outside the Black Belt, as demonstrated by Garvey, were ignored. The resolution noted, as Garvey had long done, that due to worldwide imperialist oppression, "a common tie of inter- est is established for the revolutionary struggle of race and national liberation from imperialist domination of the Negroes in various parts of the world."25 The adoption of this 1928 national line by the Communist International is not surprising in view of Stalin's advocacy of the idea. The decision is usually presented as having proceeded from Stalin's famous defini- tion of a nation--"A nation is an historically evolved, stable community of language, territory, economic life, and psychological make-up manifested in a community of culture."26 It is noteworthy that during the congress debates most American Communists, black and white, seem not to have advocated a national approach to the race question. George Padmore, at that time an active member of the American party, afterwards argued that the 1928 change had been motivated by the long-standing attempt to get at Garvey's followers. He wrote, "It was therefore decided that, since Marcus Garvey had rallied pOpular 313 support by promising to establish a 'National Home' for blacks in Africa, the American Communists should go one better and offer the American Negroes a state of their own in the Black Belt. . . . It was hoped by this manoeuvre to satisfy the nationalist aspirations of those Negroes who still hankered after 'Black Zionism' and turn them away from Garveyism to Communism.” He continued, "With Stalin's blessing, this amazing piece of nonsense was imposed upon the American party."27 The American party certainly was not tardy in accepting the new line. Indeed, the Workers Party issued a statement on self-determination simultaneously with the last stages of the congress. This was no doubt prompted by the fact that 1928 was an election year in the United States and the Workers Party had several black candidates in the field. The statement read in part, The Workers (Communist) Party of America puts forward correctly as its central slogan: Abolition of the whole system of race discrimination. Full racial, social and political equality of the Negro people. But it is necessary to supplement the struggle for the full racial, social and political equality of the Negro with a struggle for their right of national self-determination. Self- determination means the right to establish their own state, to erect their own government, if they choose to do so. In the economic and social condi- tions and class relations of the Negro people there are increasing forces which serve as a basis for the development of a Negro nation (a compact mass of farmers on a contiguous territory, semi-feudal conditions, complete segregation, common traditions of slavery, the development of distinct classes and economic ties etc. etc). 314 This Workers Party statement, much more explicitly than the Comintern statement, acknowledged (though in a grudg- ing fashion) the part that Garvey had played in inducing this new line. The statement continued, There are many national movements of the Negro city petit-bourgeoisie and intelligentsia. The fact that the most important mass movement, was a sort of Negro Zionism and had such reactionary, extremely harmful slogans as leaving the United States and back to Africa, should not bind us to the revolutionary possibilities of the Negro national liberation move- ments of the future. The resolution endowed Garvey with a measure of unintended legitimacy when it sought authority for the new national line in a Lenin quotation to the effect that all national liberation movements are bourgeois democratic. As the movement developed, though, they presumed that it would 28 be taken over by proletarian elements. By 1930 in an effort to clear up once and for all the "lack of clariry on the Negro question" which they still recognized within the American party, the POlitical Secretariat of the Executive Committee of the Communist International drafted a further resolution *On the Negro Question in the United States." This resolution recog- nized more clearly than hitherto the peculiar features of the Afro-American nation. It stated, In the interest of the utmost clarity of ideas on this question the Negro question in the United States must be viewed from the standpoint of its peculiarity, namely as the question of an o ressed nation, which is in a peculiar and extraordinarin 315 distressing situation of national oppression not only in view of the prominent racial distinctions (material differences in the colour of skin, etc.), but above all because of considerable social antagonism (remnants of slavery). This introduces into the American Negro question an important, peculiar trait which is absent from the national question of other oppressed peoples. The resolution nevertheless continued to distinguish between Afro-Americans in the South and those in the North. It saw tendencies and prospects for separateness as most likely in the South. Rather than self-determination, it saw the demand for equal rights as the more important slogan in the North, where it was "under no circumstances the task of the communists to give support to bourgeois nationalism in its fight with the progressive assimilation tendencies of the Negro working masses." Yet it contra- dictorily admonished the party to "resist all tendencies within its own ranks to ignore the Negro question as a national question in the United States, not only in the South, but also in the North." This resolution, then, was not itself a model of clarity. The distinction between South and North meant, of course, that some way had to be found around the uncomfortable reality of Garveyism, which had flourished both North and South, and which, in 1930, three years after Garvey's deportation, still presented a formidable obstacle to Communist work in the black North. Garvey was accordingly smothered in a torrent of rhetoric which was made to substitute for 316 analysis. Despite the advocacy of self-determination in the Black Belt, even to the point of separation, Commun- ists were warned that they could not "associate them- selves at present, or generally speaking, during capital- ism, indiscriminately and without criticism with all the separatist currents of the various bourgeois or petty- bourgeois Negro groups." For there was "not only a national-revolutionary, but also a reactionary Negro separatism, for instance, that represented by Garvey." This led up to a statement of the main objection to Garvey's nationalism, namely its racial exclusiveness. Having already stated the progressive nature of assimila- tion in the North it now drove home its attack on Garvey's "utopia of an isolated Negro State (regardless if in Africa or America, if it is supposed to consist of Negroes only)." Such a state would serve only the "political aim of diverting the Negro masses from the real liberation struggle against American imperialism." So this, then, was the crux of their quarrel with Garvey. A separate black-controlled state with a white minority would be supported in the Black Belt even to the point of complete secession from the United States, and even if that state Opted not to follow the Communist pro- gram. But an all-black Garvey state anywhere, even in America, would be utopian and reactionary. The point was reinforced by another parting blast at Garvey: "All 317 national reformist currents as, for instance, Garveyism, which are an obstacle to the revolutionization of the Negro masses, must be fought systematically and with the utmost energy."29 This attempt to undo the lack of clar- ity in the American party thus resulted in the utterly confused position where the Communists were ready to back secession by the "compact masses" of blacks in the Black Belt, but only on condition that they carried along with them a white minority (maybe in time to constitute itself into a White Belt of "compact masses" of whites). The Moscow-affiliated Communists apparently shifted away from emphasis on the national question in the 1930's as Garvey's American following suffered further losses due to his enforced absence and as the new united front line necessitated alliances with middle-class assimilationistsi30 American Trotskyists continued to give the question much attention during that decade. Trotsky himself had in 1922 impressed Harlem renaissance left-wing poet Claude McKay as viewing the race question in a more intelligent fashion than any of the other Russian leaders. He had granted McKay an interview in Moscow and among other things had proposed training some black men as Red Army officers.31 Discussing the national question in Mexico with American comrades in 1939 Trotsky adopted a position somewhat more amenable to self-determination than most Communists were wont to . He argued that the success of the Garvey movement 318 was explicable in its propensities for self-determination. And rather than attack the petty-bourgeois leadership of race organizations he preferred to see this phenomenon as a necessary stage in the emancipation of the race, neces- sitated by the racism manifested by white workers. He even envisaged the possibility, very unusual for a Commun- ist at this time, that black people, through the route of self-determination, might even leap-frog over the white proletariat and assume a vanguard role. He expressed this View as follows: It is very possible the Negroes also through the self—determination will proceed to the proletarian dictatorship in a couple of gigantic strides, ahead of the great bloc of white workers. They will then furnish the vanguard. I am absolutely sure that they will in any case fight better than the white workers. That, however, can happen only provided the Communist party carries on an uncompromising merciless struggle not against the supposed national prepossessions of the Negroes but against the colossal prejudices of the white workers and gives it no concession whatever.32 Communists usually tended to see Garvey in simple terms as a petty-bourgeois figure preaching reactionary nationalism and diverting the black masses into utopian back-to-Africa channels. There was obviously, as has already been seen, much more to Garvey than this inaccur- ate picture suggested. Much of Garvey's hold on the masses was due to ideas not very different from some espoused by Communists. Despite his firm espousal of the race first principle, for example, there was a persistent 319 class component to Garvey's thinking. As against the white race, he saw the need for intra-racial solidarity, but within the race he demonstrated quite clearly that he identified with the oppressed masses against those with pretentions to more exalted status. Against a charge by W. E. B. DuBois that he was born in humble circumstances he declared, "Admitting that Marcus Garvey was born poor, he never encouraged a hatred for the people of his kind or class, but to the contrary devoted his life to the improve- ment and higher development of that class within the race which has been struggling under the disadvantage that DuBois himself portrays in his article."33 [Emphasis mine.] U.N.I.A. members in New Orleans on one occasion eloquently expressed this same attitude. "We are not members of the Negro 400 of New Orleans," they wrote, "composed of the class that are spending their time imitating the rich whites, . . .”34 On one occasion Garvey could even con- sider workers' revolts in white countries as an example for the black race to follow. In a 1926 editorial he commented, "The royal and privileged classes of idlers who used to syrannize and oppress the humble hordes of man- kind are now experiencing difficulty in holding their con- trol over the sentiment of the people.” He thought that the black man should also strike against royalty and 35 privilege. On one exceptional occasion he went so far as to versify, 320 The downtrodden poor whites and blacks should join And prevent rich whites our rights to purloin. 6 The class appeal of Garvey's propaganda was recognized by a State Department official who considered it more danger- ous than Communism. This official wrote in 1921, "Though he [Garvey] is certainly not an intellectual his particu- lar propaganda and agitation is considered dangerous in that it will find a more fertile field of class divergence than Bolshevism would be likely to find in the United States."37 Nor was the race first aspect of Garvey's philo- sophy difficult to explain in class terms, for it was based on a recognition that the overwhelming majority of the black race corresponded with the workers and the peasants everywhere. Garvey analyzed this situation in relation to his native Jamaica: Jamaica is a British Colony with a population of nearly one million peoplel of this number, more than 850,000 are black people. There are 15,000 white and the rest are offsprings of white and black - coloured people. In this population there is a social arrangement whereby all positions of influence are held by a minority class. The bulk of the black people are kept in conditions bordering on serfdom, they are made up generally of the labouring class who receive but a pittance of a wage, ranging from six- pence for women a day to 9 [pence], and for men from 1 [shilling] a day to 2 [shillings]. Because of this low scale of wages among the people crime is rife, our poor houses are filled, . . . In the midst of this distress of the black major- ity we have a prosperous minority of white, coloured and a few black persons who have been taken under the patronage of the privileged minority.38 321 This tendency to identify with the oppressed masses was evident in some of Garvey's earliest writings. His 1913 historical account of the West Indies described the participants in a nineteenth century Jamaica revolt as ”powerless in the face of the organized military forces of the ruling class . . . The Gordon party killed fifteen of the native despots and a savage plutocrat by the name of Baron von Kestelhodt. . . ."39 The reverse side of his sentiment for the masses was, of course, an intolerance of privilege that was not too different from that of the Communists. And Garvey's attack on privilege extended to appropriate persons within the race, his race first doctrine notwithstanding. In 1924, for example, speaking against the candidacy of black Harlem Republican Charles H. Roberts, he accused him of being backed by black capitalists and grafters. He went so far as to assert that "as the white folks in the labor unions, the Socialist group and the Progressive group are keeping their eyes on that selfish group of_white people who are attempting to rob and exploit, so have you to keep your eyes on those selfish Negroes who have been crushing you for the last 20 years." He clinched his argument by explaining to his audience that "You, the workingman, have nothing in common with Dr. Charles Roberts at this time."40 On this occasion Garvey's Negro Political Union actually backed a white candidate against Roberts. 322 As has already been noted, Garvey thought he dis- cerned a tendency among rich black people to be more para— sitical towards their own race than was the case for a similar class in other races. He considered rich blacks less likely to endow charitable foundations and the likefiil The U.N.I.A. would therefore have to fight not only "the white capitalist" but also "the capitalist Negro."42 Such hostility towards privilege extended quite naturally towards landowners. His election platform dur- ing his 1929 campaign for the Jamaica legislative council included suggestions for land reform. Recalling the experiences of his own uncle who had been a sharecropper and subject to the caprice of a dishonest landlord, he proposed methods to compel big landowners to make surplus land available to smallholders.43 In the light of all this it is not surprising that he objected to the titles bestowed by the U.N.I.A. being viewed as a hankering after aristocracy. U.N.I.A. titles, he observed, were not based on wealth, but on service to the race. They were distinctions conferred on worthy indi- viduals by an appreciative race.44 These class sentiments on Garvey's part were rein— forced by a long history of struggle in and on behalf of workers' organizations. Communists and others who knew him only in the American context believed that his hostil- ity towards white American labor unions was indicative of 323 a general hostility towards workers' organizations. Yet illhiS hostility to the racist practices of the American Federation of Labor, Garvey was acting no differently from practically all Afro-American leaders and indeed the Communists themselves. Where he differed from them and expressed what they considered heresy was in his advice to the black workingman in America that he should have no compunction in playing on the capitalist's greed by under- selling the white worker and thereby obtaining employment. "It seems strange and a paradox," he wrote, "but the only convenient friend the Negro worker or laborer has, in America, at the present time, is the white capitalist."45 This position, however, was strictly in relation to the peculiar situation induced in America by racist white labor unions. In other situations, Garvey had a record of struggle in working class organizations (apart, of course, from the U.N.I.A. itself) which was undoubtedly more out- standing than that of many Communist critics. In 1908 he had participated prominently in a printerSStrike in 46 Not long afterwards, during his early Latin Jamaica. American wanderings, he is said to have been arrested in Port Limon, Costa Rica, for urging workers to fight for better wages and working conditions.47 During the early Jamaican years of the U.N.I.A. (1914-1916) he attempted unsuccessfully to implement a scheme setting up unemployed 48 workers as small peasants on crown lands. He maintained 324 his interest in the Jamaican labor scene after moving to the United States. In 1920, for example, during a police strike in Kingston, he upset authorities by despatching a telegram expressing sympathy with A. Bain Alves, chairman of the Jamaica Federation of Labour who had been very active in workers' struggles that year.50 Back in the Caribbean in 1921, Garvey wrote a letter to the Jamaica Gleaner in June of that year advocating the unionization of Jamaica labor and labor sponsorship of representatives to the legislative council.51 Garvey's most sustained activity in the labor movement came during his Jamaican period of 1927-1935. His daily Blackman newspaper, launched in 1929, became an organ for the exposure of labor grievances. In May 1929, a little over a month after the launching of the Blackman he took up the case of a young banana carrier who had been kicked and cuffed on the wharf by an assistant wharfinger. He remonstrated with the other laborers on the wharf for not having thrown the culprit into the sea., When the men attempted to strike a few days later he supported them. They therefore marked to his Edelweis Park headquarters and asked him to represent them in the dispute with their employers, the United Fruit Company. Their present wage was one shilling and nine pence per hundred bunches of bananas loaded. Nor did they receive overtime for night work, Sundays or holidays. Garvey spoke to them on the 325 necessity of unionization and condemned the social struc- ture in Jamaica, as a result of which, he declared, "a large number of your peOple, my people, our race form the unemployed.” In view of the lack of an organization strong enough to sustain a strike and the easy availability of strikebreakers Garvey suggested that the laborers resume work while he negotiated on their behalf. During his negotiations with J. G. Keifer, head of the United Fruit Company in Jamaica, Garvey extended his grievances to include the ragged and half nude condition of female laborers on the wharf, whom he said, formed a favorite subject for tourist photographers. Keifer threatened labor saving machines and boasted of his abil- ity to break a strike. The Daily Gleaner, described by Garvey as "the mouthpiece of special privilege and cold blooded capital in the Island of Jamaica" encouraged the adoption of the suggested labor saving devices, causing Garvey to warn its editor to "keep his monstrous 'paws' off the situation," lest the Blackman "tell him where he ought to get off at," as it was ”always ready to tell him without any hesitation."52 The demand far a minimum wage was featured on the 1929 manifesto of Garvey's Peoples Political Party, and during his stay on the Kingston and St. Andrew Corporation Council he regularly campaigned for an eight hour day.53 Out of this and allied activity, including a delegation to 326 the governor and a petition to a visiting imperial sugar 54 emerged his Jamaica Workers and Labourers commission, Association. The association was conceptualized as a body which would pave the way for unions, rather than itself being a union. Among its executive members was at least one representative of the Jamaica Trades and Labour Union.SS Garvey's interest in Jamaica labor continued after his departure from Jamaica, and in 1938 he approved of the entry into labor politics of Alexander Bustamente, who was for the next three decades to play a central role in Jamaica's political life.56 Garvey's ubiquitous presence was felt in workers' organizations in other parts of the world. Much of this :influence, it is worthy of note, was taking place during his American period. What this means is that Garvey was simultaneously advising black workers to beware of white labor in America, and actively encouraging the unioniza- tion of black labor in areas where black workers were forming their own organizations. One such area was Trinidad, where the Trinidad Workingmen's Association was revived in 1919. Originally formed in the 1890's, the T.W.A. had lapsed into non- existence by World War I. The leading figures behind its resurgence in 1919 were also some of the most prominent Garveyites in the island. By mid-1919 news of the T.W.A.'s political struggles was appearing in the Negro World.57 327 This organization played a central role in the 1919 work— ers' upheaval which temporarily wrested control of the island from the British overlords.58 Less than a year after these violent struggles the British governor reported that quotations from Garvey's writings were being read verbatim at T.W.A. meetings.59 Deportation was some- times the lot of T.W.A. Garveyites who happened to be from elsewhere. One such case involved a T.W.A. assistant secretary, Ven Edward Seiler Salmon, who was deported to Jamaica for his role in the organization. He had also 60 The T.W.A. been a member of the African Orthodox Church. continued to play a central role in Trinidad politics up to the 1930's and its association with Garveyism endured. As late as 1937 Garvey's visit to Trinidad was facilita- ted by its leader, Capt. A. A. Cipriani.61 And at about the same time as Trinidad Garveyites were resuscitating the T.W.A., their counterparts in South Africa were playing an important role in the formation of the Industrial and Commercial Workers Union (I.C.U.), one of the largest in the history of the race.) The president and several executive members of this union were prominent Garveyites at various times through the 1920's.62 Garvey's involvement, through his subordinates, in the labor movement extended to yet other areas. In British Guiana, for example, U.N.I.A. travelling commissioners seem to have had the cooperation of pioneer labor leader 328 Hubert Critchlow's British Guiana Labour Union at U.N.I.A. 63 meetings in 1920 and 1921. Similar links between the U.N.I.A. and workers' struggles were reported from 64 65 Barbados Indeed and the United States Virgin Islands. it has been said by one active in the movement that most of the important working class leaders who emerged onto the political scene in the 1930's in the West Indies had been influenced by involvement to a lesser or greater degree in the Garvey movement.66 In Garvey, therefore, the Communists were faced with an adversary whose knowledge of the black working class, both from the standpoint of the U.N.I.A. and the standpoint of labor unions, was very extensive. And Garvey's field of operations was truly as universal as the Communists' was international. Theoretically, the bodies of thought represented by Garvey and the Communists were deceptively similar. Both were to a greater or lesser degree anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist. Both were to a point anti-clerical (Garvey, of course, being at one and the same time somewhat anti-clerical but very much pro-religious). They both sought to organize around the great mass of workers and peasants, and they both (all claims of the Communists to the contrary notwithstanding) had their fair share of petty-bourgeois leadership. Indeed Garvey, the nephew of a sharecropper, the son of a skilled stonemason, a printer's apprentice at fourteen, 329 who in his early Central American and European wanderings and his early days in the United States had known what grinding poverty was, held better claims to working class purity than many of the Communist intellectuals who glibly wrote him off as petty-bourgeois. Both bodies of thought too had, at least by 1928, come to recognize the national character of the so-called Negro Question. Between them, however, stood the vast chasm of race. Just as the Com- munists, in their formulation of the national question felt the need to hedge their attitude around with assimila- tionist requirements and thus withdraw from an acknowledge- ment of the primacy of the race factor, so Garvey, while recognising the class character of society, always viewed it within the constraints of the race factor, which in his opinion overrode and transcended class differences. So however near the two bodies of thought might sometimes appear to approach each other on the surface, the race/class question presented a fundamental point of disagreement. These similarities and differences manifested themselves in practice in an intricate relationship of hostility interspersed with tolerance between the U.N.I.A. and the Communists, as all the while the Communists tried to win over Garvey's following and the U.N.I.A. deftly avoided falling into Communists hands. Some of the earliest concrete contact between Communism and the U.N.I.A. came in the persons of early 330 U.N.I.A. members. Such was the tenor of the U.N.I.A. that overt and latent black Communists could feel comfortable within it. Thus the first editorial writer (apart from Garvey himself) of the Negro Wdrld was W. A. Domingo, a 67 Domingo was responsible for much of the socialist. Bolshevik propaganda appearing in the paper which alarmed authorities in 1919. He was, in the words of Garvey six years later, "dismissed from my employ as editor of one of my newspapers because of his dangerous communistic princi- ples."68 Another U.N.I.A. hanger-on in this category was Cyril Briggs, who through his African Blood Brotherhood provided the American Communists with some of their first black cadres. The career of Otto Hall, an A.B.B. member, is instructive. A veteran of World War I, he sympathised with the militant Industrial Workers of the World, joined the U.N"I.A. in Chicago not long after the end of the war and became a member of the Universal African Legions. From there he went into the A.B.B. and later followed Briggs into the Communist party.69 In the 1930's during the scramble for Garvey's followers in the United States the Communists picked up a few more ex-Garveyites, though hardly enough to repay their efforts.70 Communist attempts at capturing the U.N.I.A. com- menced practically from the inception of the Communist movement in the United States. The program of the United Communist Party in 1920 urged black Communists to enter 331 black unions, lodges, clubs, and churches "to expose the reactionary leaders, who, for the purpose of betraying their race, infest these institutions.” Communists were urged, on the other hand, to support all radical black organizations.71 The U.N.I.A. was not specifically mentioned here but could not fail to have been considered under one of the two headings. In subsequent years similar pronouncements encouraged infiltration into black organizations. The fourth congress of the Communist International in Moscow in 1922, for example, urged sup- port for ”every form of Negro Movement which tends to undermine capitalism and Imperialism or to impede their "72 In similar vein the Executive Commit- further progress. tee of the Communist International in 1928 laid down the line of "united front tactics for specific demands" in dealing with "existing Negro petty bourgeois organiza- tions." The purpose of such tactics, it was clearly stated, should be to mobilize the black masses under Communist leadership and expose and undermine their "treacherous petty bourgeois leadership.”3 Nor were they reluctant to consider utilizing bits and pieces of Garvey's program and tactics. In 1921 an article on "The Party and the Negro Struggle” suggested, "The Negro has a great love of display, show, pomp, osten- tation, brass bands, mysticism, decorations, buttons, social frivolities and military display. (In this regard 332 it is only fair to any that he is not alone.) These con- traptions catch his imagination and act as an inducement for organization as nothing else can at the present time."'-"4 This article suggested that such Afro-American aspirations as a free Africa, race equality and the like should not be opposed but directed into "effective channels." At the fifth Comintern congress in 1924, Israel Amter, an American delegate, even suggested linking Africa and Afro-America by sending pamphlets for distribution by Africa bound sailors.75 One of the earliest attempts at infiltration of the U.N.I.A. came through the use of Cyril Brigg's African Blood Brotherhood. Though this attempt failed, Briggs and the Brotherhood were to continue to be a source of harass- ment for the U.N.I.A. up to Garvey's death. The A.B.B. was organized in New York in 1919 by Briggs, who became its "paramount chief." Briggs, an immigrant from Nevis in the West Indies, had previously been an editor of the Ngg. York Amsterdam News before having been fired for the mili- tant nationalism expressed in his editorials. During his sojourn at the Amsterdam News he had toyed with various nationalistic solutions to the race problem, such as a separate state for Afro-Americans in the West, or in Africa, South America or the West Indies. His Crusader magazine, established in 1919 after his expulsion from the Amsterdam News, originally proclaimed itself the pub- licity organ of the Hamitic League of the World. The 333P34 A.B.B. was organized around this magazine, and though never a large organization (3,000 at its height), it established branches in such places as Trinidad, British Guiana and Santo Domingo, in addition to several locations in the United States. In 1921, Briggs also claimed the affiliation of 153 organizations, such as churches, in the United States, the West Indies, Africa, and elsewhere. The organization saw itself in the beginning as radical, though not Communist.76 Perhaps in early 1921, if not before, Briggs was approached by American Communists who thereby succeeded in obtaining a handful of recruits from the A.B.B. These A.B.B. recruits were some of the earliest black Communists in the United States and continued for long to be among the most prominent. They included, apart from Briggs him- self, Richard B. Moore, Otto Hall, Lovett Fort-Whiteman and Harry Haywood. Another outstanding Harlem socialist within the A.B.B. was ex-Negro World editor W. A. Domingo. Domingo did not enter the Communist party. Otto Huiswoud, another outstanding black Communist figure of the 1920's and beyond, joined the A.B.B. from the party.77 The A.B.B. cadre proved a boon to the American Communists at a time when the powers that be in Moscow were wondering at the absence of black representation in the American movement. By 1922 we find the Harlem West Side Branch of the Workers Party being run by A.B.B. 335 members: Huiswoud, organizer; Briggs, recording and finan- cial secretary; and persons described as comrades Moore, Campbell and McKay, members of the propaganda and educa- tional committee.78 By November 28, 1922, Huiswoud, masquerading as Comrade Billings, was praising the A.B.B. at a session of the Commission on the Negro Question at the fourth Comintern congress in Moscow. He distinguished the A.B.B. from Garveyism, to the detriment of the latter.79 Back in the United States, the Communist Worker saw in the A.B.B. a great help in building a united front of black and white workers.80 The first important task for the A.B.B. in building this desired united front was to infiltrate the U.N.I.A. This they attempted to do during Garvey's 1921 International Convention. Before the convention, possibly for tactical reasons, Briggs had taken a position moderately favorable towards Garvey.81 With the convention in progress Briggs on August 15 despatched a letter to Garvey. Assuming for the occasion an attitude of due deference, he addressed Garvey as ”His Excellency, the Provisional President of Africa.” Briggs Offered Garvey a proposition--that Garvey (with his international mass movement, perhaps millions strong) should enter into a program of joint action with the A.B.B. (an obscure organization of a thousand or two) for African liberation. "But think of what we might be able to do for the race," he cajoled, "through conscious 336 co-operation were we to adopt a program which would jointly represent us, without any serious compromise on either 82 Briggs side of important tactical points or principles." then took the opportunity provided by Garvey's assembled hosts to do a little recruiting for himself and passed around copies of the A.B.B. program. The next ploy in Briggs' attempt to impose a Communist united front on Garvey was to have his white Communist friend Rose Pastor Stokes address the convention. She treated the convention to an wexplantation of Russia's treatment of minorities and asked for an endorsement of Communism. The final stroke in Briggs' strategy was to have A.B.B. delegates introduce a motion for such an endorsement. The motion was debated and tabled, and followed by adoption of a resolution expelling the A.B.B.83 It is difficult to imagine how Briggs could seriously have expected Garvey to compromise his massive power base for the sake of COOperation with the A.B.B. Such a blunt and in many ways insulting power play could only have been due to political ineptitude on Briggs' part, or a great disdain for Garvey's great knowledge Of political infighting. George Padmore must have been thinking of blunders such as this when he wrote many years later that the Communists erred fundamentally in attacking Garvey prematurely and in so obvious a 84 fashion. In any event, Garvey used the Bolshevism of the 337 A.B.B. to justify his case against them, even though he praised Lenin and Trotsky during the same convention in a speech which urged his hearers to do for Africa what Lenin and Trotsky had done for Russia in overthrowing Czarist despotism.85 This distinction between Lenin and Trotsky, whom he usually endorsed, and American Communists, whom he avoided, represented Garvey's normal position. Some time later, for example, he said, ”I am against the brand of Communism that is taught in America. . . . In America it constitutes a group of liars, plotters and artful deceivers who twist--a one third truth to a whole big lie, and give it out to the unthinking clientele for consumption. Communism among Negroes in 1920-1921 was represented in New York by such Negroes as Cyril Briggs and W. A. Domingo, and my contact with, and experience of them, and their methods are enough to keep me shy of that kind of communism for the balance of my natural life."86 Briggs, for his part, after his defeat at the 1921 convention, consoled himself by arguing that his expulsion had been engineered by Garvey to prevent the A.B.B. pro- gram from being officially represented to the delegates, whom, he said, were favorably disposed towards it.87 This turn of events meant that if even the Commun- ist desire for an A.B.B.-engineered united front with the U.N.I.A. had failed, the Communists were assured of the next best thing, the cooperation of what were now some of 338 Garvey's most vitriolic enemies. The Briggs-Garvey feud descended to its most acrimonious less than two months after the abortive A.B.B. coup when the Negro World carried an advertisement entitled "WHITE MAN NEGRO FOR CONVENIENCE." It read, "A White Man in New York by the name of CYRIL BRIGGS has started the 'AFRICAN BLOOD BROTHERHOOD' to catch Negroes, no doubt. To make it succeed he claims to be a Negro, and continuously attackes the Universal Negro Improve- ment Association and its founder, Marcus Garvey. Negroes, 88 For this take notice and govern yourselves accordingly." indiscretion Briggs (who was indeed light of hue) had Garvey arrested and tried for criminal libel, and Garvey reacted by showing Briggs' letter of cooperation to the judge.89 Briggs remained unmollified by a favorable deci- sion, for the next month's Crusader was a veritable Garvey special. At least ten of the sixteen editorials dealt with Garvey, as did several other articles. Readers were informed that Garvey had left his wife, that his father had died in a poor house (a point which wasalso utilized by DuBois and the British government in anti-Garvey campaigns), that a Briggs letter to the Bureau of Naviga- tion had met with a response suggesting that there was no record of two ships claimed by the Black Star Line, and more. He also quoted a Garvey statement acknowledging favorable comment on the U.N.I.A. from some European social- ist publications to show that Garvey might have changed his 339 mind since repudiating the A.B.B. position on linking up with white workers for the liberation of Africa. One edi- torial even claimed that Garvey had raped a "little white 90 girl in a friend's office" in England. For this last indiscretion Briggs was in his turn arrested on a criminal libel charge brought by Garvey.91 In 1923 Garvey accused the A.B.B. of being impli- cated in the police raid on the New Orleans U.N.I.A.92 Yet in 1924 Briggs acted as an agent for Garvey's Black Cross Navigation and Trading Company in helping it procure a ship.93 Garvey later attacked one of his own subordinates, William L. Sherrill, for having been responsible for this.94 In 1924, too, Briggs was responsible for the theft from a safe in a U.N.I.A. office of confidential papers relating to the U.N.I.A. negotiations with Liberia. They were in turn stolen from him as he was about to publish them.95 Briggs' relationship with Garvey took another strange twist when in 1926 Briggs wrote a letter to the Negro World. This letter stated that Briggs was no friend of Garvey and had attacked him often. Nevertheless, he still had a letter from Garvey thanking him for supporting the First International Convention. He also indicated that he and A.B.B. members W. A. Domingo and Richard B. Moore had attacked the "Marcus Garvey Must Go" campaign of Chandler Owen and his associates. Briggs even expressed sympathy for Garvey, now that he had seen, he said, the 340 incompetent help Garvey had in the management of his most recent steamship line. The main point of the letter seemed to be contained in Briggs' assertion that "To me it is evident that the U.N.I.A. will soon be on the rocks unless some drastic change of control andgpolicy can be effected quickly. And I believe it would be a great dis- aster to the race to have the U.N.I.A. disintegrate."96 [Emphasis mine.] This letter was published just two weeks after Garvey's attack on Sherrill for employing Briggs had appeared. It may have represented a genuine attempt at rapprochement on the part of Briggs but more plausibly must be seen as part of the Communist tactic of alternating hostility and (usually transparent) overtures of friend- ship. Garvey at this time was of course in jail, and the italicized portion of the quotation above indicates that Briggs was making yet another play for U.N.I.A. co-option by Communist leadership. Briggs' interest in the U.N.I.A. followed Garvey to Jamaica. In 1930 we find Garvey showing that Briggs' lat- est allegations concerning a Blackman editorial were based on alleged facts supposedly in the editorial, but in fact invented by Briggs.97 Early in 1931 we find Briggs issu- ing what was by now a familiar call to Garveyites to join the Communist League of Struggle for Negro Rights.98 Later that year Briggs kept up his attempt to win over United States Garveyites with a lengthy analysis of 341 the Garvey movement. Garvey was pictured as the usual Communist petty-bourgeois bogey man who diverted revo- lutionary black nationalist sentiment into "utOpian, reactionary, 'Back to Africa' channels.” The leadership of the U.N.I.A., he wrote, "consisted of the poorest stratum of the Negro intellectuals--declassed elements, struggling business men and preachers, lawyers without a brief, etc.--who stood more or less close to the Negro masses and felt sharply the effects of the crisis.” The undeniable mass following built up by Garvey was contrasted with "the small advanced industrial proletariat, who were experienced in the class struggle," (presumably the A.B.B.) for whom the U.N.I.A. had little appeal. Briggs also put forward here what has become something of a standard Com- munist argument, namely that Garvey had been progressive and willing to struggle in the United States in the begin- ning, but that after his exclusion from the United States in 1921 he had taken fright and become party to an abject capitulation to the imperialists. In concluding he recog- nized "certain progressive achievements" of the U.N.I.A., one being the fact that it "undoubtedly helped to crystal- ize the national aspirations of the Negro masses."99 Shortly afterwards the Negro World poked some fun at the Communists' new found position on the national ques- tion by suggesting that, in adopting this position, Briggs was in fact preaching "unadulterated Garveyism." Briggs 342 hotly denied this, claiming, among other things, that "un- conditional equality of the Negro people" was alien to 100 Garveyism. Similar exchanges between Briggs and the Negro World were repeated later.101 Briggs repeated many of his former charges against 102 Garvey in an article published in 1932. Garvey replied immediately from the pages of his New Jamaican, which edi- torialized, "As usual, we have been made the object of ridicule by the official organ 'The Negro Worker' of the International Trade Union Committee of Negro Workers. In their August issue they have published an article, below the name of one Cyril Briggs under the caption, 'How Garvey Betrayed the Negroes.'" The editorial continued, ”Briggs has been a stubborn opponent of our rational method of the solution of the Negro problem in America. He and others have always tried to rope us in with communism."103 Briggs' antagonism remained unbridled in the face of Garvey's death. A premature obituary under the caption "Marcus Garvey Dies in London" put out by Briggs' Crusader News Agency announced, in typically distorted vein, that "during his stay in Jamaica, he made peace with the British imperial— ists and joined white employers in their attacks on Jamaican unions."104 This obituary was based on wrong in- formation concerning Garvey's death. Garvey in fact died thelfollowing,month. The pattern of hostility interspersed with apparently 343 friendly gestures exhibited by the A.B.B. in its relation- ship with Garvey was typical of Communists generally, and particularly those in the United States. He was frequently described as a "charlatan."105 But perhaps the most frequent term of abuse used to describe Garvey was the term ”Zionist." Most Communist critics alleged that Garvey advocated abandoning the struggle in America in return for a pipe dream in Africa. Claude McKay had described Garvey as Zionist in an interview published in the Russian 106 Izvestia in 1922. Trotskyist C. L. R. James in the 1930's considered Garvey's program "essentially Back to h.”107 Africa" and therefore "pitiable rubbis A host of 108 The most con- others said basically the same thing. vincing argument against this "Negro Zionism" charge came, strange to say, from the pen of another Communist, Robert Minor. Minor, covering Garvey's 1924 International Conven- tion for the Communist Daily_Worker, reported a speech in which assistant president-general William Sherrill had advocated autonomy for the black man in Africa. At this point, said Minor, a reporter for "a Hebrew Zionist news- paper" whispered across the press table, "This is Negro Zionism.” Minor considered this, "despite all the superfi- cial resemblance, the wildest folly." He considered the two different for several reasons, 1. The Great Powers and the League of Nations can cheerfully give a few thousand Jews a chance to settle in Palestine. 