LIBRARY Michigan State Unlvoralty PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE A: W" Q” 802202 on! 3 8 20m 9% “ 2000 APB 4 MW» 1M common." EUGENE KINCKLE JONES AND THE RISE OF PROFESSIONAL BLACK SOCIAL WORKERS, 1910-1940 BY Felix L. Armfield A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of History 1998 Professor Darlene Clark l-line ABSTRACT Eugene Kinckle Jones and the Rise of Professional Black Social Workers, 1910-1940 By Felix L. Armfield Eugene Kinckle Jones (1885-1954) through the vehicle of the National Urban League, along with the work of professionallyltrained black social workers fought against racial discrimination directed towards African American migrants. This study will increase our knowledge of the “Urban Black Experience' and how African Americans helped to shape that experience in ways that allowed them to survive. The focus is Eugene Kinckle Jones and his role in the professionalization of black social work. His leadership of the National Urban League and his involvement with black and white social reformers early in the twentieth century was instrumental in the development of black social work. Though the focus of this study is on Eugene Kinckle Jones it would be difficult to tell without revealing some of the history of the National Urban League. Jones was the leader of this major black protest organization early in the twentieth century. It was Jones who helped to define and characterize this noted American institution. In addition to his work as the leader of this organization Jones played a major role in the further development of professional social work and workers largely for African Americans. Jones’ tenure with the League coincided with the Great Black Migration of southern African Americans to numerous northern urban cities, 1910-1940. As a result of this urbanization process by southern African Americans the urgency for black social workers was at its greatest. In essence the fate of these professionals was inextricably connected to the survival of black urban migrant communities. This study will reveal the numerous fronts that Jones and his many contemporaries fought to make professional black social work a reality for black urban people. Jones solicited funds, delivered speeches, wrote articles, served in the federal government, established League branches all over the country, and became the first noted statesman of the National Urban League. By 1940 upon Jones’ retirement from the National Urban League social work for African Americans had spread throughout the nation both North and South in addition to rural and urban. This study will establish Jones ' as a major contributor to that process and a leading African American intellectual figure of the early twentieth century. Copyright by FELIX L. ARMFIELD 1 998 DEDICATION To the memory and sweet spirits of my family members who did not live to see my dissertation’s completion. Their helpings of “Soul Food” have been sufficient. Thanks for watching at my shoulders. Jasper Armfield, Sr.--grandfather (1920-1992) Amy Armfield Knight--big cousin (1948-1995) Daniel ‘George' Armfield--uncle/big brother (1950-1997) vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This work would not have been possible had my mentor and major professor Darlene Clark Hine not insisted that I take a look at the papers of the Nation Urban League. Initially I approached this project with some reluctance and did not understand all that Professor Hine was expecting of this project nor me. I suppose she understood my graduate student innocence. At any rate words could never thank her enough for the time and energy that she has devoted to this project. In addition to Dr. Hine there have been several other individuals whose scholarship and teaching abilities have assisted me and this project. Dr. Fred Honhart read and commented on every page of my dissertation with unwavering attention. I thank him for I his enormous support of me and this project. Professors Harry Reed and David Robinson were most crucial to my development early on in my graduate studies. They both challenged me to think in meaningful and helpful ways through graduate seminars. Professor Richard Thomas’ teachings on race relations and the black urban condition certainly introduced me to new ways of organizing the black community. Professor Thomas, thanks for all the ‘self-help’. In vii addition to my Michigan State University mentors there have been any number of individuals who have supported me and my work. Ms. Linda Werbish was always available to assist me and saw to it that my deadlines and time tables were appropriately met. I say thanks to all of you. To Professor Rosalyn Terborg-Penn I owe her for all her continued support. Dr. Terborg-Penn of Morgan State University first introduced me to the Jones family. I could not have done it without her. Professors Sylvia M. Jacobs and Beverly W. Jones of North Carolina Central University never stopped mentoring, supporting, and encouraging me in my work. I would be remised if I did not thank my colleagues of Western Illinois University for all their support and encouragement. My support at Western has come from every entity of the institution. President Donald Spencer was the first to inform me that “the only. good dissertation was a done dissertation.” In addition my support has come through the department of history, other faculty, staff and my students alike. All of my friends and colleagues in the department of history and African American Studies at Western Illinois University encouraged and insisted that I get “it” done. However historian Larry Balsamo read every page of the dissertation viii in rough draft. Balsamo’s readings challenged me to think and write with greater clarity. His dedication will long be remembered. Historian Tom Watkins gave me my first lessons on Cornell University which is his alma mater. Watkins shared with me his personal collection of library materials on Cornell and I truly thank Tom and Sharon Watkins for sharing their library with me. Bill and Colleen Combs cheered me on with more passion than I ever deserved. While Fred Seaton’s computer skills proved to be my saving grace and Nancy Desulis made putting my tables and charts together uneventful. The library staff at Western Illinois University deserves a lot more thanks than I could ever offer here. Their help and assistance was never ending. The reference department proved to be my greatest assistance. John Steinman’s assistance was always available. Kathy Dahl was always available to answer my questions and she found resources for me that only an excellent reference librarian could have done. No query or request was too monumental for her. The staff at the Social Welfare History Archives were excited to assist in my research. The people at the Virginia State Archives were very helpful by providing me with all requested ix materials in a timely manner. Cornell University Archives staff in addition provided helpful information by revealing Eugene Kinckle Jones’ student records. I could not have made it through the graduate program at Michigan State University had it not been for the support of some friends I made during my studies at Michigan State. To all of you I say thanks for accepting me as a friend. Jacqueline McLeod thanks for being the best friend I could have ever ask for. You continue to give new meaning to friendship and sibling rivalry. Thanks for being there when I needed you the most. Last but not least, my family continues to be a constant force in my life. I am truly blessed to have my grandmother, Christine Jenkins Armfield who always reminded me just who I belonged to. I thank my sister Kim Armfield for all her financial and emotional support throughout this process. My folks, Jasper and Alice for all their continued love and understanding. My brother, Jeff Armfield and his family for always cheering me on. When all is said and done, yes, this is “our" degree. The degree belongs to all of my family both near and far, thank you for being my family. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................ 1 CHAPTER 1 FROM RICHMOND TO ITHACA ................................ 12 CHAPTER 2 BUILDING ALLIANCES ...................................... 56 CHAPTER 3 AN ERA OF NATIONAL CONFLICT AND COOPERATION ............ 98 CHAPTER 4 BETWEEN NEW YORK AND WASHINGTON,D.C. .................. 143 CHAPTER 5 CHANGING OF THE GUARDS ................................. 188 SUWARY ............................................... 235 APPENDIX A ............................................. 243 APPENDIX B ............................................. 244 APPENDIX C ............................................. 245 APPENDIX D ............................................. 246 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................... 247 xi V INTRODUCTION This dissertation examines the life and work of Eugene Kinckle Jones and the rise of professional black social workers. In 1971, Guichard Parris and Lester Brooks published the first major history of the National Urban League, Blacks in the City: A Histgty of the WW. Parris and Brooks put forth this much needed history of the League during the period of the black power movement in America. Several factors prompted a need for this history. One, no history existed at the time of the Leagues accomplishments and second, Parris and Brooks wanted to “help to counter the tendency in some quarters to misconstrue the Urban League’s efforts and denigrate or ignore its accomplishments.”1 Parris and Brooks wrote a useful history of the League. However Jones’ work and the experiences of black social workers appear secondary and/or it was overshadowed by the history of the League. Nancy Weiss wrote Illa MW in 1974. While Weiss chronicles the history of the National Urban League (NUL) from its early 1Guichard Parris and Lester Brooks W 1.1mm. Boston and Toronto: Little, Brown and Company,1971, p. ix. 1 2 beginnings her work paid little attention to the details of Jones’ life and the opportunities the League offered black social workers. Jones’ manuscript papers were not yet accessible to scholars. Jesse Thomas Moore, Jr. published in 1981, A Seeteh fer Equality: The W Moore argued that the NUL had grown from a social reform movement into a national institution of strictly racial/social concerns in American society by 1961. Here again, Jones and black social workers received little attention. Edyth I. Ross published a quick reference source in 1978 entitled l i ' ' r - . Ross’ work lacks historical perspective and content. Still none of the histories mentioned sought to place Jones as the central figure in the accomplishments of the NUL nor to underscore his role in the American Social Work Movement. This dissertation examines the early twentieth century black social work movement placing particular emphasis on Jones’ life and work with the National Urban League in addition to a cadre of other black sociologist. This is not a history of the NUL but of one of its most significant leaders. Eugene Kinckle Jones (1885-1954) grew up in an integrated environment in Richmond, Virginia. This was unusual given the 3 entrenchment of Jim Crow segregation. E. K. Jones and his family resided in a largely black neighborhood in Richmond, Virginia referred to as the black ward of Jackson. Both of Jones’ parents were well educated and taught in black institutions of higher education: his father taught theology at Virginia Union College and his mother was a music teacher at Hartshorn Memorial College (for black women). As a youth Jones witnessed his parents interacting on equal bases with white intellectuals (Richmond, Virginia) and this left an impression on him. Few black youngsters could recall having experiences of this kind at the turn of the twentieth century. In 1905 Jones received his A.B. degree from Virginia Union College for Negroes. Upon the completion of his studies at Union, Jones enrolled at Cornell University at Ithaca, New York to pursue a masters degree. He began study towards a degree in mathematics and engineering, but after one year he changed his major. Jones completed his studies at Cornell in the spring of 1908 with a masters degree in economics and social science. With impressive credentials in hand, Jones confronted the color line. Jones could only secure employment as a school teacher in private and public schools for ’Negroes' in 4 Louisville, Kentucky. There he encountered the man who would change his life. In 1911, Jones met with prominent black sociologist, Dr. George Edmund Haynes in Louisville who proposed that he come to New York and work for the newly formed League on Urban Conditions among 'Negroes'. When Jones arrived in New York City in 1911 to accept the position of field secretary of the League on Urban Conditions among Negroes now renamed (National Urban League-- NUL) little did he know that soon his job would engage his energies on two different fronts. He became an active advocate for black migrants, and he also worked to legitimize the black social worker's professional authority. Jones' first major task involved assessing and reporting on the conditions of Black life in the inner city of New York City. Jones assumed the responsibility for helping new migrants become acculturated to their new urban environments. Often he met new arrivals at the train depot, and assisted them in finding housing and employment. Jones met with personnel in industries and firms to discuss and arrange for expanded employment opportunities. Many firms had quotas for black hiring. Actually, black migrants were frequently used as strikebreakers and this fact fueled the flames of hostility among white workers. The duties of black social workers and the aims of the NUL included evaluating and reviewing settlement houses, in addition to other specific concerns of migrating blacks. Among the many services provided, black social workers intervened with employment bureaus on behalf of juveniles and adults. They also helped negotiate contracts for Black men. They placed personnel workers in industrial plants and generally tried to raise the efficiency of 'Negro' workers. Black social workers also paid attention to health care concerns and provided guidance in home economics to families in need of help with budgets and preparing nutritious food. In 1916 Jones was officially appointed as Executive Secretary of the NUL. Over the next four years the northward migration of Black men and women increased greatly. Jones as director of the NUL was compelled to seek the assistance of many more social workers. Jones and other black social workers tried to convince white social workers of the need to address the race question. Jones also tried to affect a unification of the mission of black and white social workers as early as 1921. He devised a plan of action for the black social work movement based upon the practice of 6 racial integration. The plan made many white social workers uncomfortable. Many white social workers sought to separate their mission from that of black social workers for fear that they would not be recognized as professionals by the larger society. A major concern of the American Association of Social Workers (AASW) during the early years of the twentieth century was that social work be recognized as a profession equal to that of law and medicine. Jones and other prominent black social workers sought to participate in the National Conference of Social Work (NCSW). The dissertation consist of five chapters. Chapter one provides a contextualized background for the subject, Eugene Kinckle Jones by placing him in relation to his contemporaries both Black and white. I examine Jones within the content of middle class black American life in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Although circumscribed by the limits of Jim Crow Jones made key decisions that affected his entire life. This chapter will detail Jones’ life from its early beginnings in Richmond, Virginia as he matriculated through Virginia Union College for “Negroes” and later Cornell University during graduate school. Both institutions helped to shaped his life and opinions. Eventually his exposures at these 7 two points in his life would propel him before the nation as a leader of social work and an advocate for institutional cooperation among the races. Chapter two examines Jones’ leadership of the NUL and the programs designed for the education of black social workers. This chapter covers the decade of the 1920s and the many fronts that Jones and his contemporaries confronted while giving a ‘good account of themselves.’ This chapter will also discuss the growing concerns of the black urban population and how professional black social work develops as a direct result of the transformations within the urban north. It will examine the growing tensions of the 1920s in the settlement house movement and how race will inevitably undermine its overall mission and establish a liberal and conservative faction by the 19305. Chapter three examines the National Conference of Social Work (NCSW) and the NUL as Jones penetrated the executive ranks of the NCSW. It was in this capacity that Jones gained valuable resources for the further training of black social workers. Jones acquired financial and educational support for his cause from his inside access in the NCSW and NUL. The NCSW also provided a national and integrated audience for addressing the social woes of Black America. Chapter three will 8 also address the attendant concerns of a developing black intellectual structure--the New Negro. Jones’ involvement with the federal government is the core of chapter four’s thesis. Jones was an integral member of Roosevelt’s Black Cabinet during the New Deal. This chapter examines how black social workers responded to ‘relief’ efforts and the ways they facilitated institution building and community development during the 1930s. Chapter five examines the overall changes within the social work profession by the late 19303 following a series of internal and external events. It will also discuss Jones’ resignation from the position of Executive Secretary of the League in 1940 and the assumptions of the title of General Secretary of the League until 1950. Following the Great Depression the complexity of state and federal government intervention drastically changed social work programs. Chapter five concludes with an overview of Jones’ work and life from 1940 until his retirement in 1950 from public work. Voluminous secondary materials are available on Jones, the NUL, and on black social workers. The Schomburg Collection in New York City, contains the largest collection of Jones Family Papers and they have only recently been open to the public. I was the first 9 researcher to examine these papers. I was also successful at conducting oral interviews with persons who knew Jones and with members of his family. The materials in New York have strengthen every aspects of this study. There was yet an even greater amount of material that begged examination. Minneapolis, Minnesota is where the Social Welfare History Archives are located at the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Invaluable records concerning Jones and his professional life were uncovered at the Social Welfare History Archives. Jones was the first African American to be elected to the Executive Board of the National Conference of Social Work (NCSW) in 1925. This was the governing body of social work and the organization that brought all social workers together annually. It was in this capacity of executive board member that Jones accomplished much on behalf of black social workers. Numerous black social workers received professional training through Jones' affiliation with the NCSW and his efforts with the NUL. The materials that were housed at the Library of Congress on the National Urban League illuminate Jones’ career and professional activities. The National Archives records reveal Jones’ federal government work as an ‘Advisor of Negro 10 Affairs’ with the Department of Commerce from 1933-1936. This study of Jones, the NUL, and the American Social Work Movement will increase our understanding of the processes of migration and of becoming black urbanites. I will not discuss the nature of social work as labor. Rather I will illustrate how social work the profession engaged Black Americans and how it was administered during its infancy. Moreover, I will explore what is considered the ‘causes’ rather than the ‘function’ aspects of social welfare as it developed for black people. The movement to increase the number of professionally trained black social workers gained momentum clue to the large numbers of Blacks who migrated North during the first World War. As the United States' immigration sanctions became inevitable by 1914 the need for black southern labor grew urgent. Many Blacks took this opportunity to free themselves and their children of the ravages of Southern oppression. Many saw the North as the ’Promised Land'. Little did they (Blacks) know that the North held its own forms of oppression. Recent scholars such as Elisabeth Lasch-Quinn and Michael B. Katz reveal that Jim Crow prescriptions abound in the Promised Land- Lasch-Ouinn’s book. WWW 11 i‘ o l '1‘: fl“: .