344 2. The great imperialist governments of the world can smile happily over Jewish nationalist propaganda which takes Jewish workers' minds away from proletarian revolution. But: 1. The Great Powers, Britain, France, Belgium-- and now the United States-~cannot smile over any suggestions of surrendering Rhodesia and the Rand, the Kamerun, the Congo and the Nile and Morocco and Tunis and Algeria--to any movement for independent Negro nationalism, no matter how fantastic Garvey's red and green robes may be, nor how unseaworthy his ships. 2. The Great Powers cannot tolerate for one instant the propaganda for Negro independent national- ism in any quarter of Africa--not even in the Negro states of Abyssinia and Liberia, especially not in the 'fanatical' form in which alone this movement is found. 3. No, the Negro nationalist movement is more readily to be compared to the Turkish nationalism of recent years, than to Jewish Zionism.109 Another staple in Communist anti-Garvey fare was his summit conference with the Ku Klux Klan. In answer to the Communist insistence that he unequivocably denounce the Klan Garvey replied by stating that pogroms perpetrated by white workers in the north killed more black people than the alleged atrocities of the Klan in the south. Garvey was attacked on many other points. These attacks were typically characterized by lies and distortions and often reduced Garvey to some kind of a tool of imperialism. A 1921 article in The Communigr_was typical. It claimed that "the kings of finance hold Mr. Garvey in great esteem far the work he has done in keeping the Negro's mind off the real problems before him and busying him with such tomfool- 110 Communist ery as knighthoods and court receptions." attacks were also often opportunistic to the point where they could accuse Garvey of lack of racial solidarity in 345 not supporting black Communist candidates at election time.111 Praise from Communist circles, though often part of a cheap manoeuvre to lull Garvey into complacency, was nevertheless sometimes based on an appreciation of the anti-imperialist implications of Garvey's ideas and career. This was possibly the reason for a statement issued in 1925 by the praesidium of the International Peasants Council (Krestintern) in Moscow expressing solidarity with Garvey after his imprisonment in the United States. The statement read in part, "The capitalists realized that the movement led by Garvey, the movement for Negro independence, even under the modest slogan of 'Back-to-Africa' contained the embryo of the future revolutionary movement which, in alli- ance with the workers and the peasants, is to threaten the reign of capital." Garvey's trial was described as "an orgy of revengeful capitalism."112 One of the most interesting attempts at an objective, and on occasion even favorable Communist analysis of the Garvey movement came in Robert Minor's coverage of Garvey's 1924 convention for the Daily Worker. The convention was the occasion for a major Communist attempt to smother Garvey with overtures of friendship, and Minor's articles must be seen in this light. Prior to 1924 the Daiinorker and its predecessors (The Worker, The Toiler and The Ohio Socialist) were largely devoid of any references to the 346 race question. From the beginning of 1924, however, a pro- gram of extensive coverage of race affairs was launched. This coverage was orchestrated to provide a supportive rOle for an equally intense Workers Party effort of that year to "bore from within" the major black organizations. ' The year began with a series of articles on the race question by Lovett Fort-Whiteman, Communist and African Blood Brotherhood member. In February the paper announced that the African Blood Brotherhood and the Workers Party would be attending the imminent Sanhedrin in Chicago. The Sanhedrin, organized by Kelly Miller, was a black convention in which over fifty race groups partici- pated. The opening of the conference was greeted on February 11 by a laudatory article by Fort-Whiteman who announced that the A.B.B.'s two delegates would work closely with the Workers Party's five (of whom Fort-Whiteman was one) since both organizations were "wholly class . l conSCious."l 3 It was pointedly noted that the U.N.I.A. would be a conspicuous absentee from the conference, no doubt because the Sanhedrin was "concerned primarily for winning rights for Negroes where they live" while the U.N.I.A. was purportedly concerned primarily with a return to Africa.114 One week later, after having apparently emerged somewhat less than victorious from several clashes with the Sanhedrin's organizers during the convention, the Daily Worker expressed utter disenchantment with Kelly 347 Miller and the "capitalist Negroes" who helped run the affair. So great was their disenchantment that they now grudgingly agreed with Garvey's decision to remain aloof from the convention. The paper lamented, "the hope of the oppressed Negro workers does not lie in the present set of Negro leaders. Marcus Garvey says they are too old. The 115 Nevertheless the workers say they are too bourgeois." real intention of the Communists here, and later at the U.N.I.A. convention, was revealed about four months later at the fifth Comintern congress in Moscow, where an American delegate boasted that deSpite the domination of this assembly by ecclesiastical and petty-bourgeois types, the Communists "were successful in the last two days of 116 The next dress the congress in provoking a split." rehearsal for the U.N.I.A. convention came in July when Minor, a staff writer and cartoonist for the paper, covered the N.A.A.C.P. conference in Philadelphia.117 Then on July 28 the paper noted the forthcoming pre-convention meeting of the Chicago U.N.I.A. This item was unusually free of anti-U.N.I.A. rhetoric. The pre-convention overtures to Garvey continued on July 29 with a remarkable reversal of the traditional Com- munist distortion of Garvey's program. For a front page article noted that "Altho [gig] the ultimate program of the Garvey organization calls for the establishment of a Negro Nation in Africa, with the gradual migration of the Negroes 348 to that country, the convention realizes the necessity of dealing with American conditions until their final ideals are realized." The same issue stated, in very explicit language, the respect which Garvey's powerful position compelled, even of his opponents. ”Garvey," it declared, ”altho [gig] his organization declares for an independent Negro nation, has succeeded in banding almost half a million Negroes together in the largest mass movement the American Negroes have ever had. The Universal Negro Im- provement Association must therefore be reckoned with as a force in the problems which confront the Negro as a part of American society."118 An editorial of July 29, though reverting to the normal phraseology of the ”Utopianism that characterizes the fantastic projects of reclaiming Africa as the home of the Negro race,” nevertheless rele- gated this to the status of a ”surface phenomenon" of Garveyism. "The real social content of the movement," it asserted, "is the awakening of millions of exploited work- ers to the fact of their exploitation, of their subjection, social and economic, by sinister forces that rule society.” The editorial, while upholding the primacy and ultimate triumph of class struggle for black workers, nevertheless went so far as to recognize as "inevitable" the "racial tendency, rather than a class one" induced by the peculiar 119 oppression of Afro-Americans. The pre-convention build-up continued with cautious 349 approval on July 30 for a Garvey speech denouncing United States imperialism in Brazil and Haiti. Yet another edi- torial in this issue considered Garvey's African program "a curious mixture of error and sound insight," a partial about turn from the editorial of only one day previously. On July 31, in the last article of the massive pre- convention build-up, a mass meeting of the Chicago U.N.I.A. was reported. Two thousand persons had assembled at a farewell meeting for the Chicago delegates to the 1924 International Convention of Negro Peoples of the WOrld. J. J. Peters, president of Chicago division no. 23, was quoted as saying, "My Communist white friends who are sitting on my left disagree with the nationalism of our association." He continued, "I have argued this point with them for several years, frequently coming to theoretical swordpoints with them; but still we are the best of friends." The first reports from Garvey's August convention were from a special correspondent but on August 5 the Daily_Worker announced that its own Robert Minor had left for New York to cover the rest of the proceedings. Minor's articles were clearly to spearhead the Workers Party effort to influence Garvey's convention, for readers were asked to circulate Minor's forthcoming convention articles among black workers, as well as the issue of August 5, which contained the Workers Party salutation ”To the Fourth International Convention of the Universal Negro Improvement 350 Association Meeting at Liberty Hall, New York, August, 1924.” "Its value depends on wide distribution," readers were urged, "Do your Communist duty." By this time the attention given by the Qgiiy_ Worker (and hence, of course, the Workers Party) to Garvey's convention had already far exceeded that given to Kelly Miller's Sanhedrin and the N.A.A.C.P. Philadelphia confer- ence. The front page preamble to the official salutation read, "Realizing that the only hope of emancipation for Colored and White workers is universal solidarity of labor, the Workers Party sends its ardent greetings to the repre- sentatives of the oppressed Negro Race who are gathered together in Liberty Hall, New York, under the banner of the Universal Negro Improvement Association." The statement itself was signed on behalf of the Workers Party of America by William Z. Foster, National Chairman, and C. E. Ruthenberg, National Executive Secre- tary. It was a lengthy one and deserving of close scrutiny. It began by expressing the hope that "this historic con- vention" might be "fruitful for the liberation of your Race." The U.N.I.A. was reminded that capitalist profit is the basis of all colonial and domestic oppression. The times were characterized as troubled ones for imperialism. The fall of the old regime in Russia was seen as symptomatic of this. Garveyites were informed that these struggles would spread to the colonies and that Africa's opportunity was 351 approaching. Thus far the statement revealed a common characteristic of Garvey's enemies and rivals, namely a stubborn reluctance to acknowledge (or a lack of knowledge of) the reality of Garvey's accomplishments. Whereas in 1919, two years before the founding of the Workers Party, Garveyites had been in the vanguard of major anti-colonial struggles in such places as British Honduras, Trinidad and South Africa, here was the party in 1924 informing Garvey that such ferment was imminent. Similarly, Garvey hardly needed the Workers Party to tell him that Africa's oppor- tunity was approaching at a time when he had already expended many years and much money and energy trying to seize that opportunity. The statement then advised Garvey to struggle against the imperialists in Africa without sacrificing rights in the United States and agreed with a convention prOposal for independent educational material for black people. Garvey's Negro Political Union, the agency which would coordinate the U.N.I.A. excursion into domestic politics, was enthusiastically supported, as was his third world solidarity, which also antedated the formation of the Workers Party. "Your militant solidarity with the oppressed colonial peoples internationally is an honor to your organization,” the statement read. Also receiving Workers Party commendation was the class composition of the U.N.I.A., and its advocacy to black peOple of not fighting 352 in future imperialistic wars. The convention's intention to petition presidents, kings and the like of imperialist countries was dismissed as a waste of time, as was the in- tention to petition the League of Nations. Garvey was advised that the Communist International was a much more worthwhile body to appeal to than the League. At the Communist International the U.N.I.A. would be "honored guests." Furthermore Communists were the enemies of Garvey's enemies, and therefore should be his friends. Communist parties, like the U.N.I.A., were in all countries organized against the ruling classes and against colonial- ism. And there was the example of Russia, which had freed its subject nationalities. The statement continued its systematic evaluation of Garvey's past performance and the convention program. Thus the convention intention to discuss a solution to the southern race problem "to the satisfaction of all concerned" was disapproved on the ground that all concerned could not be pleased. (Garvey, of course, would seeseparation of the races as such a mutually acceptable solution). On Garvey's denunciation of discrimination in American labor unions the statement was especially enthusiastic. On this point Garvey was issued an invitation to joint struggle-- "We should especially like to co-ordinate our efforts with yours in a drive to open the doors of all labor unions (or such of them as now discriminate) to the full and equal 353 admission of Negro workers. It was acknowledged that this would require the re-education of white workers. Finally, Garvey's quotations denouncing preachers and missionaries as capitalist agents was used to hope that the convention would move away from religion to 'modern, scientific thot' [gig]-"120 At the convention itself Minor interviewed Garvey, gave vivid descriptions of the pomp and ceremony, the "music of exceptionally fine quality," blamed the Republi- can party for having Garvey arrested during the convention and puzzled over what struck him as paradoxes inherent in Garvey's anti-clerical stance versus his religiousness, his anti-imperialism versus his attitude to the Ku Klux Klan.121 This August offensive, for all its obvious prepara- tion and its large scale, was not without its stupid blund- ers of the magnitude of the A.B.B.'s 1921 offensive. For one thing, the favorable tenor of Minor's articles from New York were from time to time offset by editorials from the Chicago headquarters which were hostile enough to make any intelligent reader wonder at the sincerity of the new- found friendliness towards the U.N.I.A. On August 9, for example, in the same issue bearing an effusive story of a black woman peering over the shoulder of a Daily Worker reader in a streetcar and being won over to the paper's readership, there appeared an article captioned "Daily Worker Seeks to Win Marcus Garvey's Followers to the 354 Communist Program." The item consisted of a letter from one Israel Zimmerman expressing shock at the paper's friendly attitude towards Garvey a mere two years after Comrades Briggs, Owen and Randolph had campaigned against him. He demanded an explanation. The paper explained, We have not changed our fundamental attitude towards Marcus Garvey. We are today as much opposed to his schemes for a Negro promised land in Africa as we ever were. We not only do not endorse but totally repudiate all schemes like Garvey's 'Black Star Line' as means of liberating the oppressed and exploited Negro masses. The only reason for its new spirit of cooperation with the U.N.I.A., the paper explained, was to win over Garvey's followers to a "virile, class conscious" (i.e., Workers Party) leadership. Thus were the blunders of the 1921 A.B.B. offensive repeated. Once more the Communists had sought to win his friendship, steal his followers and insult his intelligence, all at the same time. It is difficult to conceive of how the Workers Party expected to achieve its goals after this article, but the attempt continued. Minor, obviously impressed by the spectacle and the indication of power that was a U.N.I.A. convention, was moved to great feats of lyrical expression. He wrote, I heard Garvey speak last night. He is one of the most powerful personalities that I have ever seen on the platform. He is one of the rare types that history finds rising in every unsettled period to express new currents among the masses of men. For weal or woe, Garvey is of the stuff that leaders (or very powerful 355 misleaders) are made of. Not the kind of leaders who rise in times of quiet and fit their environment as a fashion model fits the gowns of the day, but the kind of leaders who rise in times of storm and stress, who do not fit their environment, who look and feel and act out of place in the order of the day--who are called uncouth, who are jeered as misfits, and yet who may form the heads of the battering rams which smash down the walls of their environment. I cannot vouch for the integrity of Marcus Garvey. But I know that the worst set of scoundrels that I know on earth hate Garvey.122 The Workers Party, perhaps desiring to create a split in the U.N.I.A. convention, as they had boasted of doing at the Sanhedrin, moved after two weeks to the tactic of direct intervention in the Liberty Hall deliberations. The Daily Worker on August 14 carried a new official state- ment to the U.N.I.A. convention from the Workers Party. This statement was again signed by Foster and Ruthenberg. For this attack the Communists utilized the convention resolution on the Ku Klux Klan which considered the Klan attitude to black people "fairly representative" of white feelings generally, and which pointed out that alleged Klan atrocities were not very significant when compared with pogroms perpetrated by white workers in the north. The statement sought to establish the Communists' credentials, as it were, by quoting from a resolution from the fourth Comintern congress in Moscow in 1922 praising struggles of black workers. Garvey was also assured that the Communists "are engaged no less than you in the struggle against the imperialism which is enslaving Africa." They therefore 356 regretted the convention's Klan resolution, which they construed as a refusal to fight for equality in the United States. This Workers Party communication was duly debated by the convention, and provided a good example of Garvey's handling of the American Communist challenge. Garvey opened the discussion by reminding the delegates that the U.N.I.A. was a very liberal organization. At a previous convention, he said, they had allowed Communist Rose Pastor Stokes to try to indoctrinate the organization and now they were going to give the Workers Party a hearing. To a motion asking that the Workers Party statement be tabled, Garvey objected, saying that it was an important question and should be answered in the same spirit of friendliness as proffered. If the Communists were so desirous of fight- ing the Klan, Garvey argued, let them take their proposal to the Jew and the Catholic, both of whom were in a much stronger economic position than the black man, and not dependent on Klan types for employment. "I think it is all right to let the white groups fight among themselves," he said. ”The more rogues fall out, the more the other people can get their dues. And therefore I would advise the Workers Party to send their communication to the Jews and Catholics, and advise them to fight On, and fight on, 123 and fight on." Workers Party delegates, who attended the convention and participated in its deliberations, were 357 not present, for some unexplained reason, at this session.124 As the convention wore on Minor considered that Garvey might destroy himself on the Klan question but that the organization would continue with other leaders.125 And towards the end of the month an editorial took the white press to task for giving much coverage to the small meeting of the National Negro Business League while ignor- ing Garvey's massive convention. In the same editorial the large scale Communist effort during Garvey's conven- tion was acknowledged and explained thus: In the sessions of the Universal Negro Improvement Association there are even more working class ele- ments represented than there were in the Sanhedrin and an even stronger attempt was made by the Communists to unify the struggles of the exploited workers regardless of their color. As has already been hinted, Garvey's attitude towards Communism was complex. Though resisting the crude advances of the A.B.B. and the Workers Party, his writings and speeches are nevertheless often interspersed with non- hostile and even favorable references to Communism. His publications also frequently carried news of an anti- imperialist nature from Communist sources. Even sources actively hostile to Garvey, such as Cyril Briggs' Crusader News Service and the Negro Worker, published by the Inter- national Trade Union Committee of Negro Workers, were utilized for news items. Negro World columnists also occa- sionally wrote favorably on Communism. Garvey also seems _ 358 to have tolerated W. A. Domingo's extremely pro—Bolshevik Negro World editorials for some months in 1919 before he 127 fired him. Garvey himself was in the latter 1920's a member of the Comité de Défense de la Race Negre, a Paris- based Pan-African organization associated with the French Communist Party and the Comintern.128 Garvey's ambiguities concerning Communism may be partially explained by the fact that he normally dis- tinguished between Communism in Russia, especially under Lenin, and its counterpart in America. On the occasiors when he denounced Communism his denunciations were fre- quently qualified by some such expression as "practised in America."129 On the other hand Garvey was deeply impressed by the Russian Revolution, and particularly by Lenin and Trotsky. He was quoted as suggesting a pact with Lenin and Trotsky to take Africa, during a Liberty Hall speech of 130 August, 1920. The New York Age took fright at this and came up with the curious analogy that since Bolshevism was the dictatorship of the proletariat (a tiny minority) Garvey might just as well ally himself with the planters of Arkansas and Mississippi (also a tiny minority).131 In 1922 we find him referring to the experiment in "social democracy" in Russia as one that would probably prove "a boon and a blessing to mankind."132 But Garvey's most extensive appreciation of the revolutionary experiments in Russia came in 1924, just seven months before the Workers 359 Party offensive of that year. The proximity of these two events highlights Garvey's different attitudes to the two Communisms. The occasion for Garvey's remarks on Lenin and Russia was Lenin's death in January, 1924. Garvey's first re5ponse was a telegram to the All Soviet Congress which said in part, "To us Lenin was one of the world's greatest benefactors. Long life to the Soviet Government 133 of Russia." This was following by a lengthy speech at Liberty Hall entitled, "The Passing of Russia's Great Man." In this speech, a remarkable tribute to Lenin and Russian Communism, Garvey called Lenin "probably the great- est man in the world between 1917 and the hour of 1924 when he breathed his last.” He expressed the view also that the whole world was destined ultimately to assume Russia's form of government. He presumed that the U.N.I.A.‘s message of condolence would be treated with respect, even though "unfortunately, we have not yet sent an ambassador to Russia.” He explained that Lenin represented the class that comprised the majority of mankind. He continued, Therefore Lenin stands out greater than all because he was the representative of a larger number of people. Not only the peasantry of Russia mourn for Lenin at this hour, but the peasantry of all of Europe, the peasantry of the whole world mourn for Lenin, because he was their leader. And we also, as Negroes, mourn for Lenin. Not one but the four hundred millions of us should mourn over the death of this great man, because Russia promised great hOpe not only to Negroes but to the weaker peoples of the world. Russia through her social democratic system promised a revolution to the world that would truly and indeed emancipate the souls of men everywhere. Negroes have not yet gotten 360 to realise the effect of certain world changes. We of the Universal Negro Improvement Association who lead have studied carefully and keenly the activi- ties of Lenin and Trotsky. We have never before committed ourselves to any public Opinion as touch- ing the system of government now existing in Russia because we did not believe it wise. The social demo- cratic soviet government of Russia is not yet recog- nised by all the other governments of the world. Only a few recognised governments have recognised Russia. The governments of the capitalist class, the governments of the privileged class have refused to recognise Russia as a government. They are still seeking and hoping that another revolution will be enacted in Russia that will take the power and con- trol of government out of the hands of the peasantry and pass it back into the hands of the privileged class. At that hour all the other governments not yet recognising Russia will recognise her government. But we of the Universal Negro Improvement Association, as I said, had our own opinion and our own idea in the matter of the new government of Russia. And it is without any hesitancy, without any reserve, we could not but favor the existence of a social demo- cratic government in Russia or in any other part of the world, because we are of the class that rules in Russia and naturally our sympathy should be with the people who feel with us, who suffer with us.134 The same issue of the Negro WOrld in which this speech appeared contained two other editorials on Lenin. One, by Amy Jacques Garvey, echoed her husband's sentiments.135 The other, by T. Thomas Fortune, the paper's editor, was entitled "The Passing of the Red Terrorist." The title of the latter was indicative of the contents. Fortune obvi- ously did not share Garvey's views on this subject.136 Several articles similar to the 1924 speech were written by Garvey after this, and others were written by editors of his publications, particularly in Jamaica. It was partly for sentiments such as these that 361 EurOpean, North American and Latin American governments often considered Garvey Communist. The fact that this was a period when radicalism was often equated with Bolshevism in official minds doubtless exaggerated this tendency. And Garvey of course was not loathe to proclaim himself a radical--"They talk about Garvey being radical," he said on one occasion. "How can a Negro be conservative? What has he to conserve? What have you but pain, suffering and hardship? It is time for the Negro to be radical and 137 Thus he could be let the world know what he wants.” variously described by the British authorities as backed by the Industrial Workers of the World, by a provincial governor of Costa Rica as Bolshevik, by J. Edgar Hoover as pro-Bolshevik, by the Belgian imperialists as having Bolshevik connections, and by one United States official in September 1921 as being president of "the communist party which is affiliated with the Russian Soviet Government."138 By 1932, however, the British Home Office had finally dis- covered that "available information goes to show that Marcus Garvey's organization is regarded by Moscow as 'bourgeois."'139 Garvey's admiration for Lenin and his Communistic experiments did not extend, as has been seen, to any love for American Communism. This was first because he con— sidered the "American Federation of white workers or laborers," as just as racist as any other section of white 362 society. He was sure that in the American context white racial self-interest would override class solidarity to 140 the continued detriment of black workers. And white chauvinism within the American Communist movement was indeed well-documented, largely due to the complaints of black Communists themselves. Claude McKay had charged white American Communists with racism at the fourth 141 Comintern congress in Moscow in 1922. Similar charges 142 were made during the sixth congress in 1928, and were acknowledged by the highest Comintern circles, in the per— son of Nikolai Bukharin who warned his comrades "to adhere in the given sphere to a correct line [of conduct] merci- lessly combatting the slightest manifestation of 'racial 143 chauvinism.'” Garvey remained convinced however, that in a place like America, "the reign of executive communism would be no improvement on the reign of executive democracy."144 Garvey's hostility to American Communism was also conditioned by his stubborn refusal to have his organization co-opted by anybody, whether to the right or left. Writing in 1932, Garvey recalled the repeated Communist attempts to seize his organization. He said, Communists have been our bitter foes for the last ten years. They have done us a great deal of harm in the United States. They made attempts several times to operate an organization of four million coloured people, of which we were head, and when we stopped them and stubbornly resisted them all around, they initiated a vile and wicked propaganda against us, calling us Capitalists, Bourgeoisie, Opportunists and Uncle Toms. 363 Garvey extracted the inevitable lesson from this, namely that "the Negro should not allow himself to be absorbed by Communism."145 Garvey was sure that in the United States the Communists would merely "use the Negro's vote and physical numbers" to elevate the position of their own kind. The black man would then discover that the majority race was .146 still in power, "not only as communists but as whitemen. This kind of thinking led Negro World editor H. G. Mudgal to scoff in 1932 at the selection of black James W. Ford as a Communist candidate for vice-president of the United States. He argued that Ford was chosen because the Commun- ists knew they had no chance of winning anyhow.147 Garvey's suspicions of Communist duplicity had an unusual possible corroboration in a communication from the military intelli- gence unit M. I. l. c. to the British Foreign Office in January, 1920. The communication, originating in New York, dealt with radical prOpaganda among black people and con— cluded that blacks were "being used to serve the ulterior purposes of the reds" and were then to be discarded. The evidence for this assertion was provided by circulars allegedly ”sent out to 'Distributors of I. W. W. litera- ture,'" by an unnamed source. The circulars were said to contain the following information: Extra activity in reaching the negroes [gig] is desired. We do not exactly want him in the organization, but we want him to help stir up unrest and general disorder. 364 The negro is rapidly rising to a high position in useful citizenship and social standing. We need to break this up. If we can disassociate him from his present tendency to what they call good citizen- ship and get capital down on him we can drop him out of the association later.143 M. I. l. c. claimed to have received this information from "a reliable source." Friction between Garveyites and Communists escal- ated rather than abated after Garvey was jailed in the United States. The Communists seized this opportunity (and later the greater opportunity provided by his depor- tation) to make inroads among his following. Although they made some progress they were nevertheless continually frustrated and irritated by the immense grip which Garvey's ideology continued to exercise over the black masses in the United States, even in the absence of "the chief" (as many of his followers affectionately called him). Cyril Briggs admitted this fact in 1931 when he wrote that "the Garvey movement, while in decline and on the verge of collapse, still represents a most dangerous reactionary force, exer- cising considerable ideological influence over large masses of Negroes."149 Even in this period though, Communist tactics were characterized by the combination of open hostility and simultaneous attempts to impose "united front" alliances and offerings of friendship on the U.N.I.A. The friendly approach was articulated by James W. Ford as follows: 365 "How do we approach the Garveyites, and the other national- istic elements. . . . We approach them in a friendly manner, and Negro Communists say: 'We Communists are defenders of our people, defenders of the Ethiopian people. . . '"150 Such tactics were often aimed at U.N.I.A. leaders. Thus in 1926 we find a committee including Workers Party representative C. E. Ruthenberg, Manuel Gomez, secretary of the Anti-Imperialist League and others arranging to have George Weston, New York U.N.I.A. leader sent on a trip to an anti-imperialist conference in Brussels. They were also considering the possibility of throwing in a trip to the 151 Weston was at the time U.S.S.R. after the conference. leading a U.N.I.A. faction of his own in a dispute with the rest of the organization. A more serious attempt to create strife through befriending the leaders came in 1935. Early that year a Provisional Committee for the Defense of Ethiopia (P.C.D.E.) was formed in Harlem. The founding conference was held at the New York U.N.I.A. headquarters, and Captain A. L.King, leader of the U.N.I.A. New York Central division was unanim- ously elected chairman. The executive-secretary was to be A. W. Berry of the Communist-organized League of Struggle for Negro Rights, while the publicity director was William Fitzgerald of another Communist organization, International 152 Labor Defense. Among the members of the P.C.D.E. were James W. Ford, at this time secretary of the Harlem Branch 366 of the Communist Party of the U.S.A. Ford used this opportunity to cultivate King's COOperation. In November he invited King to join a delegation to Mayor LaGuardia to protest police invasion of a Harlem dance sponsored by the Communist Party at which seventy-four persons were 153 arrested. The next month he invited King to a meeting of top Harlem leaders with an Anti-Fascist Committee.154 Such cooperation between King and the Communists caused dissension in U.N.I.A. ranks. A movement developed to crush King on this account. The representatives of this group, calling themselves "The Committee" reaffirmed their loyalty to Ethiopia but refused to serve on the same com- mittee with Communists. They accused King of dictatorship and of trying to turn the New York U.N.I.A. Communist.155 These dissidents apparently contacted Garvey and King was forced to write Garvey in explanation. He assured Garvey that the sole reason for his participating in the P.C.D.E. was to buy publicity which the organization could not afford. He explained that several organizations belonged to the P.C.D.E. and that the U.N.I.A. held the balance of power. This in his opinion did not amount to consorting with the Communists.156 If King's explanation was honest what this meant was that the U.N.I.A. was trying to wmathe Communists in exactly the same way as the Communists were simultane- ously trying to use the U.N.I.A. King's contact with the Communists continued a while longer, for in February 1936 367 he was invited by the American Friends of the Soviet Union to send a U.N.I.A. representative with an American delega- tion to the U.S.S.R.157 Relations between the two groups were not always so cordial in this period after Garvey's imprisonment. The Communist affiliated press, headed by the Liberator regul- arly published appeals to Garveyites to join such Communist 158 Such bodies as the League of Struggle for Negro Rights. appeals were accompanied by scurrilous and otherwise hostile articles on Garvey and the U.N.I.A. SuCh activities were backed up by active proselytizing in black communities. Here, however, the presence of Garveyites was a constant stumbling block. A report by a member of the Young Libera- tors (a Communist group) in 1931 gave an indication of this. While recruiting on Chicago's South Side the group had en- countered young Garveyites, who informed the Liberators that white sons of slavemasters and rapists would never help black people. The Liberators tried for three hours to establish a distinction between white capitalists and white workers. The Garveyites were not convinced, but the Liber- ators entertained hopes of eventually winning them over, 159 since they were "sincere and militant." Communist re- cruitment on the South Side had had a long history of frus- tration by Garveyites, going back at least as far as 1924.160 These types of encounters were accompanied by more serious ones. In 1927, for example, the Negro World 368 editorially attacked the Communist American Negro Labor Congress.161 And in 1930 occurred the most serious clash of all, resulting in a streetfight which claimed the life of Communist Alfred Levy. This particular brawl was the culmination of a bitter feud between the two groups in the New York area in 1930. William Grant, leader of the U.N.I.A. Tiger Division had been assaulted some time before by persons he identified as Communists. He had the police arrest the black Communists whom he identified as his attackers. The Communist International Labor Defense 162 had arranged to defend the accused. The Tiger Division subsequently proclaimed its hostility to "Communists and Crooks."163 The scene of Levy's death was a street corner U.N.I.A. meeting on Harlem's Lenox Avenue. Communists attacked the meeting, according to the Garveyite version, and one of their number tried to mount the speaker's plat- form. The police who were on hand attempted to restrain the Communists but without success. Fighting broke out and the police "entreated" the Garveyites to provide assistance. A free for all ensued in which Levy was killed. The next day Garveyites met again at the same corner and declared their intention to break up any meeting on Lenox Avenue which spoke against the Garvey movement. Garvey's Blackman announced from Jamaica, ”Their action can be readily under- stood for Garveyism forms one of the chief targets of com- munist hate and vindictiveness, the sowers of red prOpaganda 369 branding their peaceful brothers as 'imperialist agents,‘ 164 The Commun- 'traitors to their race' and 'bourgeois.'" ists meanwhile retired to 144th and Lenox Avenue where the body of Alfred Levy lay in state under a constant Communist guard. After two days of this a mass rally was addressed at the scene by Otto Huiswoud, who utilized the opportunity to attack Garvey. Levy was finally buried to the strains of the "Internationale."165 Relations were particularly strained for the two years or so after this. The Negro World carried the occa- sional letter alleging Communist practice of jim crow or, like one from Farrell, Pennsylvania, reporting that Communists were telling people that they were working together with the U.N.I.A. and that Garveyites should there- 166 fore join the Communists. In 1931 a Chicago Liberty Hall refused permission to August E. Poansjoe, a Communist Party candidate for city treasurer who desired to speak there.167 And the Communists in 1931 brought their biggest propaganda guns, as represented by the Scottsboro case, to bear on the U.N.I.A. In the Scottsboro case nine innocent black youths had been framed on charges of raping two white ladies of ill repute and had been sentenced to death in Alabama. The I.L.D. had captured the defense from the N.A.A.C.P. and had reaped a windfall from the international indignation felt at this travesty of justice. The Scottsboro windfall became a powerful propaganda weapon. A Negro World editorial of 370 1931 expressed an often-voiced View that the Communists would never have supported the accused were it not for the publicity. Their sincerity was doubted in view of their hostility to U.N.I.A. divisions and other race groups try- 168 ing to help. Mrs. Ada Wright, mother of the two of the accused, was utilized to attack Tiger Division leader William Grant in a speech to Garveyites in New York.169 The Liberator published an open letter attacking Grant and 170 inviting U.N.I.A. members to join the Scottsboro fight. The U.N.I.A. attitude was summed up as follows: "Let Communists agitate, congregate, and propagate--if they must; but let us remain on the 'side lines' until something is started that will provide us the opportunity that we need '"171 Garvey's followers for making our grand 'getaway. had absorbed his teachings well indeed. The Liberator kept up its intensive campaign against Garvey in this period. A successor to the Negro Champion, its contributing editors contained such well-known A.B.B. and black Communist names as Otto Hall, Otto Huiswoud and J. W. Ford. The stridency of its attacks doubtless owed something to the fact that Cyril Briggs was editor. Its attacks were frequently comprised of wild exaggerations and distortions. On Garvey being barred from Cuba the Liberator commented in 1930 that Garvey was nevertheless still an imperialist tool but was being treated in this manner by the imperialists because they were now "served by 371 other interests" and no longer needed Garvey "as a peddler 172 In 1931 the paper edi- Of his particular illusions.” torialized that the League of Struggle for Negro Rights (successor to the American Negro Labor Congress as a black Communist alternative to other race organizations, especi- ally the U.N.I.A.) "must expose this outrageous attempt [Garveyism] to hoodwink the Negro masses." It continued, "meetings must be held, leaflets distributed, contacts made with the Garvey masses, and a smashing attack carried out against these peddlers of illusions, and apologists for imperialism, and to win the workers in the Garvey 173 organizations for real struggle." The Liberator was ably supported on the international level by a constant anti-Garvey barrage emanating from the Negro Worker. This journal, published initially in Hamburg, Germany, and later at other locations, was the organ of the International Trade Union Committee of Negro Workers (ITUC-NW) a creation of the Red International of Labor 174 Unions (Profintern). The Profintern had set the tone for Negro Worker attacks on Garvey by declaring in its "Special Resolution on Work among Negroes in the United States and the Colonies" of 1931 that, "Of all forms of ideological deceit, the most dangerous is 'Garveyism,‘ denying the class struggle, and the possibility of the revolutionary 175 struggle of the Negro masses for self-determination." Even before this a statement of the ITUC-NW coming out of I'I‘III‘| 372 its founding conference in Hamburg in 1930 had declared war on "Negro capitalist misleaders" such as Garvey, DuBois and a host of others, as well as on "the white trade union faker, Captain Cipriani, in the West Indies," 176 In 1933 Garvey was moved to comment on the and more. Negro Worker campaign. He wrote, "The Communists, through their Negro section, are publishing a Monthly Magazine from Germany, called 'THE NEGRO WORKER.‘ We recognize members of the editorial staff as Negroes we have met at different places. We think these Negroes are doing their race a great deal of harm at the present time, by trying to influence them toward assuming the responsibility of 177 Garvey argued here that propagating Communism." Communism had "a great chance in influencing a change in the political systems of the world," but black people should still not be "sacrificed at the early stages of the battle" by the Communists. The Negro Worker and other ITUC-NW material were read by black people who while admiring the militancy of these publications, did not always appreciate their denunci- ations of Garvey. A letter from such a reader in British Guiana was published in 1932 together with a reply from the 178 editor. An extensive exchange took place in 1936 and 1937179 between the editor, at this time Charles Woodson (in fact Otto Huiswoud, according to a United States 180 intelligence source) and a veteran U.N.I.A. leader from 373 Dominica, J. R. Ralph Casimir. Casimir at this time was the Dominica agent for the Negro Worker and threatened to quit performing this service due to the misleading attacks on Garvey. He particularly disliked the journals tendency to play down the role of the imperialists in thwarting Garvey's Liberian plans. The journal devoted several pages to Casimir's letters and the editorial responses. Several anti-Casimir letters were also published, including one from Garvey's veteran foe W. A. Domingo. The Trotskyist wing of the Communist movement also contemplated ways of getting around Garvey's influence in the 1930's. Towards the end of the decade their black spokesman, C. L. R. James (hiding under the pseudonym J. R. Johnson) suggested a black united front organization for mass struggle which would show that it was "fighting as a Negro organization, but has nothing to do with Garveyism."181 Nowhere is the unusual blend of tolerance and rabid hostility which characterized the Garveyism/Communism rela- tionship better seen than in the series of formal debates. which took place between the two groups in this period. Such exchanges had a long history. The Negro World of September 20, 1919 had contained an exchange of letters between Harlem literary figure Claude McKay and William H. Ferris, literary editor of Garvey's paper. McKay had argued in favor of Bolshevism, suggesting that black 374 toilers would automatically be freed in the wake of a 182 Informal debates between white proletarian revolution. Workers Party members and U.N.I.A. members in Chicago have already been briefly referred to. At Garvey's International Convention held in Jamaica in 1929 a formal debate took place between Garvey himself and Otto Huiswoud, this time representing the American Negro Labor Congress. In the tradition of the A.B.B. convention offensive of 1921 and the Workers Party attempt of 1924, the A.N.L.C. was once again trying to attack Garvey in his own stronghold. Garvey, as always, was willing to let the Communist repre- senative have a hearing. The debate took place during the convention. The topic resolved that ”The Negro Problem Can Only Be Solved by International Labour Co-Operation between White and Black Labour." Garvey obviously argued against 183 and obviously won. The audience was judge. In February 1931 the editor of the Negro World, H. G. Mudgal engaged a Mr. Welch, described as associate editor of the Revolution- ary Age in a formal debate. A large crowd of Communists and Garveyites turned up at the Frederick Douglass Inter- national Forum in Brooklyn to hear them debate the topic, "Garveyism vs. Communism: Which Will Best Solve the Negro Problem?” Mudgal won, probably because there must have been more Garveyites in the audience than Communists. Welch argued that the Negro problem was essentially a class prob- lem, while Mudgal argued that "No Non-Negro could pretend 375 to give a philosophy to just suit the needs and moods of 184 the black masses." Mudgal won a similar debate later that year against Albert Weisbord, editor of the left- 185 wing Communist Class Struggle. In December of that year the Cleveland division reported a similar debate, 186 with both sides argued by Garveyites. In 1932 the Liberator reported that U.N.I.A. organizer Mme. De Mena had refused a Communist challenge for a debate while on tour due to lack of time.187 Garvey's attitude towards the Communists was to some extent vindicated in the 1930's and 1940's when several prominent black Communists became disenchanted and dropped out of the movement over such issues as Stalin's downgrading of work among black people, the U.S.S.R.‘s sale of oil to the Italian fascists, which was used during their invasion of Ethiopia, and the hostility of American Communists to black civil rights activity during World War II. The common problem in such cases was the question of what to do when black nationalism ran counter to party interest. Many of these persons had been attracted to Communism in the first place because of the potential they perceived in it for Oppressed black peoples, as stressed in Communist propaganda concerning Russia's favorable treatment of minorities, self-determination in the Black Belt, and so on. A very excellent example of all this, and one which shows the appeal that Garvey continued 376 to exert over race-conscious black people, even in the Communist hierarchy, was the case of George Padmore. Padmore, as a youth in Trinidad, had probably been a reader of the Negro World and impressed by the uprising there in 1919 which was led by Garveyites. C. L. R. James thinks that Padmore was "profoundly influenced by Garvey" 188 at this time. Certainly by the time Padmore migrated to the United States in 1924 Trinidad was the second most U.N.I.A.-organized island in the Caribbean, after Cuba.189 In the United States Padmore became a Communist in 1927.190 Yet in 1928 we find him engaged in leading a protest at Howard University against the presence of British ambassa- dor Sir Esme Howard on campus because the latter had played an important role in Garvey's deportation from the United States and Canada. Lengthy mimeographed sheets were dis- tributed to this effect, bearing Padmore's name as secre- tary of the International Anti—Imperialistic Youths' League.”l Padmore soon afterwards journeyed to Moscow where he became head of the Negro Bureau of the Profintern. During the early 1930's he edited the Negro Worker and churned out several pamphlets and other matter presenting Communist views on various matters relevant to black work- ers. Whatever lingering affinities to Garvey which may still have existed in 1928 were not visible in most of these writings (mostly published in 1931). Garvey was denounced with monotonous regularity. The language of 377 denunciation was standard Communist rhetoric--"The struggle against Garveyism," he wrote, by way of example, "represents one of the major tasks of the Negro toilers in America and the African and West Indian colonies."192 Or again, ”Like Zionism and Gandhism, it [Garveyism] is merely out to utilize racial and national consciousness for the purpose of promoting the class interests of the black bourgeoisie and landlords."193 Another typical piece of abuse during this period explained that Garvey was "the greatest fraud and racketeer who has ever imposed himself upon an oppressed people."194 Yet in the same year that Padmore was parrotting these stock Communist expressions of abuse he gave an ink- ling of a lingering sympathy with Garvey in a pamphlet entitled American Imperialism Enslaves Liberia. Here he fleetingly departed from his distortions to admit that Garvey's Liberian scheme "was defeated through the inter- vention of the U.S. Government." He also repeated the "rumour" that W. E. B. DuBois was used by President Coolidge to help defeat the scheme.195 Padmore discontinued his various Communist affilia- tions in 1933 and was then formally expelled from the move- ment amidst much strident comment from his successors in the Negro Worker. He had departed due to the conviction that the partial phasing out of the Comintern's anti- colonial program in Asia and Africa was a ”betrayal of the 378 196 In expelling him, fundamental interests of my people." therefore, his ex-colleagues accused him of many of the things that he had accused Garvey of. The ITUC-NW pub- lished a lengthy statement of "very serious charges" summed up in the following extract--"At a meeting on February 23, 1934, the International Control Commission [of the ITUC-NW] decided to expel Padmore from the Commun- ist Party for contacts. with a provocateur, for contacts with bourgeois organizations on the question of Liberia, for an incorrect attitude to the national question (instead 197 of class unity striving towards race unity." A later Negro Worker statement showed how the Garveyite race first position had affected Padmore. It charged, "In a most feeble effort to justify his position and a profound lackof confidence in the revolutionary white workers, he claims, 'what you white comrades have never understood and will never be able to understand, is the psychology of the '"198 The same statement, in criticizing his fund- Negro. raising activities on behalf of Liberia lumped him together with Garvey "the father of such an idea, who introduced the ”199 Yet a 'back to Africa movement' in the same manner. later article on "The Rise and Fall of George Padmore As a Revolutionary Fighter" against compared him with Garvey. This article in order to seal its case again; Padmore declared, in what was intended as abuse, that he had "two souls, that of the anti-imperialist and that of the Negro 379 200 Padmore would have considered this a nationalist." compliment, as would most black revolutionaries, Garvey included. Once the Communist movement had become a thing of Padmore's past, his attitude to Garvey once more underwent a fundamental change. As a contributor to Afro-American papers from 1938 on his articles sometimes assumed a 201 Garveyite tone. In 1947 he was actually listed as "our European correspondent on Colonial questions" by the 202 Garveyite journal The African. 1952 found him paying homage to Garvey as the inspirer of Jomo Kenyatta's ”Africa 203 for the Africans." Shortly afterwards in his major work Pan-Africanism or Communism?, Padmore called Garvey "the greatest black prOphet and visionary since Negro Emancipation."204 In this same work he apparently admitted Garvey's influence on his departure from Communism in what may have been a veiled reference to himself when he said, "Garvey's anti-Communist tirades had a demoralizing effect upon neophyte Negro party members, some of whom were 205 He also expelled for 'black nationalist deviations.'" repeated here Garvey's often expressed view that Communists regarded black workers and peasants as "revolutionary expendables."206 Although the greatest battles between Garveyism and Communism were waged in the United States the struggle between these two ideologies was, of course, worldwide. 380 And the place which most closely approximated the United States in its objective racial situation was South Africa. Here too there was jim crow (apartheid), a small Communist party led by white radicals, and massive black nationalist and workers' movements in the African Nationalist Congress (A.N.C.) and the Industrial and Commercial Workers Union (I.C.U.) led by Clements Kadalie. Both the A.N.C. and the I.C.U. had close links with the Garvey movement in South Africa, where the U.N.I.A. maintained one of its securest footholds in the African continent. S'uth African Commun- ists, boring from within the I.C.U. encountered the hostil- ity of Garveyites. Kadalie has written that the Garvey- ites, led by James G. Gumbs, who was also president of the I.C.U., succeeded in having the Communists expelled from the union.207 And South Africa, too, was affected by the 1928 Comintern decision to adopt a nationalist line on the race question. Together with the imposition of the slogan for self-determination in the Black Belt in the United States, the 1928 congress sought to impose on the South African comrades the slogan of an ”independent native South African republic based on the organization of the laborers and peasants guaranteeing (at the same time) the rights of the [white] national minorities." S. P. Bunting, the South African party's white spokesman (mistakenly thought to be black by United States officials monitoring the congress) resisted this slogan. He stuck stubbornly to a preference 381 for class struggle over racial struggle and claimed that South Africa had no effective national movement. He claimed that of the party's 1,750 members 1,600 were black 208 The majority of (up from only 200 the previous year). the South African Central Committee shared this view and were attacked by the Comintern'sexannive. committee for their "stubborn opposition to the correct slogan proposed by the Comintern."209 Bunting and his colleagues seem nevertheless to have made some attempt to implement the Comintern's desires for in 1930 they were in turn attacked within the party for preaching "Native Republicanism" which was seen as "Marcus Garveyism" under a different name. The black editor of the Cape Town Communist weekly Umsebenzi, replying to this attack, argued that any white socialist who could not ”acknowledge the right of the exploited and sjambokked Natives to complete national autonomy" must be considered a white chauvinist, "however many lectures he 210 may have delivered before Native audiences." The editor of the Negro World eXpressed the wish that black United States Communists could be similarly independent of spirit and added, "We are glad to see Garveyism triumph not only over imperialism of the capitalists but also over the imperialism of the Communists."211 On occasion the purely American aspect of the struggle between the two ideologies spilled over into South Africa, as in 1931 when the Negro World poked fun at Cyril 382 Briggs' article published in a South African Communist paper. Briggs had in that article attacked a Negro World editorial. The Negro World taunted Briggs with preaching "unadulterated Garveyism" by advocating "Negro rights" worldwide. "But the only difference," the editorial suggested, ”is that Briggs is willing to take orders from Moscow and Garvey is not willing to take orders from any- one whatsoever.” The editorial continued with a taunt the like of which was to cause people like George Padmore to leave the Communist ranks. It said, "We hope this expose of Cyril Briggs would not cost him his place as a betrayer of the orthodox Communist philosophy which denounces Briggs' idea as jim-crow nationalism. Wish you luck, Cyril, and hope those Communist bosses of yours will not notice this item."212 Like so much else about Garvey's movement, the scale of his struggle against the Communist movement must surely be unrivalled among race organizations. George Padmore, addressing himself to this phenomenon wrote, "The biggest mistake that the white Communists made was to attack Garvey openly and try to disrupt his movement before they had won confidence among the Negroes. . . . By fight- ing the Communists with their own weapons of half-truths, villification and thuggery, Marcus Garvey was the first black leader to force them to keep their hands off Negro organizations."213 NOTES GARVEY AND THE COMMUNISTS 1Daily Worker, August 23, 1924, p. 3. 2Ibid., August 9, 1924, p. 3. 3Theodore Draper, American Communism and Soviet Russia (New York, The Viking Press, 1960), p. 320. 4Ibid.; William Z. Foster, The Ne ro People in Amerigan History (New York, International P Iishers, 1954), p. 455. 5American Communism, p. 21. 6The Communist, no. 13 [1920], p. 4. 7The Negro People, p. 455. 8American Communism, p. 320. 9Ibid., pp. 320, 321. lo"Theses on the National and Colonial Question AdOpted By The Second Comintern Congress, 28 July 1920," in Jane Degras, ed., The Communist Internationai, 1919- 1943, Vol. I (New Yorh, Oxford University Press, 1956), p. I42. The "etc." after "Negroes" does not appear in this version but is incorporated from a shorter quotation in American Communism, p. 337. 11Claude McKay, "Soviet Russia and the Negro," Crisis, XXVII, 2, Dec. 1923, p. 64; American Communism, p. 321; Claude McKay, A Lon Wa From Home (New York, Harcourt Brace and Wor , , p. . 383 384 12American Communism, p. 326; Communist Inter- national, pp. 398,-399. l3Communist International, I, p. 458. 141bid., pp. 398-401. 15The Negro People, p. 457. 16R. G. 59, 861.00 - Congress, Communist Inter- national, IV/2, U. Steklov, "The Awakening Race," Izvestia, November 16, 1922. 17Communist International, II, p. 97. 18American Communism, pp. 328, 329. 19Ibid., p. 334. 20R. G. 59, 861.00 - Congress, Communist Inter- national VI/13, summary from Moscow Pravda, July 17, 1928. 21R. G. 59, 861.00 - Congress, Communist Inter- national VI/l9, Pravda, July 26, 1928, Speech by Dunne. 22R. G. 59, 861.00 - Congress, Communist Inter- narional IV/13, summary based on Pravda, August 18, 1928. 23ipig., summary from Pravda, August 24, 1928. 24Ibid., Pravda, August 25, 1928. 25Communist International, II, pp. 552-557. 26The Negro People, p. 463, a slightly different wording is suggestedin American Communism, p. 344. 27George Padmore, Pan-Africanism or Communism? (New York, Roy Publishers, ? , pp. , . 28 Negro Champion, I, 17, August 27, 1928, p. 8. 385 29This and preceding quotations from, Communist International, III, pp. 124-135. 30Wilson Record, The Negro_gnd the Communist Part (Chapel Hill, University of North Carolina Press, 1951), p. 120. 31A Long Wey From Home, p. 208. 2George Breitman, ed., Leon Trotsky on Black Nationalism and Self-Determhmuion (New York, Merit Publish- ers,'19677, pp. 14, I8, 25, 54. 33Philosophy and Opinions, II, p. 315. 34Negro World, March 24, 1923, p. 8. 35Ibid., September 4, 1926, p. 1. 36The Tregedy of White Injustice, p. 14. 37R. G. 59, 811.108 G 191/24, Charles Latham to Secretary of State, August 24, 1921. 38c. O. 318/399/76634, Garvey to Rt. Hon. Phillip Snowdon, Chancellor of the Exchequer, February 27, 1930. 39 p. 159. Africa Times and Orienr Review, October, 1913, 40Negro World, November 1, 1924, p. 2. 41 Chapter 3. Blackman, September 5, 1929, p. l; and see 42Dailijorker, August 12, 1924, pp. 1, 5. 43Blackman, September 12, 1929, p. l. 44NegrgWorld, December 1, 1923, p. 3. 45philosophyand Opinions, II, p. 69. 386 46African Studies Association of the West Indies, Internarional Seminar on Marcus Garvey! 2-6 January, 1973 TMona, Jamaica, 1973), p. 1. 47J. A. Rogers, World's Great Men of Colgr (New York, J. A. Rogers, 1947), p. 599. 48Prophet of Black Nationalism, p. 73. 49Theodore G. Vincent, Black Power and the Garvey Movement (Berkeley, Ramparts Press, I971), p. 98. 50 R. G. 59, 811.108 G 191/1, Charles L. Latham to Secretary of State, September 12, 1920. 51Gleaner, June 2, 1921, p. 6, quoted in Adolph Edwards, Marcus Garvey (London, New Beacon Publications, 1967), p. 15. 52Blackman, May 14, 1929, pp. 1, 2; May 27, 1929, p. 1; May 28, pp. 1, 7; May 29, pp. 1, 7; May 30, pp. 1, 2. 53Ibid., December 31, 1929, p. 2; March 10, 1930, p. 2; March 17, p. 4. 54Ibid., January 11, 1930, p. 2; April 12, 1930, p. 6; ApriI‘I2, 1930, p. 6. 55Ibid., April 26, 1930, p. 3; A Garvey message on behalf of Jamaica's workers and labourers received scant attention from the British Colonial Office - C. 0. 318/399/ 76634, E. B. Boyd to Rt. Hon. Lord Stamfordham, September 20, 1930. 56Black Man, III, 10, July 1938, p. 6. In 1941 the National Negro Voite (July 19, 1941, p. 5) considered Garvey together with Busthhente, Ken Hill and S. Kerr Coombs (publisher of the Jamaica Labour Weekly) as outstanding labour figures of the period. This paper also said that Garvey had created a Jamaica Labour Union in 1935 (August 9, 1941, p. 3). S7Negro Worig, June 14, 1919, p. 4, memorial of the TWA to the British Government. 387 58See Tony Martin, "Revolutionary Upheaval in Trinidad, 1919: Gleanings from London and Washington." 59C. 0. 318/358, Governor J. R. Chancellor to Viscount Milner, November 30, 1920. 60F. O. 371/9633, Edwin Urban Lewis to H. M. Consul, New York, September 24, 1924. 61C. O. 323/1518, minute of July 21, 1937. 6Zpy Life and the ICU, p. 220. 63C. 0. 318/356, Governor Wilfred Collet of British Guiana to Viscount Milner, October 8, 1920; Collet to Rt. Hon. Winston Churchill, June 7, 1921. Critchlow himself mentions workers turning to Garveyism during hard times in the 1920's. See Hubert Critchlow, ”History of the Trade Union Movement in British Guiana," in George Padmore, ed., Voigeof Coloured Labour (Manchester, PANAF Service Ltd. T1945T), p. 51. 64F. O. 371/8450, Governor Charles Bain of Barbados to Secretary of State, Colonial Office, January 16, 1923. 65R. G. 59, 811 G. 00/37, C. E. Rappolee, Governor, U. S. Virgin Islands, "Report on activities of one D. Hamilton Jackson," February 10, 1923. 66Basil Brentnol Blackman, Secretary-Treasurer, Caribbean Congress of Labour, lecture at St. Ann's Commun- ity Workshop, Trinidad, July 7, 1969 - notes taken by author. 67Prophet of Black Nationalism, p. 197. 68Philosophy and Opinions, II, p. 244. 69American Communism, p. 333. 7oNegro World, June 11, 1932, p. 3. 71The Communist, no. 13 [1920], p. 4. 388 72Rose Pastor Stokes, "The Communist International and the Negro," The Worker, March 10, 1923, pp. 1, 4. 73Communist International, II, p. 557. 74Robert Bruce and J. P. Collins, "The Party and the Negro Struggle," The Communist, I, 5, November 1921, p. 15. 75American Communism, p. 329. 76Ibid., pp. 323-325; Crusader, III, 5, January 1921, p. 31; V, 3, November, 1921, p. 22;1New York ZAmgterdam News, November 16, 1921; The Worker, August 11, 1923, p.t§7 77Cyril Briggs, "The Decline of the Garvey Move- ment," Communist, June 1931, p. 550; American Communism, pp. 325, 326t' 78The Worker, August 5, 1922, p. 5. 79R. G. 59, 861.00 - Congress, Communist Inter- national IV/S, minutes of "Session of the Commission on the Negro Question," November 28, 1922, enclosed in F. W. B. Coleman, U. S. Legation, Riga, Latvia, to Secretary of State, December 22, 1922. 80The Worker, August 18, 1923, p. 6. 81Crusader, IV, 6, February 1921, p. 9. 822299;; V, 3, November 1921, p. 5. 83Black Power, p. 81; Garvey_and Garveyism, p. 65; Crusader, V, 3, November 1921, p. 5. 84Pan-Africanism or Communism?, pp. 304, 305. 85Philosophy and Opinions, I, p. 73. 86Ibid., II, pp. 333, 334. 87Crusader, V, 3, November 1921, p. 8. 389 8§Negro World, October 8, 1921, p. 3. 89New York Herald, October 21, 1921; Crusader, V, 3, November'192l, p. S. 90Crusader, V, 3, November 1921, passim. 91New York Times, December 3, 1921. 92R. G. 60, 198940, Garvey to Harry M. Daugherty, U. S. Attorney-General, Jan. 22, 1923; Garvey to Daugherty, January 24, 1923. 93Black Power, p. 84. 94Negro World, March 20, 1926, p. 6. 95New York Amsterdam News, September 10, 1924, pp. 1, 7. 96Negro World, April 3, 1926, p. 3. 97Blackman, August 2, 1930, p. 1. 98Liberator, April 25, 1931, p. 7. 99Communist, June 1931, pp. 547—552. 100Negro World, August 29, 1931, p. 4. 101Ibid., February 27, 1932, p. 3. 102Negro Worker, II, 8, August 1932, p. 14. 103New Jamaican, September 20, 1932, p. 2. 104Crusader News Agency, week of May 20, 1940. lOSDaiiy Worker, September 13, 1924, p. 4; A Long Way From Home, p. 354. 390 106R. G. 59, 861.00 Congress, Communist Inter- national IV/4, summary from Izvestia, November 18, 1922. 107C. L. R. James, A History of Pan-Arrigan Revolt (Washington, D. C., Drum andSpear Press, 1969, first pub. 1938), p. 79. 108E.g., Harry Haywood, NegrgjLiberation (New York, International Publishers, 1948), PP. 201, 202; American Communism, p. 328; Daiiy_Worker, February 11, 1924, p. 1, August 21, 1924, p. 6?” Programme of the Communist Inter- national," The Communist International, II, p. 519; Egg Negro People, p. 448. 109Daily Worker, August 18, 1924, p. 3. 110John Bruce and J. P. Collins, ”The Party and the Negro Struggle," The Communist, I, 4, October 1921, p. 19. 111Negro Champion, I, 17, October 27, 1928,,p. 5. 112Negro World, November 7, 1925, p. 10, from type- written copy in Amy Jacques Garvey papers. 113Daily Worker, February 11, 1924, p. 2. 114Ibid., p. 1. 115Ibid., February 18, 1924, pp. 1, 3. 116Communist International, II, p. 97. Degras says here that there were ten Communists at the convention. She does not refer to the Sanhedrin by name but describes it as having taken place in Chicago in February of 1924. 117Daily»Worker, July 3, 1924. 118Ibid., July 29, 1924, p. 3. 119Ibid., p. 6. 120Ibid., August 5, 1924, pp. 1, 4. 391 121Ibid., August 6, 1924, p. 2; August 13, 1924, p. 3; August 18, 1924, p. 3. 122Ibid., August 13, 1924, p. 3. 123Ibid., August 23, 1924, p- 3: NegrO W°rld' August 30, 19 3: Po 3- 124Daily Worker, August 23, 1924, p. 3; references to a black Workers Party delegate Mrs. Olivia Whiteman, are in reports of August 15, 1924, p. 2 and August 19, 1924, p. 2. 125Ibid., August 29, 1924, p. 6. 126Ibid., August 25, 1924, p. 6. 127The following provide random examples of such favorable comment - Ne ro World, June 7, 1919, p. 2; June 25, 1927, p. 9; July 5, 193i, p. 5; April 12, 1932, p. 3; Blackman, February 17, 1929, p. 1, March 7, 1930, p. 3. 128Theodore Vincent reports having seen Garvey's membership card in the C.D.R.N. in the Amy Jacques Garvey papers - Black Power and the Garveijovement, p. 283. 129E.g., Philosophy_and Opinions, II, pp. 69, 333; Garvey and Garveyism, p. 90. 130New York Age, September 4, 1920, p. 4; New York Tribune, August 20, 1920, clipping in N. C. F. papers, Box 152. 131New York Age, September 4, 1920, p. 4. 132philosophy and Opinions, II, p. 94. 133Negro Worlg, February 2, 1924. 134Ibid., February 2, 1924, p. 3. 135Ibid., p. 10. 392 136Ibid., p. 4. 137Ibid., August 23, 1924, p. 19. 138F. O. 371/4567 minute of September 15, 1920; R. G. 28, Box 53 Unarranged, File 398, "Unrest Among the Negroes,” October 7, 1919; R. G. 59, 818.4016/orig., American Consul, Port Limon, Costa Rica to Secretary of State, August 24, 1919; R. G. 60, 198940, J. Edgar Hoover, "Memorandum for Mr. Ridgley," October 11, 1919; F. O. 371/16355, Home Office to Secretary of State, Foreign Office, July 20, 1932; R. G. 32, 605-1-653, Frank Burke to A. J. Frey, September 1, 1921. 139F. O. 371/16355 Home Office to Secretary of State, Foreign Office, July 20, 1932. 140Philosophy‘and Qpinions, II, pp. 69, 70, 334. 141American Communism, p. 327. 142R. G. 59, 861.00 Congress, Communist Inter- national VI/9, Pravda, July 25, 1928, and July 27, 1928. 143Ibid., Pravda, August 4, 1928. 144Black Man, II, 2, July-August 1936, p. 8. 145New Jamaican, September 5, 1932, p. 2. 146PhilosOphyrand Qpinions, II, p. 69. 147Negro World, June 11, 1932, p. 3. 148F. O. 371/4567, M, I. l. c. New York, "Special" General Report, January 6, 1920, "Negro Agitation." 149Communist, June 1931, p. 551. 150Quoted in.wilson Record, The Negro and the Communist Part (Chapel Hill, University ofiNorth'Carolina Press, 1951), p. 135. 393 151Pickens Papers, Box 1, Lovett Fort-Whiteman to Pickens, September 11, 1926. 152 Box 15, G. U.N.I.A. Central Division (New York) files, 153Ibid., Box 13, e. 149, James W. Ford to Capt. A. L. King, November 28, 1935. 154Ibid., Box 13, e. 149, Ford to King, December 8, 1935. 155 . - - Ibid., handbill in Box 9, d. 41 (no date). 156Ibid., Box 8, d. 23. King to Garvey. December 19, 1935. 157Ibid., Box 13, e. 149, Mary Dalton, Executive Secretary, New York District, American Friends of The Soviet Union to King, February 19, 1936. 158E.g., Liberator, April 25, 1931, pp. 7, 8. 159Ibid., p. 4. 16oDaily Worker, September 12, 1924, p. 3. 161Negro World, July 16, 1927, p. 4. 162Liberator, April 25, 1931, p. 2. 163Negro World, August 9, 1930, p. 3. 164Blackman, July 12, 1930, p. l. 165Ibid., July 19, 1930, p. 1. 166Negro World, November 22, 1930; P- 4? May 23' 1931, p. 4. 167Liberator, April 25, 1931, p. 6. 168Negro World, May 23, 1931, p. 4. 394 169Liberator, July 4, 1931, p. l. 17°Ibid., June 13, 1931, pp. 4, 5. 171Negro World, January 30, 1932, p. 3. 172Liberator, February 8, 1930, p. l. 173Ibid., March 28, 1931, p. 8. 174James R. Hooker, Black Revolutionary_(London; Pall Mall, 1967), p. 18. 175Negro Worker, I, 2, February 1931, p. 19. 176George Padmore, Negro Workers and the Imperial- ist War (Hamburg, ITUC-NW, 1931), p. 16. 177Black Man, I, 1, December 1933, pp. 4, 5. l78Negro Worker, II, 8, August 1932, pp. 22-24. 1791bid., VI, 10, December 1936; VII, 4, April 1937. 180R. G. 59, 844 g. 00/27, Purport Book. 181Leon Trotsky_on Black Nationalism, p. 40. 182Quoted in "Radicalism and Sedition Among the Negroes as Reflected in their Publications,” pp. 163, 164. 183The Gleaner, August 15: 19297 Nggro World, September l4,I9297 p. 4; Trials and Triumphs of Marcus Garvey, p. 140. 184Negro World, February 14, 1931, p. 2; February 21, 1931, p. 2; Fehruary 28, 1931, p. 4. leslbid., October 17, 1931, p. 1; October 24, 1931, p. 2. 186Ibid., December 12, 1931, p. 3. 395 187Liberator, July 15, 1932, p. 3. 188C. L. R. James, "Document: C. L. R. On the Origins," Radical America, II, 4, July-August 1968, p. 24. a. 16. 189U.N.I.A. Central Division (N.Y.) files, Box 2. 190Black Revolutionary, p. 6. 191Negro World, December 22, 1928, p. 2; Black Revolutionary, p. 7. Toilers Liberia 192George Padmore, The Life and Struggles of Negro (London, ITUC-NW, 1931), p. 125. 193Ibid., p. 126. 194Negro Worker, I, 12, December 1931, p. 7. 195George Padmore, American Imperialism Epslaves (Moscow, Centrizdat, 1931), pp. 6n., 33, 34. 196Black Revolutionary, p. 31. 197Negro Worker, IV, 2, June 1934, p. 14. lgelbid” IV, 3, July 1934, p. 6. 199Ibid., p. 9. 2001bid., IV, 4, August 1934, p. 17. 201James R. Hooker, "Africa for Afro-Americans: Padmore and the Black Press," Radical America, II, 4, July-August, 1968, pp. 14-19. in Ameriga, p. 33. 202The African, V, 6, June-July 1947. 203Gleaner, October 23, 1952, quoted in Black Power 204Pan-Africanism or Communism?, p. 87. 396 205Ibid., p. 304. 206Ibid., p. 289. 207My Life and the ICU, pp. 99-101. 208R. G. 59, 861.00 - Congress, Communist Inter— national VI/l3, summary from Pravda, August 24, 1928. 209The Communist International, II, p. 553; R. G. 59, 861.00 - Congress, Communiét International VI/13, speech by Kuusinen, Pravda, September 1, 1928. ZloUmsebenzi, September 26, 1930, quoted in Negro World, November 8, 1930, p. 4. 211Negro World, November 8, 1930, p. 4. 212Ibid., August 1, 1931, p. 4. 213Pan-Africanism or Communism?, pp. 304, 305. CHAPTER X OF THE N.A.A.C.P. AND INTEGRATIONISTS, AND GARVEY AND SEPARATISTS, OR, THE INTEGRATIONIST ONSLAUGHT Marcus Garvey is, without doubt, the most dan- gerous enemy of the Negro race in America and in the world. He is either a lunatic or a traitor. -- W.E.B. DuBois1 I had promised not to waste much more of the space of the Negro World on the cross-breed Dutch- French-Negro editor of the Crisis, the official organ of the National Association for the Advance- ment of 'Certain' People, because it was like washing powder on blackbirds, but this one-third Dutchman, who assumes the right to dictate to the Negro people what they should do and should not do, has become so brazen and impertinent that it leaves me no other course than to deal with him as he de- serves. In certain society, when we meet indivi- duals of this kind, we do not waste time arguing with them, but give them a good horse whipping . . . DuBois is speculating as to whether Garvey is a lunatic or a traitor. Garvey has no such specu- lation about DuBois. He is positive that he is a traitor. -- Marcus Garvey2 The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, founded in 1909, was, by the time of Garvey's advent into the United States, the most powerful 397 398 of the large number of civil rights and race uplift orga- nizations in the field. This reason alone would have given it sufficient cause to feel threatened by the rapid rise of the U.N.I.A. But the rivalry and hostility which developed between these two organizations were fed by other considerations as well. There were fundamental ideological disagreements on the race question in America and the world, on the need for Pan-African versus Afro- American struggle, on the significance of Booker T. Washington in black history, and on the style of leader- ship appropriate to a race organization, among other things. Much of this disagreement was embodied in the acrimonious feud which was waged throughout Garvey's American period and afterwards, between Garvey and W. E. B. DuBois, major black spokesman for the N.A.A.C.P. The major point of disagreement between the two organizations was undoubtedly the race question. The N.A.A.C.P. had been formed largely through the exertions of white Socialists and liberals and DuBois had been the sole black member of its initial national executive com- mittee. Its national hierarchy in Garvey's time continued to be dominated by whites. Not unnaturally the N.A.A.C.P. therefore believed in joint inter-racial cooperation, rather than in exclusively black organization such as was represented by the U.N.I.A., as the correct means of combating racial oppression. N.A.A.C.P. integrationism' 399 . was not very different in this respect from the "progres- sive assimilationist tendencies" of the Communists, and to both Garvey was equally opposed. He was particularly opposed to the position of control exercised by the whites of the N.A.A.C.P. -In a 1928 interview he described this state of affairs as an insult and thought that the N.A.A.C.P.'s white leaders "wish Negroes to go only so far and no further." He considered them "spies for the rest of the white race."3 He saw them as a brake on the black man's self-reliance and a hindrance in the quest for black nationalism. In 1923 he expressed these ideas in one of his bitterest speeches. In this speech, en- titled "Beware of Greeks Bearing Gifts," he said: The greatest enemies of the Negro are among those who hypocritically profess love and fellowship for him, when, in truth, and deep down in their hearts, they despise and hate him. Pseudo-philanthropists and their organizations are killing the Negro. White men and women of the Moorfield Storey, Joel Spingarn, Julius Rosenwald, Oswald Garrison Villard, Congressman Dyer and Mary White Ovington type, in conjunction with the above mentioned agencies, are disarming, dis-Visioning, dis-ambitioning and fooling the Negro to death. They teach the Negro to look to the whites in a false direction. . . . at the same time distracting the Negro from the real solution and objective of securing nationalism. Two years before this bitter statement Mary White Ovington, Chairman of the N.A.A.C.P.'s Board of Directors, had expressed herself privately (perhaps in jest) in a way which seemed to go along with Garvey's accusations. In a letter to Arthur B. Spingarn, at the time an 400 N.A.A.C.P. vice-president, she said, "Only black people ought to live in these soft coal cities anyway! My lungs are daily growing as grey as the dingy curtains at my window."5 N.A.A.C.P. principles deviated from Garvey's not only on the question of white hegemony over race uplift organizations but also over the question of attitudes to light-skinned black people. Whereas Garvey welcomed any- one with one-sixteenth or more black blood, as he put it on one occasion, provided they consented to work for the unity of the race,6 he nevertheless often accused lighter hued Afro-Americans of trying to emulate their West Indian counterparts by forming themselves into a distinct buffer group. James Weldon Johnson, during Garvey's American period one of the handful of important national ‘black N.A.A.C.P. officers, considered Garvey's major blunders to have included his distinctions "between people of colour and blacks" and his black God, which, in Johnson's view, helped drive a wedge between blacks and lights.7 This is not surprising, since in 1924 Garvey had published some of Johnson's Autobiography of an Ex-Colored ggg_in his daily newspaper to show that Johnson wanted to be white.8 Despite Garvey's general distrust of white people there was one group he could admire and, to a point, even work with, and that was the segregationist group as 401 represented primarily by the Ku Klux Klan. And despite the N.A.A.C.P.'s advocacy of integration there was one element in white society which they abhorred above most else, and this was the Ku Klux Klan. Garvey said, "Between the Ku Klux Klan and the Moorfield Storey National Association for the Advancement of 'Certain' People group, give me the Klan for their honesty of purpose towards the Negro." He explained, "They are better friends to my race, for telling us what they are, and what they mean, thereby giving us a chance to stir for ourselves, than all the hypocrites put together. . . ."9 The Communists were, it will be remembered, as hostile towards the K.K.K. as was the N.A.A.C.P. Neither group could buy white ex- clusivism any more than it could tolerate Garvey's black separatism. On at least one important occasion, therefore, the K.K.K. question brought about collaboration between a top Communist and a top N.A.A.C.P. official. For in August 1924 Walter White, N.A.A.C.P. Assistant Secretary, wrote a letter of introduction for Mrs. Robert Minor to one Louis R. Glavis in New York City. White explained that Mr. and Mrs. Minor were covering the U.N.I.A. conven- tion and that Mr. Minor desired "authoritative data" on Garvey's dealings with the Klan. (Among Minor's des- patches to the Daily WOrker from the convention were some severely critical of Garvey's attitude towards the Klan.) Glavis apparently had access to, among other things, a ’402 memorandum of an interview between Garvey and Edward' Young Clarke of the Klan in which an agreement had alleg- edly been made whereby Garvey would be "allowed" to sell .- 1 stock in the South "with the protection and sanction" of the Klan in return for breaking up anti-Klan organizations in the North, especially the N.A.A.C.P.10 The N.A.A.C.P. differed ideologically from Garvey too on the question of Garvey's Pan-African thrust. Despite the well-known interest of DuBois in the larger black world, the association more typically saw itself as a specialist in the Afro-American field. James Weldon Johnson, writing during Garvey's 1920 convention, dis- agreed with the idea of Afro-American involvement in African liberation. He argued that Africans should be allowed to wage their own struggles. The best way that Afro-Americans could help, he thought, would be to take care of their own business at home.11 Ten years later he argued that "The main reason for Garvey's failure with thoughtful American Negroes was his African scheme." He found it "difficult to give the man credit for either honesty or sanity in those imperialistic designs" unless his intention had been to stage a coup in Liberia.12 This N.A.A.C.P. preoccupation with Afro-America led to some imbibing of the general attitudes Of nativism.which char- acterized America at large in the post-war years. DuBois the Pan-Africanist was, strangely, one of the greatest 403 offenders in this respect, at least in his attacks on Garvey, but other black N.A.A.C.P. leaders shared his pique at Garvey's foreignness. They never forgave Garvey for being first a foreigner, second bold enough to pre— sume to lead an Afro-American movement, and third pos- sessed of the temerity to assail James Weldon Johnson's "Thoughtful American Negroes," represented mainly, it may be presumed, by N.A.A.C.P. types. Much of this feeling was expressed in a Johnson press release of 1924. He said: Mr. Garvey, who is not an American citizen, has taken it upon himself to go before the white people of this country advocating that the American Negro abdicate his constitutional rights, quit this coun- try and go to Africa. Mr. Garvey apparently does not know that the American Negro considers himself, and is, as much an American as anyone. . . .13 Garvey's ideological differences with the N.A.A.C.P. were translated into a continuous succession of running battles between the two. There was little that either side did that did not result in condemnation by the other side. One such contentious issue was the Dyer anti-lynching bill. The widespread public mutila- tion and execution of black people by lawless white mobs, with the connivance of law enforcement personnel, was a subject which exercised the minds of all black leaders in America. There were, nevertheless, different approaches to solving the problem. In June 1919 a Negro World editorial had attacked an N.A.A.C.P. resolution to fight 404 lynching by contributing to an anti-lynching fund. The editorial, in a possible reference to the African Blood Brotherhood, promised a U.N.I.A. force that would resist lynching by physical means, rather than relying on white philanthropy. With the appearance of the Dyer bill, how- ever, the U.N.I.A. decided at first on a policy of co- operation despite the fact that the N.A.A.C.P. was spearheading the campaign for the bill's passage, and even though it came at a time of escalating conflict be- tween the two organizations. The issue was obviously considered too important to allow considerations of orga- nizational rivalry. U.N.I.A. support was maintained throughout 1922, the year in which the bill made it through the House of Representatives only to be stifled afterwards in the Senate. Thus in January Garvey despatched a telegram to Congress urging the bill's passage. In February he took some of the credit for the bill's passage in the House of Representatives. In March a Negro World editorial by William H. Ferris praised the N.A.A.C.P. for its work on the bill. About the same time a mixed audience meeting in support of the bill in Wilmington, Delaware was sur- prised to see a large U.N.I.A. contingent in attendance, complete with seventy-five uniformed Black Cross Nurses wearing their red, black and green buttons. They were there on the invitation of the N.A.A.C.P., whose William 405 Pickens was the principal speaker. S. A. Haynes, U.N.I.A. Commissioner for Delaware, also spoke. In May the gggrg_ Wgrig_viewed favorably the visit to Washington, D.C. of a delegation led by William Monroe Trotter. Trotter hoped to dig the bill out of committee, where it had become bogged down. In June the U.N.I.A. joined the N.A.A.C.P., Y.M.C.A. and several other organizations in a parade from Harlem downtown into white Manhattan in support of the bill. And in November William H. Lewis, a black ex- Assistant Attorney-General spoke at Liberty Hall on the anti-lynching issue. A few months later Lewis was to en- gineer a visit by W. E. B. DuBois to Liberia. On this occasion, however, he was effusive in his praise for Garvey.14 Even in the midst of this cooperation, though, oc- casional misgivings could be heard in the U.N.I.A. ranks. Garvey, ever suspicious of temporary palliatives where more lasting measures should be applied, declared in April that only at such time as the black man obtained a power- ful government in Africa would lynching be eradicated. In May, John Edward Bruce, considering the lynching of a fifteen year old black youth in Texas by a crazed white mob of two thousand, exploded in disgust, saying that "A thousand Dyer Anti-Lynching Bills cannot change the mur- derous instinct of these cattle.