‘ : :u: o - o 311‘! :‘O-‘I" , (1993) argues that the American social reform movement fell short of fulfilling its object when it did not reach out to southern black migrant-e- KatZ’s book. Wm WM (1986) makes clear that white settlement house reformers did not welcome migrating Blacks into their settlement homes. The need and therefore the rise of professional black social workers developed as a consequence of this racial divide within the social work movement. Chapter 1 FROM RICHMOND TO ITHACA May the true spirit of fraternity rule our hearts, guide our thoughts, and control our lives, so that we may become, through thee, servants of all.1' Alpha Phi Alpha, Fraternity Prayer Eugene Kinckle Jones was born on July 30, 1885 to Joseph Endom Jones (1850-1922) and Rosa Daniel Kinckle Jones (1857- 1931) of Richmond, Virginia. Both his parents were natives of Lynchburg, Virginia. Joseph Jones was born a slave in 1850.2 From all accounts, the Jones family traced its lineage to that of Sicily Jones who was the slave of Maurice Langhorne. The Langhorne’s were noted longtime aristocrats in Virginia’s history.3 An invalid 1Charles H. Wesley, : ' ; - ' . - ;_ ; Life. Chicago, Illinois: The Foundation Publishers, p. 203, 1950. 2AIInd519:1_AIItol2lonLamby..oLEugena_lSInI:lsle.Ilsznes.Dictatedtor Gunner Myrdat 1940, p. 1. National Urban League Papers, The Collections of the Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, D. C. See also, William J. Simmons, MfitLQLMaEIS: W. New York: Arno Press and The New York Times, 1968, p. 234-239. 3Virginius Dabney, BMW. Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1976, pp. 262-264. The lineage of Sicily Jones is confirmed through a recorded interview with the granddaughter of Eugene Kinckle Jones, 12 13 Confederate soldier taught Joseph Endom Jones to read and write during the Civil War. Immediately following the close of the Civil War Joseph Jones left Lynchburg for Richmond where he enrolled in Virginia Union University formerly the Richmond Institute sometimes referred to as (Richmond Theological Seminary). The site had served as Lumpkin’s jail where Union prisoners were incarcerated. Ironically the site was originally the location of Robert Lumpkin’s slaveholding pens. The structure was “a two-story brick house with barred windows, located in the heart of Richmond’s famous slave market”-- considered by local blacks as “the Devil’s Half Acre.”4 Subsequently many black men and women following the close of the Civil War looked to Richmond as a symbol of the North’s victory. At the end of March 1865, as the Northern armies went surging down Virginia’s roads toward Richmond and Petersburg, the final crumbling strongholds of Southern resistance black Union troops were viewed Betty Jones Dowling, conducted by this writer in June of 1995 at her home In Washington, DC. The family has photographs of the grave site of Sicily Jones. The recording is in the possession of writer. 4Leon F. Litwack,Beean_tbe_$tonn§o_LoncLIbe_Aftennatb.91§Iam New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1979, p. 167-168. See also Vincent Harding, W W. New York: Harcourt Brace Javanovich. Publishers, 1981, p. 275. 14 prominent in the moving lines of men.5 Joseph Jones remained in Richmond until 1869 when a Norwich, Connecticut bookbinder, touring the South, encouraged and supported his educational endeavors. He was then sent by the bookbinder to Hamilton, New York to be enrolled in Hamilton Academy. By 1876, Joseph Jones had completed studies in theology at Colgate University (formerly Hamilton Academy) with the help of northern white supporters. Armed with a degree in theology Joseph Jones returned to Richmond, the former capitol of the Confederacy, prepared to assist in the enormous work of educating the recently freed black population, conducted by liberal whites and progressive Blacks.6 Second to only Washington, DC, Richmond served as a hub of activity through the Freedman’s Bureau and the American Baptist Home Mission Society for the education of blacks in the area.7 5Hardin9. IhereraJBixer p. 274- 6See Simmons, MengLMefls. p. 234-239 and also Charles H. Corey, AJjjstenLQt WWII: Richmond Virginia: J W Randolph Company. 1865, p. 173-178. 7See Corey. WW and Howard Rabinowitz W New York: Oxford University Prose. 1978 P 163 Also James D Anderson WW 1938, Chapel Hill and London: The University of North Carolina Press, 1988. See also Peter Rachleff,8|aek_Leber_in_Bjehmend.__1885;_1890. Urbana and Chicago: University 15 Unfortunately for Joseph Jones, he returned to Richmond at a time of unsettling race relations. By 1876 white southerners were claiming redemption over Congressional Reconstruction and African Americans were reduced to second class citizenship in general. African Americans in Richmond faired no different. Rosa Daniel Kinckle Jones was born of free lineage in Lynchburg, Virginia. Her parents were John Kinckle and Rachel Smith Kinckle. Rosa’s father had purchased his freedom but her mother was born to a slave mother and her mother’s white master. The master willed at his death that young Rachel be set free when she found a free African American male to marry. He also stipulated that she be given $500. John Kinckle seemed a likely suitor. Though a former slave, John Kinckle experienced an interesting career in the city of Lynchburg. Through “sacrifices, hard work, and self- confidence he gained the monopoly of the express business“ in his home city”.8 John Kinckle was a porter and baggage transfer person Illinois Press, 1989. “WW. I! 10 Most of his early lite has been pieced together through this document In conjunction with WemerLQt . : . - : - ,by L. A. Scruggs, 1892. Scruggs provides a biographical sketch of Rosa Kinckle Jones, proclaiming her as “one of its [Richmond] most prominent, If not the most prominent and successful teacher of music, having taught some who are now successful teachers themselves.” E. K. Jones’ 1 6 at the railroad depot in Lynchburg, Virginia.9 Lynchburg offered more opportunity for personal and material success than southern locales with a smaller black population. “Between 1860 and 1870, census statistics confirmed what the white South had already strongly suspected--a striking increase in the black urban population.” “ Three of Virginia’s principal cities--Richmond, Norfolk, and Lynchburg-mow had nearly as many blacks as whites . . . which encouraged many Blacks to take their chances at economic success.10 Richmond was the likely place of migration for most blacks leaving Lynchburg. Lynchburg was linked to Richmond as a result of the James River and Kanawha Canal.(See Appendix A) By 1860 the completion of “new railroads” became the most granddaughter, Betty Jones Dowling also confirms much of this information as well, during June 1995 interview. “An ‘express business’ is the system for the prompt and safe transportation of parcels, money, or goods at rates higher than standard freight charges or a company operating such a merchandise freight service 9W3. 1879-80. p.119: 1881-82. P-103; 1887-88, p.131. Virginia State Library and Archives, Richmond, Virginia. ”For discussion of black life in Richmond and Norfolk see, Earl Lewis, 1h_Ihej[ - - . - - . Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991 and Elsa Barkley Brown, “Uncle Ned’s Children: Negotiating Community and Freedom in Postemancipation Richmond, Virginia” (Ph. D. Diss., Kent State University, 1994). 17 11 sophisticated means of travel between the two cities. Historian Peter Rachleff concludes, “There were many reasons for coming to the capital. Some [Blacks] saw immigration as a celebration of freedom. Black men with skills or particular aspirations might pick Richmond as the site of greater opportunity than existed in the rural n12 areas and small towns. The Kinckle and Jones families experiences paralleled that described by author Robert Francis Engs in "II I ' -an‘, -.0,I' ,3 - I all, 0| 3- - 3". For example Engs states: Even in political and economic defeat, black Hampton’s first free generation could look with pride at its major achievement: its children. They were well educated, ambitious, sophisticated in business, in education, and in the ways of the world, white as well as black, Northern as well as Southern. They and their descendants would continue to play a major role in American black life long after accommodation had been repudiated.13 11LitwaIck. BeeanJbLStormficLLong. p. 313 and Rabinowitz, Melanoma: Win. p. 12-13- 12Peter Rachleff, W. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, p. 14-15, 1989. 13Robert Francis Engs WW 1861:1890. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1979, p. Xxllntroduction. 18 Though neither family was from Hampton, John Kinckle and Sicily Jones were in positions of looking to their offsprings with much pride from Lynchburg. They would represent Richmond’s best of ‘Freedom’s First Generation’. Historian, Vincent Harding put it best, “the children of bondage were crossing over, bearing visions of a new land, challenging white America to a new life.”14 The Jones family was unique in the city of Richmond in the late nineteenth century. The young married couple were both college educated. Joseph and Rose Jones both returned to Richmond by the early 1880s to begin their new lives in a city that had perhaps witnessed greater devastation than most southern cities during the latter days of the Civil War. One contemporary recalled, “the future seemed bleak indeed for devastated, bankrupt Richmond, its people. hungry and disconsolate, its soldiers returning penniless from the front, and many of its finest young men killed, or maimed for life.” A great portion of Richmond’s destruction was done by evacuating southern troops, “in April 1865 (they) set fire to supplies, arsenals, 1‘tHarding, Ihere_js_e_fliye[, p. 297. Harding appropriately titles this chapter of the book, “The Challenge of the Children”. 1 9 and bridges” causing more than $8,000,000 in damages.”15 The city of Richmond struggled to mend itself and its citizens in the aftermath of the war. It is likely that the parents of Eugene Kinckle Jones knew of each other in their formative years in Lynchburg, Virginia. Joseph Jones and Rosa Kinckle were married in 1882 in the city of Richmond, Virginia. Following their marriage vows the two honeymooned in Norwich, Connecticut. The local papers of Norwich made mention of the event by noting the following: “Negro man and his bride who was the daughter of this former slave, John Kinckle...”‘6 Both the Joneses and Richmond, Virginia were at the center of the emerging ’black elite’ i.e. black middle class activities. One study concludes that E. K. Jones “was born into the black bourgeoisie”. ‘7 At the time of the official collapse of ‘sDabney. Richmond. 9 198 and also RabinowitZ. RacLRolationslnmwroan South. p 13 Seealso A A Taylor. IhLNcomJanLReoonstmctionofJIminia. Washington, D. C.: The Association for the Study of Negro Life and History, 1926. “WWW. P- 10 l7Guichard Parris and Lester Brooks, El | I ll Q'l Ell'l Ill WW. Boston and Toronto: Little, Brown and Company, 1971, p. 156- 157. 20 Reconstruction in 1877 there were two aristocracies that were just evolving in black America. They were the aristocracy of culture and the aristocracy of wealth. There were several factors that determined whether one belonged to the black elite. They were as follows but not limited to, “official station, position in the church, possession of money or real estate, former ownership and city birth”. One other leading concern was that “the color factor was also important in the stratification process”. Accordingly the Joneses and the Kinckles were already initiated into the fraternity of “black aristocracy’ by the 1880s and were quite comfortable in its circles. The luxury of traveling such a distance to Norwich, Connecticut to honeymoon was quite typical of the elite.18 Both Joseph and Rosa Jones having attained their college education in the North during the Reconstruction era, returned to Richmond prepared to help with uplifting the black populace. The Joneses belonged to the group of African Americans that historian “Willard 3. Gatewood. WW Bloomington & Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1990, p.70. Chapter 3, entitled “Aristocrats of Color in the South“ is historian Gatewood’s detailed analysis of elite Blacks in the South. Perhaps his shortcoming is that he singled out such cities as Washington, Baltimore, New Orleans and Charleston, South Carolina as prime examples of this group of individuals, while ignoring Richmond which clearly was at the center of similar activity in the South during this time. 21 Kevin Gaines refers to as race men and women. They were altruistic in there approach to addressing the problems that beset black America following the end of Reconstruction (1865-1877).19 They were also strong advocates of group solidarity as a means of racial uplift. In 1876 Joseph Jones was commissioned by the American Baptist Home Mission Society to joined the faculty of Richmond Theological Seminary at Virginia Union University, the all black college in Richmond, though most of its faculty at the time were white. He was also one of the first instructors to aid with the further development of Virginia Union University. He was eventually promoted to Chair of Homiletics and Greek studies and served the institution until his death in 1923. One contemporary recorded “Professor Jones is an efficient teacher a popular and instructive preacher, and a forcible writer.”2° Virginia Union University’s majority white faculty strongly rejected “an emphasis on industrial skills and consciously provided an education 19Kevin Gaines, ' ’ ' ' Wm. Chapel Hill and London: The University of North Carolina Press, 1996. 20Taylor. IbLNooLanJhLRcconstLuctioLoLMiminla. p. 191-192. and Simmons, MOILOLMRLK. p. 234-239. 22 for the Talented Tenth”. Virginia Union was strictly opposed to Booker T. Washington’s ideas of racial accomodationism and advocated more liberal type attitudes.21 Though Booker T. Washington’s Tuskegee Institute model of industrial type education was in vogue by the late nineteenth century it was not the standard for all black colleges. Virginia Union held to its ideals of a more liberal arts type educational program. Joseph Jones supported these ideas and transmitted them to his young son Eugene Kinckle Jones. In 1880 Rosa Daniel Kinckle (Jones) had graduated Howard University, which was founded in 1867 in Washington, D. C. Rosa Jones graduated at a time when many in the nation were still questioning whether women should be educated and if so to what extent. Rosa Jones was one of the first ten women graduates of I22 Howard University’s Normal Departmen. She would receive further training at the New England Conservatory of Music before ”Theodore Komweibel. Jr Wagon 1911:1928. Westport, Connecticut and London: Greenwood Press, 1975, p. 24-25. 399 3'30 Anderson W 399 3'30 LOUIS Fl Harlan. BookoLLJuasbinotomlhoMzaLdoLIuskomedOfi New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1983. ”Revlon! W. Logan. W New York: New York University Press, 1969, p. 97-98. Simmons, MW p. 234-239. 23 returning south to Richmond as the wife of Reverend Dr. Joseph E. Jones.23 On July 30, 1885 the Joneses gave birth to their first and only child, Eugene Kinckle Jones. After the birth of their child, Rosa joined the faculty of Hartshorn Memorial College in 1888 as a teacher of music. Hartshorn was established in 1883 for the education of African American girls and it was named in honor of its donor, Mr. Joseph C. Hartshorn of Rhode Island.24 The school always had associated with it the “choicest women workers”. “Its educational standards are high, but most important of all it places special emphasis upon the development of the moral and religious ”25 life. Its spirit and life are pre-eminently Christian. Rosa Kinckle Jones belonged to this Christian elite group of women. Rosa Jones served Hartshorn Memorial College as head of the music department 26 for forty years. Hartshorn Memorial eventually merged with 23AbridoodAutobioomoby and WomonoLOictinction. p- 337-339- 2Michael B. Chesson. Richmond_AtIor_tbc_ltlLaL_1865_-189.Q Richmond: Virginia State Library, 1981, p. 194-195. ZSIhoMossonoor. p. 15. 1921- 23lbid. 24 Virginia Union University in 1932, one year after Rosa Jones’ death. She worked at Hartshorn during a period when the institution struggled to maintain a separate identity from that of Virginia Union University. Hartshorn’s trustees wanted it to remain an institution for African American girls. Rosa Jones distinguished herself at Hartshorn and within the city of Richmond as a pianist.27 Historian Rayford Logan stated, “A few like Rosa D. Kinckle (Mrs. Joseph E. Jones) . . . not only taught but were wives of men who served well their communities and the Nation and were mothers of children who attended excellent schools.”28 The newlyweds settled in Richmond, determined to build a life for themselves and their infant son while residing at 520 St. James Street, despite the collasp of Reconstruction (1865-1877) 2W, p. 15, 1921. Hartshorn celebrated its fortieth year of operation in 1921 when this article was published. Mrs. Rosa Jones was no longer affiliated with it at this time but it gave discussion of the type of education that Hartshorn had subscribed for its “Negro” girls. See also, Stephanie J. Shaw, WheLA 1011]..“ °-‘3l' o|n‘-'-=.'°:---I A'lI-IA'I 'II- I: II 0. Eta. Chicago 8. London: The University of Chicago Press, 1996, p. 85-87 and Rayford Logan W New York: New York University Press, 1969, p. 97. 28Logan, p. 97. 25 and deteriorating race relations.29 The Jones family home was in the environs of some of Richmond’s most prominent black family homes. Richmond’s modest black upper-class could boast that “there were similar antebellum concentrations of homeowning free Negroes on Duval, on the 500 block of West Baker . . . St. James, St. Peter, and St. Paul streets.30 During Reconstruction, Blacks in Richmond experienced a rather peculiar level of participation in the city’s government and municipalities. Historian Howard Rabinowitz claims that Richmond’s Blacks were ‘more fortunate’ than Blacks in other southern urban centers during Reconstruction. In 1870 Virginia received its first black justice of the peace in Henrico County which included Richmond.31 In 1879 Virginia’s former politicians who were ' supposedly its “best people” were interestingly removed from both 29W. Virginia State Library and Archives, Richmond, Virginia. By 1896 the Joneses were both listed with professional titles, Rosa: Teacher at Hartshorn Memorial College, Joseph: Teacher at Richmond Theological Seminary. E. K. Jones’ student records for Cornell University reveal his permanent address for Richmond. Eugene Kinckle Jones Alumni Folder, Cornell University Rare and Manuscript Collections, University Library, Ithaca, New York. ”Rabinowitz WWII. p. 98. 31 lbid., p. 37-38 26 houses of the legislature. By the 1870s a new group of white leaders who did not belong to Virginia’s aristocratic class took over officeholding. Many of these office seekers were “opportunists and some were even erratic visionaries given to supporting any minority cause.”32 Historian Michael B. Chesson discovered that ironically black participation in the city government did not begin until after the demise of Reconstruction in Richmond, 1871-1896. By the mid- 1870s Virginia was one of the southern states that “had already reverted to Democratic rule.”33 Between1871-1898, thirty-three Blacks held positions on Richmond’s City Council.34 Though Reconstruction had ended throughout the South by 1877, Blacks in Richmond expressed meaningful hope and participation in the city’s new government. 32Charles 5- WyneS. W. Totowa. New Jersey: Rowman and Littlefield, 1971, p. 16. For a general discussion of how the Republican party lost its battle in the south during Reconstruction, See also, Carl H. Moneyhon, “The Failure of Southern Republicanism, 1867-1876”, Ihe_Eaet§_o_t Wish. edited by Eric Andersen & Alfred A. Moss, Jr. Baton Rouge and London: Louisiana State University Press, 1991, p. 99- 1 19. 33Nell Irvin Painter, ' . New York and London: W. W. Norton & Company, 1987, p. 1. 34Miohael B. Chesson, ”Richmond’s Black Councilmen,1871-96',8o_uthem RlacLLoadoroofJbLRoconstmctionjra. ed Howard N Rabinowitz. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1982, p.191 27 Chesson further concludes that activities historians have usually associated with Reconstruction continued well into the 1890s in Richmond. From 1871-1898, Blacks in Richmond were visible in “officeholding. widespread voting, alliances with white Republicans of various factions, intense competition for office . . . and variously successful Republican appeals to Congress and the federal courts for relief from Bourbon oppression.”35 In the 1870s the Richmond City Council began its efforts to destroy any cooperative race relations in the city of Richmond which also aided in the further collapse of Reconstruction. “Richmond officials sought to confine Negro voters to Jackson Ward in an effort to restrict their political power.”36 By the 1880s race relations in Richmond, as with much of the South, had significantly deteriorated.“ Most black citizens were denied city jobs either because of their race or because they were Republicans. The City 35lbid., p. 191. 3t“’Rabinowitz. Minimum. 9. 105. 