“ Soon afterwards, Garvey began to criticize the N.A.A.C.P.'s handling of the 406 campaign, especially their attacks on the Republican administration while simultaneously trying to have the Republicans support the bill, and their tendency to claim too much credit for whatever successes the bill did have.15 It was not until 1923, however, that Garvey be- came totally hostile to the anti-lynching campaign. By this time the N.A.A.C.P. and allied campaign to effect Garvey's imprisonment and deportation was at its height. He had also received further evidences of white hypocrisy. He wrote: If Dyer does not know, let me tell him that I was in his Congressional District in St. Louis two weeks ago and could not get a soda served even by a dirty Greek, who kept his so-called white soda fountain in a Negro section, the section represented by the 'famous' anti-lynching advocate. Oh! The hypocrisy of this world! Garvey's pique here was increased by the fact that Dyer, in speeches for the N.A.A.C.P., had expressed satisfaction at Garvey's conviction.16 Garvey now argued that Dyer's bill duplicated laws already on the books that could be enforced if the autho- rities so wished. Furthermore any laws proposed by Dyer would still have to be enforced by white friends of the lynchers. He repeated his preference for the straight- forward Klan over the more hypocritical Dyer types. Some of Garvey's arguments here received an unusual vindication from a source which would have been generally unknown at 407 the time. For Mary White Ovington, Chairman of the N.A.A.C.P. Board of Directors, in 1921 privately expressed the view that the Dyer Bill would fail. It was too puni- tive. Whites, she wrote in a private letter, would not pass a bill to punish whites for lynching blacks.17 Garvey saw the sinister hand of the N.A.A.C.P. behind most of his problems, from the 1921 attempt to exclude him from the country to the thwarting of his Liberia scheme, to his trial and imprisonment. One such Garvey accusation blamed the Black Star Line's problems on sabotage by certain "organizations calling themselves Negro Advancement Associations." James Weldon Johnson, for the N.A.A.C.P., asked for a retraction of this state- ment and issued a press release on the matter. Garvey replied, no doubt tongue in cheek, that he did not refer specifically to the N.A.A.C.P. "Those who have clear con- sciences," he admonished, "are not disturbed when anything not relating to them is said or published."18 Some of Garvey's most bitter accusations concerned his 1923 trial. The presiding judge, Julian Mack, did indeed, as has been seen, admit his membership in the N.A.A.C.P.. He nevertheless refused to disqualify himself on this ground of apparent bias. Special agent Amos of the Department of Justice, a Constant thorn in Garvey's side before, during and after the trial, was also iden- tified by Garvey as a member, or at least under N.A.A.C.P. 408 influence. Garvey also charged that "a powerful banana and citrus fruit trust engaged in trOpical trade" (appar- ently a reference to the United Fruit Company) had con- tributed to his trial and conviction. This trust employed large numbers of Black Star Line stockholders and he iden- tified the N.A.A.C.P. President, Moorfield Storey, as an "attorney or stockholder" of the company.19 The N.A.A.C.P. at one stage issued a press release denying a Negro WOrld charge that Storey had visited the district attorney's office the same day that Garvey's case was called, in order to secure a conviction.20 One of the more unusual of the N.A.A.C.P.-HALIAA.’. squabbles developed out of the visit to the United States in 1924 and 1925 of Prince Kojo Tovalou-Houénou of Dahomey. Kojo, as he was often referred to, was a longtime asso- ciate of the U.N.I.A. and was feted at Liberty Hall. This caused him, according to some reports, to run the risk of forfeiting a tour of the country arranged for him by the N.A.A.C.P. He therefore said uncomplimentary things about the U.N.I.A., which had the effect Of reinstating him in the good graces of the N.A.A.C.P. In 1925 the prince lost two teeth while being forcibly ejected from a white Chicago restaurant whither he had been taken by white N.A.A.C.P. members, in whose company he was at the time. The Nggrg Wgrig commented drily that it hoped he would now appreciate the slogan Africa for the Africans.21 409 In the midst of their feud with Garvey the N.A.A.C.P. was occasionally chagrined by instances in which unknowing persons confused the two organizations. As early as 1919 DuBois had run into this problem in Europe. When early in 1922 the New York Times and several other papers were misled by a news agency into calling Garvey "President of the Association for the Advancement of the Colored Race," some N.A.A.C.P. officials counselled suit against them and much energy was expended extracting retractions from the errant papers. The association ex- plained to these editors that it comprised "white and colored people of the finest sort" and was not connected with Garvey.22 To add to the N.A.A.C.P.'s discomfiture it re- ceived a steady stream of letters for and against Garvey. Many were from people who wanted to know whether Garvey was honest. One such writer wanted to know whether the N.A.A.C.P. endorsed the U.N.I.A. Students at Howard University wanted material for a debate, "That the Marcus Garvey Movement is the best solution to the Negro Problem." The student body was said to be split between the two or- ganizations. The editor of the Nation, another such correspondent, wanted confidential information on Garvey. Some, on the other hand, wrote abusive letters such as 'one man who returned his N.A.A.C.P. membership card, declaring "I am for Marcus Garvey." Another informed the 410 association that it was a damned shame that their bunch of white men had nothing better to do than harass Garvey, the greatest black man of the age.23 Most of the corre— spondents were referred by N.A.A.C.P. officials to anti- Garvey articles in the Crisis, Crusader and Messenger. Yet some other rank and file members of the orga- nizations were quite happy to tolerate both. In-l924, for example, Garvey spoke at Howard University under the auspices of the University's N.A.A.C.P. and Caribbean Clubs, both of which, it so happened, were led by the same individual.24 Again, in 1921 Herbert J. Seligman of the N.A.A.C.P. received a sharp rebuke from a black lady in Boston for an article he had written on Garvey. The lady professed membership in the Boston N.A.A.C.P., the National Equal Rights League, and the U.N.I.A., since they were all working for race uplift. She presumed that Seligman was white and expressed agreement with Garvey's views on the insincerity of white motives. "If Garvey fails and we all lose our money, it is our business," she fumed, "and we have sense enough to know and to realise that there is a possibility of failure in everything in life save death." Seligman could manage only a weak reply about his right to criticize black as well as white and the "facts" upon which his article was based.25 Dual membership in the rival organizations may have become more difficult after 1924, for at1iat U.N.I.A. convention a 411 resolution moved by a delegate from Hamtramck, Michigan, was unanimously passed, to the effect that any person joining the U.N.I.A. found to be an N.A.A.C.P. member would have to withdraw from one of the two.26 The struggle between the N.A.A.C.P. and the U.N.I.A. achieved its highest embodiment in the personal feud between DuBois and Garvey. Prior to Garvey's arrival in the United States DuBois had for many years been en- gaged in a celebrated ideological altercation with Booker T. Washington, undisputedly the most powerful black man in America for the two decades or so prior to his death in 1915. Apart from the very real ideological differences between the two men, DuBois' initiatives against Washington were definitely an attempt to wrest the mantle of unoffi- cial supreme race leader from him. With Washington's death it may have seemed for a season that DuBois was now free of serious competition. Yet, within four months of Washington's burial Garvey had arrived obscurely in America, and by 1920 he had established beyond all reason- able doubt, the fact that America once more had a race leader of sufficient stature to clearly"overshadOW'his contemporaries. He had appeared from nowhere, he had overtaken the incumbent Afro-American leadership with lightning strides, and he was less reluctant than Washing- ton to sit back and wait for DuBois to attack. The battle which developed between the two far surpassed in 412 acrimoniousness the earlier Washington-DuBois debate. The latter had, at least externally, been a rather genteel affair. The DuBois-Garvey battle soon degenerated into a no-holds-barred contest in which DuBois, for once in his career, was prepared to abandon his scholarly regard for facts and deal on occasion on the level of lies, distor- tions and unprincipled mud-slinging. What was most fascinating about the GarveyrDuBois- struggle was that it was in a most real sense a continua- tion of the Washington-DuBois debate. The ideological questions raised were largely the same. Furthermore Garvey was very self-consciously a disciple of Washington, having been in correspondence with his hero up to a few months before Washington's death. Along with his admira- tion for Washington, Garvey had early imbibed a dislike for DuBois. He therefore expressly saw himself as the heir to Washington's fightagainst DuBois and nevermissed an opportunity to compare the two, to the detriment of DuBois. It is impossible to pinpoint the exact date on which Garvey first became aware of Washington's ideas. The West Indies of Garvey's childhoOd had long been ex- posed to debates on the question of industrial education, the type popularized by Washington. Such debates in the West Indies had ante-dated Washington by many years. Yet, in the West Indies, as in America, Washington's influence 413 provided a source of increased interest in industrial and agricultural schools. As a boy Garvey lived in St. Ann's Parish on Jamaica's north coast where in 1909 pioneer Barbadian Pan-Africanist Dr. Albert Thorne started an in- dustrial school.27 By this time interest in Washington's educational experiments was widespread in Jamaica and the other islands and West Indian students were attending Washington's Tuskegee Institute. Several delegates from the islands attended Washington's International Confer- ence on the Negro held at Tuskegee in 1912. Among them were a group of Jamaican educators including the island's director of education. A resolution presented to the conference by British West Indian delegates, among them teachers and students at Tuskegee, called for the erec- tion of a Tuskegee in the West Indies and for a visit to the islands by Booker T. Washington.28 It was not long after this conference (reported in the London based Africa Times and Orient Review for which Garvey worked) that Garvey read Washington's autobiography, Up From Slavery. This had a profound effect on him and it is from this event that, as he put it, his "doom" of being a race leader dawned on him.29 Back in Jamaica in 1914 he investigated the possibility of setting up a U.N.I.A. farming scheme30 and entered into correspondence with Washington. A Garvey letter to Washington in 1915 referred to 414 a previous letter of 1914 and to Washington's reply in- viting Garvey to Tuskegee. Garvey expressed his intention of leaving Jamaica in May or June 1915 for a speaking tour which would be confined mostly to race audiences in the south. This was to be a fund-raising tour to provide the wherewithal for alleviating suffering in Jamaica. He wrote, "I need not reacquaint you of the horrible condi- tion prevailing among our people in the West Indies as you are so well informed of happenings over Negrodom." He enclosed a U.N.I.A. manifesto which stated among its "local objects" (as opposed to international objectives) the establishment of industrial colleges.31 Washington replied two weeks later promising to do whatever he could to make Garvey's stay in the United States as profitable as possible.32 Less than seven months later, however, Washington was dead. Garvey therefore postponed his visit to the United States and held a memorial meeting for Washington at Kingston's Collegiate Hall. He also busied himself lecturing throughout the island bringing the life and work of Washington to the attention of, in his words, "the sleeping Jamaica Negro public." He informed Washington's associate Emmett J. Scott that he would soon be under- taking his tour to raise funds for his "Industrial Farm and Institute Scheme."33 By now Garvey was fully immersed in Washington's ideas. By February 1916 the letterhead 415 on his stationery bore a Washington quotation to the effect that the man on top could not hold down the man below without keeping himself down too. He reiterated, in a letter to Washington's successor, R. R. Moton, his desire to set up an Industrial Farm and Institute in Jamaica along Tuskegee lines to teach "race pride, race development, and other useful subjects." He even referred in Washingtonian terms, to minor assistance obtained from "cultured white people."34 When Moton visited Jamaica briefly shortly after this letter Garvey managed a few fleeting words with him despite efforts to prevent any such contact on the part of persons who by now considered Garvey an unsavory agitator.35 This brief encounter with Moton was in March 1916, the same month in which Garvey left Jamaica for the United States. During his first tour of the United States Garvey went to Tuskegee and met Emmett J. Scott, who provided him with introductions to influential persons.36 Garvey re- turned to Tuskegee late in 1923. This time he remained a few days, addressed the students and left what the student newspaper called a "substantial contribution" of $50 to the scholarship fund. He made a promise of an annual gift. ”Language fails me," he wrote at the end of his visit, ”to express my high appreciation for the service Dr. 37 Washington has rendered to us as a people." Washington was, of course, and continues to be, a 416 controversial figure in Afro-American history. Many have seen him primarily as a great accommodator willing to compromise with racism to buy time for the black man in his struggle for survival. Garvey was not oblivious of this aspect of Washington's career. He believed that Washington's reluctance to indulge in open agitation for political rights and his dependence on white philanthropy may have been inevitable during Washington's lifetime. In the new reality of the post-war world, however, "The industrially educated Negro would himself evolve a new ideal, after having been trained by the Sage of Tuskegee." Rather than attack Washington on these points he preferred to argue that Washington himself would have made these kinds of adjustments if he had lived.38 Of Washington's successor, R. R. Moton, Garvey became increasingly intolerant when it became clear that he would not make the required adjustments to the new age. By the late 1920's Garvey was willing to openly de— nounce Moton and in 1929 he wrote, "Dr. Moton is kept by white philanthropists, therefore, such a black man has absolutely no right talking on behalf of the Negro race."39 Garvey, therefore, was aware of and did not necessarily approve those elements in Washington's pro— gram which have caused him to be labelled an accommodator. But these were not the aspects of Washington's program that Garvey stressed. What Garvey more typically saw in ll.’ IR {Ill [Ii (all [l I [Ill-ll [ ‘I'llll‘ l I ll. l I III III I I'll [I I! III I 'I 417 Washington's career were self-reliance and race pride, both qualities that he professed not to see in DuBois. For whereas Washington was "an originator and builder who, out of nothing, constructed the greatest educational and industrial institution of the race in modern times," DuBois was "a bombast and iconoclast" full of "vicious and malicious criticisms of other men." Washington was therefore worth more than two million DuBoises.4o Simi- larly, Garvey saw in the U.N.I.A. a continuation of Washington's hostility to social equality.41 Another as— pect of Washington's career which Garvey also admired was the worldwide scope of his influence.42 If Garvey became disenchanted with R. R. Moton, in T. Thomas Fortune, editor of the Negro World, he had a close associate who had been for many years a close aide to Washington. Indeed Fortune thought that he must have known Washington more intimately than anyone else during the eighteen years of their relationship. Hardly a day passed during that period, he said, without the two being in direct contact, either personally or by letter or tele- gram.43 On Fortune's death in 1928 the Negro WOrld sketched the links between Washington, Fortune, and Garvey. The paper said: . . . Mr. Fortune was for many years guide, philo- sopher and friend to the greatest industrial educator, whom white men delighted to praise and black men idolized. Then a happy fate decreed that he should be helpmeet to the only man who either here or abroad 418 surpassed in girth Washington's greatness--who, starting where Washington left off, carried fast and high the torch of true emancipation for the Negro race. . . .44 Contact between DuBois and Garvey began innocently enough. DuBois recalled in his last autobiography, ”I heard of him first when I was in Jamaica, in 1915 when he sent a letter 'presenting his compliments' and giving me 'a hearty welcome to Jamaica, on the part of the United Improvement and Conservation Association [gig].'"45 In a pamphlet published around the same time or shortly before. Garvey included DuBois in a long list of race heroes that included the Pharoahs, Simon of Cyrene, Hannibal of Carthage, L'Ouverture and Dessalines of Haiti, Edward Wilmot Blyden, Frederick Douglass, Samuel Lewis of Sierra Leone and others.46 Garvey's esteem for DuBois was to be short lived, however. DuBois said many years afterwards that on this trip to Jamaica he was "surprisingly well- received by colored people and white."47 Possibly because of this, and possibly because of the apparent absence in Jamaica of the more blatant aspects of American racism, he may have been temporarily fooled, as has many an unwary North American visitor, into thinking that the Jamaican race problem had been solved. For in February 1916 Garvey now disenchanted with DuBois, wrote in a letter to Moton at Tuskegee, "Don't you believe like coloured Dr. DuBois that the 'race problem is at an end here' except you want to admit the utter insignificance of the black man." 419 Garvey continued, significantly, "I personally would like to solve the situation on the broadest humanitarian lines. I would like to solve it on the platform of Dr. Booker T. Washington."48 Garvey later attributed DuBois' misreading of the Jamaican race situation on this occasion to the fact that he had associated on this visit mostly with the local light-skinned caste.49 The N.A.A.C.P.'s official organ, the Crisis, of which DuBois was editor for the whole of Garvey's American period, acknowledged Garvey's presence shortly after his arrival in the United States. A brief, innocuous state- ment in the May 1916 issue stated, "Mr. Marcus Garvey, founder and president of the Universal Negro Improvement Association of Jamaica, B.W.I., is now on a visit to America. He will deliver a series of lectures on Jamaica in an effort to raise funds for the establishment of an industrial and educational institution for Negroes in Jamaica."50 In an article published in January 1917, Garvey declared that he had detected some false, self-seeking leaders in Afro-America, as well as some worthy ones. The name of DuBois did not figure among the good ones he listed.51 This article was written not long before Garvey's famous visit to DuBois at the N.A.A.C.P. office. He was "dumbfounded" by what he saw and professed to be almost unable to tell "whether it was a white show or a 420 colored vaudeville he was running at Fifth avenue."52 By 1919 Garvey had already emerged as one of the more important of Harlem's militant New Negroes, and even though, as DuBois himself admitted, he tried for as long as he could to "explain away the Garvey movement and ig- nore it,"53 he could not totally pretend that Garvey did not exist. For one thing, the occasional reference to Garvey, sometimes explicit, sometimes veiled, intruded itself into the Crisis. During DuBois' absence in France, for example, a long editorial considered favorably the new demand of Africa for the Africans and even advocated limited Afro-American migration to Africa, though not at 54 the expense of the struggle at home. A brief Crisis report later that year carried news of Garvey's conflict with the District Attorney in New York.55 In 1919, too, a U.N.I.A. commissioner in France crossed the path of DuBois and actually attended the latter's hastily orga- nized Pan-African Congress in Paris.56 And in December of that year the Crisis felt obliged to affirm the right of the Negro World and other radical black papers to pub- lish, in the face of an onslaught against the black press by Southerners in Congress, backed by the Attorney-Gene- ral.57 By 1920 Garvey was very near, if not at the peak of his career, so that even though DuBois continued to try, it was now becoming very difficult indeed to ignore 421 Garvey. For one thing, two former associates of DuBois were now among Garvey's closest colleagues. One of these was John Edward Bruce, a veteran Afro-American journalist and Pan-Africanist who had been among the fifty-nine who issued the call to the founding meeting of DuBois' well- known Niagara Movement in 1905. Another was William H. Ferris, graduate of Harvard and Yale and author, and also one of the fifty-nine.58 Both these men were members, during their U.N.I.A. years, of the editorial board of the Negro WOrld and Bruce served also on Garvey's daily Negro Times. Both were knighted by Garvey. Bruce's wife, in addition, served as a confidential secretary in Garvey's employ. Bruce also had been president of the Negro Society for Historical Research, founded in Yonkers, New York, in 1911. DuBois had been a corresponding member of that society. So was Mrs. Marie DuChatellier of Bocas del Toro, Panama, by 1920 a U.N.I.A. organizer, and Duse Mohamed Ali, Garvey's former employer in England and himr self connected for a time with the U.N.I.A. Garvey's staunchest Liberian supporter, Chief Justice James J. Dossen, a former vice-president of Liberia, was an hon- orary member.59 DuBois could not have been unaware of the Garveyite connections of at least some of this impres- sive list of the highly educated element whom he called the "talented tenth." He usually preferred, however, to see the U.N.I.A. as the near exclusive domain of persons 422 he characterized as ignorant. From the beginning of 1920, then, DuBois began to direct some Crisis editorials towards Garvey. Even at this point, however, he was still possessed of the desire to ignore his new rival, and confined himself to thinly veiled references to Garvey without actually naming him. In January 1920 he editorialized favorably on the new mood of separatism and race consciousness expressed in such slogans as "Asia for the Asians" and'Africa for the Afri- cans" (Garvey's slogan). He suggested that the white man should get out of black communities all over the world or provide "utter justice for all." "Here is the choice," he wrote, "Which will you have, my masters?"60 In March, though, in response to criticisms of the N.A.A.C.P.'s inter-racial character from an unnamed source, a Crisis editorial withdrew from the earlier hint of support for separatism. The editorial argued that black people could not strive for equality in white society and separation at the same time, and vigorously defended white partici- pation in the N.A.A.C.P.61 Shortly thereafter Garvey sneered at DuBois' receipt of the Spingarn Medal for founding the Pan-African Congress. He considered William Monroe Trotter (who had broken with DuBois) to have per- formed a worthier task in presenting a petition of his National Equal Rights League to the Paris peace conference. Trotter, he pointed out, had been too radical for the 423 N.A.A.C.P.'s white point of view.62 With the start of Garvey's epochal First Interna- tional Convention in August things took a turn for the worst. On August 3rd it was announced to the convention that DuBois had attended an earlier session. This brought forth a Garvey denunciation of DuBoiswhich, it was re- ported, was responsible for the day's most enthusiastic applause.63 To add to his discomfiture, DuBois had been mistakenly blamed by the Chicago Tribune for the "Back to Africa" riot in that city, in which Garvey had been sup- posedly implicated.64 Halfway through the convention Garvey informed an interviewer for the National Civic Federation that DuBois represented the "ante-bellum Negro" as opposed to the militant post—war New Negro.65 Four days later DuBois informed the same interviewer that Garvey was not sincere. He also said here what was to become something of an obsession with him, namely that Garvey's followers were "the lowest type of Negroes, mostly from the Indies" and that the U.N.I.A. could in no way be considered an Afro-American movement. He also de- nounced Garvey as an ally of Bolsheviks and Sinn Feiners.66 Despite this forthright denunciation of Garvey made in private DuBois continued his policy of veiled public attack in the Crisis, the September issue of which carried an editorial on West Indians directed, on DuBois' 424 own admission, at Garvey and the U.N.I.A.67 By this time DuBois' efforts at ignoring Garvey had come to the atten- tion of Chandler Owen and A. Philip Randolph of the Messenger. For the September Messenger in an editorial entitled "A Record of the Darker Races" (a takeoff on the sub-title of the Crisis) pointed out that the Crisis did not live up to its sub-title. To illustrate this conten- tion the Messenger showed that although the Crisis had mentioned minor race events, it had allowed Garvey's spectacular happenings in New York City to go unreported.68 Perhaps in response to this criticism the November Crisis finally took cognizance of Garvey's August convention. The report consisted of a few brief lines hidden away in the midst of several brief and relatively unimportant news items.69 This same issue carried yet another DuBois editorial against attacks from unnamed sources on his ad- vocacy of social equality. This time DuBois attempted to use Booker T. Washington against the Garveyite neo-Wash- ington camp by suggesting that Washington himself, the great opponent of social equality, had participated in functions with white people.70 The usual Garveyite re- sponse to this kind of argument was, of course, that Washington took the white people's money but built himself an independent black power base with it. Furthermore, the typical Garveyite argument went, with black resources at a low ebb after slavery he had little alternative but to 425 obtain funds from.white folks. DuBois, on the other hand, was seen as a man dependent on whites almost for his very existence. Indeed his whole career was seen as the work of white philanthropy, and Garvey liked to refer to DuBois' education as an "experiment" by white people to see whether black people could profit by instruction.71 Garvey probably did not know it, but his contempt for DuBois' history of dependence on white philanthropy was shared by at least one of the most influential of the white N.A.A.C.P. leaders. Mary White Ovington, Chairman of the N.A.A.C.P. Board of Directors, privately contrasted DuBois' influence among white people with his lesser in- fluence among black people, even within the N.A.A.C.P. She then remarked, with a contempt no less than Garvey's, "His career has been made by the whites; first Dr. Bumstead [the Atlanta University president who hired DuBois], next various members of the N.A.A.C.P."72 His attempt to publicly pretend that Garvey was not there having failed to secure Garvey's disappearance, DuBois in November 1920 decided that the time had come to call off the pretense. He wrote W. A. Domingo, by now a known enemy of Garvey: "May I ask if you have any infor- mation concerning Mr. Marcus Garvey and his organizations which you would be willing to give me?" He inquired also after the address of Eliezer Cadet, the Haitian U.N.I.A. commissioner who had attended the 1919 Pan-African It‘ll!!! 426 Congress in Paris. The letter was returned to him and he sent it off to historian Arthur A. Schomburg in the hope that Schomburg could locate Domingo and forward it.73 The letter seems to have gotten no further than Schomburg but the December Crisis nevertheless featured a DuBois article entitled "Marcus Garvey." He could ignore Garvey no longer, so he had now embarked on the next best thing, open confrontation. The battle was now irrevocably joined. In this article, as in most but by no means all of his published comments on Garvey, DuBois affected the pose of the impartial scholarly observer. This posture never prevented his analyses of Garvey from being to varying degrees distorted and inaccurate. It did, how- ever, mislead many commentators on the DuBois-Garvey con- flict for the next half century into thinking that DuBois was in fact always fair and detached. Whereas in August DuBois had privately denounced Garvey as an insincere Bolshevik sympathizer leading a bunch of ignorant West Indians, now his public pose was somewhat more mellow. Garvey was characterized as "essentially an honest and sincere man" but possessed of a long list of character defects. Several of his major objections to Garvey were stated. Inveterate snob that he was, he scoffed at what he considered Garvey's defects of training, much as he had long flayed all those, including Washington, who 427 would not acknowledge the near-divine right of the "talented tenth" to lead the race. Again, as always, Garvey was described as a leader of Jamaica's black pea- santry but not as a leader of Afro-Americans. The con- tinuing conflict between the Pan-African Congress and the U.N.I.A. also got a preview. DuBois denied a Garvey al- legation of 1919 to the effect that DuBois had humbugged the U.N.I.A. commissioner in France that year by repudi- ating Garvey's statements on lynching and racial intoler- ance in the United States. In attempting to establish that Garvey could not get along with his fellow workers he overreached himself. He adduced as proof the fact that none of the fifteen names of Garvey's officers in 1914 appeared on a similar list for 1918.74 The truth of the matter was, of course, that the 1914 list comprised Garvey's earliest Jamaican executive, while the 1918 list represented Garvey's American organization. John Edward Bruce attacked DuBois on this point.75 DuBois published a second installment of this critique in January. Here he attacked Garvey on the black versus light-skinned question, accusing Garvey or raising this question in a land where, according to DuBois, it was a non-question. He also objected to Garvey's antago- nism of the British imperialists and released the infor- mation that in July 1920 he had sent "a courteous letter of inquiry" to Garvey asking for financial data on the 428 U.N.I.A. and Black Star Line. For some inexplicable reason he had expected Garvey to furnish him with this information and was upset because his letter remained unacknowledged and unanswered. He again overreached him- self, this time describing the Black Star Line's Yarmouth as a wooden rather than a steel vessel.76 He later pub- lished a retraction of this statement at the suggestion of Arthur B. Spingarn, head of the N.A.A.C.P.'s legal committee and a vice-president of the organization.77 By this time the controversy between the two men had elicited enough interest for a "debate" to be arranged at the Mother Bethel A.M.E. Church in Philadelphia. DuBois pre- sented his views on April 4, 1921. Garvey, scheduled to speak the following week, could not do so, being still stranded in the West Indies.78 After these two articles DuBois returned to his policy of attacking Garvey without naming him. In one such attack in May 1921 he stated what, together with the miscegenationist, West Indian and talented tenth questions was to be a major point of ideological difference between himself, as an N.A.A.C.P. representative, and Garvey. This was the question of a concentration on purely Afro- American struggle versus a move to immediate linkages among African communities worldwide. DuBois, after blow- ing away the "hoard of scoundrels and bubble-blowers, ready to conquer Africa, join the Russian revolution, and 429 vote in the Kingdom of God tomorrow" came out in favor of "a program which says: the battle of Negro rights is to be fought right here in America." He expressed the san- guine expectation, which he himself was to repudiate in the next decade, that twenty-five more years of "intelli- gent fighting" such as the N.A.A.C.P. was engaged in, would free the race in America.‘79 Such isolationist sentiments from the founder of the Pan-African Congress were not as unusual as may appear at first glance. For DuBois at this time seems to have conceived of this organization more as an international social club for the talented tenth, rather than a body engaging in real worldwide grass roots struggle such as was the purpose of the U.N.I.A. He himself said as much in a letter to Secretary of State Charles Hughes one month after the appearance of this article. He told Hughes, "The Pan-African Congress is for conference, ac- quaintanceship and general organization. It has nothing to do with the so called Garvey movement and contemplates neither force nor revolution in its program." He continued, "We have had the cordial cooperation of the French, Bel- gium [gig] and Portuguese governments and we hope to get the attention and sympathy of all colonial powers.80 What is interesting about this letter, apart from its evidence of DuBois' very non-militant conception of Pan-Africanism, is that it was written at the time when Hughes and the State Department were trying to keep Garvey out of the 430 United States. It may possibly have reinforced Hughes' conviction of Garvey's undesirability. Garvey, for his part, was quite convinced that DuBois had a hand in his exclusion. DuBois wrote a similar letter to the British Ambassador in Washington.81 The purpose of these letters was to obtain support for the 1921 Pan-African Congress in London. The Pan-African Congress was scheduled for August and September and may have represented an attempt to dis- tract some attention from Garvey's annual August conven- tion. On the eve of the U.N.I.A. convention Garvey, only recently back from his ordeal in the Caribbean, issued a call for unity and invited DuBois, R. R. Moton, Kelly Miller and Emmett J. Scott to attend.82 Yet the conven- tion all but commenced with a resolution denouncing the Pan-African Congress. This was passed amidst loud cheers.83 During the convention the Negro WOrld published an account of the U.N.I.A. finances. This information, long sought by DuBois, was diligently transcribed from the paper at the N.A.A.C.P. headquarters.84 And Garvey's con- vention once more rated a fleeting mention among the Crisis news briefs.85 In Europe meanwhile the Pan-African Congress was widely mistaken, despite DuBois' efforts, for a Garveyite affair, much to the chagrin of its founder and to the joy of Garvey, who exulted in the free publicity accruing to 431 the U.N.I.A. from DuBois' hapless predicament. Every second word said at DuBois' congress had been "Marcus Garvey" he boasted, and cited a large collection of clippings from European papers to support his conten- tions.86 DuBois had not considered it necessary to in- vite any U.N.I.A. participation because he considered the Garvey program too "dangerous" and "impracticable."87 Garvey's ideas and influence nevertheless continued to haunt the proceedings. At the London session, for ex- ample, a Nigerian student read a paper proposing "An African Program" which was nothing but warmed over Gar- veyism, complete with New WOrld African migration to the mother continent, a Liberian Loan, and establishment of a beachhead in Liberia to lead eventually to a United States of West Africa.88 But the "most unkindest cut of all" came when the person left in charge of the permanent secretariat set up in Paris after the conference became infected with Garveyite ideas. DuBois himself thusly ex- plained this episode: Just as the Garvey movement made its thesis industrial cooperation, so the new young secretary of the Pan- African movement, a coloured Paris public school teacher, wanted to combine investment and profit with the idea of Pan-Africa. He wanted American Negro capital for this end. We had other ideas.89 DuBois added here that this Garveyite influence almost wrecked his organization. The problemsof DuBois' 1921 Pan-African Congress were not made any less worrisome by a stream of hostile 432 comments, emanating from the Negro World editorials of William H. Ferris. DuBois, he argued, must surely be indulging in poetic license when he dared call his gather- ing a Pan-African Congress even though such people as British colonial official and Africanist scholar Sir Harry Johnston were among the sponsors. Johnston it was, Ferris reminded his readers, who in his arrogance had said that not a single Afro-American kenw anything about Africa. DuBois' misnomer was also emphasized by a long list of African territories (the vast majority on the continent) unrepresented at DuBois' congress. "There has been no 'Pan-African' Congress in Europe this year," this edito- rial concluded, "because ALL AFRICA didn't respond to the DuBois call." Ferris wrote off DuBois' gathering as a joke, a "racial adulteration," an "exclusive college func- tion," comprising thirty delegates and two thousand white so-called "audiences." Furthermore, Ferris saw in this latest DuBois en- deavor merely the most recent example of BuBois' long- standing tendency towards plagiarism. He argued that DuBois had incorporated Ida Wells-Barnett's anti-lynching program without giving her credit for it. Eight years after William Monroe Trotter's Guardian and race organi- zation had appeared, Ferris continued, DuBois had started a magazine and organization along similar lines. The only credit he gave Trotter for his idea was to call him 433 a fanatic. DuBois' short history of the Negro, was but a shorter version of one published nine years prior to that by a black man whom DuBois had referred to as an up- start. Ten years previously Duse Mohamed Ali had written Booker T. Washington, Dr. W. S. Scarborough and DuBois informing them of the impending appearance of his maga- zine designed to draw closer together the darker races of the world. The first two sent encouraging replies. DuBois' reply had been characterized by Mohamed as point- less and disappointing. Yet DuBois later copied Mohamed's idea. Now, after having found fault with Garvey's 1920 convention, he was busy discussing the same things at his congress and trying to set up a permanent organization.90 Back in America after the congress DuBois ran into a storm of criticism from Garvey and others, includ- ing Garvey's adversary Cyril Briggs, over a widely circu- lated Associated Press report. This report had quoted DuBois as having said during the congress that not only did Afro-Americans have no desire to oust the colonialists from Africa, but they could hardly migrate there since they could not stand the climate. Garvey naturally seized the opportunity to embarrass his rival, commenting, "One editor and leader went so far as to say at his so-called Pan-African Congress that American Negroes could not live 91 in Africa, because the climate was too hot." Since the statement attributed to DuBois had been made as part of a 434 general refutation of Garvey's African program, Garvey despatched a reply to a New York paper which had published it.92 DuBois later attempted to extricate himself from this statement. He denied it but diluted his denial somewhat by adding that because one's great grandfather might have been African it did not follow that the African climate would hold no terrors.9 Apart from this criticism DuBois on his return had to face continuing embarrassing disclosures in the pages of the Negro WOrld concerning his Pan-African Con- gress. One such report, translated from a Portuguese paper recalled DuBois' invitation to the Portuguese colo- nialists to attend his conference. The article claimed that handpicked Africans, members of the Liga Africana (African League) had been allowed to attend. These dele- gates had then returned to Portuguese controlled Africa. At a meeting of the league in Africa two of these dele- gates, Nicolan Santos Pinto and Jose de Magalhanes [gig] were heckled and forced to stop speaking when they tried to extol the virtues of the Pan-African Congress. They were confronted by shouts of "Long live Marcus Garvey and the African National Party (U.N.I.A.)" The audience de- nounced Blaise Diagne (conservative Senegalese president of the congress) in particular and the congress in general. Another such article translated from a French maga- zine, was by a Paris attorney, a Mr. Alcandre, who had 435 attended the Paris session of the congress. The article reproduced a resolution introduced at the congress calling upon the body to invite Garvey to its next meeting instead of attacking him unjustly in his absence. Diagne, pre- siding over the meeting, had at first refused to read it. When he did read it, it was in a semi-understandable fashion at the very end of the session. Alcandre, the resolution's sponsor, was not sure whether it passed or not.94 The end of 1921 found DuBois vainly attempting to persuade the N.A.A.C.P. hierarchy to move their head- quarters uptown into Harlem.95 The dispute with Garvey may well have heightened the disadvantages of a downtown location on the white side of New York City. Thus ended the first full year of increased hostility between the two leaders. During the year their followers and supporters had increasingly joined in the fray. One Garveyite had actually published a book attacking DuBois because he thought that Garvey had not been firm enough with him. The book bore the self-explanatory title, Mistakes of W. E. B. DuBois, Being an Answer to Dr. W. E. B. DuBois' Attack upon the Honourable Marcus Garvey.96 The author described himself as a "Voluntary Field Speaker of the U.N.I.A." and emphasized that DuBois was "dubious," and an adept at "scientific lying," an apparent reference to DuBois' tactic of framing distortions in apparently 436 scholarly, dispassionate language. DuBois accelerated his campaign against Garvey's philosophy and personality in 1922. The beginning of the year found Garvey on his annual list of "debits" "In Ac- count With The American Negro" for the preceding year. Garvey shared DuBois' list of debits together with Presi- dent Harding's Birmingham speech and the lynching of fifty-nine black people during the year. Among the "credits" were the Dyer Anti-Lynching Bill and, naturally, the second Pan-African Congress.97 Garvey's response was to call his adversary a "crazy lunatic or a soulless em- ployee" in the pay of an alien race for suggesting that his ships were liabilities rather than assets.98 A few pages after the list of debits and credits DuBois slipped in another attack on Garvey in the midst of a eulogy of Afro-American Colonel Charles Young, who had died in West Africa. DuBois here articulated his intellectual's dis- dain for Garvey's style. He wrote of Young, "But Africa needed him. He did not yell and collect money and adver- tise great schemes and parade in crimson-~he just went quietly, ignoring appeal and protest."99 As if this was not enough, DuBois included yet another camouflaged anti-Garvey editorial on the same page. This one was entitled "Africa for the Africans." DuBois, at this period in his life was a fairly moderate character, and, compared with Garvey, might even have been described 437 as conservative. His conception of the Pan-African Congress as a benign body that would seek the cooperation of the European colonizers of Africa has already been noted. Garvey, to be sure, also on occasion spoke in terms of such cooperation. But Garvey's radical actions in the colonized world spoke louder than his attempts to disarm the colonialists. This editorial shows clearly DuBois' limited Pan-African outlook at this period. He suggested that "Africa should be administered for the Africans and, as soon as may be, by the Africans." He emphasized that he did "not mean by this that Africa should be administered by West Indians or American "100 Thus whereas Garvey was clamouring for im- Negroes. mediate African government with West Indians and Afro- Americans to provide a supply of extra skilled personnel, DuBois in 1922 seemed content to go along with the colo- nialist lie that they were gradually training presently incompetent Africans for eventual self-government. Seve- ral Africans protested this and other similar statements emanating from DuBois and Blaise Diagne.101 On the domestic scene, Garvey's criticisms seem to have brought about a sharpening of DuBois' analysis of the Afro-American reality. For whereas in 1921 he had argued that Garvey had all but introduced intra-racial color antagonism onto the American scene where it practi- 102 cally did not exist, now Garvey's success made him 438 think again. In yet another lengthy attack on Garvey without expressly naming him, he referred to his adver- sary as "The Demagog." "From now on in our new awakening," he declared, "our self-criticism, our impatience and pas- sion, we must expect the Demagog among Negroes more and more. He will come to lead, inflame, lie and steal. He will gather large followings and then burst and disappear. Loss and despair will follow his fall until new false pro- phets arise." Yet he acknowledged that his supposedly hypothetical demagog would in 1922 find a fertile field of growing cleavage "between our incipient social classes." White oppression, he argued, had artificially restrained class differences among black people. But these differ- ences, though not as great as they would be in the absence of such discrimination, were there all the same. "Never- theless," he argued, "the ties between our privileged and exploited, our educated and ignorant, our rich and poor, our light and dark, are not what they should be and what we can and must make them."103 This admission by DuBois of the antagonisms existing in Afro-American society be- tween "light and dark" is important because prior to this, and indeed afterwards too, he preferred to treat it as a taboo subject not to be discussed, except to blame Garvey for introducing it. After this spate of sniping attacks during the first half of 1922 DuBois decided that the time had come 439 for another article openly directed at Garvey. He there- fore set about from July gathering information for an article on the Black Star Line. On July 27 he wrote the chairman of the United States Shipping Board for informa- tion on Garvey's attempts to buy ships from the board. He explained to the chairman that Garvey had collected perhaps half a million dollars in connection with his shipping line and hinted at the possibility of fraud. The chairman declined to divulge any information but sug- gested he try Joseph P. Nolan, who had acted as attorney for the Black Star Line in some of these transactions.104 Undaunted, DuBois then wrote the State Department. He was requested to furnish a statement explaining his in- terest in the matter before a decision could be made on whether to grant his request. He complied with this sug- gestion, explaining that "The Black Star Line was promoted by a West Indian agitator named Marcus Garvey. He col- lected from the colored people in America and the West Indies nearly $800,000." Many persons, he suggested, lost money in the process. Among these were Crisis readers. He therefore now wanted to publish the truth and warn readers against such schemes. Once more, however, the information was refused. He was informed that the files 105 While awaiting these replies DuBois were confidential. went ahead and wrote the article anyway, and obtained legal advice before sending it to press, to ensure that 440 it was not libellous.106 Much of this activity was going on during August, the month of Garvey's convention. An earlier Garvey in- vitation to DuBois to attend and let "the real leadership" lead the race was apparently not taken up. Nor was Garvey's invitation to the N.A.A.C.P. to participate in the convention parade together with a banner bearing the association's name.107 The Black Star Line article appeared in the Sep- tember Crisis. It was carefully documented to avoid the possibility of libel proceedings, with most of the impor- tant information in the form of direct quotations from the Negro WOrld and the Orr case (where a stockholder had sued the Black Star Line, resulting in public exposure of the line's great financial losses). Many of DuBois' argu- ments here were later repeated by the prosecution in the 1923 trial. Here for once in his dealings with Garvey DuBois was able to harness his rage long enough to effec- tively employ his considerable scholarly talents. And coming as it did in the midst of the "Marcus Garvey Must Go" campaign and at a time when Garvey had already been arrested and indicted for alleged fraud in connection with the shipping line, the result was the most devastating of 108 DuBois' attacks. DuBois in effect presumed guilt and passed judgement on a matter which was subjjudice. This, together with his letters to government officials and his 441 friendship with the judge who was soon to preside over Garvey's trial, must certainly have prejudiced Garvey's chances of an impartial hearing. Garvey considered this particular DuBois attack to be particularly unfortunate since, he explained, the Black Star Line represented not a venture in the interest of individuals but an effort to lift up a struggling race. "If," he therefore lamented, "DuBois were a constructive leader, since he possesses all the knowledge in the world, he would help Marcus Garvey, the Universal Negro Improvement Association, and the Black Star Line to make good."109 The Black Star Line article marked the beginning of an escalated series of open attacks on Garvey. It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that these articles were deliberately timed to lend support to the campaign for Garvey's imprisonment and deportation then being waged by a coalition of black Socialists, N.A.A.C.P. officials and other black integrationists. They were also quite obviously a deliberate attempt to create a climate favor- able to Garvey's conviction in his forthcoming trial. One of these articles appeared in November and concerned the defection from the N.A.A.C.P. to the U.N.I.A. of Dr. Leroy Bundy. Bundy had been arrested during the 1917 massacre of black people in East St. Louis for en- couraging the black community to arm in self-defense and charged with alleged murder and incitement to riot. He 442 collaborated for a while with the N.A.A.C.P., who orga- nized a defense fund and prepared to defend him. Some- where along the line Bundy fell out with the N.A.A.C.P. and defected to the U.N.I.A. camp. During the 1922 con- vention he was knighted by Garvey and the convention elected him First Assistant President-General of the U.N.I.A. In response to the incessant N.A.A.C.P. accusa- tions of financial mismanagement Garvey had countered with an accusation of his own. What, the Negro WOrld enquired, had become of the $50,000 collected by the N.A.A.C.P. for Bundy's defense? Only $150 had been spent on Bundy, the paper charged. The N.A.A.C.P.'s legal director Arthur Spingarn had thought it not worth the while to institute legal proceedings against Garvey for this statement but suggested that DuBois publish a "very brief resume of the disbursements and expenditures in the 110 Bondy [sic] matter." DuBois published a six-page article on the affair, which was duly repudiated by two Ferris editorials in the Negro WOrld.111 1923 was greeted by a DuBois attempt to prove that the U.N.I.A. had less than 18,000 members.112 To do this he published a U.N.I.A. financial report which he claimed had been suppressed up to that time. The figure for sub- scriptions was relatively small and DuBois presumed from this that all branches had sent in all their subscriptions and that paid up members and active members were I It x I .. try ..... I .I l .. 443 necessarily the same. When he discovered that only around two hundred delegates had voted at the 1922 convention he seemed to conclude that this was an indication of the small number of delegates present, not realizing that votes were cast by delegation rather than by individual. DuBois' conclusions concerning membership here were ob- viously a gross understatement. When white papers could conservatively estimate 20,000 to 25,000 persons attending the first session of Garvey's 1920 convention, or 3,000 people at one meeting of the Chicago branch alone, or 100,000 people parading and jamming the sidewalks of Harlem in 1926 demanding Garvey's release, then the enor- 113 mity of DuBois' underestimate becomes clear. Garvey at this stage issued An Answer to His Many_ Critics114 refuting, among other things, the charge that his following represented "The ignorant and gullible." To prove the erroneousness of this charge he informed the public that he had challenged DuBois, James Weldon Johnson and anyone else who might be willing to a debate over their differences. He had had no takers. This Garvey statement appeared about the same time as an N.A.A.C.P. press release of January 25115 giving advance publicity to DuBois' most elaborate onslaught against Garvey, a ten page article appearing in the February issue of the white Century magazine.116 The article portrayed Garvey as a semi-comic figure. It began: 444 There was a long, low, unfinished church basement, roofed over. A little, fat black man, ugly, but with intelligent eyes and big head, was seated on a plank platform beside a "throne," dressed in a military uniform of the gayest mid-Victorian type, . . . Among the lucky recipients of titles was the former private secretary of Booker T. Washington! In this article DuBois restated most of his ideological and other differences with Garvey. There was first the question of race. DuBois reverted here to the argument that Garvey had introduced a peculiarly West Indian phe- nomenon of intra-racial color conflict into America. Even so, he could not completely deny, as he had seemed to on occasion before, the existence of similar phenomena in Afro-America. He insisted contradictorily that intra- racial color lines were essentially a West Indian pheno- menon, "despite the near-white aristocracies of cities like Charleston and New Orleans, and despite the fact that the proportion of mulattoes who were free and who gained some wealth and education was greater than that of blacks because of the favor of their white parents." He even admitted that after emancipation in America "color caste tended to arise again" and that in his own time it was fashionable for light-skinned Afro-Americans to pose as Spanish or Portuguese. In the face of all this voluntary evidence he stubbornly insisted that intra-racial color antagonism was practically unknown in Afro-America because all-prevading white racism forced light-skinned folk 445 (those, presumably, who did not pass for Spanish and Portuguese) to refer to themselves as Negroes. That this position was due largely to his own feeling of vulnerabi- lity as a person of very light hue was apparently uncon- sciously admitted when he stated, "Colored folk as white as the whitest came to describe themselves as negroes [gig]. Imagine, then, the surprise and disgust of these Americans when Garvey launched his Jamaican color scheme." For someone as sensitive about his color as DuBois was the intra-racial color question was best treated by silence. He said so in this article, though he foisted his idea upon the bulk of Afro-Americans. He said, "it came to be generally regarded as the poorest possible taste for a negro even to refer to differences of color." Coupled with his refusal to admit of a home grown color question within the race, DuBois came very near in this article to a condescending, amused and even offensive treatment of Garvey's blackness. References to Garvey as a "little, fat black man, ugly, but with intelligent eyes and a big head," and "this black peasant of Jamaica," and in a white magazine at that, were, at the very least, dis- concerting. Garvey, of course, often accused DuBois of hating the black blood within him and of hankering after white society. This facet of DuBois' experience was later given scholarly treatment by the eminent Afro-American sociologist E. Franklin Frazier. Frazier's analysis came 446 close to that of Garvey. He defined DuBois as a "marginal man." He wrote: He was born in New England, where his mulatto characteristics permitted him a large degree of par- ticipation in the life of the white world. During his short sojourn in the South as an undergraduate at Fisk University, where he was under New England white teachers, he never was thoroughly assimilated into Negro life. His return to New England afforded him a more congeniel environment where he thoroughly absorbed the genteel intellectual tradition of Harvard. . . . But DuBois, aristocrat in bearing and in sym- pathies, was in fact a cultural hybrid or what sociologists call a 'marginal man.‘ Once back in America and Atlanta, he was just a 'nigger.' Fine flower of western culture, he had here the same status as the crudest semi-barbarous Negro in the South. In the Souls of Black Folk we have a classic statement of the 'marginal man' with his double consciousness: on the one hand sensitive to every slight concerning the Negro, and feeling on the other hand little kinship or real sympathy for the great mass of crude, uncouth black peasants with whom he was identified. For, in spite of the way in which DuBois has written concerning the masses, he has no real sympathetic understanding of them. The Souls of Black Folk is a masterly portrayal of DuBois' soul and not a real picture of the black masses. When he takes his pen to write of the black masses we are sure to get a dazzlingly romantic pic- ture. Someone has remarked aptly that the Negroes in The Quest of the Silver Fleece are gypsies. The voice of DuBois it genuine only when he speaks as the representative of The Talented Tenth. . . .117 In the Century article DuBois restated his con- tention that Garvey was essentially a leader of West Indian peasants who was uninterested in and little know- ledgeable about Afro-American struggles. Recurring here also was his typical disdain for Garvey and all others who had not been educated at Harvard and Berlin. "Garvey," he said, "had no thorough education and a very hazy idea 447 of the technic of civilization." He once again voiced his disapproval of Garvey's anti-imperialist attitude and accused Garvey of trying to take over Liberia. The see— saw struggle in his mind between separation and integra- tion was now firmly on the side of integration. "Not in segregation," he pontificated, "but in closer, larger unity lies interracial peace." And with his insistence against segregation he recognized the affinity between Booker T. Washington and Garvey. He disposed of them jointly with the claim that: The present generation of negroes [sic] has survived two grave temptations, the greater one, fathered by Booker T. Washington, which said, 'Let politics alone, keep in your place, work hard, and do not come plain,‘ and which meant perpetual color caste for colored folk by their own cooperation and consent, and the consequent inevitable debauchery of the white world; and the lesser, fathered by Marcus Garvey, which said: 'Give up! Surrender! The struggle is useless; back to Africa and fight the white world. This passage showed too that DuBois' Pan-African ideas were still far from Garvey's. In the same month of the Century article readers of the Crisis were presented with DuBois' annual list of race credits and debits. The black Star Line figured among the debits.118 The Century attack, the most comprehensive by DuBois, did not go unanswered. Garvey's reply was swift and bitter. He addressed himself first, not unnaturally, to the racial slurs contained in DuBois' article. The 448 Negro World headline proclaimed, "W. E. BURGHARDT DUBOIS AS A HATER OF DARK PEOPLE." A sub-title followed: "Calls His Own Race 'Black and Ugly,‘ Judging From the White Man's Standard of Beauty." Garvey declared, This 'unfortunate mulatto,‘ who bewails every day the drop of Negro blood in his veins, being sorry that he is not Dutch or French, has taken upon him? self the responsibility of criticizing and condemn- ing other people while holding himself up as the social 'unapproachable' and the great 'I AM' of the Negro race. Garvey, himself no mean wielder of a vitriolic pen, con- tinued to heap scorn and abuse on DuBois' racial remarks. "How he arrives at his conclusion that Marcus Garvey is ugly, being a Negro, is impossible to determine," he raged, indulging his fondness for referring to himself in the third person, "in that if there is any ugliness in the Negro race it would be reflected more through DuBois than Marcus Garvey, in that he himself tells us that he is a little Dutch, a little French, and a little Negro. Why, in fact, the man is a monstrosity." Garvey could not see why "this professor, who sees ugliness in being black, essays to be a leader of the Negro people." He supposed that DuBois' equation of blackness with ugliness and whiteness with beauty explained "why he likes to dance with white people, and dine with them, and some- times sleep with them." In DuBois' racial attitude he preferred to find an explanation "for the bleaching pro- cesses and the hair straightening escapades of some of 449 the people who are identified with the National Associa- tion for the Advancement of Colored People in their mad desire of approach to the white race." It was for these reasons too, no doubt, that "the erudite Doctor" kept a "French Beard" which was obviously not African but French. Garvey also took credit for having embarrassed the N.A.A.C.P. after his 1917 visit to their offices, into hiring black James Weldon Johnson and William Pickens. Pickens, he asserted, must have been ugly for DuBois, be- cause he afterwards came to Garvey seeking employment. Garvey also used his differences with DuBois on race to answer his rivals disparaging references to Liberty Hall as a "low, rambling basement of brick and rough stone." DuBois had contrasted this structure with several nearby ones which he considered beautiful. Garvey was able to demonstrate that every building praised by DuBois was wholly or partly white-owned. Liberty Hall, he argued, at least represented black self-reliance. DuBois, on the other hand, was a 'lazy dependent mulatto." DuBois' jeering at Garvey's knighthoods was also seen as a lack of racial consciousness, for he certainly would have exulted in a similar honor from a white potentate. (In fact, it will be remembered, DuBois had in 1920 been the recipient of a Spingarn Medal, named after a white N.A.A.C.P. leader, and certainly no less silly than a Garveyite honor.) 450 On DuBois' incessant harpings on the educational disabilities of his rival Garvey also had his say. He pointed out that graduates of Fisk, Harvard and Berlin did not have a monopoly on education, the value of which lay in the use made of it, rather than in the schools one had passed through. "If DuBois' education fits him for no better service than being a lackey for good white people," he commented, "then it were better that Negroes were not educated." The reason for the fuss over DuBois' educational accomplishments he saw as stemming from the fact that "he was one of the first 'experiments' made by white people on colored men along the lines of higher education." Despite the vehemence of his reply, Garvey did not address himself to some of the accusations made by DuBois. He ignored the charge that he was a black Jamaican peasant disinterested in the Afro-American struggle. He ignored, too, DuBois' assaults on his Liberian program and on his anti-imperialist attitude.119 Garvey repeated many of these arguments in the months that followed. During these months his trial took place and he was imprisoned awaiting bail. He was out of jail in time for DuBois' Third Pan-African Congress, how- ever. DuBois blamed Garvey for the poor showing of this congress. He wrote later that "The unfortunate debacle of his over-advertised schemes naturally hurt and made difficult further effective development of the Pan-African 451 120 Congress idea." Nevertheless both Kelly Miller in America and Casely Hayford's Gold Coast Leader came out at this time in favor of Garvey's African program as against DuBois' Pan-African Congress.121 In London meanwhile the Pan-African Congress ran into trouble and could not raise a quorum for its last session. Garvey's representative in London reported an attendance of eleven. DuBois' report of a larger repre- sentation Garvey attributed to double counting and the inclusion of a few curious people who looked in briefly. Of all the Africans in the world, Garvey lamented, DuBois could not get twenty to meet with him. Instead the prin- cipal speakers, apart from DuBois himself who was princi- pal speaker at most sessions, were "white persons having peculiar ideas about the Negro, especially Sir Sydney Olivier and H. G. Wells." "Why a Pan-African Congress in such company?" Garvey wanted to know. "The thing is unholy and is bound to die the death of the unrighteous."122 Similar criticisms were voiced by A. Philip Randolph and Chandler Owen of the Messenger which editorialized, "Dr. DuBois represented the twelve millions of American Negroes, without their consent, and Mr. H. G. Wells, together with some other white English liberals, doubtless, constituted the voice of the African section of Great Britain."123 Garvey made the same point more picturesquely: "DuBois had no more right or authority to have called a Pan-African 452 Congress than a cat had to call together a parliament of rats."124 And the Negro WOrld quoted the Manchester Guardian on the unconcern shown for the congress by most 125 of Britain's prominent Africans. DuBois' London failure was followed by a session of his congress in Lisbon, Portugal, hosted by the Liga Africans. From here he journeyed to Liberia where he was to be Special Minister Plenipotentiary and Envoy Extra- ordinary representing President Coolidge of the United States of America at the second inaugural of President King of Liberia on January 1, 1924. He had been notified of this appointment while already in Europe. DuBois was aware that the appointment had been made on the advice of William H. Lewis, a leading black Boston lawyer and some- 126 What he somewhat time Assistant Attorney-General. naively did not realize was that his appointment was a political trick by the Republicans to, as Lewis put it, "insure the‘ support of the Crisis, the most widely read publication among the colored people, or stultify it, if it should come out against us" in the forthcoming elec- tions.127 Garvey was nearer the truth when he presumed that DuBois must have been bought for a few thousand 128 DuBois, for his part, misguidedly exulted in dollars. this official "gesture of courtesy . . . one so unusual that it was epochal . . . the highest rank ever given by any country to a diplomatic agent in black Africa." He 453 was completely carried away. He gloried in his Liberian military escort, in the fact that he was dean of the diplomatic service in Liberia, in the frock-coated Liberian President "with the star and ribbon of a Spanish order on his breast" and in the European consuls "in white, gilt with orders and swords,"129 the two last mentioned observations in spite of his hostility to simi- lar finery worn by U.N.I.A. members. Garvey saw DuBois' trip to Liberia as an effort to discredit the U.N.I.A. effort there, and it is cer- tainly conceivable that DuBois, after the intense antago- nisms of 1923, and presumably still smarting from the failure of the London sessions of his Pan-African Congress, could have used his exalted position to undermine the U.N.I.A.‘s Liberia plans. The Crisis had long attacked Garvey on this point and as far back as 1921 DuBois had published a statement by President King, obviously aimed 130 Fearful at Garvey, discouraging undesirable Emigrants. that DuBois' influence might extend to the Gold Coast, John Edward Bruce from his sick bed (he died seven months later) advised Garvey to send the following cable to J. E. Casely Hayford, the Gold Coast nationalist and Pan-Africanist who usually favored Garvey's programs: DuBois-~Crisis--on trip to Africa, bent on mischief due to failure of his Pan-African congress scheme. Financed by Joel Spingarn a Jew, and other interests (white) inimical to African independence. Watch him. Letter follows. Make no committals.l3l 454 Garvey's fears concerning this aspect of DuBois' mission and the possible implication of President Coolidge in it were shared by some Communists. Robert Minor, for ex- ample, wrote that "Coolidge, while attempting to imprison Garvey and to destroy the mass organization, appoints DuBois as official spokesman for American capitalism be- fore an African government that is being coerced."132 George Padmore, during his Communist period also believed that "DuBois is the most bitter opponent of Garvey and because of this was used by Coolidge."133 Back in the United States DuBois, in his report of his mission to the Secretary of State, suggested, among other things, that a small team of United States agricul- tural and industrial experts be sent to Liberia. Where possible they should be black. This was exactly what Garvey had been suggesting and was in the process of doing. The only difference was that Garvey's experts were all black. He also published further attacks on Garvey's 134 Liberian plans. Garvey also reported that DuBois was honored at a banquet at which Judge Mack, who presided 135 And in over Garvey's 1923 case, was special guest. September Secretary of State Charles E. Hughes informed President Coolidge, after reading a U.N.I.A. petition for assistance in going to Liberia, that DuBois' following was much larger and more respectable than Garvey's.136 The Messenger, by this time well into the "Marcus Garvey ——_—‘_ Must t that Garvej while his a Lunat diffe fine mUrc p03; The 455 Must Go" campaign, approved of DuBois' actions, arguing that if he had done nothing else in Liberia than thwart Garvey's plans, then his trip would have been worth- while.137 In May DuBois published the most venomous of all his attacks on Garvey. This notorious editorial, "A Lunatic or a Traitor," showed once again that all the differences between the two men were overshadowed by their differences on the various aspects of the race ques- tion, particularly the question of intra-racial color antagonisms and separation as opposed to integration. The editorial condemned Garvey as a lunatic or traitor who had overstayed his welcome in America and must now be "locked up or sent home." He alleged that "No Negro in America ever had a fairer and more patient trial than Marcus Garvey." Garvey, he claimed, had convicted himself by his own "swaggering monkey-shines" and threats of vio— lence, and was for the latter reasons refused bail. He made the important admission that J. W. H. Eason (whom he did not actually name) had been responsible, after he broke with Garvey, for giving the Crisis the U.N.I.A. financial statement which DuBois had published. Eason was murdered in New Orleans two weeks later. The immediate reason for this outburst was a sym- posium.which Garvey had mailed to influential white people. The symposium sought to secure a favorable sentiment among 456 white people for racial separation and African coloniza- tion. It argued in effect that black people would never be tolerated as equals in America and hence the N.A.A.C.P. program of integration could only lead to race war. For all his occasional flirtations with the possibility of separation, the vehemence of DuBois' attack showed that he was still very deep into his integrationist phase. He relegated Garvey to a position lower than the most infa— mous racists. "Not even Tom Dixon or Ben Tillman," he ranted, "or the hatefulest enemies of the Negro have ever stooped to a more vicious campaign than Marcus Garvey, "138 DuBois was not the only integration- sane or insane. ist driven to fury by this symposium. The Communists blasted it on the front page of the Daily worker and the black Socialist integrationists of the Messenger group also attacked it bitterly. It is interesting to note that DuBois was in the midst of severe internal difficulties within the N.A.A.C.P. at this time, a fact of which Garvey was aware. He had been forced out of the 1923 annual N.A.A.C.P. conference and now he was accusing James Weldon Johnson, Walter White and Mary White Ovington of trying to keep him out of the 139 His conflict with 1924 conference starting in June. these three had been going on for about three years and it has already been seen that Mary White Ovington shared some of Garvey's feelings on DuBois' relationship to white Ill,|lal|lll ‘ll {all 'll [.1 I ll It'll" I 457 people. (The Negro WOrld, despite its strained relations with the N.A.A.C.P., for a long time featured a weekly column "Book Chat," by Ms. Ovington.) This latest DuBois attack contained several fac- tual inaccuracies and the Negro WOrld devoted much space to counter-attacks and refutations. Garvey led off with the usual point concerning DuBois' hankering after white company and his unbearable arrogance. He took DuBois' allegation that Garvey was convicted by his monkey-shines to be an admission that the conviction was due to pre- judice rather than guilt on his part. DuBois he said, had lied by suggesting that Garvey wore a long coat in court or that the U.N.I.A. accounts published in the ‘Crisis had been "long concealed." These accounts were in fact annually presented to the U.N.I.A. convention and de- bated, a procedure which, he said, the N.A.A.C.P. did not follow. DuBois lied, too, he said, when he suggested that Garvey wanted to take all black Americans to Africa. For he certainly did not want "lazy philosophers" of the DuBois type on the continent. Another article refuted the "outrageous canard" broadcast in DuBois' article that a Liberian U.N.I.A. official had been convicted of murder. The man was in fact an imposter who had caused the orga- nization trouble on both sides of the Atlantic. T. Thomas Fortune editorially described the latest DuBois effort as an "orgy of inaccurate detraction and vituperative 458 abuse."140 But the most imaginative response came in a special editorial by Norton Thomas, Associate Editor of Garvey's paper, entitled "With Apologies to Shakespeare." This was in fact an adaptation from Shakespeare's Julius Ceasar. It commenced at "Act XCIX. Scene IX. Harlem. Seventh Avenue." It continued: Enter William Pickens, William DuBois and Weldon Johnson. DuBois. (Nervously) Another general shout! I do believe, that these applauses are For some new honors that are heaped on Garvey. Johnson Why, man, he doth bestride the world of Negroes Like a Colossus; and we petty men Walk under his huge legs, and peep about To find ourselves dishonourable graves, Men at some time are masters of their fates; The fault, dear DuBois, is not in our stars, But in ourselves, that we are underlings. DuBois and Garvey: What should he in that Garvey? Why should that name be sounded more than yours? Write them together, yours is as fair a name; Sound them, it dbth become the mouth as well; Weigh them, it is as heavy; conjure with them, DuBois will start a spirit as soon as Garvey. Now, in the names of all the Gods at once, Upon what meat both this our Garvey feed, That he is grown so great? DuBois Enough, faithful one. (Sighs) What you have said, I will consider; what you have to say, I will with patience hear: and find a time Both meet to hear, and answer, such high things. Till then, my noble friend, chew upon this: DuBois had rather be a Nordic, Than to repute himself a son of Ham Under these hard conditions as this time Is like to lay upon us. (Exeunt DuBois and Johnson.)141 The editorial continued with a Pickens soliloquy. 459 With the "Lunatic or Traitor" editorial the con- troversy between these two leaders descended to a new low. Garvey, to be sure, was never sparing in abusiveness, but of outright falsehoods DuBois seems to have maintained a monopoly. And this editorial represented about the worst example of DuBois' propensity to let the truth get away from him. For this he was assailed by several race papers and individuals, not all of whom were particularly fond of Garvey. The Pittsburgh Courier called him a negative hindrance who thought he was too big to help the race and condemned him for calling Garvey a lunatic or a traitor. William H. Ferris, though now no longer associated with the U.N.I.A., nevertheless came out strongly in the pages of the Hotel Tattler against DuBois' blatant lying. The Gary Sun was similarly disapproving and said of DuBois, "A man who loses his temper in a fight is in danger of 142 being soundly thrashed." Communist Robert Minor also attacked DuBois very severely on this editorial, even though he enjoyed cordial relations with some N.A.A.C.P. members. He wrote: I would think long before I would dispute the judgment of the Negro scholar, Dr. W. E. B. DuBois. But when Dr. DuBois writes that the United States Government gave Garvey Fa fair and patient trial' and that Garvey was refused bail 'because of the repeated threats and cold-blooded assaults charged against his organization,‘ and that 'he himself openly threatened to 'get' the district attorney,‘ etc., I get a different reaction from that intended by Dr. DuBois. I am obliged to look beyond the de- tails at the apparent fact that a government which 460 hates the working class, and which has never been unforgiving to grafting schemes, that such a govern- ment does not find a friend in Garvey. And above it all towers the fact that the Universal Negro Improvement Association, the largest organization of Negroes in the world, is made up almost entirely of the working class. I am waiting for some Negro leader who has orga- nized more Negroes than Marcus Garvey has organized, to criticize Garvey--and I frankly confess that if such a leader has been given a longer term in Leavenworth than Garvey received, I will listen to him more attentively. The lickspittles of capitalism in Washington do not love Marcus Garvey. This alone ought to make one of the working class think twice before condemn- ing the man. His enemies say the government condemns Garvey for using questionable financial methods for the purpose of fleecing the masses of uneducated Negro workers. But I don't think the Teapot Domers at Washington have any objections to the fleecing of the Negro masses. I think their solicitude is based on something else. The fact that Garvey is organizing many thousands of Negroes of the class that is destined to take over the earth, and makes a militant demand for a sweeping international liberation of colonial peoples, seems to me to be a more likely reason why Messrs. Coolidge, Daugherty and, yes, Mr. Hughes of the State Department have interested themselves in Garvey.143 Shortly after the "Lunatic or Traitor" editorial DuBois and Garvey actually came face to face with each other for a brief and frightening moment. DuBois, in the company of one W. P. Dabney, was waiting to enter a hotel elevator, when out stepped a bevy of splendidly dressed ladies accompanied by "a stout dark gentleman, gorgeously costumed" in military attire. "Ye gods!" wrote Dabney, afterwards, 'Twas Garvey. He saw me, a smile d5 recogni- tion, then a glance at DuBois. His eyes flew wide open. Stepping aside, he stared; turning around, he stared, 461 while DuBois, looking straight forward, head uplifted, nostrils quivering, marched into the elevator. . . ." In response to a Dabney inquiry DuBois claimed that he did not see Garvey. His nostrils were quivering, he explained, because he smelt food.144 One result of the events of 1923 and 1924 was that both Garvey and DuBois took the irreconcilability of their views to mean that total race unity was not only an impos- sibility, but a goal not even worth striving for. At the Sanhedrin in February 1924 Alain Locke of Howard Univer- sity and other prominent black persons had called for a rapproachement between the two rivals.145 Responding to such views before the start of the Sanhedrin, Garvey had argued that he and DuBois could not come together on any constructive basis in such an all-embracing convention. For DuBois was a "modern extremist" preaching an integra- tion ideal which might materialize in 2,000 years time when all races had achieved equal material and cultural strength. For the time being, Garvey explained, "The Negro has got to develop apart, and create his own govern- ment and industrial foundation" in order to catch up with a world that respected only political and economic strength, in both of which the black man was far behind.146 DuBois in July came out equally strongly against unity, arguing that diversity, and even some "personal bickering" were "absolutely essential in the present situation of the 462 Negro race." The N.A.A.C.P., he argued, wanted the black man to become "a full fledged American citizen" and dis- agreed with contrary views. "Under such circumstances," he declared, "to talk unity and agreement is nonsense. If the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People is right, these other people are wrong. If one group is walking North and the other group walking South then unity would mean an abdication of its position by one group." Only such people as were willing to accept its program were welcome to unite with the N.A.A.C.P.147 The "Lunatic or Traitor" editorial was followed by a few relatively low key Crisis attacks later in 1924, but the U.N.I.A. moved on to officially ostracize DuBois from the race. This was done by a resolution, unanimously carried, at the end of the 1924 U.N.I.A. convention. News of Liberia's final frustration of U.N.I.A. colonization had been received during the convention and the delegates saw in this the consummation of DuBois' efforts. The re- solution stated: In view of the fact that W. E. B. DuBois has contin- ually attempted to obstruct the progress of the Universal Negro Improvement Association to the loss and detriment of the Negro race and that he has on several occasions gone out of his way to try to defeat the cause of Africa's redemption, that he be proclaimed as ostracized from the Negro race as far as the Universal Negro Improvement Association is concerned, and from henceforth be regarded as an enemy of the black people of the world.148 With Garvey in jail from early in 1925 the battle 463 subsided somewhat. Garvey continued to accuse DuBois and the N.A.A.C.P. of helping him to jail and DuBois no doubt felt that he had accomplished his purpose, since he had lent his voice to those calling for Garvey's incarceration and deportation. He planned a fourth Pan-African Congress to be held in the West Indies in 1925. This may or may not have been a move to increase his influence in the only area in which he acknowledged the existence of a powerful Garvey following. However his plans were frustrated. Strange to say, he thought the colonialists were behind this failure.149 In 1921 and-1923 he had blamed Garvey for his congress setbacks. In 1927, however, DuBois did succeed in holding a congress‘in that greatest of all Garveyite strongholds, Harlem. The initiative had come largely from black women's organizations. Garvey was, of course, still in jail and had decreed that there should be no U.N.I.A. con- vention that year. So, in the U.N.I.A. convention month of August, DuBois rushed in to fill the breach. His con- gress went so far as to borrow Garvey's famous slogan and . pass a resolution advocating "Africa for the Africans."150 It would have been strange indeed‘if DuBois could have held a congress, even a four day one, in Harlem.with- out some Garveyite interest. From the pages of the Negro Worlg_Kelly Miller pointedly called Garvey a political prisoner, a greater race leader than all his predecessors and the called < Garvey, sion to his ofj with m Profes 900d 4 out 0 with lamb "bee Indj CO“. 