37See Rayford Logan, : ° . : 1901. New York: The Dial Press, Inc. 1954 and Rabinowitz, Becejeletjehejhm Omanfiomtt. and Chesson,Rlchmond_Aftor_tbc_iliLaLlO6§_1.8m 28 Council created the majority black ward of Jackson to assure a Democratic stronghold on the Council. Jackson Ward represented the first gerrymandering efforts to occur in Richmond. This allowed for the other five wards to be overwhelmingly Democratic. Therefore the Council was primarily Democratic. This aided in the efforts to and radical Reconstruction successes in Richmond. All of the thirty- three black councilman represented Jackson Ward. In 1890, 79 percent of the population in Jackson Ward was black. Though 30 percent of the black population lived throughout the white wards, Jackson was commonly referred to as the black belt.38 It was Jackson Ward that the Joneses would call home upon settling down in Richmond. Jackson Ward was “the most famous concentration of blacks”.39(See Appendix B) Black political power in Richmond was heavily concentrated in Jackson Ward, the electorate was 77 percent black and almost half 38Chesson, p. 192 and Chesson, W, p. 195-196. 39Rabinowit2. WW. II. 98. 29 the city’s black population.40 The ward was bound on the west and north by Bacon Quarter Branch, on the east by Shockoe Creek and to the south by Leigh Street. By 1890 Jackson’s black population was 13,530 of Richmond’s total black population of 32,330.41 It was due to the Joneses middle class status that young Eugene Kinckle Jones was able to see and reach beyond Jackson Ward. This represents the paradoxical nature of freedom’s first generation for Blacks in Richmond. It was also the Richmond that Eugene Kinckle Jones was born into in 1885. By the 1890s cooperative race relations had deteriorated rapidly in the old Confederate capitol. In 1890 a major lack of respect was dealt to the black community of Richmond. Richmond city leaders extended a city expansion project that “tore up Richmond’s historic black cemetery, in which many of the city’s most famous slaves and free Negroes had been buried.”42 As a 40U. 8., Bureau of the Census, Compendium of the Eleventh Census, 1890, I (Washington, D. C., 1896), 850. See Chesson, W. p. 191-1.92 See also Rabinowit2. RacoRolationanhoJimanfioInh 41Rabinowit2.Race_Rciations_ln_nn_Lirban_$oum. p.98. 42Virginius Dabney, RjehmendLIhejtenLQLeQity. Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1976, p. 241. 30 further insult the relocation of the remains were not revealed. Three years later Richmond experienced its first serious financial panic since the war. Much suffering, unemployment and bankruptcy occurred. In the midst of this panic of the 1890s race relations were sorely wounded again by the unveiling of the statue of Robert E. Lee in 1890. While the event brought out a record setting turnout of Civil War personalities it was not well received in the black community. The white South had looked forward to the “equestrian statue” for quite some time.43 This occasion did not stop the leading black newspaper of Richmond, the Bjehmendflehetfrom attacking Robert E. Lee and all the Confederates.“ The W was owned and edited by black Councilman John Mitchell, Jr. Mitchell was a ‘mulatto’ who also served on the Richmond City Council from 1888-1896. Mitchell had adamantly opposed the Council’s $10,000 appropriation for the statue. The day that the unveiling ceremony took place he objected against it publically in the Ejehet. He wrote that, “The men who talk most about the valor of Lee and the blood of the brave Confederate 43Ibid. “lbid. 31 dead are those who never smelt powder” and further raided “most of them were at a table, either on top or under it, when the war was going on.” Mitchell candidly proclaimed that the event would cement a “legacy of treason and blood”. He exhibited enormous courage at a time when Iynchings of black men and women in the South were on the increase.45 Mitchell “was the kind of black leader that white Richmonders hated and feared. Mitchell had had the audacity to ridicule the Confederacy and to campaign openly against the brutal and increasingly frequent practice of lynching.”46 He was not alone in his opposition to the unveiling of the Confederate monument. The Philadelphia W981) compared Lee to Benedict Arnold; and the New York Mm proposed that Congress stop the continued erection of monuments to Confederate heroes as well as the continual use ofthe Confederate flag." 45Dabney, p. 242. For more discussion of Mitchell and the other black city councilman of Richde during this era, Michael B. Chesscn’ s essay W W provides perhaps the most detailed information and also Chesson, RichmonsLAttoLthoiNar 460hasson,Bjehmend_AtteL_the_flaL p.195. See also, Work Projects Administration in the State of Virginia, Wale, New York: Hastings House, Publishers, 1940. 47Chesson, p. 242 32 Mary White Ovington interviewed E. K. Jones for a 1927 publication entitled 3mm. When asked what was there to say about himself he stated, “there’s nothing much to say about me”. He further noted that he had no ‘Up From Slavery’ story. His father owned the house in which he was born and he attended some of the finest schools that Richmond had to offer. As a youngster Jones attended schools that were aided by white Northern supporters. He also witnessed white and black teachers co-mingling as he was exposed to the environments of both Hartshorn and Virginia Union as a child. He also admitted that his parents were in privileged positions in comparison to most Blacks of Richmond and the South generally. Ovington recalled from a photograph that his mother was an “exquisite lady in her black satin with a bit of fine . lace at the throat.” Perhaps Ovington viewed the photograph in relation to the Joneses middle class status at the time. Joseph Jones eventually chaired the department of theology at the Richmond Theological Seminary which eventually became Virginia Union University in 1896.48 48Mary White Ovington, W91. New York: The Viking Press, 1927, p. 146. 33 Soon thereafter in 1897 Joseph E. Jones received an invitation to join the American Negro Academy. The Academy was the first major black American learned society in the United States which was founded in 1897. Some its more prominent founding members were such noted individuals as Alexander Crummell, W. E. B. DuBois, John W. Cromwell, and Kelly Miller. “They tended to be well educated, with a strong sense of race identity, active and effective n49 leaders, and highly respectable. According to its constitution it was “an organization of authors, scholars, artists, "and those distinguished in other walks of life, men of African descent, for the ”50 promotion of Letters, Science, and Art. Joseph Jones never responded to this new black intellectual organization’s call. The historian Alfred A. Moss has declared that all the individuals who were invited to enjoin the founding members of the Academy were stellar in character. The Joneses were pillars of prosperity and 49Alfrad A. Moss, Jr. ll : - - .-. - Baton Rouge and London: Louisiana State Universrty Press,1981, p. 27, 29, 36 and see also the Introduction. For more detailed discussion of Joseph Jones’ life and career see, Simmons, MengLMans, p. 234-239. See also Raymond Gavins, IDLEQLIISJDO '0-‘u-01.-° 'll- "-3 . $3.15!." .0 "l-3.l3 l-Ihs 33;" . Durham and London: Duke University Press, 1977, p. 24-25. 50Moss, p. 27. 34 hope for many persons in the black community of Richmond during the late nineteenth century. They represented the advancement that had come to some Blacks during Reconstruction. In spite of mounting adversity there was much activity in the city of Richmond during the late 1880s and 1890s that was initiated by African American race leaders. Eugene Kinckle Jones recalled in an interview with Gunnar Myrdal in 1940: In Richmond there was great activity among certain Negro leaders to develop race pride, business ventures, political influence. John Mitchell, the editor of the W; D. Webster Davis, the poet and lecturer; W. W. Brown, the founder and president of the Grand United Order of True Reformers; Maggie L. Walker, the first woman president of a bank in the United States and the leader of the St. Lukes--these and many others were active during those days and aroused all Negro young people in Richmond to a high degree of racial consciousness and confidence.51 Maggie Lena Walker was the first woman president of a bank in the United States. The bank was founded in 1887 by the United Order of True Reformers. This was a black civic organization which was founded in the late 1870s and “flourished into the twentieth century.” The St. Luke’s Penny Savings Bank “W. P2- 35 represented a major achievement for Blacks as an example of an institution that was independently organized, supported and controlled by Blacks. The United Order of True Reformers was a very visible and active organization during the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century. The organization provided the black community of Richmond with grocery stories, clothing stores, a one-hundred room hotel, a home for the aged, a real estate firm, a loan association, and an organizational newspaper, Bejemehsz To be sure, historian August Meier found that the social climate of the are favored ‘group separatism’. “It was in the church and fraternity that Negroes found unhampered opportunity for social life and for the exercise of leadership.”53 Richmond’s black community appears to have seized the opportunities that grew out of their social realities- -Jim Crow Laws. 52$ee, Elsa Barkley Brown, 'Wcmanist Consciousness: Maggie Lena Walker and the Independent Order of Saint Luke”, Siege, vol. 14, no. 3, 1989, p. 610-633 and Chesson. RichmondfltoLtholNat. p. 194. See also L. H. Hammond. IanolandIIatdoLA Rage, New York: Arno Press, 1972, p. 108-118. 53August Meier, L3. . In 0| ' WWW. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 1963, p. A 1 5. 36 Moreover it is particularly interesting to focus on Richmond. Historian Elsa Barkley Brown argues that “as the former capital of the Confederacy, Richmond is an important place to look at the transition from slavery to freedom.”54 Richmond’s black populace appears to have span the entire spectrum during this period of political, social, and economic uncertainty. The irony of all of this is that Richmond was one of the first urban centers in the country to allow for black membership in the Knights of Labor. Though this was a short lived opportunity for African American workers of Richmond it reveals much about their search for economic stability. Historian Peter Rachleff concludes that despite “their creativity and commitment, the Knights would disintegrate as rapidly as they arose.”55 Amongst the mounting turmoil of political and social change in Richmond by the late nineteenth century many of its black citizens remained focused on 54$ae Elsa Barkley Brown, “Uncle Ned’s Children: Negotiating Community and Freedom In Postemancipation Richmond, Virginia” (Ph. D. Diss., Kent State University, 1994), p. 2. 55Peter Rachleff, W. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press. p. 158.1989. 37 obtaining full equality long after Reconstruction had passed. To be sure Jones’ parents were in the forefront of much of Richmond’s black upper-class activity. Joseph Jones was an active participant in fighting for black rights. In the early 18803 he led one of the first successful fights to get black teachers in the “Negro” public schools of Richmond. Joseph Jones also conducted numerous debates in the “religious press of the community with a Catholic priest on the relative merits ”56 of Catholicism and Protestantism. Jones observed his parents “serving on mixed faculties of white and colored teachers in which equality was recognized within the group and where it was nothing strange to see highly educated northern white people sit at meals with similarly trained Negroes.”57 He claimed further that these were the kinds of activities that had contributed to his belief that all men were created equal and if given an opportunity black men and women would measure up 56Abrldged Autobiography, p. 2-3. 57Ibid. 38 with “any other racial variety”.58 Eugene Kinckle Jones while growing up in the old Confederate capitol in the 18803-903 enjoyed numerous unique and enviable opportunities and experiences. In spite of Jones’ exposures the Jones family resided in the “black belt’ of Jackson Ward. He often saw Blacks and whites intermingling as a result of his parents professional status within the community. The Joneses were often seen interacting with white intellectuals in and around the Richmond area. This left an impression on young Eugene K. Jones that few black youngsters could recall having experienced at the turn of the twentieth century. As a result of his childhood exposure Jones developed a yearning for higher education. On numerous occasions Jones was treated to the unusual experience of observing students from Africa and the West Indies “par with those of our own Negro students” at Virginia Union and Hartshorn College. Jones also witnessed those same “Negro students” leave for northern institutions, not unlike his parents, and match “their wits with the best young white minds of the north and gave a good account of 58lbid., p.2-3. 39 themselves”. 59 Jones’ early education was done in the “Negro” public schools of Richmond. Upon the completion of his secondary education Jones enrolled in Wayland Seminary which later merged with Virginia Union University of Richmond in 1899.60 Very few other black institutions could match the education that was delivered at Virginia Union at the turn of the century. It exemplified the classical education that was being offered in many American educational institutions at the time. The school was comprised of three divisions, “an academy of preparatory instruction and manual crafts, a liberal arts college, and a theological department.” All the classics were covered at Union: Latin, Greek, Hebrew, French and German; European and American history; science and mathematics and of course Bible. The industrial educational model by Booker T. Washington that was then in vogue received very little attention at the Virginia Union 59AMdoed_AutooiooLaony. p. 3- 6ORaymond Gavins, IboRomundflosocctsoLSomnomjlacLLoadotshlo: WWW. Durham and London: Duke University Press, 1977, p. 23. 40 campus, if any at all.61 Furthermore Richmond and Atlanta were the chief southern anti-Washington strongholds.62 The liberal arts college, Virginia Union University and of course the E18091 had been known to attack the Washington camp. At the first meeting of the Niagara Movement in 1905 Richmond sent representation.63 With Eugene K. Jones’ education completed in Richmond while he had sat at the foot stool of such activities--he was now prepared to match his own wits with the best young white minds of the North. In 1905 he graduated Virginia Union University and enrolled in Cornell University, Ithaca, New York. This northward trek for education was typical of the southern 61 Rachleff p. 23-24. For discussion of Booker T. Washington and the Industrial Educational Model. see Louis R Harlan. WWW 190L191; New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1983. August Meier, W. p 207-247 Also James D Anderson. IhoEducationot 8|eelse_tn_the_$g_uth and Anderson, “The Hampton Model of Normal School Industrial Education. 1868-1900”. NoLRcLspcctlmonjlacLEducationalJiistom Edited by Anderson and Vincent P. Franklin. Boston: G. K. Hall 8. Co., 1978, p. 61 -96. 6it’Meier. Noom_IboIIobtJn_AmoLica. p- 175-178- 63Ibid. 41 black aristocratic class at the turn of the century.64 Most Blacks who received advanced education prior to the late 19303 took their degrees in the North because there were no advance degree programs at black institutions in the South prior to this time. Furthermore no southern white institutions admitted Blacks at the time.‘55 Perhaps Jones was able to attend Cornell due to the contacts that his parents had secured during their tenure in the North while pursuing their own education during Reconstruction. In the fall of 1905, Jones arrived at Ithaca, New York to begin his studies at Cornell University. By the turn of the twentieth century Cornell had an acceptable reputation as a liberal white institution amongst black intellectual circles. Philanthropist Henry W. Sage granted Cornell several generous amounts of money in 1885. By the 18903 Cornell had become an educational institution of unusual financial security. The first 6‘llbid., p. 5. For further discussion of the southern black aristocrats refer to Willard Gatewood’s MW, chapter 3, “Aristocrats of Color in the South”. 55833 Charles H. Wesley, “Graduate Education for Negroes in Southam Universities”, W, 10, p. 82-83, 1940. See also James D. Anderson. WWW Chapel Hill and London The University of North Carolina Press, 1988. 42 endowed chairs at Cornell were in ethics and philosophy with a total sum of $70,000. Again in 1890 Sage offered $200,000 to open up the Susan Linn Sage School of Philosophy. The school and chairs were named for Sage’s deceased wife (which occurred coincidently the same month and year of Jones’ birth, July, 1885). It was within this new school that Professor Walter Wilcox taught perhaps one of the school’s most popular courses. For thirty-four years he taught the coursework in Social Statistics.66 Jones spent half of his first year at Cornell studying civil-engineering. Through his love for mathematics he initially began his Cornell education with the pursuit of engineering. Eventually Jones was convinced that a career in economics and social science would better enable him to serve black people. Perhaps Professor Walter F. Wilcox, an expert on the “Negro” conditions and someone who offered empathy toward black advancement aided Jones in this decision to change his major. To be sure, Wilcox convinced Jones that the job market in 66Morris Bishop, MW. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1962, p. 274-276. 43 engineering would not be open to him because of his race. Professor Wilcox arranged for Jones to enter graduate school and established the two year and a half time frame for its completion. Jones completed his studies at Cornell well within record time of the initial agreement. In the Spring of 1908 he graduated with a masters degree in social science, focused on economics and sociology.” Jones was able to align himself with Professor Wilcox throughout his tenure as a student at Cornell. Professor Wilcox was in his second decade with Cornell by the time Jones arrived in 1905. Wilcox, a specialist in political science and statistics, belonged to an elite group of faculty members at Cornell by the turn of the twentieth century. Wilcox eventually became one of the first faculty members to be elected to the Board of Trustees in 1916. This practice had never occurred at an American school of allowing faculty members to serve on the governing body of that institution. Other eastern schools followed this idea which became known as the “Cornell ldea’. Aside from meeting with the timetable established for his 37W. P- 136-185- 44 tenure as a student Jones took several of Professor Wilcox’s classes in ethics and social statistics. It was at Wilcox’s instruction that Jones conducted some of his first studies on racial statistics. While still a student in 1907 Jones wrote to the most prominent black social scientist and historian in the United States, Professor W. E. B. DuBois of Atlanta University at Professor Wilcox’s instruction. He was given an assignment to justify through “representative men of the country” the reasoning for spelling “Negro” with a capital “N”. Jones wrote to Professor DuBois: The task I consented to perform for Prof. Willcox is to secure all possible data, which one can consider authoritative, on the method pursued and the reasons given for so spelling the word by various writers.68 He also disclosed to DuBois that he was a “Negro” student at Cornell studying towards a masters degree in social science and economicsf This would be the beginning of a lasting relationship between Jones and DuBois. Again in 1908, Jones wrote to Professor DuBois requesting information concerning the “Health 6tiApril 24, 1907. From Jones to Prof. W.E. B. DuBois, Atlanta University, Atlanta, Georgia. The Papers of W. E. B. DuBois, 1877-1963, Reel 2, Frame 287, Microfilm version, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. 45 of the American Negro”. 69 When Jones arrived at Ithaca he understood the nature of race relations in the South. He proclaimed: “A boy brought up as l was in the capital of the old Confederacy, Richmond, especially during the late 18803 and the 18903, would have the factors involved in the problems of race indelibly impressed upon his mind.”70 Jones left Richmond to pursue advanced education at a time of entrenched racial hatred throughout the South and mounting racial discord throughout much of the North. The Eleeey_y_f_e_l:gueeh Supreme Court decision in 1896 had already established legal segregation in the previous decade. Though the case directly addressed seating on railway lines it eventually found its way into practically every aspect of American life. Writer Harvey Fireside laments that the 1896 case was “not just in railways but in schools, restaurants, hotels, theaters, 69February 5, 1908. From Jones to Prof. W. E. B. DuBois, Atlanta University, Atlanta, Georgia. DuBois Papers, lbid. See also David Levering Lewis, We; W. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1993. 70W. P- 2- 46 n71 and other areas of social life. African Americans of every social and economic status had to reassess their acquired freedoms, even blacks of Jones’ middle class background. Jones further stated in 1940, “. . . Whites were asking further to prescribe Negroes by segregation, jim crew, and disfranchisement legislation”. 72 Jones also experienced Jim Crow prescriptions upon arrival at Cornell. While Cornell was open to accepting black students it was not always a conducive environment. Black students at Cornell during this era were not permitted to live in campus housing nor to take their meals amongst white students. Therefore black students had the added burden of living off campus. Most of the black student body boarded in the homes of lthaca’s black residents. Jones did likewise. He boarded in a home at 214 Hazen Street, Ithaca, New York.73 Historian Charles 71Harvey Fireside. Wall Springfield New Jersey: Enslow Publishers, Inc., 1997, p. 5-6. 72lbid. ”The address that Jones resided can be found on his correspondents that he exchanged with such persons as DuBois while a student at Cornell. 47 Harris Wesley lamented that “the cleavage, characteristic of this period, had laid the basis for the division even in college n74 life. What Jones and his fellow black students found upon arrival in Ithaca, New York was a northern Jim Crow determined to limit the extent of their achievements. Whether African American students knew that their files were marked “Colored Student” is uncertain. The university coded the records of black students with the above script.75 The first decade of the twentieth century offered little hope for African Americans outside of the institutions that they built and fostered themselves. In other words the first ten years of the twentieth century witnessed the founding of numerous black institutions. The Age of Jim Crow had come as a result of southern redemption and northern industrial expansion.76 African Americans in practically every aspect of 74Charles H. Wesley, : . ' - ;- : Lite. Chicago: The Foundation Publishers, 1929,1950, p. 15. 75Eugene Kinckle Jones Alumni Folder, Rare and Manuscript Collections, University Library, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York. 76See Edward L. Ayers, ll : ' New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992. 48 American society: socially, economically and politically found themselves excluded and when included, only marginally. During the first decade of the new century a plethora of black protest and advancement institutions were born out of necessity espousing ideals of racial solidarity and self-help. The Negro Business League, 1900; the National Afro-American Council, 1903; the National Aeseciation of Negro Teachers, 1903; the beginnings of the National Urban League, 1905; the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People began in 1905 (through the Niagara Movement) all were organizations established for the sole purpose of securing African American equality on the bases of social, economic, and political uplift in an oppressive society. “Pressures of segregation, discrimination, mistreatment, prejudice, caste and neglect of consideration were being exerted on the black people in many places, as they were endeavoring to advance and improve their status.”77 This was the two-fold nature of the exposures of 77Wasley, p. Xiii from the Introduction. Wesley does an excellent job of painting the segregated nature of black life at the turn of the century for black Americans. He also singles out the fact that many of the black students at Cornell at the turn of the century were from middle class backgrounds and that their plight was best characterized by Jim Crow prescriptions. Even higher class status did not make them Immune to the ravages of racial segregation and discrimination. 49 Jones and his fellow students at Cornell University, 1905-1908. Though a Jim Crow society existed in the larger society Jones and his fellow peers were each convinced of their abilities to make a difference through their chosen disciplines. Black students of Cornell confronted considerable isolation during these dark days of segregation. There were so few black students enrolled at the time that they very seldom had occasion to encounter one another. Had it not been for Jim Crow exclusions from the white fraternities at Cornell it is doubtful whether black fraternities would have evolved at such a crucial point in time. There were many blacks in education who did not favor the development of fraternities in the black community. lnspite of this grave concern Jones arrived at Cornell in time to facilitate the establishment of the first black Greek lettered fraternity in the United States at Cornell University in 1906, Alpha Phi Alpha. Henry Arthur Callis considered a jewel of the fraternity i. e., founding member, proclaimed, “Diversity rather than unity of background, interests and objectives led these young men to Ithaca in 50 1905".78 Several of the young men involved in the establishment of Alpha Phi Alpha were from “moderately secure middle class homes”. To be sure Jones belonged to this group of middle class black students at Cornell who expected employment upon ”79 graduation “despite the handicap of race There are seven young men who now belong to this history making event in Cornell’s history. Though conclusive evidence is lacking it is widely believed that the seven individuals represented the total black student enrollment of Cornell at the time. They were as follows: Henry Arthur Callis, physician; George Biddle Kelley, civil-engineer; Charles Henry Chapman, educator; Nathaniel Allison Murray, educator; Vartner Woodson Tandy, architect; Robert Harold Ogle, federal service and Eugene Kinckle Jones, social reformer. The overall majority of the individuals all had 78Charles H- Wesley. RonmAmuLOalflcLLlfLandLooacy- Chicago: The Foundation Publishers, 1977, p. 276. Callis is a founding member with Jones of the fraternity, Alpha Phi Alpha with its Alpha Chapter at Cornell University--established in 1906. Callis after completing his work at Cornell than enrolled in Howard University's School of Medicine eventually forfilling his life long dream to become a doctor and address the concerns of black health care. This particular work compiles all of the medical writings of Callis. 79Wesley. RoanAnhIILQallls. p. 277. 51 come from stable middle class backgrounds from the upper south and northeast with the exception of Tandy who hailed from the border state of Kentucky. Again they each had come from families which had benefitted from the good of Reconstruction. Against the backdrop of a Jim Crow society that offered little opportunity for economic, social and political mobility the founding members of this fraternity sought to offer each other a sense of comradeship and a means of aiding the downtrodden black community. Callis declared, “Society offered us narrowly circumscribed opportunity and no security. Out of our need, our fraternity brought social purpose and social action”.80 Jones went on to become the first initiate of the fraternity in 1906. This gives him a dual place in its history, as a jewel and first initiate.81 Jones and Callis remained close friends throughout their lives. In fact it was they who wrote the fraternity’s first constitution. Jones has been referred to as the “most dynamic and forceful” of the initial group of ”Wesley. Ibo_l:lictom_oLAloba_EhLAloba. p. Xiii. 8lAhLidooil_AI.Itohioctet:by.of_EIIoeIJe_ISlncislo_I.lotIos. p. 6-7- 52 individuals in the fraternity. Jones and Callis both witnessed the lecture on campus by Mary Church Terrell and sat through the class lectures done by Professor Wilcox who had frequently quoted DuBois.82 Wilcox and DuBois often spent summers together in Atlanta, researching and writing on such topics as the socioeconomic conditions of African Americans.83 These were the incidents that aroused a level of awareness in these two students about the usefulness of studies in social science, government and economics. The following school year at Cornell in 1907 Jones was elected as President of the new organization--Alpha Phi Alpha, Fraternity and under his administration the organization expanded its boundaries. Jones stated he “personally, organized 82Wesley, tiethALthuLQeliie, p. 281. For detailed discussion on Mary Church Terrell see Sharon Harley’,s “Mary Church Terrell: Gentael Militant”, 8|eeLLeedetLot Wm. editors Leon Litwack and August Meier. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1988, p. 307- 321 also Terrell’s autobiography, A_C_Qie[e_d WWO. Washington, D. C. Randell,lnc.,1940 and Beverly Washington Jones. Wm M. Brooklyn, New York: Carlson Publishing, 1990. 83Wesley. HODELAEIIJIIILQBIIIO. p Xvii See else. LewiS. W. p 350-354 and Elliott Rudwick, ”W. E. B. DuBois as Sociologist”, W HistoflcaLandMomootamEoLsoectixeo Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1974, p.25-55. 53 84 the first two chapters In other colleges.” Namely, the second and third chapters of the fraternity were established at Howard University and Virginia Union, Jones’ alma mater. It is likely that Callis played a major role in the efforts to establish the fraternity at Howard University as he was enrolled there for medical school. At any rate, these young men followed historical precedent in keeping with the tradition of black community mutual aid and beneficial societies. Callis stated later in his life, “we were convinced that leadership in the struggle to overcome race prejudice in America depended upon college trained young people. The talented tenth, Dr. Du Bois had heralded as the hope of the Negro American rather than the humble servitor prescribed by Booker T. Washington’s program.”85 Historian Willard Gatewood contends that “in an age of rising expectations they [blacks] encountered a degree of social segregation, political disfranchisement, educational discrimination, and economic exploitation experienced by no 84AItLidood_AIIIolziooLaIztItt. p- 7- 85lbid., p. Xvi. 54 other segment of the American population.”86 Against this backdrop young African Americans such as Jones and his peers at Cornell persevered. Jones had now demonstrated his capabilities to his mentors and undoubtly his leadership to his peers. The time had come in 1908 after graduation from Cornell University with his masters degree in economics and social science that Jones would have to put the ideals and motto of the new fraternity to work: “We shall be first of all, servants of all, we shall transcend all”. Coupled with his fraternity’s motto and with the understanding that he represented the black intelligentsia Jonas left Ithaca, New York with his life’s mission confronting him. Upon leaving Ithaca Jones could only secure employment as a school teacher in both private and public schools for Blacks-in Louisville, Kentucky. On March 11, 1909, Jones married Blanche Ruby Watson of Richmond, Virginia. She had also graduated Virginia Union University. Out of this union two children were born, Eugene “Willard B. Gatewood, Jr. ' . J898;190_3,.Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, p. 2-3. 55 Kinckle, Jr. and Adele Rosa. In 1911, while the Jones children were still in infancy, Jones met Dr. George Edmund Haynes, an eminent black sociologist.” Dr. Haynes proposed that he come to New York and work for the newly formed League on Urban Conditions among “Negroes”. Little did Jones know that New York would provide him with an opportunity to illustrate his ideas and philosophies concerning the social conditions of black life, eventually propelling him before the national and an international audience. The time had arrived for him to test his capabilities and leadership style on the larger black community and ultimately work to instruct and inform the nation of the social woes that confronted black America. 87Butler A. Jones, “The Tradition of Sociology Teaching in Black Colleges: The Unheralded Professionals". RIacIsfioQIolooIstLHictoucaljndfiomomootary Eemeeetiyee, editors James E. Blackwell and Morris Janowitz. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1974, p.121-163. Chapter 2 BUILDING ALLIANCES The National Urban League has been particularly useful in its contribution towards the solution of the problem of races in the United States, because it has sought to secure the co-operation of leading people of both races in attacking these problems.1 President Warren G. Harding, 1921. By the decade of the 19203 all of social work was going through a professional transformation. In 1915, Abraham Flexner, Carnegie Foundation representative, informed social workers that they were not professionals due to their profession’s lack of a scientific methodology. Flexner argued: “It lacks specificity of aim; social workers need to be well informed, well-balanced, tactful, judicious, sympathetic, resourceful, but no definite kind or kinds of technical skills are ‘flholsflhanfiolorodAmoflca, “Eugene Kinckle Jonas,” p. 110, 1927. 56 57 needed.”2 It was to this very end that most social workers worked to create a reputable body of knowledge. Moreover, social workers considered themselves to be professionals as early as 1921. In their urgency to counter Flexner’s assessment, the American Association of Social Workers (AASW) was founded in that year. The AASW was an organization founded by largely white social workers to address their desire for professional status. When white social workers served the poor and less fortunate i. e., often times black people, their services were viewed by many black social workers as strictly charity which brought about little meaningful change. This perception is clear in an article written by Eugene Kinckle Jones, Executive Secretary of the National Urban League (1916-1940). A 1921 edition of the W carried an article entitled, “Social Work Among Negroes” by Jones stating: In case of white organizations interested more or less in Negro welfare, it has taken on 2Abraham Flexner, “ls Social Work a Profession?” EmeeedinguLtthietienal Wu. 1915 (Chicago 1915). p.576-90 See also John A Ehrenreich MmistichaolnatiomAflstomoLSociaLWodundjocial Eolichn_the_Ltnited_State§. Cornell University Press, 1985, pp. 57-58. 58 the character of material aid given with no special desire to render the recipient independent but to relieve immediate suffering. This is especially true of many southern communities where the Charity Organization Society or the Associated Charities has maintained a list of indigent colored people who have received the weekly baskeL3 Jones worked tirelessly throughout his life, both public and private, to integrate the profession of social work. Throughout the decades of the 1910-203, he worked to establish an acceptable working relationship among social workers, both black and white. This chapter will define the meaning of social work for Black Americans and examine Jones’ leadership of the NUL. It will also discuss the decade of the 1920’s and the many fronts that Jones and his contemporaries confronted as black social workers. The growing concerns of black urban people and how social work for black urban people develops as a result of the transformations within the urban north are essential to an 3Eugene Kinckle Jones, “Social Work Among Negroes”, W, 1921, p. 27. The Meesenge: was perhaps the most radical black jeumal of the early twentieth century, produced by Chandler Owens and A. Philip Randolph. Theodora Komweibel. Jr. NLQantaifitaILRacLLIfLanthLMossortoothiERE See also Paula F. Pieifler. WWW Baton Rouge and l-ondon Louisiana State University Prass,1990. 59 understanding of Jones’ mission. This chapter will also examine the growing tensions of the 19203 in the settlement house movement and how race inevitably undermines the overall mission of the larger society. Social workers have always viewed themselves as a helping profession, ameliorating human wees, driven by ethical, humanistic, and social concerns. Social work was always a dual profession. There was social work, the occupation, which at times was manipulated by persons with wealth and power to maintain some sense of social order.‘4 There were also numerous social workers who were motivated out of passion , altruism, and respect for the clients they served. Consequently, social workers saw themselves as a separate entity from other noted professions as providers of a distinct service.5 Though social workers received a major rejection in 1915 4For a recent discussion of how social work was used to exercise some sense of social order in society Ruth Hutchinson Crocker's work reveals enormous insight through her book entitled. EoclalJALodLandfiocialQLdoclbciettlomomMovemomjn W, Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1992. See also Elisabeth Lasch Quinn. ElaclLNoiohooLszjacoondeoumitsoLRefonanJbo AmoncanfiotilomontfiouaidoxomoquEOJRE Chapel Hill and London The University of North Carolina Prass,1993. 5Ehrenreich, pp. 57-58. 60 from one of the nation’s leading philanthropic societies-- (Carnegie Foundation) it was only the beginning of decades of changes that would eventually alter the social work establishment. Some of the first organized forms of social work activities began as charity organizations in the late 18803 and continued in the 18903. Much of the Settlement House Movement came about as a means to aid European immigrants, mainly from southern and eastern Europe. Social work activities of these early organizations were seen as community efforts to integrate the immigrants into the native white communities. Recent scholarship suggests that early social workers were individuals who acted as agents of the middle class. This evolution within social work can be seen as one of the many efforts to professionalize the occupation of social work.6 Social work historian, Clarke Chambers concludes that, socialized by formal training and practical experience to maintain social distance and to strive 6For a look at early social work activities as it developed from its infancy” Edward T. Davina. WW9. New York: The MacMillan Company, 1939, specifically chapter Ill. Also Elizabeth A. Ferguson. SOOIEIJNOEISLAD intmductien. J. B. Lippincott Company, 1963. For a more lndepth understanding of social work and other lprefessions in the early twentieth century a study of Magali Sarfatti Larson. : - - : -- . . . . : . University of California Press, 1977. 61 for objective analysis, social workers, longing for recognition as truly professional persons, were generally little inclined to engage themselves with issues of class, race, social power, and property. Social workers generally, in whatever era, did indeed so strongly reflect a prevailing middle-class ethos that only a few rare souls in any generation were able to transcend its limitations and bias.7 Black social workers were not afforded such luxuries as the ones mentioned above. This set apart middle class white social workers from that of the black social work movement. Early white social work activities sought to assimilate the recent white immigrant populace into mainstream American society. The numerous immigrants who poured into northern urban cities underscored the need for white social workers. White social workers dealt with class and gender issues but they were reluctant to add the question of race to their agendas. Unlike white social workers black social workers were always aware of the race question in all their efforts. Black social workers were at times consumed by the constant reminder of racial 7Jacob Fisher In: . ' . . Massachusetts: G. K. Hall & Co., 0. XII-xiii, foreword written by Clarke Chambers, 1980. 62 injustices.8 Though black social workers were agents of a black middle class ideology they could not escape the insults of a Jim Crow society. Historian Kevin Gaines contends that to continue to refer to all African American professionals as middle class “introduces a false universal standard for class formation . . .”9 Perhaps black social workers better understood the importance of what Gaines argues as a “moral economy” that existed at the core of black racial uplift ideology.10 Therefore African American accomplishments must be understood through the lens of a class system that existed within the American caste system--racism. Moreover the black middle class does not 8Elisabath Lasch-Quinn, z. . : AmoncanfiettlomomtloosudoyomontJEEQJRE. Chapel Hill and London: The University of North Carolina Press,1993. Lasch-Ouinn argues that white settlement house workers were not willing to open their settlements up to southern migrant blacks and when they did it was only on limited bases. Even such noted referrnars as the Abbot sisters, Jane Adams, and Breckinridge subscribed to the laws of Jim Crow. Judith Trolander‘s work,‘ = - - z - ~- W New York: Columbia University Press, 1987, p. 93- 95. Trolander opens this chapter with a brief discussion of the settlement house movement before the 19403 following World War II. Chapter 5, “Blacks, Equal Rights, and Integration”, p.93-117. “Kevin K- Gaines. mummmmwmmnum Wm. Chapel Hill and London: The University of North Carolina Press, 1996, p.14. ”lbid., p. 13-17. 63 mirror that of the larger white society in the early twentieth century. The migration of European immigrants continued to swell into the opening of the 20th century and until 1914, when Europe exploded with the First World War. From the opening of war in Europe until its demise in 1918 European immigrants were no longer immigrating into the United States as they had prior to the War. European immigrants totaled 1,218,480 in 1914. The United States entered the war in 1917. According to the United States census by the last year of the war in 1918 European immigration totalled just over 110,000.11 As a result of this decrease in European immigration numerous northern urban cities in the United States began to attract southern black migrants during the interwar years. Black southerners began their northward trek with the outbreak of the war in Europe and continued this pattern of movement well after the war had come to a close. "WWW. Bicentennial Edition, Partl, U. S. Department of Commerce, p 105. Also see Florette Henri, Black . Garden City, New York: Anchor Books, 1976, 49-53. 64 Northern white settlement houses opposed embracing southern black newcomers into their established settlement homes.12 When white settlement homes did address the needs of African Americans they were careful not to integrate the activities with those of the white home dwellers. Historian Michael Katz contends that though Jane Addams, Edith Abbott, Sophonisba Breckenridge, and Florence Kelley are viewed as the left wing of the settlement house movement “no differences separated them from their more openly racist colleagues in the settlement movement.”13 They simply refused to “integrate their settlement houses. Even when the racial composition of their neighborhoods changed, most settlements remained white islands. . .” further claiming that “the handful of settlements opened to serve blacks were always few, always separate, and always unequal.”14 iflash-Quinn, mm, and Ruth Hutchinson Crocker, W W. and also Judith Ann Trolander WWW ' Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1975. 13Michael B. Katz. . - America. Basic Books, 1986, p. 177. 1‘llbid. 65 Florette Henri’s work B_Lac|s_Mig_rarj_o_n makes clear that black people had been moving in America from colonial times onward “looking for freedom and opportunity”. Black Americans were no different than other peoples, “they shared in the general American pattern of mobility”. The first major migration to the North by southern Blacks peeked between 1916-1918. Coupled with the war time efforts there were four major themes that were peculiar to black migrants: 1. low wages in the South 2. bad treatment by whites 3. injustices and evils of tenant farming 4. more dissatisfaction than formerly.15 However black southern migrants began arriving in the North as a result of industry’s demand for labor as early as 1914. World War | spurred the migration of African Americans from the American south at its greatest in the history of the United States. The demand for southern black labor came as a result of war time sanctions placed upon European immigration. Between 1915 and 1925, thousands of rural southern black people left family, friends, and extended families in the South to head for 15HeInri. W. 53. 66 what was considered “the Promised Land”, the North.16 There are numerous reasons that black people quit the South to live in the North. Between 1865-1914 Black southerners migrated in small numbers to the North in comparison to the years during and after the First World War. This migration pattern into the American north and northeast seemingly offered greater hope than previous migration patterns, particularly opposed to the southern black exodusters from the deep South who left for Kansas and Oklahoma during the 1880s and 1890s.” Migration appeared very enticing at a time when the plight of black life throughout most of the South was dismal at best. By 1915 the boll-weevil had already made its way through the South destroying its main staple crop, cotton. The boll-weevil infestation started in Mexico and 1liSee Joe William Trotter, Jr., editor W - - - .Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1991. Two of the more prominent regional works on “black migration’ are Peter Gottlieb W W. Urbana and Chicago. University of Illinois Press, 1987 and James R. Grossman. .z. . ' .. - - Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1989. Richard Sherman, ed. The Negrcamuhegity. Prentice-Hall, Inc. 1970 and James Weldon Johnson. Black Manhattan, New York: Arno Press, 1930. "See Nell Irvin Painter. WWW Becenetructien. Lawrence, Kansas: University of Kansas, 1986. 67 quickly spread to the United States often destroying entire fields of cotton and often farm animals.18 Coupled with the insect destruction of the lower South, mechanization established its own new forms of economic marginalization for Blacks throughout practically all of the southern United States. Sociologist Carole Marks concludes that with new technology, “many jobs were redefined and the stigma attached to them eroded”. Marks further states that in numerous communities throughout the South newspaper editorials continually demanded that available jobs be given to whites first. One black migrant lamented, “The whites done taken all our men’s jobs, they are street workers, scavengers, dump fillers, and everything. All white men got the jobs around the city hall that colored use to have.” He concluded “back to the cotton fields, city jobs are for white folks.”19 Many skilled blacks had already been displaced by the end of the Civil War and 18Sherman. IhLNmmJnthLQin Pp 643 and Carola Marks Bennett: Winn lndiana University Press 1989 19Carole Marks, “The Social and Economic Life of Southern Blacks During the Migration", ' 2 - . : Alferdteen Harrison, Jackson and London: University Press of Missisfippi, 1991, p. 40- 41. 68 by the turn of the twentieth century agrarian and unskilled blacks were under ever increasing competition from whites.20 Numerous northern industries took advantage of this opportunity to play upon the sentiments that existed among the south’s black population. Many industries began sending agents into the South to recruit black southerners. Newspapers became one of the greatest advocates of black migration soliciting ads such as “Why should the Negro stay in the south? West Indians live North”. Ihe__ericagc_D_eien_der was known as the herald of glad tidings to many southern Blacks. Letters from friends and relatives that were already in the North became another source of advocacy for others to come North. One sister living in Chicago wrote to another sister in the South, My dear sister: I was agreeably surprised to hear from you and to hear from home. I am well and thankful to say I am doing well. The weather and everything else was a surprise to me when I came . . . Tell your husband work is plentiful here and he won’t have to loaf if he want to work . . . I will send you a paper as soon as one come along they send out extras 20lbid., p. 41 -42. 69 two or three times a day.21 Accessible railway lines provided easy access for Blacks to move North. Railroads proliferated immediately following the Civil War and by the turn of the twentieth century they were the predominant form of transportation in the migration. Recent scholarship has revealed specific black southern migration patterns from regions and/or states, into distinct areas of the North. Because of the direct railroad lines, Chicago became the home of black southerners from Mississippi, Arkansas, Alabama, Louisiana, and Texas. The black population of New York increased due to black migrants from North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, Georgia, and Alabama; with North Carolina contributing 20 percent of the total population. There were three definite patterns of migration for the southern black population. According to the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders 1968, those patterns were north 21Shen'nan, pp. 6-13. For a discussion of the thcagepeiender the most note newspaper in the country at the time for leading black southerners to the north- particularly Chicago» refer to James R. Grossman. Land_ef_i:iepe;_Cnicagc,_Biacir WWW- Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1989. See also, Darlene Clark Hine, “Black Migration to the Urban Midwest: The Gender Dimension 1915-1945”. WWW DimeneieneeLBacefilmdfiender. Edited by Joe William Trotter, Jr. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1991, p. 127-146. 70 along the Atlantic Seaboard toward Boston, from Mississippi toward Chicago, and west from Texas and Louisiana toward California.22 The United States Department of CommerCe reported in 1935 that New York, Chicago, and Philadelphia had the largest black populations of northern cities due to the migration. Between the years 1910 to 1920 the black population increased in New York from 91,709 to 152,467; Chicago from 44,103 to 109,453; and Philadelphia 84,459 to 134,229. Since New York stood out as a black metropolis more and more blacks sought to find their way to this cultural center. By 1910-11 many large northern cities began to adopt well defined lines of discrimination and segregation. In New York City white property owners adopted restrictive covenants. Blacks experienced overcrowding in their housing conditions as a result of this act of discrimination.23(See Appendix C and D) 22Sherman, pp. 6-14. 23Oscar Handlin, II : z ' ' . ' ' Metrceclie. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1959. There are any number of major publications that have addressed the concerns of restrictive covenant? Hollis R Lynch WM 1911. New York: Crowell, 1972. Karl E. and Alm F. Taeuber,Negrces_in_Qi1iee, 71 In February of 1911 New York white homeowners adopted and signed restrictive housing covenants. The covenant restrictions were a contractual agreement between white residential homeowners, that they could not sell nor lease property to Blacks. When the 1917 Supreme Court case of W was decided national newspaper headlines announced support in favor of the Supreme Court decision to uphold the covenants as constitutional. On November 6, 1917 the W reported the following news: “Race Segregation Invalid . . .” further proclaiming that “Compulsory separation of the negro and white races in residential districts was a violation of the Constitution, the Supreme Court held in a unamious opinion declaring invalid . . ."24 The Supreme Court’s ruling was “City ordinances that segregate neighborhoods by restricting some blocks to white residents only and other blocks to black residents only violate the Fourteenth Amendment 1965. Clement E. Vose, 6 : .Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1 959. 24"Race Segregation Is in Violation of Federal Constitution, U. S. Supreme Court Holds”, Wee, November 6, 1917, p. 18, col. 1. 72 guarantee of due process.”25 Despite the Supreme Court’s decision in 1917 that ruled the covenants as unconstitutional and in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1926 the high court ruled in Ccrrjgan v, Buckley that the covenants were constitutional. White homeowners were able to win this victory because of their adoption of private agreements not to sell or rent their homes to non whites following the 1917 case. In 1926 the Supreme Court stated the following: Civil rights are not protected by the Fifth, Thirteenth, or Fourteenth Amendments against the discriminatory actions of private individuals. Therefore there is no constitutional protection for individuals who have been discriminated against by private restrictive covenants, under which residents of one race living in a neighborhood agree among themselves not to sell or rent their homes to members of another race.26 In short the courts granted white homeowners the right to 2590th Biskupic and Elder Witt. WW Sueremegcurt, Second Edition, Washington, D. 0.: Congressional Quarterly, p. 898, 1996. 26W. p- 900- 73 restrict African Americans from all white neighborhoods.27 Many northern cities experienced an increased black migrant population and this demographic transformation became a major concern for early social workers. In addition to the mounting concerns about the human condition in northern urban cities-~social workers urgently desired increased professionalization. This desire for professionalization by social workers was prompted by the growing needs of a society that was rapidly becoming more diversified. Black social workers simultaneously aspired for the same levels of professional development as their white counterparts. By virtue of the tumultuous nature of the early twentieth century-- social workers were faced with the dual challenge of adjusting their tactics to meet the growing needs of a black migrant population, and establishing themselves as professionals. It proved to be a time of rapid change. This period has often been referred to as the “Roaring Twenties”, or the Progressive Era. Aside from being depicted as the age of 27W p. 898, 1996. See also Clement E. Vose. stezn 3.l‘.1ll II: I :=II I I II: I.. ’ atIIII~ Earl“: II :=II Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1967. 74 progress, it is recorded as the age of great turmoil. Numerous race riots developed in urban cities across the nation early on in the twentieth century. To be sure, the race riots of the 1910s had set the social tone for race relations and by the 19205 undo tensions for most black urban dwellers were an established social reality. Many northern urban cities erupted in racial chaos by the turn of the twentieth century. Springfield, Illinois, 1908; East St. Louis, Illinois, 1917; Chicago, 1919; and Tulsa, Oklahoma by 1921 were some of the places that experienced this growing racial discord.28 Ultimately, the duties of black social workers and the aims of the NUL included evaluating and reviewing settlement houses, in addition to other specific concerns of migrating Blacks. Black social workers dealt with employment bureaus for both juveniles and adults. They also helped negotiate 23$ee Elliott M Rudwick.Ba99_Bi9LaLEasLSL_L9.uI§._ILulL2._l911 Carbondale Illinois. Southern Illinois University Press, 1964. William Tuttle, mm W, New York: Atheneum, 1970. Scott Ellsworth, Deamjruhe WWW, Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Prose. 1982 Roberta Senechal WW 1908., Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1990. In addition see, Wanda Ann Hendricks, “The Politics of Race: Black Women in Illinois, 1890-1920' (Ph. D. Diss., Purdue University, 1990), chapter six: “Doing Her Level Best to Make the World Better: 1916-1920', p. 190-224. 75 contracts for black workers. They placed personnel workers in industrial plants and generally tried to increase the level of black employment. Because of the low socioeconomic conditions of many of the migrants most were ill prepared for descent lives in the North. Therefore black social workers also paid attention to health care concerns and provided guidance in home economics to families that needed assistance in arranging budgets and preparing nutritious food. Jones and most black social workers found these duties time consuming and often exhausfing. When Jones arrived in New York City in 1911 to accept the position of field secretary of the League on Urban Conditions among Negroes, renamed National Urban League(NUL) in 1920, little did he know that soon his energies would be engaged on several fronts. He became an advocate for black migrants and he also sought to legitimize the black social worker’s role as a recognized professional. His first major undertaking was to assess the conditions of black life in the inner city of New York and submit a written report describing its status to the NUL officials. As a result of that first assessment Jones and George 76 E. Haynes presented the following principles as the basis for the foundation of the NUL. 1. To bring about coordination and cooperation among existing agencies and organizations for improving the industrial, economic and social conditions of Negroes and to develop other agencies and organizations, where necessary. 2. To secure and train Negro social workers. 3. To make studies of the industrial, economic and social conditions among Negroes. 4. To promote, encourage, assist and engage in any and all kinds of work for improving the industrial, economic and social conditions among Negroes.29 In Jones’ task of assisting new migrants with their acclimation to the urban environment several duties were essential. He often met new arrivals at the train depot, then assisted them in finding housing and employment. Jones also met with personnel in industry and business to discuss expanded employment opportunities. Many companies were only willing to hire Blacks for menial jobs. Black migrants were often hired as strikebreakers. 29Eugene Kinckle Jones, “Social Work Among Negroes,“ IheAmaleeiJhe WWW. Vol. CXL. November. 1928. P- 287- 77 Recognizing the shortage of laborers and time, Jones and other black social workers set out to convince white social workers of the need to address the race question. By 1921, Jones had begun working to affect a unification of the mission of black and white social workers. In an article cited previously from the Meeeenger in 1921, Jones argued: As soon as possible efforts should be made to prevent the organization of movements to care only for colored people. Where possible, white organizations should be induced to include Negroes in their programs of and to employ colored workers to handle their cases. This statement illuminates part of Jones’ mission as a social worker. The plan of action that Jones devised for black social workers to some degree defied the meaning of professions. According to Magali Larson’s model in Ihe_Brs_e_ci Wives. (1977) Professionals were to prosper economically through their clients. In this instance, black social workers were fighting an enormous uphill battle. Their clients were usually those who had not prospered economically in society. The National Conference of Social Work began to address the issues facing “Negro” clientele at its 78 1923 meeting. During this meeting a social worker “pointed out that one rarely finds white people even in an audience of social workers, with their efforts to put themselves in the other fellow’s place.” Social work scholar David Fogel concluded that “before a caseworker could identify with a client he would have to be adequately aware of the real problems affecting his ”30 client. White social workers discovered in 1923 what many black social workers were already aware of as social work practitioners. Early on during his brief tenure, as a cofounder and first Executive Director of the NUL, George Edmund Haynes made some initial attempts to create professional training schools for black social workers in the South. Shortly after Haynes helped to establish the NUL in 191031 he left for Nashville, Tennessee to join the faculty at Fisk University that same year. Haynes participated in the founding of the NUL when he was present at the initial meeting with Frances A. Kellor and Ruth Standish 30David Fogel, “Social Work and Negroes“, Ehylcn, Vol. 18, p.281., 1957. 31 For a complete study of the founding the Nation Urban League, Nancy J. Weiss, W. New York: Oxford University Press, 1974. 79 Baldwin. Baldwin went on to become the major benefactor of the League. Her husband William H. Baldwin had recently died 32 and she was left with an enormous financial estate. Social work scholar Iris Carlton-LaNey found that Haynes believed “that securing and training African American social workers for service in urban communities was the most pressing need of the newly established National League on Urban Conditions Among Negroes (NUL).”33 Soon after arriving at Fisk Haynes established the first social work training department in the country for African Americans. Haynes established the Social Science Department at Fisk. He insisted on a core curriculum for social work training at Fisk. The courses included: ‘Elementary Economics’: Principles and Organization; ‘Advanced Economics’: Economics and Labor Problems; ‘Sociology and Social Problems’; ‘History of the Negro in America’ and ‘the Negro Problem’. Haynes believed 3"Nancy J- Weiss, W. New York: Oxford University Press, 1974. For the specifics of the establishment of the League see chapters II & III of Weiss’ study. 33lris Carlton-LaNey, “Training African-American Social Workers Through the NUL Fellowship Program”. MAW Vol. XXI. No.1. March, 1994, p. 43. 80 that in order to understand and improve the social conditions of black people, an understanding of black history was required}34 Social work historian, Clarke Chambers concluded that the first three decades of the twentieth century were the ‘seedtime of reform”. Chambers concludes that the period from 1918 to 1933 was an era when social reformers were largely dealing with trial and errors.35 Between the end of World War I and New Deal politics, social reformers reacted to events rather than taking preventive actions. Social work activity was still loyal to the community chest concept which offered more temporary relief than permanent solutions. “Theoretically settlements still functioned as organizers for their neighborhoods.”36 In addition to Haynes’ efforts black social workers were 34lbid., pp. 44-45. 