19a ‘tc Q] 464 and the greatest ever advocate of African redemption. He called on the Pan-African Congress to demand clemency for Garvey. T. Thomas Fortune dropped in on the closing ses- sion to see for himself what was going on and returned to his office to write an editorial about it. He disagreed with much of what he heard, including "The opinion of Professor Logan that it was not possible nor would it be good to hope that the Europeans could or would be driven out of Africa," and that the Africans should cooperate with the white man. "The old theory of the lion and the lamb lying down together without a row," Fortune mused, "because the lamb was inside the lion. It is the Red Indian in contact with the European whites on the Western Continent all over again." One of the last items of business for the congress was the adoption of resolutions. DuBois had kept tight control over this phase of the business. He drew up the resolutions himself and they were approved by a committee. While he was reading them to the audience a Rev. Walker, pastor of an A.M.E. church in Cleveland, Ohio, interrupted to suggest that the congress should issue a call for clemency for Garvey. The idea was roundly applauded and put in the form of a formal motion, accompanied by an effusive and well-received eulogy of Garvey. DuBois sug- gested that the resolution go back to committee, where he could kill it, rather than be voted on by the whole lllllllll‘uli i..‘flllilll. I‘ll!“ [I (I'll Illl I 11.1.: III-III. ii I‘lIlIlII-Ii 465 gathering. After a warm debate which, Fortune reported, indicated that most of the audience supported the resolu- tion, it was maneuvred into committee from which it did not return. But this did not stop "the brazen-faced doc- tor" as one report put it, from proclaiming "Africa for the Africans."151 Garvey was nevertheless released from jail and deported three months after the congress. DuBois cele- brated with a review of his controversy with Garvey "not to revive forgotten rancor but for the sake of historical accuracy." The article was in fact yet another distor- tion and anything but historically accurate. In claiming that the Crisis had published a mere five articles on Garvey he conveniently forgot those which were obviously devoted to Garvey but did not name him, as well as several minor Crisis articles. DuBois even forgot the date of one of his own articles, claiming that extracts from a 1924 article had appeared in 1922. His claim that "the impres- sion that the N.A.A.C.P. has been the persistent enemy of Marcus Garvey" was "without the slightest basis of fact" was at the very least a gross exaggeration. He contrasted this sweet innocence on the N.A.A.C.P.'s part with "Garvey's attacks on the N.A.A.C.P. [which] have been continuous, 152 About this time it seems that preposterous and false." DuBois took his campaign against Garvey into fiction, for Alain Locke, reviewing his Dark Princess, spotted "perhaps 466 a thinly varnished Garvey" among the characters.153 DuBois lived for ninety-five years. His life was in many ways the sad and tortuous story of a man, drawn by training and upbringing to white aristocracy, yet too sensitive to ignore the racism that buffeted him and his race. During the many years of his existence he moved impatiently from one tactic to the next, from one philo- sophy to the next, in a frustratingly vain quest for the elusive formula that would down the formidable monster of white racism, and more especially American white racism. And so it was that DuBois came to Garveyism. When Garvey was deported from the United States in December 1927 DuBois was already an old man. He was less than three months short of his sixtieth birthday. He had already tried intellectualizing the race problem away. He had long given that up in favor of agitating it away. He had tried Socialism, and integration, and more. Yet some time around 1930 DuBois began going the way that George Padmore was soon to follow. The major difference between the two was that Padmore was more honest about the influence of Garvey on causing black Communists to recon- sider their positions than DuBois was in the case of his own switch from integration to separation. The integration versus separation debate, together with the race question, had been central to the DuBois- Garvey struggle. Yet, no sooner was Garvey out of the way m1 ta tj tl‘. pe Am fl. We‘ .1 am 467 than DuBois was overcome by a deep disillusionment with the integration that he had defended so stubbornly. He increasingly came to realize that for all his effort, for all the effort of the N.A.A.C.P., integration was making no headway. De facto school segregation had increased in the North and lynchings, though less frequent, were no less brazen. He therefore now began to argue that since integration was an apparent impossibility for the time being at least, then black people might as well make the most of separation. He talked of a non-profit cooperative "racial economy" that would operate within American capi- talism but not be of it. This racial economy would in time incorporate the West Indies. He even began, with the terrible tragedy of the depression, to voice Garvey's pessimism about the survival of the African race in America. DuBois had in the past threatened separation if America denied the black man equality but these were but fleeting glimpses of the anguish within his soul. They were quickly submerged by his striving for integration and his attacks on Garvey's separatism. Now, however, it was different. One of the first persons to notice the change in DuBois was Garvey himself. After reading a DuBois com- mencement speech at Howard University, Garvey, from Jamaica, loudly accused DuBois of now preaching Garveyism. This was in 1930, and DuBois had referred in that speech [‘il'itl 468 154 to the need for a black economic base. In 1931 the Negro WOrld made the same point. Page 1 headlines de- clared, "Dr. DuBois agrees with U.N.I.A. Leader--Takes Program Over Finally--But Does Not Openly Confess It. 155 This Emphasizes Negro-Owned INDUSTRIES, BUSINESS." new line of thinking led inevitably to a break between DuBois and his integrationist employers at the N.A.A.C.P. (but not for good, for he was to return in 1944, only to be fired again in 1948). DuBois, in his own words, was now "advocating new, deliberate, and purposeful segrega- 156 In 1934 he and the tion for economic defense." N.A.A.C.P. parted company, leaving the Crisis in the capable integrationist hands of Roy Wilkins and George W. Streator. Garvey, alluding to DuBois' late arrival at the philosophy of racial economic self-reliance commented, "It is no wonder DuBois has resigned from the National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People. He can go no farther. Can he continue abusing the white man when the American Negro is at the white man's Soup Kitchen?"157 DuBois meanwhile, while steadfastly re- fraining from giving Garvey credit for his new position, sought to make his peace with the ghost of Booker T. Washington, claiming now that he had not opposed Washing- ton on segregation grounds.158 Other observers, however, noted the Garveyite sound of DuBois' new pronouncements. George Streator, co-managing 469 editor of the Crisis at the time of DuBois' departure, wrote soon after, "It is significant that the Garvey idea, however much it was ridiculed by Negro intellectuals during the heyday of the movement, has not downed. On the contrary it reappears in the most unexpected quarter, for example, in the currently expounded DuBois doctrine of a black economy. . . ."159 And sociologist E. Franklin Frazier, himself no great lover of Garvey, observed, "when Garvey proposed a grandiose scheme for building a black commercial empire DuBois ridiculed his naiveté. But what could be more fantastic than his own program for a sepa- rate non-profit economy within American capitalism?" Frazier, having written DuBois off as the marginal man who could not discover his identity, prophesied, correctly as it turned out, that DuBois would not remain a separatist for too long. He wrote in scathing tones: DuBois' racial program needs not to be taken seriously. . . . He has only an occasional romantic interest in the Negro as a distinct race. Nothing would be more unendurable for him than to live within a Black Ghetto or within a black nation--unles per- haps he were king, and then probably he would attempt to unite the whites and blacks through marriage of the royal families. When Garvey attempted his genuine racial movement no one was more critical and contemp- tuous than DuBois of the fantastic glorification of the black race and all things black. Garvey's move- ment was too close to the black ignorant masses for DuBois. On the other hand, he was more at home with the colored intellectuals who gathered at the Pan- African Congresses.150 In England, meanwhile, Garvey summed up his con- flict with DuBois. He summarized DuBois' great shortcomings 470 in a sentence: "He has no racial self-respect, he has no independent ideas, he has nothing of self-reliance about him and that is his great trouble." Central to these defects was the fact that DuBois had no program. This was an important point for Garvey always stressed the fact that he had presented the race with a definite pro- gram leading, in clearly defined stages, to racial eman- cipation. This same tendency to formulate individual actions within the framework of a definite long range program had also characterized the thought of Booker T. Washington. In DuBois, however, Garvey saw no evidence of any kind of long-range plan. What he saw, on the con- trary, was a haphazard "propaganda of complaint." Rather than trying to do some independent long-range thinking on strategies to emancipate the race, Garvey saw DuBois' outstanding contribution as a negative hostility to the most important programs for liberation in his time. Garvey wrote in 1935: When DuBois dies he will go down in his grave to be remembered as the man who sabotaged the Liberian colonization scheme of the Negro, the man who opposed the American Negro launching steamships on the seas, the man who did everything to handicap the industrial and commercial propositions of the American Negro, the man who tried to wreck the industrial, educational system of Tuskegee, the man who never had a good word to say for any other Ne ro leader, but who tried to down every one of them. 51 The short-range, more spontaneous nature of the DuBois- N.A.A.C.P. conception of a program of liberation was well- expressed by DuBois himself in 1921 when he explained that 471 "the N.A.A.C.P. is organized to agitate, to investigate, to expose, to defend, to reason, to appeal. This is our program and this is the whole of our program."162 This is exactly what Garvey meant when he said that DuBois had no program. Concerning the charge of constant hostility to the programs of Garvey and others DuBois wrote later, "In his case, as in the case of others, I have repeatedly been accused of enmity and jealousy, which have been so far from my thought that the accusations have been a rather bitter experience."163 The DuBois-Garvey conflict dominated the conflict between the N.A.A.C.P. and Garvey. But Garvey had his occasional exchanges with other N.A.A.C.P. leaders. In ' the case of one of them, William Pickens, an extended controversy developed which was second in intensity only to Garvey's struggle with DuBois. The case of Pickens is important because not only was the personal animosity generated as great, but the ideological disagreements which surfaced were the same as those of the DuBois-Garvey conflict, namely the question of light-skinned and dark- skinned Afro-Americans, separation versus integration, attitudes toward the Ku Klux Klan, "talented tenth" Pan- African Congresses versus grass roots U.N.I.A. organiza- tion, and Afro-American struggle versus struggle in African communities worldwide. The coincidence of the positions of DuBois and Pickens in their separate conflicts pr Ve rec til the wit Mar Sel 472 with Garvey underlines the real ideological character of the differences between the N.A.A.C.P. and the U.N.I.A. Pickens joined the N.A.A.C.P. in 1920 as associate field secretary. He was a graduate of Yale, class of 1904, and had been a member of DuBois' Niagara Movement. At the time of his switch to the N.A.A.C.P. he was a vice- president of Morgan State College.164 Garvey, as already noted, often took credit for Pickens' appointment, arguing that his exposure of the whiteness of the N.A.A.C.P. in 1917 forced them to employ identifiably black people in prominent positions. Even before he joined the N.A.A.C.P., if Pickens' very unreliable later testimony can be believed, he had received an offer or offers from the U.N.I.A.165 At the time he preferred the N.A.A.C.P. After about a year with the N.A.A.C.P. Pickens began expressing dissatisfaction with the organization. He was counselled by DuBois in 166 DuBois was him- March 1921 to be loyal nevertheless. self having problems within the organization at about this time, with, among others, Mary White Ovington, James Weldon Johnson and Walter White. Pickens nevertheless decided to explore the possibility of alternative employ- ment with the U.N.I.A. Amy Jacques Garvey recalls that he phoned Garvey and subsequently visited his apartment twice. He told Garvey that his pay was insufficient even though he did more work than his colleagues, and he was III-Ill I'll I'll! I.Illlt » 473 being discriminated against because of his color. Garvey offered him a job until the August convention, at which time he could run for office.167 Pickens, however, had no real intention of joining Garvey at this juncture but was merely skillfully, and with extreme callousness, using Garvey in an attempt to exact more money and a position of greater authority from the N.A.A.C.P. He was therefore able to temporize with Garvey until safely after the August convention. On September 12, however, at a time when his conflict with the N.A.A.C.P. was reaching a head, he wrote Garvey an effusively flattering letter, which, in the light of later events, was a calculated deceit of the greatest magnitude. The letter claimed that Pickens was doing well and really did not need a change of job except for "the great feeling of the great opportunity to aid the supreme enterprise which you are undertaking, and which you have been urging me for some time to consider." Undaunted by his intended treachery he assured Garvey, "I know you have dealt with many traitors and have still traitors to meet. They infest the world. But trust me. If I never worked in the same organization with you, I should still be your brother."168 A mere five days later, on September 17, Pickens submitted a resignation to the N.A.A.C.P. Board of Direc- tors. He expressed his intention to resign not later than November 1, but preferably on October 1. He claimed that 474 he would continue to uphold the aims of the association, strange talk for a prospective Garveyite.169 It tran- spired that the October 1 preference was due to his pro- mise to speak to the "colored people of New York" on October 2.170 On September 25, doubtless in response to N.A.A.C.P. attempts to settle his problems, he informed the association's treasurer that whereas he would have received substantially more had he succumbed to earlier offers, his biggest current offer (presumably from the U.N.I.A.) was only about the same as his current salary plus his earnings from occasional lectures.171 On Septem- ber 29 he refused an invitation to attend a meeting of the N.A.A.C.P.'s executives to discuss his resignation. "The next move," he scribbled on the bottom of the invi- tation, "belonged to them and I let them take it."172 The executives nevertheless refused to accept the resig- nation and appointed a committee to investigate. The committee recommended an increase in pay and a reorgani- zation of field work to give Pickens "a larger directional part," thus overcoming his two major grievances.173 Pickens' ploy had thus succeeded. That he had merely used the U.N.I.A. he himself confirmed. Describing Garvey's offer of temporary employment until the 1921 convention he explained, "This I decided to try out for all it was worth, IF I should have to leave the N.A.A.C.P., which I never wanted to do, if it could be reasonably avoided."174 475 Sometime during the course of these intrigues Pickens wrote an article for the Nation at that magazine's request. It was written before the resolution of the con— flict with the N.A.A.C.P. Pickens, of course, could not afford to alienate Garvey at this time. The result was so effusively pro-Garvey that the magazine's editors suspected a hoax. On October 11, therefore, one day after the N.A.A.C.P.'s Board of Directors accepted the recommen- dation to increase Pickens' pay and authority, he had to assure the Nation's editors that he had not in fact taken them for a ride. He claimed that the article had been written before he began to entertain the possibility of joining Garvey and that he would write exactly the same article now that his conflict with the N.A.A.C.P. was 175 settled. The Nation published an expurgated version in December. The Negro World published the full article a week and a half earlier. It also appeared in the black California voice on December 31, 1921, together with a Pickens Christmas greeting to the U.N.I.A. The California paper introduced the article with the headline "Field Secretary N.A.A.C.P. Analyzes and Endorses Garvey Move- ment."]'76 The article itself praised Garvey's emphasis on race, defended his regalia while not agreeing that it was necessary, supported his business methods, his steamship line and his honesty, and saw no necessary contradiction DC CC 6V me ra: mi] gar Pic. Side inte Ceiv For . In JL Prais ganiz domes the r COnca the 476 between the international operations of the U.N.I.A. and the domestic emphasis of the N.A.A.C.P. Pickens even argued that there was no reason why the same person could not belong to the Urban League, the U.N.I.A., and the N.A.A.C.P. "and yet talk consistently in an 'interracial congress' in Atlanta, Georgia." The unexpurgated version even suggested that a West Indian leader and a black movee ment in the United States were the perfect combination for racial emancipation at that particular time. Where there was criticism, as on the light-skinned question, it was mild. In February 1922 Garvey proclaimed his "high re- gard" for Pickens, whom he considered "above meanness of any kind." In March a Negro world editorial came to Pickens' defense when the Cleveland Cgll_enquired, "What Side of the Fence is Pickens On?"177 Pickens seems not to have informed Garvey of his intention to remain with the N.A.A.C.P., even after re- ceiving his increased salary and settling his dispute. For in May 1922 Garvey again extended an offer to him.178 In June, Pickens privately made a fairly favorable ap- praisal of Garvey. He praised Garvey's international or- ganization but this time opted for the N.A.A.C.P.'s domestic struggle as a quicker remedy for emancipation of the race in America. He Opposed emigration to Africa but conceded that Garvey's program was the greatest menace of the time to the white world. His appraisal of Garvey's 477 program here was probably much more favorable than any important N.A.A.C.P. official could have been expected to give. His remarks are important because they came on the verge of the "Marcus Garvey Must Go" campaign, of which Pickens was shortly to become one of the leaders. Perhaps as a harbinger of things to come, he seemed to anticipate the persistence of the "Garvey idea" after the departure of Garvey himself. He wrote: As to the Garvey Movement, it is not perfect. No movement is--but Garvey has the right idea that ALL NEGROES of all countries and especially of the Western World, should be in touch and organization with each other. I know Garvey personally, and I do not regard him as a crook. He is somewhat of a visionary; all such men are. He will not FAIL, altho he himself will not see the great success of his plans. The idea he has injected into the Negro masses will stay, even if Garvey should be jailed or hung. The whole world today, the large white world, outside of places like Shreveport and Mississippi, are more concerned over the 'Garvey idea' than over any other move the Negro has ever made for power in the modern world. They know that to effect an international organization is to reach out for REAL power, expecially thru MASSES of men. But I am with the N.A.A.C.P., altho I have been offered as much as TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS a year to join other forces, and the offer still stands. I believe in the EARLIER FRUITION of the sowings of the N.A.A.C. P., for the good of Negroes in the U.S.A. Colored Americans will make regrettable mistakes, if they help white Americans to fight the 'Garvey idea.‘ The idea is all right, if only Garvey can get rid of some of the crooks that have infested his or- ganization, and speak plain about ORGANIZATION of the racial group, and not try to fool anybody about the 'back to Africa' myth.17 On July 10 Garvey invited Pickens to accept an honor at the forthcoming August U.N.I.A. convention for his exemplary endeavors in the cause Africz. By this time, 478 however, the "Marcus Garvey Must Go" campaign was firing its first broadsides at Garvey and Pickens had aligned himself with it. On July 24 he replied angrily.180 His reply showed quite clearly that, like DuBois, he could be driven to great rage by Garvey's more extreme separatist manifestations. Just as DuBois' "Lunatic or Traitor" editorial was prompted by Garvey's circular to influential white people pouring scorn on the N.A.A.C.P.'s integra- tionist objectives, so Pickens' opening attack on Garvey was prompted by Garvey's summit conference with the Ku Klux Klan. Pickens considered any deal with the Klan by which as he said, America was accepted as a white man's country in exchange for assistance in making Africa truly a black man's continent was absurd. He believed, he said, in Africa for the Africans, black and white, and in America for all colors. Up to this time Pickens had done nothing worse than mislead Garvey to obtain a salary increase. From now on he was to be a central figure in the most vituperative campaign ever waged by Afro-American leaders of importance against a rival major race leader. "MARCUS GARVEY MUST G0!!!" The "Marcus Garvey Must Go" campaign represented essentially a temporary alliance of convenience between 479 black Socialists, represented principally by A. Philip Randolph and Chandler Owen of the‘Messenger magazine, some black Urban League officials, the N.A.A.C.P., and miscellaneous other black integrationists. It represented a formidable coalition of the most influential black in- tegrationist leaders in the land. Many of them had previously crossed swords with one another in their com- petition for leadership of the Afro-American masses and many were to cross swords after the removal of Garvey, but for the moment they were willing to cooperate in the face of the Garvey steamroller which threatened to crush them all. Among the more important personalities leading this campaign were first of all Randolph and Owen. They represented the radical wing of the non-Communist integra- tionists, being more prone to intemperate speech and voluble pratings concerning the class struggle and the "scientific" nature of their program. In many respects, however, they differed little from the mainstream integra- tionists in the N.A.A.C.P. The N.A.A.C.P.'s major repre- sentatives in this campaign were Pickens and Robert W. Bagnall, its Director of Branches. DuBois played a key supporting role, for he orchestrated his Crisis attacks on Garvey to coincide with and reinforce the campaign. The executive board of the National Urban League in New York provided two of the campaign's leaders in John E. Ill IIIV Illa!" III-II. . II' III It'lllll III] III 480 Nail and Harry H. Pace.181 The Urban League, too, was mainstream integrationist. The "League's Ideal" read, "Let us work not as colored people nor as white people for the narrow benefit of any group alone, but TOGETHER, as American citizens for the common good of our common city, our common country."182 Many of the campaign's leaders had previously been engaged in acrimonious disputes with Garvey. Bagnall, a preacher, had almost attempted to throw Garvey out of his church in Detroit when Garvey tried to "integrate" it by sitting up front among the light-skinned folk during 183 his early years in the United States. Robert S. Abbott, Editor of the ChicagoDefender and another leader of the campaign, had been sued for libel by Garvey in 1919 for attacks on what he called the "Jim Crow" Black Star Line. Abbott, as the editor of one of the leading Afro- American newspapers presumably did not appreciate the competition from the fast-growing Negro WOrld and Garvey's attacks on his race-demeaning advertisements. In 1920 Abbott engineered Garvey's arrest on a technicality while 184 Garvey's previous contacts he was on tour in Chicago. with Randolph and Owen went back much further. Owen and Randolph were among Garvey's earliest Afro-American associates as he plunged into Harlem's radical politics. A 1917 Garvey speech denouncing the East St. Louis pogrom was presided over by Chandler Owen, en cl the 481 then editor of the Hotel Messenger.185 Owen and Randolph were among the orators whose soap boxes shared Harlem's 186 This Lenox Avenue with Garvey's in this early period. cordial relationship continued into 1919. From July 1919 w. A. Domingo, himself a Socialist, was listed as a con- tributing editor of the Messenger while simultaneously editing the Negro World. Many of his articles appeared in the Messenger up to and beyond his resignation from the paper. In 1919 Randolph was actually chosen by Garvey as one of his representatives to the Paris Peace Confer- ence. The trip never materialized. Randolph later claimed, at the height of the campaign against Garvey, that the first big mass meeting ever held by the U.N.I.A. was under the pretext of sending him to this conference.187 Garvey's collaboration with these Socialists was doomed from the start because of the incompatibility of their advocacy of integrationist inter-racial class strug- gle with his own ideas of race first. His dismissal of Domingo therefore coincided with a break with the Social- ists Owen and Randolph over these principles. The Messenger itself in 1920 acknowledged the ideological nature of the split. It editorialized: At one time, the editors of the MESSENGER spoke from the same platform with the moving spirit of the or- ganization in question. Then, the Black Star Line idea was no part of its effects. Nor were the slo- gans "Negro first," and "African Empire," "Back to Africa," and extreme race baiting prominent in its program.188 482 These race first and related ideas were not new to Garvey's thought as the Messenger suggested. But before 1919 he did not have the strong organizational base from which he could now develop a concrete African program. Siding with Garvey in this schism was Hubert H. Harrison for a time one of Harlem's most prominent Socialist ora- tors. Harrison left the Socialist party, as he explained in 1917, because as a firm believer in "the American doc- trine of 'Race First,‘ he wished to put himself in a position to work among his people along lines of his own ”189 (Harrison was referring to himself here in choosing. the third person.) Increasing the ranks of these dedicated integra- tionists of long standing was the inevitable occasional opportunist who seized the time to grind some personal axe against Garvey. The outstanding representative of this category was J. W. H. Eason. Elected U.N.I.A. Leader of the American Negroes in 1920, Eason had maintained this position up until his expulsion during the August conven- tion of 1922. Eason it was who in 1920 had been slated to occupy the U.N.I.A. Black House in Washington, D.C., a most un-integrationist gesture. A few months before his departure from the U.N.I.A. he had expressed a fervent desire to go to Africa. "But if I never go," he implored his U.N.I.A. audience, "I want you American Negroes, when you make your future exodus from this country, to take my 483 bones with you and bury them in the motherland." Four months later he was saying that he left the U.N.I.A. be- cause there were enough problems in America without having to get involved in Africa, or anywhere else. In June he claimed to be impressed by white Mississippi segregation- ist Senator McCallum, whom he had interviewed. McCallum had suggested that black people should see about their own affairs. In August, on the eve of his expulsion, he was trying to counterattack by accusing Garvey of joining the K.K.K.190 The truth of the matter was that Eason had been formally impeached and expelled from the U.N.I.A. for ninety-nine years in lengthy legal proceedings at the 1922 convention. His impeachment had arisen out of charges of a large number of financial and other irregu- larities, some of which he admitted. These matters had come to the attention of Garvey and had been substantiated by his auditor J. Charles Zampty during an extensive tour throughout the United States prior to the convention.191 Once expelled, he reinforced the integrationist campaign by holding anti-Garvey meetings all over the country under the nominal auspices of his hastily organized Universal Negro Alliance. He travelled through many of the same areas which he had only recently toured on behalf of the U.N.I.A., this time repudiating his former Garveyite opinions. Sometime during this period it was announced that t latte face Chic; up t- on h to 1; had wer fol in mo; fow C01 ar: ‘Ne 96 484 that he would be the star witness against Garvey in the latter's forthcoming trial. The swiftness and comprehensiveness of his about face did not go down well with Garvey's supporters. At a Chicago meeting thirty-one of the thirty-five who turned up to hear him were loyal Garveyites keeping a wary eye on him. After this meeting shots rang out leading many to believe, in the words of the Negro World, "that Eason had paid the price of the traitor." The shots in fact were the result of some unconnected altercation. The following night he had an audience of six. In New Orleans in October he spoke to thirty-two persons where a few months previously, as Garvey's representative he had on four occasions addressed full houses. WOrse was yet to come. In January 1923 he was shot dead after addressing an Emancipation Day meeting, again in New Orleans. The Negro World called his murder a "dastardly act" and sug- gested an illicit amorous entanglement as the probable cause. Two Garveyites were arrested and charged with the murder. The U.N.I.A. initiated a defense fund for them and they were eventually acquitted. A third suspect was almost cornered at a U.N.I.A. meeting in Detroit, but detectives inquiring after him were detained at the door by members of the Universal African Legions long enough to enable the suspect to escape through a rear exit. The U.N.I.A. meanwhile disclaimed any complicity in the 485 assassination.192 As in the case of DuBois the integrationist coali— tion made Garvey's separation its main object of attack. And, as usual, this integration-separation debate encom- passed all the related items--miscegenation, the Ku Klux Klan, Garvey's African program and the question of purely Afro-American struggle versus worldwide African struggle. There was also the very non-ideological question of what one study has called the "crisis of confidence" in the Urban League (and certainly in other organizations) when, despite white philanthrOpic help, they could not raise anywhere near the sums that Garvey could from his black followers.193 (Indeed both John E. Nail and Harry H. Pace, the two major Urban League figures in the anti- Garvey campaign, were at the time members of the Urban Leagues's finance committee.)194 The effect of Garvey's doctrine of racial separa- tion in forcing these integrationists to come together is highlighted by the squabbling which went on among them prior to, and for a short while after his rise to promi- nence. In 1917, for example, the Messenger had attacked DuBois, Pickens and others. In 1918 it called DuBois, Pickens, James Weldon Johnson and others "a discredit to Negroes and the laughing stock among whites." Similar attacks came in 1919 when Randolph referred to these three as typical Negro reactionaries. In December 1919 Pickens, 11 V6 486 responding to attacks from Owen and Randolph, said that he respected Socialism, but not the cheap brand practiced by these two. He advised the white Socialists to find more suitable material for work among black people or face continued failures. And as late as December 1920 the first overt DuBois comment on Garvey charged that early in 1919 a large mass meeting in Harlem's Palace Casino had been presided over by Chandler Owen. At that meeting, DuBois charged, Garvey and Randolph addressed the audience and $204 was collected on a claim that DuBois had obstructed Garvey's High Commissioner in France by repudiating Garvey's statements on American lynching and injustice. (The Messenger had attacked DuBois in Septem- ber.)195 By the time of DuBois' article, however, Pickens had begun to make his peace with Owen and Randolph.196 He had also, if he is to be believed, al- ready been approached by Garvey. One of the earliest muffled shots in the coali- tion's campaign came in May 1920 when the founding meeting took place in Washington, D.C., of the Friends of Negro Freedom. This group was to play an important role, at least nominally, in the campaign. The meeting was con- vened at the initiative of Owen and Randolph, who were to become its joint executive secretaries. The list of in- vitees showed that already there had been some closing of integrationist ranks, for several N.A.A.C.P. local ma th 487 officials were among them. These included Archibald Grimke, president of the Washington, D.C. chapter, who had formerly been written off as reactionary by Owen and Randolph. Among the other invitees were Robert W. Bagnall from Detroit, Carl Murphy, editor of the Baltimore‘Afro- American, and historian Carter G. Woodson who, unlike most of the others, usually managed to discreetly avoid be- coming involved in attacks on Garvey. Later on this Owen- Randolph inspired integrationist coalition reached out to embrace the Communist assimilationists, for the name of Cyril Briggs appeared on the Friends of Negro Freedom letterhead.197 The pre-campaign hostility of Owen and Randolph to the Communists (which was reciprocated in equal measure) was as great as that towards other elements of this coalition. The first meeting of the Friends of Negro Freedom was scheduled for less than two weeks after the 1920 national convention of the Socialist Party. Here Owen and Randolph, together with fellow blackaocialists W. A. Domingo and Thomas E. A. Potter, were seen as playing the same kind of role as the African Blood Brotherhood was to play for the Communists. They were to spearhead the 198 The Friends Socialist drive among the black masses. of Negro Freedom.were doubtless, among other things, a manifestation of this role. The new organization was also thoroughly integrationist, it being specified that it 5} CC mi na it th no Eg By the me: We} re; tot tho bla who: men. Sui< eveI his Ship 488 should be inter-racial though black-led. In the months that followed Owen and Randolph continued their attacks on Garvey's separatist program. Owen declared in August 1920, "we educated scientific- minded and higher minded Negroes do not want a Negro nation. It would forever kill our dream of world equal- ity." The Messenger also opposed the slogan "Africa for the Africans" because, it was argued, oppression knows no color. The oppression of the Israelites by the Egyptians in ancient times was cited as proof of this.199 By October 1920 the magazine had come to the conclusion that the U.N.I.A. was "not a promise but a definite menace to Negroes." Among Garvey's menacing attributes were his advocacy of a black political party in the United States.200 Garvey's African program especially came under repeated attack. Randolph argued that Africa was almost totally colonized and so could not be taken. Garvey, he thought, was a tool of white racists in that he diverted black aspirations into unattainable goals. On this point Randolph compared Garvey unfavorably with the Zionists, whom, he claimed, did not advocate conquest. "The keen mentality of the Jew," he pontificated, "recognises the suicidal folly of such a policy." He did recognize, how- ever, that Garvey had made a useful contribution through his "necessary and effective criticism on Negro leader- ship," through his popularization of black history, in his 489 instilling of an attitude of resistance towards whites, and in motivating black people to follow black leader- ship.201 These attacks, serious as they were, were but a prelude to the real campaign. The real campaign may be said to have gotten underway with the appearance of the Messenger for July 1922. The very first editorial screamed starkly, "Marcus Garvey!" complete with exclama- tion mark. Once again, and not for the last time, Garvey's separatist utterances had driven the integra- tionists into a frenzy. This time the casus belli was a Garvey speech in New Orleans. He was quoted as having said, in terms reminiscent of Booker T. Washington, that America was a white man's country. The black man could not insist on riding the white man's jim crow streetcar, he was quoted as saying, because he had not built any streetcar of his own. This was too much for the Messenger integrationists. Before the month was through, Randolph had commenced his anti-Garvey speeches in Harlem.202 Once the decision for all out war had been made, Owen and Randolph dropped all pretentions to propriety in their attacks. And like DuBois they exploited to the full the most vulnerable chink in Garvey's armor, namely his foreignness. As an alien Garvey could be not only jailed but deported, and his incarceration and deportation were henceforth to be the main objectives of the campaign. m A: Ck to Ve 490 Like DuBois they were to push the argument that Garveyism was really a West Indian phenomenon and could thus be extirpated without harm to Afro-Americans. "This fool talk, too," this opening salvo declared, "emanates from a blustering West Indian demagogue who preys upon the igno- rant unsuspecting poor West Indian working men and women who believe Garvey is some sort of Moses." All "ministers, editors and lecturers who have the interests of the race at heart" were urged "to gird up their courage, put on new force, and proceed with might and main to drive the menace of Garveyism out of this country." And just in case the message still had not been made clear, the fol- lowing declaration of uncompromising hostility appeared in italics: "Here's notice that the MESSENGER is firing the opening gun in a campaign to drive Garvey and Garvey- ism in all its sinister viciousness from the American soil."203 At this point Pickens entered the campaign with an integrationist complaint of his own. He was outraged at Garvey's summit meeting with the white racist separa- tists in the Ku Klux Klan. The black Philadelphia Public Journal for which he was a contributing editor and the August Messenger both carried reprints of a July 1922 ex- change of letters between himself and Garvey. In response to Garvey's offer of an award at the August U.N.I.A. con- vention he had replied that he wanted no award from the 491 204 By suppressing his former corre— K.K.K. organization. spondence with Garvey he created the impression that Garvey's advances were a one-sided affair, although he later admitted to having "discussed" a job possibility.205 He supported his entry into the campaign with a steady flow of news releases and editorials, many of them scur- rilous, against Garvey.206 Garvey, for his part, lamented Pickens' about face. "We believed that he was really a race patriot," he wrote, "and could have been harnessed for service to his race, but we find him, black as he is, smarting under the lash of a prejudiced crowd that has more venom than sense, more malice than race loyalty." Garvey also regretted his dishonesty in not publishing a further addition to the correspondence in which Garvey had rejected accusations of a link with the K.K.K. and had challenged Pickens to a public debate.207 August, the month of Pickens' anti-Garvey debut in the Messenger, was also the month of Garvey's conven- tion. The back page of the Messenger proclaimed, as thousands of handbills were soon to do, "Marcus Garvey Must Go!!!" There followed notice of anti-Garvey meetings in Harlem for each of the four Sundays in August. The speakers would be Pickens and Bagnall of the N.A.A.C.P. and Randolph and Owen of the black Socialists. Handbills described this quartet as "Four of the most distinguished scholars, nationally noted orators, famous debaters, deep think corru dom." by th names corre had n revol Progr were 1 492 thinkers, faithful, unselfish, fearless, devoted and in- corruptible public servants in the cause of Negro free- dom." The involvement of the N.A.A.C.P. was underscored by the addition of DuBois and James Weldon Johnson to the names of the four speakers as persons who had taken the correct line while in the South, which Garvey allegedly had not. It was made clear that the attacks would largely revolve around the Black Star Line (and hence the African program) and the Ku Klux Klan question.208 The meetings were under the auspices of the Friends of Negro Freedom. The U.N.I.A. convention not unnaturally opened amidst much tension. A large police contingent was on hand for the opening parade, during which a few minor skirmishes took place between marchers and bystanders who were brave enough to echo the charges of the rival camp.209 During the course of the month and beyond, in Harlem, all over the country and even in Canada, the anti- Garvey campaigners would often have to resort to police protection to guard their persons and their meetings from Garvey's irate followers. Interestingly enough, the of- fices of Randolph and Owen were situated right above Garvey's Universal Publishing House, from the steps of which Garvey and his officers reviewed the parade. In a photograph of U.N.I.A. officers on the reviewing stand published in the Philosophy and Opinions, Amy Jacques Garvey identified "A. Philip Randolph and Chandler Owen, 493 the Socialist enemies of Marcus Garvey, who are also re- viewing the parade at a position immediately behind the group of officials." During the course of the month Garvey challenged the campaigners to a public debate, Randolph was reported as having said that the Afro-American would be just as out of place in Africa as the white man, three Africans wrote the New York Times protesting Pickens' denigration of the Motherland during an anti-Garvey meeting, and Walter White, Assistant Secretary of the N.A.A.C.P. sent an unnamed gentleman from the West Indies to Randolph with interesting anti-Garvey information that Randolph was glad to receive.210 In September exploitation of Garvey's foreign birth became more intense with Owen openly calling for imprisonment and deportation on the grounds that "his de- portation as an anarchist in thought and advocacy would be in accordance with a true and non-strained interpreta- tion of the law." He reinforced this by suggesting that Garvey could legally be deported also as a potential 211 His campaign for public charge and an imbecile. Garvey's deportation contrasted with the Messenger's many campaigns against the deportation and exclusion of white foreign-born radicals and Japanese immigrants. Around this time Randolph received through the mail a packet containing a human hand. The hand had red 494 hair on it and was evidently that of a white person.212 An accompanying letter scolded Randolph for not being able to unite with his own and gave him a week to join his "nigger improvement association." It was signed K.K.K. Whether the hand came from the Klan or Garvey or was posted by Randolph to himself has not been established. In any event Randolph concluded that "the Klan has come to the rescue of its Negro leader, Marcus Garvey." He conveniently omitted from the Messenger article which drew these conclusions the fact that the hand was white.213 This event was balanced by rumors that the campaigners were considering having Garvey assassinated.214 In between the abuse the very real ideological ob- jections to Garveyism continued to surface. The questions raised continued to be the same as those simultaneously being raised by DuBois. Most of the non-Communist integrationists shared the same objections to Garveyism. The dependence of all their arguments on their basic integrationist position can be demonstrated in the following sequence--the main goal, the integrationist would typically argue, was to be fully accepted as Americans. This would mean total integration, social, political and otherwise into American society. This would include the right of intermarriage, hence Garvey's hostility to the "lights" was an irritant. Since the primary goal was integration into American society, Pa Ra th Va. 1‘ S P 495 this would necessitate a concentration on purely Afro- American struggle. (Even DuBois' relatively innocuous Pan-African Congresses found less than enthusiastic sup- port within the N.A.A.C.P.) And purely Afro-American struggle meant that migration to Africa was out of the question. Seeking the assistance of white separatists and in any way suggesting that America was a white man's country was striking at the very root of their aspirations. Hence, at every turn, Garvey's ideology of separation and African redemption provided an antithesis to the position of the integrationists. An outstanding feature of the integrationist at- titude towards Africa was the extent to which they imbibed white propaganda about that continent. DuBois, as has been seen, had expressed reservations about the climate, though denying authorship of the form in which his remarks were reported. He had also accepted the rule of Africa Egr_the Africans, but not necessarily immediately by the Africans. And Garvey often scored New World Africans who parroted the expression "I have lost nothing in Africa." Randolph, in a Harlem campaign speech, gave evidence of these same tendencies. "Africa for the African," he said, was "devoutly to be wished," which did "not imply that we recognize the ability of the Africans to assume the re- sponsibilities and duties of a sovereign nation, at the present."215 496 In November the Crisis came to the assistance of the campaign by attacking a U.N.I.A. handbill distributed through Harlem countering the charges of Randolph and company.216 The same month the Messenger copied DuBois' annual "credit and debit" idea (in which Garvey appeared regularly among the debits) and published a list of the "Twelve Smallest Persons in America." Garvey naturally headed the list, followed by such persons as a Ku Klux Klan leader, Jack Johnson, and one John S. Williams of Georgia who had buried thirteen black people alive.217 Throughout the campaign the brunt of the attack was borne by Owen and Randolph and to a lesser extent by Pickens and Bagnall. A useful indication of how little they had been able to carry prominent non-Garveyite and even anti-Garveyite Afro-American opinion with them was provided by Owen and Randolph themselves. They sent a questionnaire to twenty-five of the most prominent Afro- Americans, including some nominal members of the Friends of Negro Freedom and some of the most active campaign members. The recipients of the questionnaire included DuBois, Carter G. Woodson, Bagnall, Kelly Miller, Emmett J. Scott, Robert S. Abbott, Carl Murphy, Archibald Grimke and others. The questionnaire was accompanied by a letter of so-called "facts" stating Garvey's involvement with the Klan and implicating him in the human hand affair. Four- teen persons replied. Of this number, DuBois referred cc tc re th ag. Scc men coa the. attc Sigr favo Bagn the and hall Ibis ‘ the N. 497 them to the Crisis and declined to answer further, and Woodson discreetly pleaded lack of sufficient knowledge of the Garvey movement to answer meaningfully. Of the remaining twelve no less than five were soon to be sig- natories of the notorious anti-Garvey letter to the attorney-general and thus were among the most strongly committed of the anti-Garvey campaigners. Yet out of a total of twenty—five questionnaires and fourteen responses resulting in twelve effective replies, heavily biased by the inclusion of anti-Garvey campaign members, only four agreed with Owen and Randolph that Garvey should be de- ported. Among those against deportation were Emmett J. Scott, Kelly Miller, Archibald Grimke and two campaign members, Carl Murphy and John E. Nail, who would soon be coaxed (presumably by Owen and Randolph) into changing their minds and signing the pro-deportation letter to the attorney-general. Abbott of the Chicago Defender, another signer, declined to answer that question. Those who favored deportation were Harry H. Pace of the Urban League, Bagnall of the N.A.A.C.P. (both signers of the letter to the attorney-general), Thomas W. Talley of Fisk University and J. B. Bass, editor of the California Eagle.218 The beginning of 1923 found both Pickens and Bag- nall listed as contributing editors to the Messenger.219 This was symptomatic of the ever closer cooperation between the N.A.A.C.P. and the black Socialists Owen and Randolph. 