35Clarke A. Chambers, = z ' ‘ ' ' ‘ : ' W. Minneapolis. UniversIty of Minnesota Press, 1963. Chambers is considered the most senior social work historian in the United States. He laid the major groundwork discourse on the history of social work with such other major works as Ihe MW. editor. 1965 and EauLUJSellognAnthe WM. 1971 These works will be discussed in more detail within Chapter III. In spite of this contribution Chambers’ works comes short of including the role of black people in this history. “Judith Ann Trolander. WWW. Detroit: Wayne State University, 1975, p. 15. 81 engaging in several other activities to accomplish their goals of becoming professionals. During the early twentieth century black social workers initiated numerous activities to establish themselves as noted professionals. In 1915 the first black social work organization was established in New York City, the Social Workers’ Club. Jones as President of the Social Workers’ Club wrote to Dr. W. E. B. DuBois in 1918 inviting him to join. DuBois wrote back to Jones on April 10, 1918 stating that he would be “glad to join the Social Workers’ Club, but I am afraid that I shall not often have the pleasure of attending n37 meetings. By 1918 the organization boasted a roaster of eighty members and proclaimed as its object: “To furnish means of friendly intercourse between members of the profession.” It is interesting to note that most persons who considered themselves social workers were not necessarily trained in the traditional social work manner. Accompanying Jones as officers of the social workers’ club in 1918 were Mrs. C. L. Anderson, Vice-President; Miss Carita V. Owens, Secretary; and Mrs. Adah 37April 10, 1918 from DuBois to Eugene Kinckle Jones. National Urban League Papers, Miscellaneous Items, Library of Congress, Washington,D. C. 82 B. Thorns, Treasurer who was a noted leader of the black nursing 38 profession. Black social workers in general were very involved in the process of professionalization of social work though oftentimes mainstream social work histories do not reveal their participation. Robenia Baker Gary and Lawrence E. Gary, social work scholars, reveal that black social workers were busy creating similar kinds of activities as those of their white counterparts. They too participated in such activities as, demonstration to the public that everybody ‘with love in his heart’ could not do social work in a professional manner; identification of knowledge and skills necessary for the practice of social work; the establishment of schools for the training of social workers; the development of professional organizations; the publication of major books dealing with social work theory and practice; the development of professional journals; and an identification of values shared by social 38April 5, 1918 to Dr. W. E. B. DuBois from Eugene Kinckle Jones, President of the Social Workers’ Club. National Urban League Papers, Miscellaneous Items, Library of Congress, Washington, D. C. For a further study of Mrs. Adah B. Thoms a founding member of the National Association of Colored Graduate Nurses, look to Adah B. Thoms’, , - ' - - - - -:-. NewYork: Kay Printing House, 1929 and Darlene Clark Hine’ s, W MW. Bloomington and IndianapoliSI Indiana University Press, 1989. 83 workers.39 Most black social workers received their training at black colleges at the start of the twentieth century. The program at Fisk served as the only undergraduate program in the country during the first three decades of the twentieth century that catered to black people. However by the mid-1920s there were . two southern black institutions that had established graduate training for black social workers, Atlanta University School of Social Work program organized in 1920 and the Bishop Tuttle School at Raleigh, North Carolina was established in 1925.40 Fisk University was established in 1865 at Nashville, Tennessee. It was soon to become the darling of the American Missionary Association. The University was named for General Clinton 8. Fisk, assistant commissioner of the Freedmen’s Bureau of Tennessee and Kentucky. In honor of General Fisk’s generous donations and loyal support to the institution during its infancy, the school was named for him. W. E. B. DuBois 39Robenia Baker Gary and Lawrence E. Gary, “The History of Social Work Education for Black People 1900-1930’, WW, Vol. XXI, No.1, March, 1994, pp. 67-70. 4°Ibld., p. 74. 84 remarked many years later, “the aim in founding Fisk and similar schools... was to maintain the standards of lower training by giving leaders and teachers the best possible instruction, and more important, to furnish blacks with adequate standards of human culture and lofty ideals of life.” Geographically Fisk served as a convenient geographical location for the training needs of black social workers, north and south.41 Eugene K. Jones is largely responsible for the first successful approach to solving the problem of providing professional training to black social workers. The training institutes that were established were all at white educational institutions.42 Jones’ first step at assisting with the black social workers plight therefore was to broaden educational opportunity. Jones sought to educate a pool of trained black MJoe M. Richardson. W946 Alabama: The University of Alabama Press, 1980, p. 1-12. See also Eloise Turner Welch, “The Background and Development of the American Missionary Association’s Decision to Educate Freedman in the South, With Subsequent Repercussions“ (Ph. D. Diss., Bryn Mawr College, 1976), p. 93-146. See also, Stanley H. Smith, “Sociological Research and Fisk University: A Case Study“, WW Eerspectixes, editors, James E. Blackwell and Morris Janowitz. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press,1974, p. 164-190. 42Weiss, p. 33-34. 85 social workers by providing fellowships for young black college graduates or persons who at least expressed a definite interest. Throughout the Qcpcrtunjjy, the NUL’s magazine designed in 1923 to promote literary and other concerns of the NUL and the black community at large, advertisements encouraged interested persons to take advantage of the fellowship offerings. In Jones’ annual report of the accomplishments of the NUL for 1922, he wrote specifically of the training of black social workers. At the close of the school year 1921-22, he stated that two of the NUL’s fellows had completed their training at New York School of Social Work and the Carnegie School of Technology at Pittsburgh. The two individuals in question 'found employment, one in family casework in Minneapolis and the other with a branch of the YWCA, respective. In 1910, when Jones began working with the NUL, securing social work fellowships were already being considered as an integral part of its overall mission. This was at a time when social service programs were practically unknown to black people, and there were few black workers to carry out these programs. Haynes was responsible for bringing this idea of 86 training black social workers to the NUL at its inception. Soon after Jones joined its staff, the NUL incorporated its first plan that would allow for two fellowships to be offered at New York School of Social Work. A generous grant from the Carnegie - Foundation in 1923 expanded the system to include such institutions as the Graduate School of Social Administration of the University of Chicago, Carnegie School of Technology of the University of Pittsburgh, Simmons College of Boston, and the Pennsylvania School of Social Work at Philadelphia.43 Whether these schools all made the level of commitment as the New York School of Social Work remains problematic. The New York School of Social Work first offered classes in the summer of 1898 and by the 1920s was the most well established program of graduate studies offering the one year advanced degree in social work. In addition to the fellowships, the NUL took on the responsibility of field training individuals in the problems of health care concerns, housing, industry and 43W. May. 1923. 9.4 87 4 recreation.4 Usually after three to six months, they were placed in responsible positions. Jones and the NUL felt that the field training underscored the value of special training for social workers and contributed to professionalizing the occupation as well. There was one southern black school that took an active role in the training of black social workers starting in 1910. Immediately upon Haynes’ arrival at Fisk University in 1910 he implemented a program to address black social work. According to Joe M. Richardson, “Under the leadership of Haynes and [President] McKenzie many new'friends were enlisted in the cause of social betterment of Nashville.” However by 1920 Atlanta University’s School of Social Work was established to train graduate students in social work. Fisk University had the only well established school of social work training for blacks, offering the baccalaureate degree. According to Dr. Francis Kornegay, retired Executive Director of the Detroit Urban “Elizabeth G. Meier. W- New York: Columbia University Press, 1954, p.3-9. While Meier's work is considered a very comprehensive history of the New York School of Social Work it does not offer anything in light of the training of black social workers. For an understanding of NY School of Social Work and its disposition a study of the Qancrtenity and its annual reports which were done by Jones proves to be revealing. 88 League, Atlanta University’s graduate program taught only a few courses in sociology at this time. Haynes assumed his position at Fisk full time in 1916 making it the only program in the country at the time for African Americans. Jones was then appointed Executive Secretary of the NUL. Jones and Haynes worked endlessly to keep a pool of students enrolled in the department at Fisk to eventually do the duties of social work both North and South.45 By 1923 a small pool of black social workers had been trained under the auspices of Jones and the NUL. This body began immediately to combat the exclusionary and discriminatory practices of the larger society of white social work activities. The National Conference of Social Workers 45Richardson, W, p. 64, 75 and Francis Kornegay, Ph. 0., recorded interview in the possession of this researcher. Dr. Komegay provided recollections of Eugene K. Jones. Jones was still alive when he first join the Detroit branch of the Urban League--he was a friend of Mr. Jones. Nancy J. Weiss, Ine_uaticnal WW. Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1970. For a more indepth study of George Edmund Haynes' role in the professionalization process of black social workers look to Daniel Perlman’s dissertation “Stirring the White Conscience: The Life of George Edmund Haynes“ (Ph. D. Diss., New York University,1972), p. 83-123. Chapter IV gives a very detailed and comprehensive study of Haynes’ involvement with Fisk University and the National Urban League, entitled “Between Nashville and New York“. See also, Butler A. Jones, “The Tradition of Sociology Teaching in Black Colleges: The Unheralded Professionals". Wooten W editors, James E. Blackwell and Morris Janowitz. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press,1974, p.121-163. 89 (NCSW) was the umbrella organization that supposedly brought all social workers together annually. In 1923 the NCSW convened in Washington, D. C. According to the Qppcrrurriry editorial there were six thousand delegates in attendance and seventy-five blacks were present for this annual meeting. This meeting reportedly gave attention to the “Negro Problems”. Among the black speakers during the meeting were Jones, Mrs. Gertrude McDougald, R. R. Moton, and Charles S. Johnson. Jones delivered a paper entitled, “The Negro’s Struggle for Health”. He discussed the “Negroes” ability to combat certain types of diseases during slavery because they had come from the tropical zones of Africa. Jones stressed grave concern over whether the “Negro” would be able to withstand or survive the diseases that invaded the crowded slums of northern cities. The health of African Americans was a subject Jones had long been interested in, his first writings on this are found in his correspondence with DuBois while a student at Cornell.46 In spite of this grave “February 5, 1908. From Jones to Prof. W. E. B. DuBois, Atlanta University, Atlanta, Georgia. The Papers of W. E. B. DuBois, 1877-1963, Reel 2, Frame 287, Microfilm version, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. In this particular letter Jones writes to DuBois inquiring about some statistical information on the health of the American “Negro“. 90 concern Jones expressed bewilderment over the growing educational facilities throughout the South and that consequently blacks were still migrating North “within the zone of better living conditions”.47 Although conditions were growing worse in the north Jones felt that the north offered African Americans greater opportunities. There were several issues which were addressed at the conference in 1923 concerning the “Negro” question. The question of black people’s health, special problems of vocational guidance for black children, and the role of public opinion and relations were stressed. Jones was a member of the section on Public Opinion of the NCSW, and played a major role in planning the program. The disappointment of this conference meeting for black social workers was the realization that once again no black person would be elected to its executive board. There were some conference officials who expressed an interest in electing a black social worker to the executive board. This faction of the conference was viewed as the radicals. Black 47Qcper1unity, May, 1923, p. 31. Eugene Kinckle Jones, 'l’he Negro’s Struggle for Health”, ' ..z . z. I . I., Washington, D. C, 1923, 68- 72. 91 social workers were hoping that Washington, D. C. would be the conference site to secure this feat. Two black social workers were nominated by the Nominating Committee. In the and, the vote was defeated and the efforts of those who had worked for its victory were not to be according to the Qppcriermy, May, 1923. Jones was elected to the position of Treasurer at the 1925 meeting in Cleveland, Ohio. That meeting was also marked by black social workers disapproval of a southern city for the 1926 meeting. They objected to Chattanooga, Tennessee because not all delegates would be guaranteed the same privileges and accommodations. Therefore, Chattanooga, Tennessee was forced out of the bid, giving way to Des Moines, Iowa, for the upcoming meeting. It can be assumed that the highly visible African Americans who were serving in positions of power were influential in the decision. In 1925, Jones was elected to the Executive Committee of the Conference and Jesse O. Thomas, Forrester B. Washington, George E. Haynes and Charles S. Johnson were elected as members of their division 92 committees.48 Jones’ crusading qualities for black social workers makes him one of the prominent social workers in America. Jones was the first African American elected to the executive committee of the NCSW in 1925. In the mid-1920s, the NUL had began conducting investigations of the African American living conditions in urban centers. This kept with the recently adopted scientific approaches that were adopted by the NCSW.49 Jones continued to address the ‘Problem of the Negro’ throughout the 1920s. The NCSW provided a national and integrated audience for discussing the issue and how black social workers could address the ‘problem’. Jones became a regular speaker at the NCSW meetings. At the 1928 NCSW meeting in Memphis, Jones gave a paper on “Some Fundamental Factors in Regard to the Health of the Negro“;0 and at the 1929 San Francisco meeting he 43W, July, 1926, p. 230. 49Harvard Sitkoff, . k z . New York: Oxford University Press 1978, p. 24. 5°Eugene Kinckle Jones, “Some Fundamental Factors In Regard to the Health of theNagro", ‘ .z - _ :_ -- ._ .:-, meeting, 1928, p. 176-178. 93 ”51 spoke on “The Negro in Community Life. Jones viewed himself along with other black social workers involved with the NCSW “as messengers of good will from the colored people in an effort to improve interracial relationships.” By the late 1920s, the NUL expressed that there had been “progress . . . in the field 9:52 of social work for Negroes , undoubtly due to Jones and his colleagues crusading efforts. Housing problems were of major concern to Jones and many of the local branches of the NUL in the decade of the 1920s. Black migration from the South to the North was perhaps at its greatest then and created major housing problems for the New York City Urban League Branch and other northern urban cities. The NUL complained to the Governor of New York that the “Negro population was receiving less consideration than any other group."53 In 1926 the NUL began its ‘Better 51 Eugene Kinckle Jones, “The Negro in Community Life“ Emceedinchthe W. San Fransico meeting. 1929 P- 333 52Unknown author, “Social Service Progress in 1926’, National Urban League Papers, The Collections of the Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, p. 1. 53lbid., p. 1. 94 Housing’ campaign. The NUL sought the support of Mr. John D. Rockefeller, Jr. during its campaign efforts and eventually convinced him to purchase “a whole block in north Harlem”. Good housing facilities was the main concern of this campaign effort. The campaign sparked interest within the NUL branches across the United States: Milwaukee; Detroit; Kansas City, Missouri; Los Angeles: Philadelphia; St. Louis; Louisville; and Columbus, Ohio; are but a few of the cities that were mentioned in a 1926 written report from the NUL. The efforts of the NUL in New York City were believed by its supporters to eventually “have a direct effect on Negro housing in cities throughout America and on the consideration given the Negro population in social reform.”5 4 By 1926, Jones had achieved considerable recognition outside the social work profession. Mayor James E. Walker of New York appointed 500 representatives to serve as his non- partisan committee to survey the city and plan for its future needs. Of the 500 representatives involved, eleven were black man. According to the Qcpcrjemje, July, 1926 in addition to 54Ibid., p. 1. 95 Jones, W. E. B. DuBois, James Weldon Johnson, Ferdinand Q. Moton, and John E. Nail were the prominent Blacks involved. Jones’ reputation by 1928 had reached international proportions. He proclaimed, “In 1928 I attended the International Conference of Social Work in Paris as an American delegate; also the International Conference on Human Relations in Industry at Girton College, Cambridge, England . . . Jones also stated, “I believe very strongly that most of the acts of man are influenced by his economic outlook on life.”55 Throughout the decade of the 1920s, black people had begun to feel the sting of economic devastation in spite of their northward trek long before the Great Crash of 1929. Jones had already begun to assist in their economic outlook. Through an all out assault on unjust woes, brought on by the larger society, Jones worked diligently to have them overturned.56 Jones and black social workers were always aware of the race question in all their efforts. White social workers no doubt dealt with class and gender but they were reluctant to add the question of 55’Abridged Autobiography“ 55Ibid. 96 race to their agendas. Black social workers were at times constantly reminded of racial injustices. They experienced racial slights on a daily basis. This point has recently been put forth by historian Elisabeth Lasch-Quinn. Lasch-Quinn argues that perhaps the greatest failure of the American settlement house reform movement occurred at the crucial juncture of race.57 Historian Michael Katz argues that [even] “the more liberal settlement leaders advocated economic and political equality, but not social equality.”58 In other words most white settlements house workers did not support racial integration of their missions. It was at this crucial juncture that the greatest need for black social work and workers found unwavering support through numerous advocates. Jones is an example of the tenacity that black social workers brought to their jobs in confronting the social woes of the black community. His support base was secured through a cadre of well trained individuals both, black and white, representing numerous fields of training. Jones 57Lasoh-Ouinn. Wishbone. 58Kat2. Woun- P-177- 97 stated late in his life: “I have always cultivated the friendship of Negro and white persons in key positions wherever it was my good fortune to meet them; and many educators, statesman, religious leaders, businessmen, and social workers have aided the cause I have espoused.” During the decade of the 1920s Jones was able to align himself with certain individuals. Though his achievements were numerous it was a decade that was ripe with conflict and cooperation. In spite of many accomplishments perhaps the greatest challenge to Jones the NUL and black social work remained before them as they sought to define the meaning of professionalism and to build an institution of agency. Chapter 3 AN ERA OF NATIONAL CONFLICT AND COOPERATION The opportunity for statesmanship service to humanity is ours. The obligation is ours. We cannot pass on to posterity the responsibility for work which we should assume. The challenge of democracy is before us. The Negro is probably the real test of democracy in America.1 Eugene Kinckle Jones, 1925 The decades of the 1920s and 30s proved to be busy for Jones, his schedule of events and duties kept him quite mobile. As the national spokesperson for the NUL Jones found his duties ever expanding. The 1920s was a decade of constantly changing climates--politically, socially and economically for African Americans throughout American society. In spite of the major cultural awakening in Black America through the Harlem Renaissance during the 1920s many African Americans found their economic and political status nonexistent. Though many African Americans migrated from the oppressive South they found racial discrimination in housing, jobs, and education 1Eugene Kinckle Jones, “Negro Migration in New York State”, Qppcrtunlty, January 1926. Originally delivered at the New York State Conference of Charities and Corrections, Hotel Roosevelt, New York City, Friday, December 11, 1925. 98 99 mounting in the American North by the late 19208. In addition to these changing conditions in 1929 they were hard hit by the Great Depression which deepened their already economic dislocation. In the midst of these economic hard times Jones was always waging a battle to further the goals of the NUL. The task of making sure that the NUL was adequately funded was Jones’ primary responsibility. He was therefore forced to make every use of his available financial and human resources. No doubt this was the greatest challenge of Jones’ career with the NUL. It was a continuing issue as Jones noted in 1940 that many white philanthropist were rather stingy with their financial givings during the economic Depression of the late 1920s and 303. The NUL received some of its operating funds through such noted philanthropist as the Rockefeller Foundation, the Julius Rosenwald Fund and the Carnegie Foundation. Jones expressed to Gunnar Myrdal in 1940 that even those leading philanthropist: . will give small sums to Negro causes seemingly as balm to their consciences. They frequently will give to cue Negro cause only as evidence of their “interest in the Negro” while contributing to as many different white organizations as are represented by phases of social work in which they 100 . are interested.2 The continual need to address the financial concerns of the NUL were mounting long before the 1920s. It was Jones’ task from the time he joined the NUL in 1911 to prove annually the worth of the organization to various philanthropic societies. After his appointment in 1916 as the official Executive Officer of the NUL it became the sole responsibility of the Executive Secretary. As the recently appointed chief executive of the NUL the 1920s engaged Jones’ times and energies directly into, the infant social work profession as well. Coupled with the already demanding duties of the day to day operations of the NUL, Jones’ schedule of appointments and appearances around the country on behalf of the League and its programs were only beginning. This was also the decade that the NUL laid the foundation for its identity amongst prominent American institutions, and Jones more so than any other single individual personified that identity. “The name The National Urban League does not convey to many the purpose of this organization. But when it is known that KINCKLE JONES is its administrative secretary, its identity 2Autobiography, p.3-4. 101 is better recognized.”3 Jones’ conservative nature and no nonsense approach to dealing with the social problems confronting black Americans was often unmatched. It was this identity and image that Jones constantly held before the nation. One scholar contends that most of the NUL’s original mandate had gone unfulfilled during the first decade of its existence. The NUL did not become a viable national organization until the advent of the First World War and the Great Migration.4 Through the appointment of Executive Secretary in 1916 Jones became the personification of the NUL. Jones was able to cultivate the national image of the League through a host of activities. Jones was someone who represented the NUL with a conservative approach. Further he was also soft spoken and nonconfrontational towards the status quo. He quickly became the noted handsome, refined, and skillful leader of the NUL. His activities were some of the following: radio broadcasts; commencement speeches; addresses to local 3W, “Kinckle Jones Report“, Wednesday, April 27, 1 932. 4Weiss, Ihe_NationaLuIban_Leaoue. p- 83-92 102 branches of the NUL; aiding in fact finding ventures such as ‘The Durham Fact-Finding Conference’; the NUL’s committee on race relations which created the “suggested arguments to use in appealing to employers for jobs for Negroes”. He worked also to establish cooperative relations with such philanthropic organizations as The Rockefeller Foundation, the Julius Rosenwald Fund and The Carnegie Foundation. These were but a few of Jones’ many activities in this era of national, conflict and cooperation. Regardless of the occasion Jones always found a way to highlight the most recent accomplishments of the NUL along with the continual need for black social workers. Though Jones continually involved himself with countless social matters his focus remained on social work for and by black people. In the midst of promoting the NUL as a major social work institution in American society he worked on numerous fronts with many leading black and white intellectuals of the era. In the fall of 1920, Jones submitted a most important proposalto the Carnegie Foundation on behalf of the NUL,Ito secure funding for a new project-~the creation of a Department of Research and Investigations of the NUL. This led 103 to Jones’ first encounter with historian Carter G. Woodson. Woodson was the founder of the Association for the Study of Afro American Life and History--(ASALH) in 1915. WOodson and Monroe Work of Tuskegee Institute had submitted to the Carnegie Foundation competing proposals for separate projects. Woodson was soliciting funds for his recently established organization--ASALH, and Monroe Work for the efforts going on at Tuskegee Institute.5 Although Jones, Woodson, and Work were initially unaware of the works of each other--they were promptly informed by Carnegie Officials of each others proposal. Carnegie Foundation officials were hoping to be able to convince the three to agree to some kind of joint venture. James R. Angell, President of the Foundation was aware that “the proposals of Jones and Work were in direct competition with each other. Angell, however felt a compromise could be reached 5Jooquelihe Goggin.QaIIeLG._lIlLoodson.A_L119Jn_Black_lzllsm Baton Rouge and London: Louisiana State University Press, 1993, p. 56. April 16, 1928, Jones to Alfred Stern, Director of the Julius Rosenwald Fund. Julius Rosenwald Fund Archives, Box 306, Folder 9. Amistad Research Center, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana. See also, Darlene Clark Hine, “Carter G. Woodson: White Philanthropy and Negro Historiography“, .I : - - . McMurry, . - . Baton Rouge and London: Louisiana State University Press, 1985. 104 between the two. Though evidence suggest that Jones and Work may have reached an agreement--ironically, Woodson proved to be the hold out. He declined to cooperate with the two on a joint project. There remained a long standing personal distrust in Monroe Work on Woodson’s behalf. Evidence is not conclusive as to the reason for such feuding. However despite Woodson’s often inability to cooperate with others in May of 1921 the year long battle was resolved. The Foundation decided to fund each of the three proposals. Jones received his request from the Carnegie Foundation with no stipulations.6 The funds which were received from the Carnegie Foundation were used to help establish the research division of the NUL. This division of the NUL’s program was devoted to the “Fellows” and the publication “of the Qcpcrtenjjy magazine. Carnegie Foundation awarded Jones and the NUL the amount of 8,000 per year for a period of five and a half years in 1921.7 By 6Goggin, p. 58. 7Alfred Stern to Eugene Kinckle Jones, January 10, 1928, and reply April 16, 1928. Julius Rosenwald Fund Archives, Box 306, Folder 9. Amistad Research Center, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana. Though the letters here are dated for 1928- -after the period that the five and a half year period was up for the Carnegie Foundation award to the NUL it Is clear that this was the reason that Jones began his solicitation of 105 1921 the Fellows programs was well underway and by 1923 Jones had invited Sociologist Charles S. Johnson to head up the Department of Research and Investigations of the NUL. Johnson had recently published his seminal work on the infamous Chicago race riot of 1919 entitled, mm W in 1922. In addition to heading the division he was editor of the Qcpcrteniry from 1923-1928 until he left to chair the Department of Social Science at Fisk University. Johnson’s name became synomous with that of the magazine during this early period of the magazine’s existence. The magazine became the print voice of the League and its activities. During the 1920s and 30s it was a major factor in the literary life of black America. The Harlem Renaissance Movement of the 1920s was a major social and cultural revolution in Black America. This revolution occurred in the form of arts and letters produced by and about African Americans and their lives. Many Harlem Renaissance personalities received their first publishing funds from the Rosenwald Fund to continue to finance the works of the NUL. See also Nancy Weiss. W946 106 opportunities through the W. Through the magazine the NUL promoted the Fellowship programs and many writings and works of Renaissance writers and artists.8 In many ways the Qcpcrtrmjry was more than just a magazine, it was a major journal. The Qcccrrermy was different from the Qrieie in that it sought to promote more labor and socioeconomic concerns. The Qrieje was published by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and DuBois was its editor and chief. The Crieie however was much more radical in content. The ercmmjigr’e only rival was perhaps the Qrieje.9 One of the important consequences of the Carnegie Foundation funding was that it aided in the establishment of the NUL’s Fellowships in social work education. The longing for 8For an indepth study of the Qppcnunity and Its role in the Harlem Renaissance look to David Levering Lewis, Whenflariemflasjnicgue, New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1981, Chapter 7-- “A Jam of a Party”, p. 198-239. Also It is evident from a study of the chcrteniry itself the roles and issues that were promoted through tlIe NUL See also Cary D Wintz W. Houston, Texas: Rice University Press, 1988 and Richard Robbins, “Charles S. Johnson”, 2. - - : .Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1974, p. 56-84. “David Levering Lewis. W New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1993. Also see Nancy J. Weiss, Ineuaticnauirban League._1_9_]_0_-_1_94_Q, particularly chapter 4 entitled, “Progressivism and Racial Reform: The NAACP and the National Urban League”, p. 47-70. 107 professional status and recognition by black social workers was never more intense than during the decade of the 19205. Jones’ efforts and those of the NUL collectively were well thought out and systematically strategized during this process of evolutionary change. While Jones carefully orchestrated procedures through the NUL, his connections to a pool of well- trained black men during the first two decades of the twentieth century helped to further his efforts. Sociologists Charles S. Johnson, Lawrence A. Oxley, Forrester B. Washington, T. Arnold Hill, E. Franklin Frazier and George Edmund Haynes had all studied at some of thefinest schools in the country such as the University of Chicago and Columbia University. Practically all of them were well versed in sociology and social services. Frazier and Washington were but a few of the individuals who gained prominence in the field of social welfare for black people. They owed some credit for their education to the fellowship programs organized by the NUL under Jones’ leadership.10 1tlButler A. Jones, “The Tradition of Sociology Teaching in Black Colleges: The Unheralded Professionals, W and Edythl. Ross, editor, W W. Metuchen, New Jersey & London: The Scarecrow Press, Inc" 1978. 108 Several fellows acquired national prominence following their initial work with the League. Ira D. Reid, E. Franklin Frazier, and Walter B. Chivers devoted the major portion of their careers to the teaching of sociology, and to developing source materials through research. In addition they each also did consulting at black colleges. All three of the aforementioned individuals eventually went on to chair departments of sociology at Atlanta University, Howard University, and Morehouse College in Atlanta, Georgia, respectively. Their labors increased the pool of young black social workers prepared to address the issues of social work on the national level. Much of the work pertaining to black social work education has gone practically unnoticed in general social work histories. A more careful consideration must be given the monumental work done by several individuals, such as E. Franklin Frazier and Charles S. Johnson. Once this greatly needed undertaking has been completed the rightful place. in the development of social work will no doubt be attributed to other obscure individuals.11 11Edyth L. Ross, ed. WW. Metuchen. N. J. & London: The Scarecrow Press, Inc., 1978, p. 423-425. See also, James E. Blackwell and Morris Janowitz. BlacLSccicicgjera. For a complete study of E. Franklin Frazier, Anthony M. Platt, W. New Brunswick and 109 Historian Ruth Hutchinson Crocker contends, “Jane Addams and Hull House have overshadowed the history of the settlement n12 movement in the United States. There were numerous black women available for Jones’ cause who had long since labored hard at relieving the social woes of the black community. For example, Fannie Barrier Williams made substantial progress in Chicago as early as 1904.13 Williams conducted the first successful settlement house in the country for black people in the city of Chicago. Black women contributed greatly to the relief of the human woes suffered by London: Rutgers University Press,1991. For a listing of some of the works compiled by Frazier. W. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1931; BlacLBcurgecisie. Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press, 1957, and Ihe_hlegro_in_the uniterLStates, rev. Ed. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1957. The most provocative work done by Charles S. Johnson. II : . . Bace_Bict_ir1_1_919. New York: Arno Press,1922. When the NUL’s magazine the Cppcrtuhihr was founded Johnson was selected as its editor and remained so from 1923- 28. 12Ruth Hutchinson Crocker. W W. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1992, p. 6. See also, Louise W. Knight, “Jane Addams and the Settlement House Movement", - II :I .z, - . . .Edited by Randall M. Miller and Paul A. Cimbala. Westport, Connecticut and London: Greenwood Press, 1996. 13Fannie Barrier Williams, “Social Bonds in the “Black Belt" of Chicago. Negro Organizations and the New Spirit Pervading Them“, Charities, Vol. 15, No. 1, 1905, p. 40-44 See also Anne Meis KrIIIpter. WWWM A'll II'I'I'-II3 I .ll- . I A.“ l- '- I Il'0'l- 3| I I 5" New York and London: New York University Press, 1996. 110 black urban people. To be sure, black women made great contributions to the knowledge base that influenced succeeding generations of sociologists. Carlton-LaNey asserts that Elizabeth Ross Haynes was “an African American reformer of womanish consciousness”, who’s professional life spanned from 1908-1940. In addition Haynes was the wife of Dr. George Edmund Haynes and social reformer who championed “the rights of the African American race and for the rights of women.”14 A number of black women devoted their life careers to social work for the race. There was a new and exciting interest that had arisen in sociology by the early twentieth century, “particularly the study of Blacks, also gave rise to a demand for college-trained social scientists. A disproportionate number of these were Black women as well.”15 Williams and numerous other black female social workers have been overlooked largely due to the double standards of race and sex assigned them during the era of the 1920s. Black settlement house work was 14Iris Carlton-LaNey, “Elizabeth Ross Haynes: An African American Reformer of Womanish Consciousness, 1908-1940", Seciaiflerk. August 1996, p.1. 15"an Giddings, I I :I z " .3 . I and_Sex_in_America. New York and London: Bantam Books, 1984, p. 142-147. 111 overwhelmingly established and conducted by black women. Jane Edna Hunter of Cleveland established the Phillis Wheatley Association in 1913. W. Gertrude Brown headed the Phyllis Wheatley House of Minneapolis from 1924-1937. Birdye H. Haynes was head resident of the Wendell Phillips Settlement on the west side of Chicago in 1909 until she later was moved to the Lincoln House in New York City.16 Historian Cynthia Neverdon-Morton argues that while many of the programs were implemented by national organizations such as the NUL--the duties were in fact done by black women, the leadership roles still remained dominated by men. Neverdon-Morton states, “this less glamorous but equally crucial work by women has gone largely unnoticed by 1tiSee Adrienne Lash Jones, : - ° . :.:.: : . - ‘ _1_9_1_0_-_1_9_5_Q, Brooklyn, New York: Carlson Publishing, Inc.,1990. For a discussion of W. Gertrude Brown sea, Judith Ann Trolander, WM Caeressich, Detroit. Wayne State University, 1975, chapter 9, p. 136-147. For a detailed study of Birdye H. Haynes life and career see, Iris Carlton-LaNey, “The Career of Birdye Henrietta Haynes, a Pioneer Settlement House Worker", ScciaLSehrice Bexiew, (June 1994), Vol.68, See also Stephanie Shaw, WW tc_Dc. And, Cheryl D. Cromwell, “Black Women as Pioneers in Social Welfare, 1880- 1935", '2.. z. z .. . .V.ol7, 1977, p. 7- 12. 112 historians.”17 The administrative duties in social work were practically always assigned to men. Actually the leadership roles often carried out by women are obscured. However social work scholar Daniel J. Walkowitz concludes that the scientific model created in the 19203 created tensions for female social workers. Objectivity and rationality were thought to be characteristics of male professionals. Women had to navigate a very tight rope. They had to “develop a work identity that would both give them professional status and preserve their femininity”.18 Coupled with the desire for professionalization, women social workers responded to the new expectations of professionalism. Moreover, women in the profession of “social work found achievements illusory and problematic”.19 Carlton- "Cynthia Neverdon-Morton. WWW W325. Knoxville, TN: The University of Tennessee Press, p.8. 18Daniel J. Walkowitz, 'T he Making of a Feminine Professional Identity: Social Workers in the 19208”, W. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Publisher, 1990, p. 1051-1053. See also Clarke A. Chambers, “Women in the Creation of the Profession of Social Work", W, Vol. 60, 1986, p. 1- 33. And Philip R. Popple, 'T he Social Work Profession : A Reconceptualization", Social W, vol. 59, 1985, p. 560-577. 19Walkowitz, p. 1053. 113 LaNey argues that “racism and segregation placed strict limitations on what Birdye Henrietta Haynes was able to accomplish during her social work career.”20 She constantly worked in isolation of other social work colleagues and therefore was always overworked. Chambers however insists that historians must begin to pay close “attention to the work of prominent and powerful men . . .” further “they must also reckon with women who moved into positions of leadership, of local and national influence in charities and hospital social ”21 work... Social welfare scholar, Cheryl D. Cromwell concludes that “the contributions of . . . Black women . . . are seldom, if ever, mentioned in the traditional social welfare or even Black History textbooks.”22 While social work scholar 20Iris Carlton-LaNey, “The Career of Birdye Henrietta Haynes, a Pioneer Settlement House Worker”, W, (June 1994), Vol. 68, p.254. 21Clarke A. Chambers, “Women in the Creation of the Profession of Social Work", Wm, vol. 60, 1986, p. 1-33. Chambers list such noted white social workers as: Edward Devine, Homer Folks, Paul U. Kellogg, Graham Taylor, Jane Adams, Mary Richmond, Lillian Wald, Edith Abbott, Sophonisba Breckinridge, and Mary Van Kleeck to name a few. 22Cheryl D. Cromwell, “Black Women as Pioneers in Social Welfare, 1880- 1935',--~. : ° 0 II: 0 L=°Iz ;—:.0. = 0|- ==_.. 0.: “In'-,VOI.7, 1977, p.11. 114 Audreye E. Johnson concludes that “ignoring their [black women] myriad contributions is indeed a sin.”23 Typically, neither black women nor men were chronicled in the list of prominent social welfare pioneers of the period from 1890-1930. Medical historian, Vanessa Northington Gamble discovered while researching the history of black hospitals that “most of the records of black hospitals had been lost or destroyed”.