498 The year opened disastrously for the anti-Garvey campaign. J. W. H. Eason, star defector from the Garvey camp and expected chief witness against Garvey in the upcoming mail fraud trial which the campaigners were trying so hard to prejudice, was shot dead in January. He had just emerged from yet another anti-Garvey meeting, this time in New Orleans, a Garveyite stronghold. At this stage the campaign was in a very precarious position indeed. For about six months the campaigners had poured forth a torrent of anti-Garvey rhetoric backed up by meetings all over the United States and in Canada. Garvey's great influence over the mass of people was evi- dent everywhere. In New Orleans, Chicago, Toronto, Harlem, and elsewhere, they were subjected to threats, harassments and intimidations by Garveyites. Their meetings regularly had to be held under police protection. The campaigners' list of complaints was impressive. An Eason meeting in Philadelphia stopped by the police to prevent bloodshed after persons attempting to attend were knocked down and insulted by Garveyites congregating out- side; a "veritable riot" in Cleveland, Ohio, led by Garvey's deputy Dr. Leroy Bundy against anti-Garvey elements; Chandler Owen narrowly saved by the police from Garveyites rushing the streetcar on which he was riding in Pittsburgh; Pickens intimidated by Garveyites in Toronto; a Chicago policeman shot by a Garveyite during a fracas after an 499 anti-Garvey meeting; campaign meetings in New York in- vaded by "scores" of Garveyites; a campaign speaker slashed after an anti-Garvey meeting in Cincinnati; and now Eason dead.220 Furthermore, as has been seen, of the twenty-five non-Garveyite and anti-Garvey Afro-Americans considered most distinguished by Randolph and Owen, only four could be found who would unequivocally advocate Garvey's depor- tation. It was at this stage that the anti-Garvey crusaders decided to enact one of the strangest episodes in Afro-American history. They decided to write and publicize widely a letter to the attorneyegeneral. They decided, in effect, to openly enlist the support of the United States government in overcoming their major rival. Concerning this episode Garvey commented, "It is said that there is honor even among thieves, but it is apparent that there is no honor and self-respect among certain Negroes."221 The notorious letter to Attorney-General Harry M. Daugherty signed by eight leaders of the "Marcus Garvey Must Go" campaign, was dated January 15, 1923. This seems to be the date on which the draft was composed. It was in fact posted or delivered later, although the original date was not changed. Though signed by eight, the principal drafters were four--the same four who had provided the initiative and most of the energy for the campaign so far. 500 They were Randolph, Owen, Pickens and Bagnall. The pre- eminent role of these four was stated by Bagnall in a letter to Arthur B. Spingarn, a national vice-president and chairman of the legal committee of the N.A.A.C.P. This letter to Spingarn proves, as if any proof were needed in light of the role of Pickens and Bagnall, that the N.A.A.C.P. was deeply implicated in the whole affair. For Bagnall enclosed the draft to the attorney-general and requested legal advice. This was before the other eventual signers had endorsed it. Bagnall's letter read: The enclosed is an open letter to Attorney General Daugherty which we plan to have signed by influential colored people in various parts of the country. It was drawn up by a group of us, among whom Owen, Randolph, Pickens, and I were the prin- cipals. We wish to guard against any illegal statement, and we shall appreciate your advice on that point and as to the whole matter.222 Spingarn (or somebody else at the N.A.A.C.P. office) did examine the draft very carefully. Several over-exuberant portions were deleted. It seems quite safe to say that the version which eventually went to the attorney-general was finalized in the N.A.A.C.P. office, in all probability by Arthur B. Spingarn. It was apparently seen by other N.A.A.C.P. officials too, most probably Johnson and White, Secretary and Assistant Secretary respectively, though they later claimed that the N.A.A.C.P. "as an organization" had nothing to do with it.223 The letter naturally attacked Garvey's anti-inte- gration position. It said, "there are in our midst certain 501 Negro criminals and potential murderers, both foreign and American born, who are moved and actuated by intense hatred against the white race. These undesirables con- tinually proclaim that all white people are enemies of the Negro." The U.N.I.A. was described as "just as ob- jectionable and even more dangerous" than the K.K.K., "inasmuch as it naturally attracts an even lower type of cranks, crooks and racial bigots, among whom suggestibi- lity to violent crime is much greater." Garvey's foreignness, a favorite target of the middle class integrationists, was once more exploited. His followers were described as mostly foreigners and voteless, the inference being that the Republican govern- ment would not have to worry about losing their votes. To make the proposition even more attractive, DuBois and Domingo were quoted as authorities on the worldwide mem- bership of the U.N.I.A., which was put at "much less than 20,000." The letter also revealed the same type of inte- grationist elitism and snobbery which characterized DuBois. The integrationists just could not come to grips with the phenomenon of mass grass roots organization. The phenomenon of masses of black workers and peasants militantly organized and not afraid of violence if neces- sary was a spectre as terrifying to black integrationists as to white people. The letter declared, "The U.N.I.A. is composed chiefly of the most primitive and ignorant 502 element of West Indian and American Negroes." Much was made of the proneness to violence of this group and over half of the letter was devoted to a catalogue of U.N.I.A. violence against anti-Garveyites, especially members of the "Marcus Garvey Must Go" campaign. The U.N.I.A. con- stitution was quoted to show that Garvey frowned on criminals except where their crimes were committed in the interests of the organization. This provision would doubtless have covered cases such as the occasional con- viction of U.N.I.A. members for resisting police attacks on their meeting places. It was presented here, however, as a positive incitement to crime. In two cases where matters were pending before the courts, the letter attempted to impress upon the country's chief law officer the probability of Garveyite guilt. These were the Eason case, where the U.N.I.A. of- ficers arrested had professed their innocence though rejoicing in his death, and Garvey's own pending mail fraud case. They begged the attorney-general to "vigor- ously and speedily push the government's case against Marcus Garvey for using the mails to defraud" since "hosts of citizen voters" of both colors "earnestly" desired it. The letter asked finally for Department of Justice sur- veillance of the U.N.I.A. and requested "that the Attorney- General use his full influence completely to disband and extirpate this vicious movement." The eight signatories 503 were Harry H. Pace of the Urban League and president of a phonograph corporation, Robert S. Abbott, publisher and editor of the Chicago Defender, John E. Nail of the Urban League and president of a real estate company, Dr. Julia P. Coleman, president of a cosmetic manufacturing company, William Pickens, field secretary of the N.A.A.C.P., Chandler Owen, who described himself as co-editor of the Messenger and co-executive secretary of the Friends of Negro Freedom, Robert W. Bagnall, the N.A.A.C.P.'s direc- tor of branches and George W. Harris, editor of the New York News and a member of the Board of Aldermen of New York City.224 Conspicuously absent from the list of signatories was the name of A. Philip Randolph. Randolph was undoubtedly one of the principal figures in the cam- paign and had helped draft the letter. The attorney-general was requested to address his reply to Owen, the secretary of the committee of signa- tories. For Owen especially, this was a most sorry turn of events. His Messenger in its early days had unashamedly proclaimed itself the only radical black journal. And in 1919 the then Attorney-General A. Mitchell Palmer had branded it the most radical Afro-American publication. Now the Socialist radical was begging the attorney-general to get rid of his rival Garvey. On January 26 Owen wrote another letter to the attorney-general, this time on the letterhead of the 504 Friends of Negro Freedom. He suggested that the letter of the eight be not given to the press since it was planned to release it all over the country on February 1.225 On January 30 Carl Murphy, editor of the Baltimore Afro-American, inquired by telegram of the attorney- general what steps had been taken to disband the U.N.I.A. in accordance with the wishes of the eight. Murphy was a founder-member of the Friends of Negro Freedom.226 On February 4 Garvey, now aware of the letter, informed the chief law officer that there was "absolutely no truth" in the allegations contained therein. The U.N.I.A., he wrote, stood for the uplift of a downtrodden race. There was nothing disloyal about that. The Bolsheviks and Socialists among his detractors he considered the real disloyal elements.22l7 Then on February 20 a remarkable thing happened. The attorney-general's office drafted a detailed reply to Owen endorsing his hostile analysis of the Garvey movement and promising possible further legal action against him. The letter was apparently drafted by Assistant Attorney-General John W. H. Crim. Crim, it is interesting to note, was later accused by Garvey of re- marks prejudicial to his mail fraud case while it was still sub judice. Somebody, perhaps Attorney-General Daugherty, had second thoughts about the reply and it was not sent. The unsent draft read: The Department is in receipt of your communication 505 of the 15th ultimo addressed to the Attorney General by yourself and several others with particular re- ference to Marcus Garvey and the organization known as the Universal Negro Improvement Association. The Department appreciates thoroughly the facts recited in your letter with regard to the activities of this alien. The Department of Justice is very well acquainted with the details of his operations and is thoroughly satisfied that his schemes were formulated and have been executed to the great detri- ment of thousands of colored American citizens who have fallen as dupes and turned over to him inno- cently their meager savings in the hope that he would accomplish the impossible. Garvey has known this impossibility from the start but, like so many other organizations that have sprung up throughout the country the propaganda has been a means of livelihood more satisfying than an honest occupation. It is unfortunate that so many of Garvey's dupes have been American citizens, a number of them the poorer Negroes [sic] who could least afford to lose their meager life sayings. It was with this knowledge that the government succeeded in having Garvey indicted in New York for the misuse of the mails in a scheme to defraud. As you are aware, this case is set for trial at a very early date and the Department has sufficient confi- dence to believe that the ends of justice will most certainly be satisfied before the entire matter is concluded. The Government is thoroughly aware of the fact that Garvey does not and never has represented the American negro. For many months prior to the pre- paration of this joint letter, the Government has not been idle or unmindful of this colossal fraud and at all times it is anxious to receive from the substantial elements of your race any information which will assist it in enforcing the laws of the nation and the suppression of movements such as the Garvey scheme. The details of your letter are being given very careful attention and if sufficient evidence can be obtained on the several instances recited, you may rest assured that still additional action will be taken.228 This draft was replaced by a brief, more formal note of two sentences. Even this note, however, ended, "Please keep us advised in the event additional facts come to your 506 attention."229 It is hardly surprising that the original draft was not sent. It would undoubtedly have found its way into the Messenger and the rest of the anti-Garvey press. And even in the context of Garvey's case, already hope- lessly prejudiced by the efforts of DuBois, the Friends of Negro Freedom and others, this would have been a little too much. On February 26 Owen, the would-be Socialist radical, thanked Crim for his reply and reminded him that the eight represented "the most distinguished and respon— sible businessmen, educators and publicists among the colored people of the United States."230 Garvey responded at length to the charges of the eight. "My enemies," he said, "and those opposed to the liberation of the Negro to nationhood are so incompetent and incapable of meeting argument with argument and tolerance with tolerance that they have cowardly sought the power of Government to combat and destroy me." He concluded that this was proof of "their weakness and in- ability to stand up under the onward march of African redemption and real Negro freedom." Like the "good old darkies" that they were, "they believe they have some news to tell and they are telling it for all it is worth." He denounced them as a bunch of assimilationists who wanted to hurdle the barrier into the white race. The U.N.I.A. was not in his opinion a hater of white people 507 because it believed in the rights of all races. And he could not see how his maligners could simultaneously ac- cuse him of stirring up ill-feeling between the races and seeking an alliance with the Ku Klux Klan. Their main problem, he thought, was their inability to tolerate any organization that did not have white members. Concerning the alleged "primitive" and "ignorant" following of the U.N.I.A. he was no less indignant. "Were it not for the ignorant element of Negroes," he retorted, "These very fellows would have starved long ago, because all of them earn their living either by selling out the race under the guise of leadership or by exploiting the race in busi- ness." He reaffirmed the ability of the U.N.I.A. to marshall more votes than all other black organizations in the United States put together and affirmed that "every second Negro you meet, if not an actual member, is one in spirit." And he warned them that by their actions "a pre- cedent will be set for the destruction of all Negro orga- nizations that seek in any way to improve the condition of the Negro race." Garvey's reply included a pen portrait of the eight. One was a "business exploiter" who appealed to race patriotism while overcharging for his products. Another was "a race defamer of Chicago" whose paper loved to highlight the crime and vice of the race. 'He was the man who published in his newspaper for over one year a 508 full page advertisement showing the pictures of two women, a black woman and a very light woman, with the advice under the photograph of the black woman to 'lighten your black skinn'" The next was a "real estate shark" who charged higher rents than white landlords. Then came "a hair straightener and face bleacher, whose loyalty to the race is to get the race to be dissatisfied with itself." On the "turn coat and lackey" who had used him to get a raise in a rival organization, he was particularly severe. Then came the "grafter Socialist" who had started sundry enterprises among black people without accounting for the funds. The seventh signer was Garvey's old adversary, the ex-pastor of a "Blue Vein Society Church in Detroit, Mich." who was relieved of his charge for alleged immoral- ity. Finally there was the "unscrupulous politician" who had lost the respect of the masses. The response ended with an appeal to U.N.I.A. members to close ranks against this onslaught. By way of postscript Garvey noted that all the signers were octoroons or married to octoroons. The sole exception, "a mulatto and Socialist" (Owen), had tried to marry a white woman but had been dissuaded by U.N.I.A. criticism. The coincidence between the personal backgrounds and integrationist positions of his detractors 231 John Edward Bruce, ever faithful was thus established. to Garvey, composed a poem for the occasion entitled "Seven Little Colored Men." A typical two lines went 509 "Three little colored men a sitting in a row,/ Remarked one to the other dis Garvey man must go."232 The campaign continued unabated after the letter. Bagnall, showing that integrationist dislike for Garvey's physical features shared by DuBois, described him as "A Jamaican Negro of unmixed stock, squat, stocky, fat and sleek with protruding jaws, and heavy jowls, small bright pig-like eyes and rather bulldog-like face. Boastful, egotistic, tyrannical, intolerant, cunning, shifty, smooth and suave, avaricious . . ."233 Yet, due no doubt to the stress of the campaign, splits began to appear among Garvey's foes. For one thing, the progression of the campaign had been marked by a strident anti-West Indian onslaught which now began to embarrass its chief West Indian member, Jamaican Socialist W. A. Domingo. While maintaining his anti-Garvey position Domingo now openly attacked the Messenger on this score. Owen defended the Messenger's position amidst more rancor- 234 ous integrationist nativism. Another fissure resulted in the dismissal of Floyd J. Calvin from his post as associate editor of the Messenger. Calvin's mistake had been to suggest that Randolph and Owen should not seek to bring about the destruction of the whole of Garvey's or- ganization merely because Garvey may have erred. Mild as this criticism was, it cost him his job.235 As if to underscore their disagreement with Calvin, the Messenger 510 editors declared in April 1923, "Our work is bearing fruit. The Black Star Line is completely gone. Every one of his stores is closed. His Negro Times is sus- pended, and well-nigh all of his former employees are "236 suing him for pay. The campaign had by now degene- rated to the point where a Messenger cartoon could depict Garvey as a donkey and describe him as "A Well Known Jackass."237 The campaign did not let up during Garvey's trial, and during the post-trial imprisonment without bail the Messenger again demonstrated the truth of Calvin's allegation. An editorial urged the total destruc- tion of the U.N.I.A. now that Garvey was in jail, since it represented a continuance of Garvey's spirit.238 Garvey was out of jail in time to congratulate his supporters for having contributed to George Harris' defeat in Harlem primaries. Harris, one of the eight, had some time previously been the lone objector to a U.N.I.A. sponsored "Rose Day" celebration, even though his white colleagues on the Board of Aldermen had given their approval.239 And Pickens, after publishing an article in which he reversed the good he had to say about Garvey in 1921, wrote the prosecutor expressing his impatience at the delay in disposing of Garvey's case now that he was out on bail.240 DuBois' "Lunatic or Traitor" attack in 1924 was warmly applauded by the Messenger which came to his 511 defense in the face of widespread disagreement generated by it. The editors were so pleased that they said they felt like rescinding all their previous criticisms of DuBois. DuBois, they said, was an intellectual giant. Garvey was but a "Low Grade Moron."241 Garvey lost his appeal in February 1925 and 242 An interesting aside on the tragedy Pickens rejoiced. and comedy of Pickens' role in this campaign is the fact that late in 1924 he again extracted a salary increase from the N.A.A.C.P. by using the same tack as in 1921. He claimed that he had passed up a chance to get a sub- 243 In his stantial increase from a similar organization. first application for pardon in June 1925 Garvey pointed out that Pickens had acted in a provoking and unbecoming manner in the courtroom during the trial and that Abbott, another of the eight, had brought the first Mrs. Garvey back into the country and featured her pronouncements in his Chicago Defender in order to prejudice his trial.244 By 1926 George Harris was not above boosting the circula- tion of his New York News by organizing a "petition" supposedly on behalf of Garvey and publishing Garvey's "memoirs," the latter in fact written by a prosecution witness at Garvey's trial.245 As in the case of the Communists, who adopted a form of black nationalism once Garvey had departed America, and as in the case of DuBois, who began preaching 512 separatism in the 1930's, so it was with some of the eight. Amy Jacques Garvey noted in 1927 that George Harris had warned the white world that it would have to reckon with Garvey's radical ideas and stop exploiting black people. And the Negro WOrld noted an Abbott edi- torial on African redemption, complete with Garvey phrase- ology.246 Of the eight, however, it was Pickens, always the most erratic and unpredictable, who came out openly for Garvey's release in 1927. He said, however, that he would have preferred deportation to prison for Garvey from the beginning.247 The "Marcus Garvey Must Go" campaign, as has been noted, was essentially an alliance of convenience between integrationists, many of whom had been at loggerheads with one another before Garvey's successes drove them to tem- porary unity. Once Garvey had gone, the basis for their unity went with him. Thus less than a year after Garvey's imprisonment the Messenger was editorially attacking Abbott. And even before that they had turned on former Attorney-General Daugherty who was now, in their opinion, "notorious for his crooked, shady political dealings." (Daugherty had in fact become implicated in such dealings.) And in 1928 Owen and Randolph launched an attack on yet another of the eight, George Harris.248 The relationship between the U.N.I.A. and the integrationists was one of overwhelming but not unrelieved 513 hostility. Occasionally, as in the case of the Dyer bill, they were willing to cooperate where the interests of black people might otherwise suffer severely. Thus in 1922 at the height of DuBois' attacks, John Edward Bruce was willing to join him on a "Fair Play League" which would visit police stations in Harlem to try and ensure the prOper treatment of black prisoners.249 As is the case of relations with the Communists, however, this type of cooperation was more likely to take place after Garvey's deportation from the United States when the U.N.I.A. gradually receded as a threat to the integra- tionist establishment. Thus in 1931 the Negro Wbrld could side with the N.A.A.C.P. against Communist exploita- tion of the Scottsboro case and in the middle of the decade a meeting sponsored by the U.N.I.A. and the Provi- sional Committee for the Defense of Ethiopia could have Walter White and DuBois (now in his separatist phase) as speakers.250 And in 1944, the same year in which he re- joined the N.A.A.C.P., DuBois actually solicited the help of Amy Jacques Garvey in attracting delegates to the fifth Pan-African Congress.251 When the congress convened in Manchester, England, in 1945, the Jamaica U.N.I.A. was among the delegations represented.252 These instances of cooperation were, however, relatively minor and mostly very late in the day. They in no way detract from the fact that a major portion of 514 the responsibility for Garvey's imprisonment and deporta- tion must be attributed to the integrationist onslaught, especially as manifested in the campaigns of DuBois and the N.A.A.C.P., and the black Socialists Owen and Randolph. CUO Congr¢ NOTES OF THE N.A.A.C.P. AND INTEGRATIONISTS, AND GARVEY AND SEPARATISTS, OR, THE INTEGRATIONIST ONSLAUGHT 1Crisis, XXVIII, 1, May 1924, p. 8. 2Negro World, May 10, 1924, p. l. 3Ibid., October 6, 1928, p. 2. 4Philosophy and Opinions, II, p. 70. 5Arthur Barnett Spingarn papers, Library of Congress, Box 2, Ovington to Spingarn, February 8, 1921. 6New York World, August 24, 1920, p. 9. 7James Weldon Johnson, Black Manhattan (New York, Atheneum, 1968, first pub. 1930Y7p. 257. 8Messenger, June 1924, p. 184. 9Philosophyand Opinions, II, p. 71. 10N.A.A.C.P. Administrative Files, Library of Congress, Box C-304, Assistant Secretary to Louis R. Glavis, August 28, 1924. 11New York Age, August 21, 1920, p. 4. 12Black Manhattan, p. 258. 13NOAOAOCOP. files, BOX (2-304, N.A.A.C.P. press release, March 21, 1924. 515 2mm... 190 C01 516 l4Negro World, June 7, 1919, p. 2; January 7, 1922, p. 3; January 14, 1922, p. 7; February 4, 1922, p. 2; March 4, 1922, pp. 4, 10; May 27, 1922, p. 2; June 10, 1922, p. 2; November 4, 1922, p. 4. 15Negro World, April 8, 1922, p. 1; May 27, 1922, p. 5; July 15, 1922, p. 7; December 16, 1922, p. 1. 16Ibid., October 27, 1923, p. l. 17Spingarn papers, Box 2, Ovington to Spingarn, February 8, 1921. 18N.A.A.C.P. files, Box C-304, Johnson to Garvey, January 20, 1922, Garvey to Johnson, January 21, 1922. 19PhilosoPhy and Opinions, II, p. 261. 20N.A.A.C.P. files, Box C-304, press release June 22, 1923. 21 Negro World, January 3, 1925, p. 2; June 6, 1925, 22N.A.A.C.P. files, Box C-304, Assistant Secretary to Mr. Allen Dawson, ed., New York Tribune, February 17, 1922, and related correspondence; Spingarn papers, Box 2, Walter White to Spingarn, February 18, 1922. 23N.A.A.C.P. files, Box C-304, A. A. Maney to James W. Johnson, December 2, 1921; Norman Thomas, associate editor of the Nation to Johnson, August 31, 1921; Edgar Collier to Johnson, March 12, 1921; J. K. Marshall to N.A.A.C.P., August 24, 1924, and many others. 24NegrgWorld, February 2, 1924, p. 2. 25N.A.A.C.P. files, Box C-304, Alice Woodby McKane, M.D., to Seligman, December 21, 1921; Seligman to McKane, December 27, 1921. 26Negro World, September 6, 1924, p. 19. 2“’Graham Knox, "Political Change in Jamaica (1866- 1906) and the Local Reaction to the Policies of the Crown Colony Government," p. 161; Lewis, "A Political Study of Garveyism," p. 14. PP- "A 1 Con‘ 191 Gar‘ Wil Rep SEQ: TusL 13.6 P.2 517 28 pp. 10-12. Africa Times and Orient Review, I, 1, July 1912, 29Negro World, December 8, 1923, pp. 1, 10. 3ODai1y_Chronicle, November 1914, quoted in Lewis, "A Political Study of Garveyism," p. 61. 31Booker T. Washington papers, Library of Congress, Container 939, Garvey to Booker T. Washington, April 12, 1915. 32Washington Papers, container 939, Washington to Garvey, April 27, 1915. 33Garvey to Emmett J. Scott, facsimile in Daniel T. Williams, Ei ht Negro Bibliographies (New York, Kraus Reprint Co., 7017 n.p. 34Garvey to R. R. Moton, February 29, 1916, in Eight Negro Bibliogrephies, n.p. 35J. J. Mills, His Own Account . . ., p. 110. 36Prophet of Black Nationalism, p. 80. 37Garvey to Moton, October 23, 1923, Garvey to Secretary, Tuskegee Institute, November 2, 1923, Principal, Tuskegee Institute to Garvey, November 6, 1923, all in Eight Negro Bibliographies; Negro World, November 17, 1923, p. 6; The Tuskegee Student, XXXIII, 17, December 1923, p. 2. 38Philosophy and Opinions, I, p. 41; New York World, August 3,71921, p. 12. 39Blackman, April 22, 1929, p. 1; Southern Workman, LVII, 10, Octdber 1928, p. 425. 4oNegro World, November 10, 1923, p. l. 41Philospphy__and Opinions, II, p. 38. 42Negro World, November 17, 1923, p. 6. IH Afr: 2, 1 (Ne- and D011 518 43Ibid., April 19, 1924, p. 4. 44Ibid., June 9, 1928, p. 4. 45W. E. B. DuBois, The Autobiography_of W. E. B. DuBois (New York, International Publishers,71968), p. 273. 46A Talk With Afro-West Indians, p. 3. 47W. E. B. DuBois, Dusk of Dawn (New York, Schocken, 1968, first pub. 1940), p. 277. 48Garvey to Moton, February 29, 1916, in Eight Negro Bibliogrgphies. 49Philosophy and Opinione, II, p. 60. SOCrisis, x11, 1, May 1916, p. 9. 51Champion Magazine, I, 5, January 1917, p. 267. 52PhiloSOphy and Opinions, II, pp. 57, 311. 53Dusk of Dawn, p. 278. 54E£}§}§J XVII, 4, February 1919, pp. 165.166. Sagggggg. XVIII. 4. August 1919, p. 207. 56C. G. Contee, "The Worley Report on the Pan- African Congress of 1919," Journal of Negro HistoryL LV, 2, April 1970, p. 141. 57E£i§i§y XIX, 2, December 1919, p. 46. 58The List of the fifty-nine is reproduced in Herbert Aptheker, Afro-American History: The Modern Era (New York, Citadel, 1971), pp. 154-155. 59The list of members is reprinted in Martin Kilson and Adelaide Hill, A ro 03 of Africa (Garden City, New York, Doubleday, 1971), pp. 253-205. 519 60M. XIX, 3, January 1920, p. 107, 61Crisis, XX, 1, March 1920, pp. 6-8. 62Negro World, June 12, 1920, quoted in Elliott M. Rudwick, "DuBois versus Garvey: Race Propagandists at War," Journal of_Negro Education, XXVIII, 1959, p. 424. 63New York World, August 4, 1920, p. 8. 6425;315: XX. 4. August 1920, p. 189. 65National Civic Federation papers, Box 152. 66Ibid. 67Crisis, XX, 5, September 1920, pp. 214-215; N.C.F. papers, op. cit. 68Messenger, September 1920, pp. 84-85. 692££§i§1 XXI, 1, November 1920, p. 35. 70Ibid., p. 16. 71These arguments are forcefully stated by Amy Jacques Garvey in the Negro World, December 1, 1923, p. 5. 7ZSpingarn papers, Box 2, Ovington to Spingarn, July 24, 1921. 738chomburg papers, Box 2, DuBois to Schomburg, November 9, 1920, enclosing DuBois to Domingo, November 6, 1920. 74££i§£§. XXI, 2, December 1920, pp. 58-60. 7SBruce papers, Group D-9E, 14-9. 76Crisis, XXI, 3, January 1921, pp. 112-115. 77S£i§i§p XXI, 5, March 1921, p. 213; Spingarn Papers, Spingarn to DuBois, February 9, 1921. 520 78Negro World, April 9, 1921, p. 2. 79953335. XXII. 1, May 1921. p. 8. 80R. G. 59, S40 C2/original, DuBois to Hughes, June 23, 1921. DuBois published Hughes' cordial reply in the Crisis (XXII, 4, August 1921, p. 150.) 81F.O. 371/5708, Garvey to Sir A. Geddes, British Ambassador, Washington, June 16, 1921, quoted in Robert G. Weisbord, "Marcus Garvey, Pan-Negroist: The View from Whitehall," Race, XI, 4, 1970, p. 426. 82New York Call, August 1, 1921. 83New York World, August 2, 1921, p. 2. 84N.A.A.C.P. files, Box C-304, typewritten copy. BSQEEEiE: XXII, 5, September 1921, p. 225. 86W. E. B. DuBois, The World and Africa (New York, International Publishers, 1965, first pub. 1946), p. 237; Dusk of Dawn, p. 278; Negro World, October 8, 1921, p. 2. 87Nggro World, July 2, 1921, p. 2. 88Crisis, XXIV, 1, May 1922, p. 33. 89W. E. B. DuBois, "The Pan-African Movement," in George Padmore, ed., History of the_Pan-African Congress (London, Hammersmith Bookshop, T194517, pp. 21, 22. 90Negro World, July 2, 1921, p. 2; October 1, 1921, p. 4. 91Philosophy and Opinions, I, p. 50. 92New York Tribune, September 15, 1921, reprinted in Crusader, V, 3, November 1921, pp. 24, 25. 93Crisis, XXIII, 4, February 1922, p. 154. 17, 1921, 1922, Shippin UBOiS ’ 521 94Negro World, October 29, 1921, p. 2; December 17, 1921, p. 6. 95Spingarn papers, Box 37, minutes of a December 21, 1921, meeting. 96Wheeler Sheppard, (n.p., 1921). 97E£i§i§p XXIII, 4, February 1922, p. 151. 98Negro World, February 1922, p. l. ggggigig. XXIII, 4, February 1922, p. 155. l°°Ibid. 1OINegro World, October 1, 1921, P- 33 February 11' 1922, p. 8. 102Crisis, XXI, 3, January 1921, p. 114. 103Crisis, XXIII, 6, April 1922, p. 252. 104R. G. 32, 605-1-653, DuBois to Chairman, U.S. Shipping Board, July 27, 1922; A. D. Lasker, Chairman, to DuBois, July 31, 1922. 105R. G. 59, 195.7 Kanawha, DuBois to Department of State, August 3, 1922; Wilbur J. Carr, Director of Consular Services, to DuBois, August 18, 1922; DuBois to Carr, September 6, 1922; Carr to DuBois, October 5, 1922. 106Spingarn papers, Box 52, DuBois to Charles Studin, August 8, 1922. 107Negro World, February 4, 1922, quoted in Rudwick, "DuBois versus Garvey," p. 427; N.A.A.C.P. files, Box C-304, Garvey to Secretary, N.A.A.C.P., July 14, 1922. 108Crisis, XXIV, 5, September 1922, pp. 210-214. logNegro World, November 4, 1922, p. l. 522 110Spingarn papers, Box 2, Walter White to Spingarn, August 16, 1922; Spingarn to White, August 17, 1922; White to Spingarn, August 18, 1922; Negro World, August 19, 1922, p. 4. 111Crisis, XXV, 1, November 1922, pp. 16-21; Negro World, October 28, 1922, p. 4; November 4, 1922, p. 4. 112Crisis, xxv, 3, January 1923, pp. 120-122. 113The author has interviewed old men in Harlem who considered themselves Garveyites but were never paid- up members of the U.N.I.A. One such informant says that he regularly took time off from work to attend U.N.I.A. parades and functions; Ferris refuted this DuBois allega- tion in the Negro World, January 6, 1923, p. 4. 114January 1923. 115N.A.A.C.P. files, Box C-304. 116Century, cv, 4, February 1923, pp. 539-548. 117Race, I, 1, Winter 1935-36,pp. 11, 12. 118Crisis, xxv, 4, February 1923, p. 151. 119Philosophy and Opinions, II, pp. 310-320, reprinted from Negro World, February 13, 1920. 120Dusk of Dawn, p. 278. ' 121Negro World, December 15: 1923: Po 27 October 6' 1923, p. 2,_reprinted from the Gold Coast Leader, n.d.; Negro World, January 26, 1924, reprinting editorial from Gold Coast Leader of December 1, 1923. 122Negro World, November 24, 1923, p. 1; December 1, 1923, p.71. 123Messenger, January 1924, p. 5. 124Negro World, December 29, 1923, p. 1. 523 125Ibid., December 15, 1923, p. 4. 126Dusk_pf Dawn, p. 122. 127Quoted in Frank Chalk, "DuBois and Garvey Confront Liberia," Canadian Journal of African Studies, I, 2, November 1967, p. 137. 128Negro World, September 6, 1924, p. 3. 129Dusk of Dawn, pp. 123, 124. l3oerisis, XXII, 2, June 1921, p. 53. 13J'Bruce papers Ms L 33, Bruce to Florence (his wife), January 2, 1924. 132Daily Worker, August 20, 1924, p. 6. 133American Imperialism Enslaves Liberia, p. 34n. 134Crisis, XXVIII, 3, July 1924, p. 106; XXVIII, 4, August 1924, p . 154, 155. 135Negro World, August 27, 1927, p. 5; Philosophy and Opinions, II, p. 243. 136R. G. 59, 882. 5511/10, Memorandum of September 6, 1924, in Hughes to the President, September 6, 1924. 137Messenger, October 1924, p. 313. 138Crisis, XXVIII, 1. May 1924: PP° 8' 9' 139Spingarn papers, Box 3, DuBois to Johnson, April 15, 1924. For attempts to settle this dispute see Harry E. Davis to Spingarn, June 16, 1924; DuBois to Spingarn, June 23, 1924, enclosing Johnson to DuBois, June 23, 1924 and DuBois to Johnson, June 23, 1924; Garvey referred to DuBois' N.A.A.C.P. problems in the Negro World, September 9, 1922 and November 4, 1922 - quoted in DuBOls versus Garvey," p. 427. 524 140Negro World, May 10, 1924, pp. 1, 2, 4. 141Ibid., p. 4. 142Pittsburgh Courier, n.d., quoted in Negro World, May 17, 1924, p. 2; Hotel Tattler, n.d., reprinted in Negro World, May 24, 1924,“p. 2; Gary Sun, n.d., reprinted in Negra'World, May 24, 1924, p. 2;“' 143DailyWorker, August 13, 1924, p. 3. 144Cleveland Gazette, n.d., reprinted in Negro World, June 7, 1924, p. 2. 145Daily Worker, February 14, 1924: PP- 1' 2° 146Boston Chronicle, n.d., reprinted in Negro World, February 2, 1924, p. 5. 147Crisis, XXVIII, 3, July 1924, pp. 103, 104. 148Ne ro World, September 6, 1924, p. 2; New York Times, August 29, 1924, p. 4. 149World and Africa, p. 242. 15°Ibid., p. 243. 151Negro World, September 3, 1927, pp. 2, 4, 5; January 14,—1928, p. 4. 152Crisis, XXXV, 2, February 1928, p. 51. 153New York Herald Tribune Books, May 20, 1928. 154Negro World, July 19, 1930, p. 1. 155Ibid., November 7, 1931, p. l. 156Autobiography, p. 298. 157Blackman, I, 6, November 1934, p. 9. 525 158Newspaper clipping, no nane, n.d., DuBois Scrap- book, Schomburg Collection. 159Race, 1, 1, Winter 1935-36, p. 14. 16oIbid., pp. 12—14. 161Black Man, I, 8, late July 1935, pp. 6-8. 162Crisis, XXII, 4, August 1921, p. 151. 163Autobiogrephy, p. 273. 164New York Age, February 1920. 16SPickens papers, Schomburg Collection, Box 1, Pickens to J. E. Spingarn, September 25, 1921. 166 28, 1921. Pickens papers, Box 1, DuBois to Pickens, March 167Amy Jacques Garvey papers, Amy J. Garvey to E. David Cronon, March 28, 1955; Garvey_and Garveyism, p. 249; Philosophy and Opinions, II, p. 307; Negro World, August 27, 1927, p. 8. Here Mrs. Garvey suggests that Pickens may have visited Garvey several times. lGXPickens papers, Box 1, Pickens to Garvey, September 12, 1921, Box 1, quoted in Sheldon Avery, "Up from Washington: William Pickens and the Negro Struggle for Equality, 1900-1954" (Unpub. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Oregon, 1970), p. 82. 169Pickens papers, Box 1, Pickens to Board of Directors, N.A.A.C.P., September 17, 1921. 17oIbid., "Memorandum to Mr. Bagnall," n.d. 171Ibid., Pickens to J. E. Spingarn, September 25' 1921. 1721bid., Robert W. Bagnall, Secretary pro tem, to Pickens, September 29, 1921. the and June Picke W Janna] Marcus % Line , n 526 173Spingarn papers, Box 37, Minutes of meeting of the Board of Directors, October 10, 1921. l“Pickens papers, Box 1, Pickens to Mr. Gruening and Mr. Thomas, editors of the Nation, October 11, 1921. 175Ibid. 176Nation, cx111, December 28, 1921, pp. 750-751; Negro World, December 17, 1921, p. 9; California Voice, December 31, 1921, p. l ff. 177 1922, p. 4. Negro World, February 25, 1922, p. 3; March 11, 178Pickens papers, Box 7, Garvey to Pickens, May 5: 1922. 1791819" Box 1, Pickens to Dr. H. Claude Hudson: June 4, 1922. 180Ibid., Box 7, Garvey to Pickens, July 10, 1922; Pickens to Garvey, July 24, 1922. 181Bulletin, New York Urban League, Inc., Annual Report 1921, p. 1. 182National Urban League. Report 1920' III' 1’ January 1921: P- 14- 183Philosophy and Opinions, II, p. 58. 184Federal Court Records, New York, FRC 536137, Marcus Garvey v. Robert 8. Abbott Publishing Company; Philosgphy and Opinions, II, pp. 78, 321. 18Scanspiracyrof the East St. Louis Riots, p. 2. 186William H. Ferris, "Garvey and the Black Star Line," Favorite Magazine, IV, 6, July 1920, p. 397. 187Messenger, August 1922, pp. 467-471. 188Ibid., December 1920, p. 170. 527 189Hubert Harrison, The Negro and the Nation (New York, Cosmo Advocate Publishing Company, 1917), p. 3. 190Negro World, May 6, 1922, p. 8; June 10, 1922, p. 2; September 20, 1922, p. 1; New York Times, September 11, 1922, p. 19. 191Interview with Mr. J. Charles Zampty, Highland Park, Michigan, April 17, 1973; Negro World, September 2, 1922, p. 2. 192Interview with Mr. Zampty; Negro World, October 14, 1922, p. 5; January 13, 1923, pp. 5, 10; January 20, 1923, p. 2. 193Guichard Parris and Lester Brooks, Blacks in the City- A History of the National Urban League (Boston, Little, Brown and Co., 1971), p. 200; Owen andIRandolph expressed the same fear'-N.C.F. Papers, Box 152. 194Negro World, January 28, 1922, p. 7. 195Messenger, November 1917, p. 31: January 1913: p. 23; May-June 1919, pp. 9, 10, 26, 27; December 1919, p. 21; September 1920, pp. 84, 85; New York Age, December 13, 1919, p. 4; Crisis, XXI, 2, December 1920, p. 60. 196Messenger, December 1920, p. 178. 197Messenger, April-May 1920, pp. 3, 4; R. G. 60, 198940, Chandler Owen to Hon. Harry M. Daugherty, January 26, 1923. 198Revolutionary Radicalism, p. 2007. 199N.C.F. papers, Box 152; Messenger, September 1920, pp. 83, 84. 200Messenger, October 1920, p. 114; December 1920: p. 171. 201Ibid., September 1921, pp. 248- 252; January 1922, pp. 330-335. Au< NJ Rd: 19: 528 202Negro World, July 29, 1922, p. 2. 203Messenger, July 1922, p. 437. 204Ibid., August 1922, pp. 471, 472; The public Journal, JuIy 29, 1922; Pickens papers, Box 7, Garvey to Pickens, July 10, 1922, Pickens to Garvey, July 24, 1922; N.A.A.C.P. files, Box C-304, Pickens to Garvey, n.d., July, 1922. 205The Public Journal, clipping, n.d. 206Pickens papers, Box 7, undated clippings from The Public Journal. 207Negro World, August 12, 1922, p. 1; August 26: 1922, page number torn off. 208Messenger, August 1922, back page; "Marcus Garvey Must Go!!!" Handbill, The Messenger advertisement had one exclamation mark. 209New York World, August 2, 1922, p. 3. 210Ibid., August 6, 1922, p. 14; New York Times, August 7, 1922, p. 7; Garvey and Garveyism, pp. 96, 97? N.A.A.C.P. files, Box C-304, Assistant Secretary to Randolph, August 7, 1922, Randolph to White, August 25, 1922. 211Messenger, September 1922, p. 479. 212New York Times, September 6, 1922: Po 6- 213Messenger, October 1922, p. 500. 214Negro World, August 19, 1922, p. 2. 215Messenger, November 1922, p. 523. 216Crisis, XXV, 1, November 1922, pp. 34-36. 21‘IMessenger, November 1922, p. 517. 529 218Ibid., December 1922, pp. 550-552. 219 . Ibld., January 1923, p. 561; February 1923, p. 591. 220 . . . Philosophy and Opinions, II, pp. 296-298. 221Ibid., p. 294. 222 . . Spingarn papers, Bagnall to Spingarn, January 16, 1923. 223 The draft is now lodged in a file with material largely written by Johnson and White -N.A.A.C.P. files, Box C-304. See also White to Johnson, May 17, 1923; N.A.A.C.P. press release, May 18, 1923; Johnson to Hon. Julian W. Mack, May 19, 1923. 224R. G. 60, 198940, Chandler Owen et al. to Hon. Harry M. Daugherty, January 15, 1923; PhiloEEpHE and Opinions, II, pp. 293-300. 225R. G. 60, 198940, Owen to DaughertYo January 26' 1923. 226Ibid., Murphy to Daugherty, January 30: 1923- 227Ibid., Garvey to Daugherty, February 4, 1923; John W. H. Crlm, Assistant Attorney-General to Garvey, February 7, 1923. 228Ibid., Assistant Attorney General to Owen, February 20, 1923. 229Ibid., Crim to Owen, February 23, 1923. 2301bid., Owen to Crim, February 26, 1923. 231Philosephy and Opinions, II, pp. 300-309. 232Bruce papers, Group D, P 3-10. 233Messenger, March 1923, p. 638. 530 234Ibid., pp. 639—645. 235NewYork Amsterdam News, March 7, 1923, p. l; Messenger, March—1923, n.p. 236Messepger, April 1923, p. 748. 237Ibid., March 1923, p. 647. 238Ibid., August 1923, p. 782. 233Negro World, October 6, 1923, p. 3. 24°Ibid., October 20, 1923, p. 6; October 27, 1923, p. 6; N.A.A.C.P. files, Box C-304, Pickens (simply "W.P." on this unsigned carbon copy) to Mattuck, December 19, 1923. 241Messenger, July 1924, pp. 210, 212. 242New York Amsterdam News, February 11, 1925, p. 16. 243 16, 1924. Spingarn papers, Pickens to Spingarn, September 244Philosophy and Opinions, II, pp. 243, 253. 245Negro World, February 6, 1926, p. 4. 246Ibid., August 27, 1927, pp. 2, 8. 247New Republic, LII, 655: AUQUSt 31' 1927' pp. 46' 47. 248Messenger, January 1926, p. 16; Ne ro World, August 27, 192 , p. 8; Messenger, February 9 , pp.41, 45. 249Bruce papers, R. E. Enright, Commissioner of Police to Bruce, June 2, 1922; Negro World, June 10, 1922, p. 2. 250Negro World, May 23, 1931, p. 4; U.N.I.A. Central Divisibn (New York) files, Box 14, f. 4, handbill, n.d. 531 251Black Power and the Garvey Movement, p. 246. Vincent quotes'here the following letters from the A. J. Garvey papers'-DuBois to A. J. Garvey, April 8, 1944, and A. J. Garvey to DuBois, April 24, 1944. 252Historyof the Pan-African Congress, p. 62. CHAPTER XI THE KU KLUX KLAN, WHITE SUPREMACY AND GARVEY-- A SYMBIOTIC RELATIONSHIP Between the Ku Klux Klan and the Moorfield Storey National Association for the Advancement of 'Colored' People group, give me the Klan for their honesty of purpose towards the Negro. They are better friends to my race, for telling us what they are, and what they mean, thereby giving us a chance to stir for ourselves, than all the hypocrites put together with their false gods and religions, notwithstanding. Religions that they preach and will not practise; a God they talk about, whom they abuse every day-—away with the farce, hypocrisy and lie. It smells, it stinks to high heaven. -- Marcus Garvey1 A black man who advocates racial integrity cannot be Opposed by a white man who advocates racial integrity. They are drawn to each other, for they fight in a common cause. -- Earnest Sevier Cox, of the White America Society.2 Garvey's doctrine of race first, as has been seen, together with its corollaries of separatism, hostility to miscegenation, and African colonization, provided a basis for limited cooperation with white segregationists who shared these doctrines, though for different reasons. Moreover, he admired white segregationists because he 532 533 considered them as merely the honest spokesmen for the attitudes of the vast majority of white people. Their forthrightness, furthermore, he saw as a blessing in dis- guise because it forced black people to deve10p alongfi_ separate lines and to be on guard against the OppressiOn “Av“ which segregationists openly espoused. Garvey argued that white N.A.A.C.P.-type liberals loved black people no more than segregationists and were in fact more dangerous because they lulled the race into a sense of false secur- ity. He had expressed these views as early as 1917.3" The most widely publicized of Garvey's dealings with white segregationists and supremacists involved his summit conference with a representative of the Ku Klux Klan in 1922. As head of a black organization with branches all over the United States, Garvey continually came face to face with the racist reality Of the K.K.K. and similar groups. In Key West, Florida, for example, the formation in 1920 of a U.N.I.A. division had caused whites in the area to organize a K.K.K. branch as a counter measure. The local U.N.I.A. leader, Rev. T. C. Glashen, was given twenty-four hours to leave town by the president of the local Chamber of Commerce. When he refused he was arrested and jailed. After intervention by the U.N.I.A. parent body in Harlem a judge visited him in jail and begged him to leave to avoid a racial clash between the U.N.I.A. and the white mobs. He finally left for New York via Havana, Cuba, since from sione on an whippe convex experi escape told o the U, lynchi: Prises. 534 since he was warned by the judge that he would be pulled from the train if he attempted to travel that way.4 Again, in 1922 R. B. Moseley, U.N.I.A. High Commis- sioner for Texas was jailed and fined for "vagrancy" while on an organizing tour. On his release from jail he was 5 At the U.N.I.A. whipped by a gang of eight white men. convention that year several delegates related first-hand experiences of white racist fury, including some near escapes from lynch mobs. A Mr. Davis of Homestead, Alabama told of attempts by white mobs to intimidate and break up the U.N.I.A. in his town, these efforts culminating in the lynching of a young man selling stock in U.N.I.A. enter- prises. It was because of incidents like these that Garvey initially not only supported the Dyer Anti-Lynching Bill, but also adopted a position of open hostility towards the Klan. He was quoted in 1920 as threatening to whup the Klan if it came north,7 and several Negro World editorials 8 in 1920 and 1921 were directed against this organization. A banner at the convention parade of 1921 proclaimed "The New Negro is Ready for the Ku Klux."9 In June 1922, however, while on an extensive tour of the United States, Garvey stopped in Atlanta for a con- ference with Edward Young Clarke, acting Imperial Wizard of the Klan. The initiative had come from Clarke who relayed a request to the local U.N.I.A. to meet with the 535 U.N.I.A. leader. Garvey accepted this invitation because he considered it in the best interests of his organization, given the history of conflict between the two organizations, especially in the South. The meeting lasted two hours. During this time, each side outlined its philosophy. Clarke emphasized that America was a white man's country, that his organization stood for racial purity, and denied that the Klan was res- ponsible for all the incidents of racial intolerance attri- buted to it. Garvey outlined the U.N.I.A.‘s philosophy. He said afterwards, "I was Speaking to a man who was brutally a white man, and I was speaking to him as a man who was brut- 10 As a result of the discussions Clarke ally a Negro." expressed sympathy for the aims of the U.N.I.A. while Garvey was reinforced in his suspicion that the Klan repre- sented the invisible government of the United States. He became convinced that this organization represented the white American majority viewpoint and was impressed by Clarke's assertion that the Klan was stronger in the North than in the South. Both principals agreed to publish a memorandum of the meeting in their respective organs and Garvey invited Clarke to Liberty Hall to further clarify the Klan's position. In the meantime Garvey seems to have gotten an assurance from Clarke that the Klan would refrain from harassing the U.N.I.A., especially since the U.N.I.A. did not represent a threat to their phobia concerning inter- marriage. Clarke even said, according to Garvey, that he 536 was against white men raping black women. And Garvey approvingly cited the case in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, where U.N.I.A. members had flogged some white men they found sleeping with black ladies. For this the U.N.I.A. members were complimented by a K.K.K. judge. The end result of all this was that Garvey concluded that it would henceforth be more worthwhile to push forward with the program of the U.N.I.A. to build a strong government in Africa which would redound to the benefit of black people everywhere, rather than waste time attacking the Klan,11 an idea which Garvey had been contemplating since 1921.12 The immediate result of this U.N.I.A.-K.K.K. summit conference was an avalanche Of protest from black integra- tionist leaders and white ones too, the Communists in par- ticular among the latter. The leaders of the Marcus Garvey Must Go campaign which was just getting under way, eagerly seized upon this meeting to push their effort to discredit Garvey. They proclaimed from their meetings, their publications and their handbills that Garvey had joined the Klan. A. Philip Randolph went so far as to call .13 Garvey the Klan's "Negro leader, a sentiment echoed by Communist Robert Minor, who declared Garvey "chief defender of the Klan."14 The Communists, for their part, made Garvey's posi- tion on the Klan the main question in their large-scale effort to influence the 1924 U.N.I.A. convention, even 537 addressing a communication to the assembly on the subject. After much debate the convention accepted Garvey's basic position on the matter, namely that more black people were murdered by white workers in the North than by the alleged actions of the Klan and that Jews and Catholics, the other major victims of the Klan, were in a stronger position to fight the Klan than black people were, since they did not, like large numbers of black people, have to ask Klan members for a job. The convention therefore respectfully suggested that the Communists send their anti-Klan communi- cation to the Jews and Catholics.15 The federal government got into the act too when, during their prosecution of the mail fraud case against Garvey, they forced Clarke to appear under subpoena before a federal grand jury in New York. Garvey protested that this was an attempt to further prejudice his case, since his dealings with the Klan were irrelevant to the charges against him.16 In the face of this hue and cry, Garvey tried, largely in vain, to counter the simplistic views put for- ward concerning his meeting with the Klan. Less than a month after the meeting he defended it this way: I repeat, knowing the power and influence and intention of the Klan, I interviewed them for the purpose of getting them, if possible, to adopt a different attitude toward the race and thus prevent a repetition in many ways of what happened during the days of reconstruction. Because of this, my effort to stave off an impending danger by a better understanding of the attitudes of this organization, 538 this unthinking bombast [George Harris] steps out in the full authority of his ignorance to accuse me of surrendering to the Wizard and forming an alli- ance with the Klan. This has been the attitude of a large number of Negro editors all over the country, and especially those editors who live in the North, who do not come in daily contact with the Ku Klux Klan, as the millions of our people do in the Southern States. These wiseacres and so-called race-patriots remain 1,500 and 2,000 miles away and write all kinds of stuff against the South, against the Ku Klux Klan, and against people with whom they do not come in contact, leaving the people who really come in contact with them to suffer from the result of their senseless and hypocritical propaganda. Some Negro men who talk and write up North will make a big noise as far as Washington, but whenever the conductor requests of them to change cars they become as mum as an oyster.17 Several individual segregationists got Garvey's support when their views seemed to coincide with his. A few months before his meeting with the Klan in 1922, for example, Garvey urged support for a resolution introduced into the Mississippi state senate by Senator McCallum. This resolution called upon the Mississippi legislature to memorialize the president and congress to secure by treaty, purchase or other negotiation a piece of Africa where the Afro-American could move towards independence under the tutelage of the United States government. He suggested that a European nation might be induced to part with such an area in exchange for some of the allied war debt owed to the United States.18 Garvey agreed with a similar idea put forward at about the same time by Senator Joseph I. France of Maryland. This plan envisaged the giving over to the United States of ex-German East Africa, again in 539 exchange for the war debt.19 Garvey cooperated also with John Powell of the Anglo-Saxon Clubs of America. Powell visited Garvey in jail shortly after his incarceration in Atlanta in 1925 and thereafter let it be known that Garvey had assured him of "the fullest support of his organization." Eeggg, World editor T. Thomas Fortune considered this a little too much and sought to confine Garvey's support to the doc- trines of race purity and Africa for the Africans. Garvey thereupon telegraphed a rebuke from Atlanta. "I know nothing of the spirit of the editorial," he fumed, "which I regard as mischievous." Fortune insisted that his edi- torial was written in good faith and that there was "noth- ing in it to modify or retract." Garvey's response was to arrange, from jail, for Powell to speak at Liberty Hall. There Powell explained, among other things, that he had introduced a resolution into the Richmond, Virginia branch of the Anglo-Saxon Clubs expressing indignation at Garvey's imprisonment.20 One of Garvey's most extensive contacts with white segregationists was his relationship with Theodore G. Bilbo. By the time their paths crossed in the late 1930's Bilbo had already had a long and notorious public career in Mississippi. He had been a state senator from 1907 to 1911, lieutenant governor from 1912 to 1916 and governor from 1916 to 1920 and 1928 to 1932. He had run unsuccessfully for 540 congress in 1918 and for governor in 1923. By the time of his contacts with Garveyism he was serving as Democratic senator to the United States Senate from Mississippi.21 Bilbo had long been one of the country's most out- spoken, and therefore best-known racists. He once admitted having been initiated into the Ku Klux Klan. In 1926 he declared, "Let us treat the negro [gig] fairly; give him justice; teach him that the white man is his real friend; let him know and understand once and hr all that he belongs to an inferior race and that social and political equality will never be tolerated in the south." Two decades later he wrote, "Historically and scientifically, the inferiority of the Negro race when compared to the white race, is both a proved and obvious fact," though he claimed here to have "always dealt fairly and sympathetically with the Negro." As a United States senator he was active in moves to pre- vent black peOple from participating in Mississippi primaries. In 1947 the 80th Congress, acting in response to a loud clamour from civil rights and church groups, trade unions and other organizations, moved to prevent him from being sworn in for his third term. The motion was tabled because he was already stricken with a fatal ill- ness.22 Like Garvey, one of Bilbo's pet hates was miscegena- tion, or mongrelization, as he preferred to call it. To demonstrate the inequities of race mixing he was willing 541 to falsify history, arguing that ancient Egypt had origin- ally been Caucasian but had subsequently declined owing to race mixture. "The desire to mix, commingle, interbreed or marry into the white race" he blamed mostly on "mulattoes or mongrels" who were "now to an alarming degree found within the Negro race in this country." Not surprisingly, he deplored the marriage of a white girl "to the corpulent, fraudulent, pot-bellied, coal-black, seventy year old Negro who calls himself Father Divine." At one point he intro- duced a bill to prohibit intermarriage in Washington, D.C.23 Bilbo's links with Garvey and Garveyites revolved around the Greater Liberia Bill which he introduced in the United States senate in 1939. The bill called for the voluntary repatriation of Afro-Americans to West Africa with assistance from the United States government. Bilbo had not always considered repatriation to be feasible. In 1923 he had scoffed at "Senator T. G. McCallum's scheme to move negroes [gig] of the United States to darkest Africa" as "wonderful to contemplate, a fact to be devoutly wished for, but . . . an idle dream."24 Several factors had caused him to modify his opin- ion. For one thing he had become impressed by Garvey, whom he considered "the most conSpicious [egg] of all the organizers of his race" and "a noted and world-renowned .25 Negro leader. Garvey, he said, had "definitely succeeded: in establishing the fact that there is an overmastering impul: in the goverx the P6 spear? the IS Chicag Marcus way on during PIEdge Was ti MOVeme aSista that t fOr a Charit‘ thrOug; miSSio had be; Of acre later fellOw COIlabC 542 impulse, a divine afflatus among the masses of Negroes in the United States for a country of their own and a government administered by themselves."26 He had become impressed, too, by the activities of the Peace Movement of Ethiopia. This organization, which spearheaded the drive for Afro-American repatriation during the 1930's, was led by Mrs. Mittie Maude Lena Gordon of Chicago, a former U.N.I.A. member and an undying admirer of Marcus Garvey.27 Mrs. Gordon saw emigration as the only way out from the suffering which descended on black people during the depression. In a touching letter to Bilbo she pledged her support for his bill because, she said, she 28 In 1933 the Peace was tired watching black children die. Movement of Ethiopia had petitioned President Roosevelt for asistance in getting to Africa. The petition pointedcout that the cost of helping black people lay the foundation for a modest living in Africa would be less than the charity which they were forced to subsist upon in America 29 Bilbo claimed that com- through no fault of their own. missioners of the movement had journeyed to Liberia and had been assured by the country's president that "millions of acres" were awaiting Afro-Americans.3O Mrs. Gordon later incurred the disfavor of Bilbo and his patriotic fellow segregationists when she was arrested for allegedly collaborating with the Japanese during World War 11.31 Bilbo changed to advocacy of repatriation too 543 because Africa was, or so he affected to believe, the rich- est continent in the world. He related in wondrous terms the story of an Afro-American emigrant from Mississippi who reaped twelve crops of sweet potatoes a year in the 32 He added to these reasons his balmy Liberian climate. fear of "a mongrel race" developing in America and the fact that the Afro-American had picked up skills during his en- forced sojourn in the white man's land which would increase his ability to make good in Africa. Finally, during World War II he foresaw "so much trouble with the negro [gig] race in every part of the country" at the war's end that there would surely be "a crying demand for passage of my legislation."33 Bilbo envisaged the removal of five to eight million black people over a period of fifteen to twenty- five years. By concentrating on persons of productive age ' and young persons it was expected that those who remained 34 To avoid would die out in the normal course of things. a possible loophole, he Specifically made provisions for black aliens within the United States to participate in his repatriation scheme.35 And when the emigrants were settled in West Africa, he declared, he would make Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt, wife of the United States president, "Queen of Greater Liberia," this presumably an indication of his dis- like for the first lady's liberal tendencies.36 Garvey's support for Bilbo's bill was extensive. 544 In August 1938 the Eighth International Convention of the U.N.I A. meeting in Toronto, Canada passed a unanimous resolution of support. Garvey sent COpies to President 37 Roosevelt and to Bilbo. The Virginia division of the U.N.I.A. shortly afterwards wired the president in support.38 The leaders of the U.N.I.A. in New York, Philadelphia and elsewhere entered into correspondence with Bilbo, sent delegations to Washington, distributed copies of the bill, and organized mass meetings in support of it. The U.N.I.A. by April 1939 had contributed fifty thousand signatures to the two million which Bilbo said he collected. Bilbo at one stage tried to obtain funds to send some of his Harlem 39 supporters on a speaking tour. The U.N.I.A. even staged 40 a public debate on the bill in Brooklyn. And Garvey from England appointed a special committee to lobby in Washington 41 during the bill's introduction. U.N.I.A. leaders from New York, Philadelphia and Cleveland later formed themselves into a "Lobby Committee on Greater Liberia Act."42 Garvey, as usual in his dealing with segregationists, took the position that Since what the senator was proposing was what he wanted, then Bilbo's motives were irrelevant. "The Senator's desire for carrying out the purpose of his Bill may not be as idealistic as Negroes may want," Garvey argued, "but that is not the point to be considered. What is wanted now is the opportunity of the Negro to establish himself, and there is no doubt that this Bill offers such an opportunity."43 545 Bilbo's bill, after two readings in the senate was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations since it involved negotiations with a foreign power. This,for all practical purposes, was the end of it. In 1946 he expressed an intention of resuscitating it in the coming congress, but death intervened.44 Closely related to Garvey's support of the Bilbo bill was his long-standing association with Earnest Sevier Cox, a tireless worker in the cause of the White America Society and a close friend and associate of Bilbo. Cox, a resident of Virginia, claimed to have first become inter- ested in racial matters when he came into contact with black people while a graduate student at the University of Chicago. This interest, he said in 1931, caused him to spend $60,000 of his own money. He claimed also to have travelled widely in Africa.45 Perhaps for this reason, he supported Garvey's African program, even considering white colonization in that continent "impractical and . . . un- "46 He had the closest contacts with the fair to the Negro. U.N.I.A. rank and file of any segregationists. Not only did he address the occasional U.N.I.A. meeting (on one occa- sion as far away as Berkeley, California) but claimed to be in correspondence with Garveyites in twenty-six states, as well as Jamaica, Panama, Honduras, Cuba, Haiti, Santo Domingo and elsewhere.47 Garveyites in Detroit sold 17,000 copies of his book White America, mostly to white people.48 His 1920 his read rese betl Of 1 whet an a disc ance that ques revo; Afric Ameri Well Whom 1 a r951 State'; had bee assembl 546 His association with the U.N.I.A., begun in the early 1920's, was still very much alive in 1961 when a letter of his to the Fourteenth Annual Convention of the U.N.I.A. was read at that gathering.49 Cox dedicated his book Let My People Go to Garvey and discussed him approvingly in another, The South's Part 50 in Mongrelizing the Nation. Like Garvey, however, he resented the simplistic view which saw in the relationship between black advocates of race purity and white advocates of race purity some sort of all-embracing alliance. Thus when the Norfolk Journal and Guide suggested that there was an alliance between the two men and that Cox was Garvey's disciple, his refutation was as emphatic as Garvey's annoy- ance at being called a member of the Klan. He pointed out that there was an understanding between the two men on the question of race,integrity, and that was all.51 Most of Cox's collaboration with the U.N.I.A. revolved around his espousal of Afro-American emigration to Africa. He saw himself as a successor to racist white American statesmen like Thomas Jefferson and Ben Tillman as well as the "great emancipator" Abraham Lincoln, all of 52 As whom had favored repatriation of the Afro-American. a resident of Virginia he was especially aware of the state's historical antecedents to his work. For Virginia had been the home of Thomas Jefferson. The Virginia assembly had also supported the American Colonization 547 Society which was responsible for settling Afro-Americans in Liberia in the nineteenth century. In 1932 Cox obtained the introduction into the Virginia state legislature of a resolution suggesting that the federal government be memorialized to assist in emigra- tion to Liberia. The resolution was couched in language almost identical to Abraham Lincoln's second message to Congress. It engendered much opposition and died in com- 53 In 1936 his efforts were more successful. The mittee. state of Virginia on this occasion did memorialize Congress for federal assistance to the Greater Liberia idea. Cox later thanked the governor of Virginia on behalf of the U.N.I.A., the Peace Movement of Ethiopia, the National Union for PeOple of African Descent and a group of black Virginians.S4 Cox worked closely with Bilbo for the populariza- tion of Bilbo's bill and both men tried strenuously to get Garvey back into the United States. In the case of Cox these efforts went back at least as far as 1931.55 By 1938 the effort was intense due to Bilbo's conviction that Garvey's presence, even on a temporary permit, would great- 56 ly enhance his bill's chances of success. Cox had another reason for wanting Garvey back, namely to offset the influ- ence of the N.A.A.C.P.S7 In the effort to get Garvey back they were tirelessly assisted by U.N.I.A. officials, especially in New York. 548 The most bizarre episode in the story of the attraction which Garveyism exerted upon white segregation- ists came from novelist Thomas Dixon whose literary efforts glorifying the Ku Klux Klan and white supremacy had long earned him a notoriety that rivalled, if it did not exceed, that accruing to Bilbo. It was Dixon whose libellous novel The Clansman had called forth massive oppo- sition from the N.A.A.C.P. and other black groups when it appeared in 1915 as the motion picture Birth of a Nation. The picture, like the book, sought to present the emanci- pation and granting of civil rights to Afro-Americans dur- ing reconstruction as a great mistake. Dixon published in 1939, the year of the Bilbo bill, a novel called The Flaming Sword. The novel was wild, fast-moving, exciting after a fashion and very long (562 pages). Dixon, considering the novel to be "the most vivid and accurate form in which history can be written" presumed "to give an authoritative record of the Conflict of Color in America from 1900 to 1938."58 The novel was essentially an epic diatribe against what the dust jacket called "the one unsolved problem of America which threatens our existence as a civilized people." This problem, of course, was race mixture. Dixon warned in his preface that he had "been compelled to use living men and women as important characters." He warned further, with remarkable aplomb, "If I have been unfair in treatment they have their S49 remedy under the law of libel. I hold myself responsible." Having thus cleared the air he proceeded to fill his book with all manner of vile insults against "the junta fight- ing for intermarriage," to wit, DuBois, James Weldon Johnson, A. Philip Randolph, Communists James W. Ford and Earl Browder, the African Blood Brotherhood, Claude McKay, Carl VanVechten, J. E. Spingarn, Moorfield Storey and others. The book's frontiSpiece bore a DuBois quotation from which Dixon had extracted its title. The quotation read, "Across this path stands the South with flaming sword." Dixon did not fail to highlight the normal racist stereotypes of happy, contented slaves and lascivious black "beasts" lusting after white women. One such killed a white man and his two dogs, gagged his child, raped a white woman to death in the dead man's house and was eventu- ally lynched. After finishing off the woman the rapist was made to say, "A nigger in Harlem sent me a little book dat say I got de right ter marry a white gal ef I kin get her. Can't marry her down here, but by God, I got her." It turned out that his inspiration had been a poem by James Weldon Johnson entitled "The White Witch" and containing the following lines: And I have kissed her red, red lips And cruel face so white and fair; Around me she has twined her arms, And bound me with her yellow hair.59 550 The story, such as it was, was merely an excuse into which Dixon could inject his ideas on race mixing and race relations. His basic contention was that the good work started by Booker T. Washington and continued by Garvey was in danger of being destroyed by DuBois and the integrationists. He contrasted the almost-white DuBois to Washington, who in spite of the tinge of yellow in his darker skin, was unmistakably African in every line of his face and body. And not of the handsomer type. His hair, inclined to kink in spite of modern lotions, was coarse and plainly Negroid. His large ears were inclined to flop. His nose was large and flattened. His jaw was heavy. Every feature stamped him a Negro of Negroes. Only from his grave forceful eyes flashed the light of leadership. He was heavily built and sprawled Negro fashion when seated.60 Garvey he considered the "logical successor" of Abraham Lincoln and Thomas Jefferson through his emigrationist efforts and also "the greatest Negro of the modern world." His heroine, on a trip to Harlem, happened to hear a Garvey speech and was won over to the idea of repatriation. She was reinforced in this opinion when she read Earnest Sevier Cox on white superiority and the necessity for black re- patriation. Near the end of the book the hero died and bequeathed a ten million dollar trust fund for establish- ment of a Marcus Garvey Colonization Society for the "peaceful, voluntary colonization of the Negro race." The book closed with America caught off-guard in the throes of a Communist revolution. Thus ended undoubtedly the 551 strangest tribute ever paid to Marcus Garvey. Earnest Savier Cox considered it "the first colonizationist novel since Uncle Tom's Cabin."61 The story of Garvey and white supremacy is a most unusual one and susceptible of easy misinterpretation. What the story proves is that Garvey must surely be the most singleminded black separatist of all time. His fierce love for his own race and his burning desire to put the Atlantic Ocean between his followers and white America placed him in the unlikely position of Sharing, with America's most notorious white racists, a hostility to integrationists and an advocacy of emigration. People like Bilbo and Cox continued to preach white superiority for the benefit of their kinsmen, but in their direct dealings with Garvey and his representatives there was no hint of racial arrogance. Each side was aware of the other's position and preferred to dwell as far as possible on areas of common concern. As Garvey said of his interview with the Klan's representative, "I was speaking to a man who was brutally a white man, and I was speaking to him as a man who was brutally a Negro." NOTES THE KU KLUX KLAN, WHITE SUPREMACY AND GARVEY-- A SYMBIOTIC RELATIONSHIP lPhilosophyand Opinions, II, p. 71. 2Negro World, September 26, 1931, p. 3. 3Champion Magazine, I, 5, January 1917, p. 267. 4Negro World, July 16, 1921, p. 9. 5Ibid., June 3, 1922, p. 3. 6Ibid., September 16, 1922, p. 8. 7Afro-American, November 19, 1920, quoted in Vincent, EIack Power and the Garvey Movement, p. 19. 8Negro World, September 24, 1921, p. 4. 9New York World, August 2, 1921, p. 6. 10Negro World, July 15, 1922, p.7. 11Interview with Mr. J. Charles Zampty; interview with Mrs. Amy Jacques Garvey; Ne ro World, July 1, 1922, p. 7; July 15, 1922, p. 7; R. 5. 254, 42-793, Garvey's application for executive clemency, June 5, 1925. 12Negro World, October 8, 1921, p. 1. 13Messenger, October 1922, p. 500. 14Daily Worker, August 23, 1924, p. 1. 552 553 15Ibid., p. 3. 16New York Times, February 8, 1923, p. 16; R. G. 204, 42-793, op. cit. 17 Negro World, July 22, 1922, p. 1. 18Ibid., February 11, 1922, p. 5; February 18, 1922, 19Ibid., May 13, 1922, p. 4. 201219., August 15, 1925, p. 4; August 22, 1925, p. 4; October 24, 1925, p. 3; Philosophy and Opinions, II, pp. 340-342. 21Thurston E. Doler, "Theodore G. Bilbo's Rhetoric of Racial Relations," unpub. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Oregon, 1968, p. 31ff. 22Ibid., pp. 1, 2, 69, 135; Theodore G. Bilbo, Take Your Choice; Separation or Mongrelization (Poplarville, Miss., Dream HOuse Publishing Co., 1947, p. 86? Living Age, CCCLVIII, 4485, June 1940, p. 333. 23Living Age, op. cit., p. 334; Take Your Choice, preface (n.p.I; Theodore G. Eilbo papers, University Of— Southern Mississippi, Bilbo to Earnest Sevier Cox, May 19, 1944. 24Bilbo's Rhetoric, p. 107. 25Take Your Choice, pp. 271, 254. 26Ibid., p. 271. 27Time, May 8, 1939, p. 14. 28Gordon to Bilbo, October 15, 1939, quoted in Bilbo's Rhetoric, p. 247. 29LivingAge, op. cit., p. 328; Gunnar Myrdal, Ag American Dilemma (New York, Harper and Row, 1944, 1962), p. 813. 554 3OLivingAge, p. 330. 3l‘Bilbo papers, Earnest Sevier Cox to Gordon, September 28, 1942. 3zLivingAge, p. 330. 33Bilbo papers, Bilbo to Elzy Johnson, January 24, 1940; Bilbo to Cox, October 2, 1942; Living Age, p. 334. 34Living Age, p. 330; Take Your Choice, p. 275; Bilbo papers, Cox to Bilbo, February 20, I938. 35 Take Your Choice, p. 304. 36Bilbo's Rhetoric, p. 115. 37R. s. 59, 880.5211/21, Garvey and Ethel Collins, Secretary-General, to President, U.S.A., August 13, 1938. 38U.N.I.A. Central Division (New York) files, Box 6, c. 26, minutes of meeting October 4, 1938. 39Ibid., Box 8, d. 23, Capt. A. L. King to Garvey, April 28, I939; Box 8, d. 5, King to C. Jacobs, May 9, 1939; Box 14, f. 19, handbill, n.d.; Bilbo papers, Bilbo to Cox, November 21, 1939. 40U.N.I.A. Central Division (New York) files, Box 8, d. 8, Andronicus Jacob to King, July 19, 1939; Box 14, f. 19, handbill, n.d. 41Ibid., Box 8, d. 23, op. cit. 42Ibid., Box 12, e. 95, Cox to King, January 11, 1940. 43Black Man, III, 11, November 1938, p. 19. 44Bilbo's Rhetoric, p. 108; U.N.I.A. Central Divi- sion (New YOIE) files, Box 8, d. 5; Bilbo papers, Bilbo to Cox, August 2, 1946. 555 45Negro World, November 28, 1931, p. 1. 46Ibid., September 26, 1931, p. 3. 47Earnest Sevier Cox, Lincoln's Negro_Policy (Richmond, Virginia, The William Byrd Press, Inc., 1938), p. 30; Negro World, November 28, 1931, p. 1. 48Philosophy and Opinions, II, p. 342. 49Minutes of the Fourteenth Annual Convention of the U.N.I.A.! August 13-20, 1961, Brooklyn, N.Y., p. 6. 50Negro World, July 17, 1926, p. 5. 51Ibid., August 15, 1925, p. 4. 52Bilbo papers, Cox to Bilbo, May 14, 1944. S3Negro World, September 26, 1931, p. 3; March 5, 1932, p. l; June18, 1932, p. 3. S4Richmond Times-Despatch, January 27, 1940; U.N.I.A. Central Division YNew YorkIfiles, Box 8, d. 10, Cox to Governor James H. Price, December 29, 1939. SSNegro World, September 26, 1931, p. 3. 56U.N.I.A. Central Division (New York) files, Box 16, h. 10, Bilbo to King, February 23, 1938. S7Bilbo papers, Cox to Bilbo, February 20, 1938. 58Thomas Dixon, The Flaming Sword (Atlanta, Monarch Publishing Co., 1939), preface, n.p. 59Ibid., pp. 175, 178. 6°lbid., p. 248. 61Bilbo papers, Cox to Bilbo, December 12, 1939. AFTERWORD My work is just begun, and as I lay down my life for the cause of my people, so do I feel that succeed- ing generations shall be inspired by the sacrifice that I made for the rehabilitation of our race. Christ died to make men free, I shall die to give courage and inspiration to my race. -- Marcus Garvey1 If Garvey dies, Garvey lives. . . . -- Marcus Garvey2 The career of Marcus Garvey is without parallel in the history of the race. Insofar as his program was foiled short of its ultimate realization in his own lifetime, his career represents a monumental tragedy, an epic of heroism and courage overcome by catastrophe. Yet the larger tragedy in no way detracts from the multitude of successes that were Garvey's accomplishments. Among Garvey's greatest feats is the fact that at a time when almost every black center of population in the world was subjugated by colonialism, oppression and dis- franchisement, Garvey succeeded in creating an organization with many of the attributes of a ge_£eg£g_provisional government to look after the interests of black people. 556 557 Whether it was U.N.I.A. commissioners negotiating directly with governments on behalf of the black population as in Cuba and Santo Domingo, or Garvey despatching a protest note to the British government at the arrest of Harry Thuku and the shooting down of unarmed Africans in Kenya, or U.N.I.A. representatives lobbying at the League of Nations, or Garvey giving to black people all over the world a flag, an anthem and an ideological direction which they could tenaciously adhere to, or any of a multitude of other cir- cumstances, Garvey could not be ignored. The United States, British and other white rulers over black people had no illusions about the potency of Garveyism and waged a con- sistent struggle against Garvey and the U.N.I.A. And the Communist International, for its part, spent as much time trying to find a way around Garvey as colonial governments did trying to suppress him. The reaction of the white press, in Europe in particular, to Garvey's dramatic entry onto the world scene was often one of trepidation and alarm. Garvey bestrode the black world like no one else and all those in power there, or aspiring to influence therein, had to deal with him. In achieving this position within a mere three years of the inception of the U.N.I.A. in the United States, and on slender resources, Garvey, as is widely acknowledged, performed one of the greatest propaganda miracles of all time. 558 The most obvious indication of Garvey's power and success is the fact that despite years of the most concen- trated and formidable opposition that any race leader in America has ever had to face, not only could he not be dislodged, but his organization was continuing to grow. Neither the "Marcus Garvey Must Go" campaign, nor the poaching of the Communists, nor the defection of former U.N.I.A. members, nor the constant harassments from the British, French, and United States governments, nor his conviction in 1923 was able to stem the onward march of the U.N.I.A. It took the full force of government, in sending him to jail on palpably flimsy evidence, and deporting him on highly questionable grounds, to finally cause the edi- fice he had built to totter, and then only very slowly deteriorate. And it is in his susceptibility to deporta- tion that there lay the fatal chink in his armor and the essence of his tragedy. For his enemies could exploit, with the most dire consequences, the one weakness in his position over which he had a minimum of control, namely his nationality. As early as 1919, it will be remembered, J. Edgar Hoover had been on the lookout for a pretext to deport him, and in 1921 the State Department had narrowly failed in its attempt at SE.£22E2 deportation through denying him re-entry into the United States. The major setbacks afflicting Garvey before his 559 deportation were also the result of hostile governmental action. Thus it was not the impracticability of his schemes, as some are wont to say, or his robes, or his bombast, or his knighthoods, or his lack of business experience, , / . tblb......l£...14aqv. 01.12.... m... .| pl: 4: Ir ' . . .9 ...... . ' ,Q, . ... 'R‘ ’3 -t.—.‘.,‘ . 1»! .d ‘ ‘ v'ot ' ""'- ‘Wsu M . .. V. , L ‘ . A. ' ‘1» ‘ 4.1- ' ‘- ‘ < . - . '“"“.-'~ ' ~"-‘ ~ . . . . pi. . 7. _- 1 . . ,' I‘ '1‘ .4" , ~ 4 ; .‘-‘ I -. 7 . ." 1 '~ ~ 4, . . i C’- ‘ it 1 “ - '- 1 ‘ ’ 5 - V are; ' '. TI ’ DlSSER h N' RN STRTE UNIV. first”: \IHII‘IVIHHIIWIW 31293 LIBRRRIES ”WWI WI IHIIHNNIH‘I 09 7 936 ll HI (3 E! 11