‘24 This is true of other institutions that many black men and women served as social workers and reformers. The fact that few of the records of many of the institutions have survived contributes to Black social workers invisibility within the discourse. With the exception of the NUL, few institutions such as the “colored”--YMCA’S and YWCA’S, black settlement homes, black hospitals, black schools and a host of other similar institutions that were in black communities have not survived. In addition, recent scholarship suggest that progressive ideology was dominated by middle class white women whose 23Audreye E. Johnson, “The Sin of Omission: African-American Women in Social Work”. WM. Vol. 1 (2). p- 1. 1991. “Vanessa Northington Gamble. W W. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995, p. Xvii. 115 realities differed from that of poor and black women. As historian William Chafe points out “Progressive white women failed even to consider the plight of their black sisters--even n25 the more affluent among them. This is echoed by Carlton- LaNey: If these white feminist reformers [Florence Kelley and Lillian Wald] could show such concern and caring for each other, why were they unable to recognize the stress under which Haynes labored and to embrace her similarly? Perhaps these reformers, ahead of their time in so many ways, were very much a part of their time in other ways. Adhering to the tenets of racial segregation that dictated both physical and social distance prevented these women from seeing the struggles of black women. Perhaps the noted antilynching crusader and journalist Ida Wells-Barnett was correct in her accusation that white reformers had an inability to “know the souls of Black women”.26 In the midst of this race and gender terrain, Jones continued to persist with the education of a pool of black social 25William H. Chafe, “Women’ a History and Political History. Some Thoughts on Progressivism and the New Deal", .: : . - - edited by Nancy A. Hewitt and Suzanne Lebsock. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1993, p. 106. 26Carlton-LaNey, “The Career of Birdye Henrietta Haynes", p. 269. 116 workers, both male and female.27 An examination of Jones” work and contributions in social work may suggest an answer to historian William H. Chafe’s query: “How do we integrate those male progressives who focused on social justice issues into this gender-based framework?”28 Undoubtly Jones reached out to a much broader intellectual pool of constituents in his quest to fulfill this major void of available black social workers. Jones always kept abreast of the most recent and current literature by and about African Americans. He studied the work’s of such scholars as Carter G. Woodson. Though Woodson was a leading intellectual of the time, other Black intellectuals found him and his work on occasion unsettling. Historian Arvarh Strickland recently stated that, “various individuals described 27Alvin B. Kogut. “The Negro and the Charity Organization Society in the Progressive Era”. Emmmmmmmmmmsmmmm Pittsburgh. 1917, 44th Annual Meeting. Fannie Barrier Williams had carried out the duties of social work in the city of Chicago by as early as 1904 when she served as the director of the Frederick Douglass Center and the Trinity Mission Settlement serving the Black population. Williams also published a rather provactive essay entitled “Social Bonds in the Black Belt of Chicago", Charities, 15, no. 1 (1905). Jones’ commitment to young social workers male and female is evident through an examination of the NUL papers housed at the Library of Congress. The original applications of interested individuals were all submitted with photographs. 28Chafe, p. 114. 117 him as “arrogant,” “cantankerous,” and “domineering”.”29 Jones appears to have only engaged with Woodson intellectually. When Woodson’s book Ih_e_N_e_gLo_in_Qgr_l_-Li§19_m was published in 1922 Jones along with several other black intellectuals rushed to read and review it for numerous leading newspapers and journals. In Jones’ review he noted that the book had several “handsome photographs and old prints”. However he questioned whether miscegenation and fornication should have been included in the book’s thesis.30 Jones stated, “Aside from his [Woodson] brief treatment of subjects such as miscegenation and fornication, which in the judgement of some will be considered a little too salacious for the youthful mind . ."31 Perhaps due to Jones’ reserve nature he felt such inclusions was 29Lorenzo J Greene WWW 1930:1933. Edited with an Introduction by Arvarh E. Strickland. Columbia and London: University of Missouri Press, 1996, p. 4. 30Eugene Kinckle Jones, review of WW. Magnum (May 1923), p. 704-23. Elinor DesVemey Sinnette, W W. The New York Public Library & Wayne State University Press, Detroit, 1989, p. 126-127. See also, Carter G. Woodson, W. Washington, D. C.: The Associated Publishers, Inc., 1922. Later revised and enlarged editions of this book were done by Charles H. Wesley. 31Eugene Kinckle Jones’ review, W, p. 722. 118 in poor taste. In spite of this Jones felt, “the publication meets a long felt need for a simple presentation of the relation which Negro life in America has borne to many of our country’s important historical facts.”32 Jones was not alone in bringing the ‘miscegenation and fornication’ issue into question. His long time intellectual and personal friend Arthur A. Schomburg offered some of the more biting criticisms of Woodson’s book. Schomburg biographer Elinor DesVemey Sinnette suggests that Schomburg’s criticisms may have arisen from the fact that Woodson did not mention him in the acknowledgements. Many of the ’handsome photographs and old prints’ that Jones mentioned had originally been on loan to Woodson from Schomburg’s extensive personal collection of black history. Woodson and Schomburg continued their back and forth feuding over the next few years until the New York Public Library purchased the Schomburg Collection in 1927. Woodson eventually acknowledged the importance of Schomburg’s contributions to the study of Black history when he proclaimed 32lbid. 1 1 9 the sale “the outstanding event of the year”.33 Jones played a greater role in the black intellectual movement of the 1920s than is usually considered by most scholars. He was perhaps the most instrumental participant in helping to establish a permanent repository for Schomburg’s collection of black history. In 1926 Schomburg approached Jones, L. Hollingsworth Wood, NUL President, and Charles S. Johnson, editor of the Qmmnijy to discuss turning over his massive collection of black memorabilia to the NUL. Schomburg was informed that the NUL was not in a position to take on such a collection nor could their facilities accommodate the project. Jones along with Wood and the Director of the New York Public Library, Edwin H. Anderson decided to approach the Carnegie Foundation. In March 1926 the Carnegie Foundation agreed to purchase the Collection for the sum of $10,000.34 A year later in 1927 the 135th Street Branch Library of the New York Public Library received the Collection. 33Sinnette, p. 127. 34lbid.,p. 136-37. 120 In later years Jones worked with Schomburg and a group of other notable intellectuals to co-found the Associates in Negro Folk Education located at New York City and Atlanta. The ‘Associates’ later published the Bronze Booklet Series from 1935-38 which chronicled the “Negroes” history in their own words. The membership list consisted of other such individuals as Charles S. Johnson, Mary McLeod Bethune, Franklin Hopper and Lyman Bryson of Teachers’ College, Columbia University.35 Jones maintained a list of philanthropist organizations and frequently called upon the officers. During this period Jones’ list consisted of such institutions as the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial, the Carnegie Foundation of New York, Friends of Mrs. Ella Sachs Plotz, the estate of Mrs. L. Hollingsworth Wood, and the Phelps Stokes Fund. In addition to the philanthropist organizations there were also those educational institutions that Jones contacted to provide opportunities for black men and women to matriculate for social work educational programs. This group consisted of the New York School of Social Work, the Graduate School of Social 35Ibid., p. 171. 121 Administration of the Chicago University, the University of Pittsburgh and the Ohio State University. In addition to the financial concerns of the League and its agenda Jones was always promoting the continual training of black social worke rs.36 Jones sought to take advantage of every available means to further his mission. He worked to appeal directly to the masses of black people with his self-help message through the use of recently invented technology--radio. On Sunday May 16, 1926 Jones delivered over radio station WMCA at Hotel McAlpin in New York an address entitled, “Go-To-High School, Go-To- College". The broadcast was sponsored by Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity to encourage young African American students “to continue their education in High Schools and in College”. This provided an opportunity for Jones to inform young African Americans of the numerous options that awaited them if they 36April 16, 1928 to Stern from Jones, Rosenwald Fund Archives. In this particular letter Jones maps out to Stern the financial status of the League--and list the contributing organizations and institutions. The Carnegie monies had run out and now Jones needed new financial support for the Department of Research and Investigation. He had hoped to convince Stern that the NUL was worthy of financial support through the Rosenwald Fund now that Carnegie had declined to renew its allocations. See also, Lewis, WWW P.198-199 and Weiss, WW 1210.. 122 pursued education. He also claimed in this address that “the past ten years have proved to be the banner period of this age”. Perhaps to overshadow the fact that there were recent race riots and the economic dislocation African Americans suffered after World War I he overstated the accomplishments of the race. In spite of the many accomplishments that had been made at the time by African Americans, there were some bleak arenas. Jones, nevertheless, declared, “Competent teachers, social workers, clergymen and other community leaders are far too few in numbers, and should be augmented from the ranks of the Negro students of today“. Jones always took it upon himself to promote social work to and for African Americans. He lobbied for a greater expansion of secondary and collegiate institutions for African Americans. Furthermore, according to Jones, “the more liberal support of organizations working to secure larger civic and industrial opportunities for the Negro like the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and the National Urban League” were reasons enough for young people to aspire. The Fraternity was useful in expressing 123 such issues of national interest within the black community.37 In this instance Jones and Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity aided the cause of black America and supported its ideals of community uplift. By the mid-19203 Jones had achieved national prominence. His speaking engagements had grown beyond strictly social work audiences. In 1924 Virginia Union University awarded Jones with the honorary degree of L.L.D. Jones remained one of Virginia Union’s most distinguished alumni. He never broke ties with the University nor the city of Richmond.38 In June, 1926 he delivered the commencement address at West Virginia Collegiate Institute. “The Negro’s Opportunity Today” was the title of Jones’ talk to the graduating class. Jones read a Who’s Who list of African Americans to the graduates on this 37Eugene Kinckle Jones, “Go-To-High School, Go-To-College”, urged by the Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity, Delivered over Radio Broadcasting Station WMCA (Hotel McAlpin, NY), Sunday, May 16, 1926. NUL Papers, Series IV, Box 3. See also, Wesley, W. p. 103-264. 38Eugene Kinckle Jones Alumni Folder Cornell University, Rare and Manuscript Collections, University Library, Ithaca, New York. The recorded interview with granddaughter, Betty Jones Dowling also confirms much of this information. She tells of how the family did not break its ties to Richmond until after her grandfather’s death. The family made trips frequently to Richmond and the annual ritual of attending Virginia Union University’s Homecoming Festivities. Eugene Kinckle Jones would typically address an audience during Founder’s Day which occurred during homecoming. 124 particular occasion. Never failing to include the accomplishments of black social workers and their contributions to society he proclaimed in a self-referential note: “A colored man is member of the National Conference of Social Work elected to this Board of fifteen persons by a membership of 4,000 social workers the overwhelming majority of whom are white”.39 Jones had been elected the previous year (1925) to the executive board (NCSW) as treasurer. Jones spoke of numerous achievements by African Americans--always mindful of the distance most had travelled to reach any level of accomplishment. Perhaps one of the high points of the speech was when he boasted: Even in America, the Negro brought in as a slave was not introduced into the economic life of the country as a competitor to the white man, but as an aid. I doubt whether any statesmen of the periods in which Negroes were brought to America as slaves would have continued the experiment if they had known that 1865 would have recorded Negroes to the number of four million on American soil, eventually to become 39Eugene Kinckle Jones, “The Negro’s Opportunity Today", Commencement Address at West Virginia Collegiate Institute, June, 1926. NUL Papers, Series IV, Box 3. 125 economic competitors of white men.40 Undoubtedly, such speeches propelled Jones’ at the pinnacle of his professional power. By this point in his career Jones had a clearly articulated mission. Between 1915-1930 social workers ,black and white, strove to construct a distinct professional identity as social workers. Jones had a direct impact upon the development of this identity for all of social work. In 1925 he was elected as the first African American to the National Conference of Social Work’s (NCSW) Executive Board. He was elected at the NCSW meeting as Treasurer. The NCSW served as the umbrella organization for all other social work entities. It was the parent organization of the American Association of Social Workers (AASW). The AASW was established in 1921 and throughout the 1920s was the most important body of the NCSW. One of the organization’s objectives was to “define and secure professional standards for social work.”41 Throughout the 19203 academic training 40lbid. 41CIarkeA. Chambers, : WM. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1971, p. 93. See also museum.p..9-1o 126 institutions became more prominent in the evolutionary process of social work the profession. In 1915, when Abraham Flexner, Carnegie Foundation Representative declared that social workers were not professionals there were only five professional social work schools, by 1930 there were some forty.42 During Jones’ stint on the NCSW’s executive board (1926- 1933) he addressed and interpreted the social and economic concerns of the black community to a national and integrated audience. He eventually was elected to the position of Vice President of this main body of social workers--the NCSW.43 Moreover this platform enabled Jones to espouse the attendant concerns of black social and economic welfare. He was often able to place those concerns on the national agenda of social work activity. For example Jones continuously argued before the conference the issues of health, economics, and housing as it affected the African American population. Of all the professions that existed at the time social work 42Chambers. Eaul_u._lSellooc. p. 93- 43Autobiography, p. 10. 127 was the only profession that accepted blacks and whites equally into professional organizations. Though it is arguable to what extent the above practice existed, many black social workers such as Jones often embraced the white social work establishment. Jones and other black social workers were active in the American Association of Social Workers from its founding in 1921. The Social Work Club which was founded in 1915 for black social workers appears to have been abandoned by 1921. Jones insisted in 1928 that “There is probably no profession in which Negro members are on as cordial relationships with white members as is that of the social worker.”“’4 This practice of accepting black social workers into professional membership was unique to the social work profession of the early decades of the twentieth century. Most other more established professions such as medicine, nursing, science, law, and history for example practiced segregation and or discrimination within their professional 44Eugene Kinckle Jones, “Social Work Among Negroes," Mariam: MW. Vol CXL.(N0vember.1928).Pp- 287- 293. 128 memberships during the early twentieth century.45 African American professionals created their own governing organizations as a result of the majority professional organizations racist and discriminatory practices of exclusion during this era. They created such major organizations as the National Medical Association in 1895, the National Bar Association in 192546, and the National Association of Colored Graduate Nurses in 1908.47 The NCSW was unique during this period. It made no discrimination in the rank and file of its black and white members during the 19205. Black social workers served on the Executive Board, division committees, 45lbid See also Gonna Rae McNeil. WWWMM . Wiggle, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Pre83.1983:Adeh 8 Theme. WW memes. New York: Kay Printing House, 1929. Darlene Clark Hine, Bleekflgmengn AI.“ :2 3, 0I :I0 000;;0II I: l I0 '0; 0I .‘AO-' O, Bloomington 8. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1989; Linda 0. McMurry, Gegrge WWW. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1981; Kenneth R Manning. W. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1983; and August Meier and Elliott Rudwick, Blegls W. Urbano and Chicago: University of Illinois Press,1986. 46See McNeil, W, p.6. 47Darlene Clark Hine, W, p. 94. See also, Hine, “ “T hey Shall Mount Up with Wings as Eagles”: Historical Images of Black Nurses, 1890- 1950'. 1110951901. P- 163‘201- 129 and even served as division program speakers and addressed general programs of the Conference. Though the NCSW made no discrimination in its rank and file of black and white social workers it was the racist attitudes of the institutions that Black social workers served that they encountered Jim Crow policies. Black social workers continually worked with Jim Crow institutions such as the numerous settlement houses that were established by the 19203 to serve only black people. Many of these facilities were directed by whites. Further, when white social workers served the black migrant population they implemented Jim Crow guidelines in these institutions. Often white settlement houses created separate agendas for black and white newcomers. By and large white settlement houses were not open to African Americans.48 This was a grave concern on the part of many black social workers of the era. Jones focused on addressing these concerns through the national forum. His reception into the overall social work profession had gone over well by the mid-1920s and he 48Lasch-Quinn, mm and Carlton-LaNey, “The Career of Birdye Henrietta Haynes, a Pioneer Settlement House Worker". 130 now began to address the shortcomings of social work for black people on several other fronts. Jones wrote to an associate in Boston in 1926, In our great America, relations between the various elements making up our population-native Protestants, Catholics, Jews, foreigners, Negroes, Indians-need constantly to be watched, that no disturbing propaganda may work havoc to the improving conditions.49 Jones remained optimistic about the plight of the “Negro” population. It would appear that all was well with Jones and his concerns for black social welfare. This was not the case. There were other issues that confronted Jones and the cadre of approximately 500 special trained black social workers on the eve of the Great Depression in 1928.50 The number of trained black social workers reflected the efforts of several northern white social service training schools and Jones’ efforts with the fellowship programs that were offered through the NUL. In 49July 28, 1926, Eugene K. Jones to S. A. Allen, Boston, Massachusetts, “Race Relations". National Urban League Papers, Series IV, Box3,The Collections of the Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, DC 5°lbid. 131 spite of this major development there were other issues to overcome. Behind the facade of inclusivity there were major problems which Jones had to confront. Both internally and externally the concerns of racial tensions percolated beneath the surface. However in the South, there were only two schools by the 19208 that had been established for “Negro workers”. The Atlanta School of Social Work and Bishop Tuttle Training School for Social Workers of St. Augustine College at Raleigh, North Carolina were the only black schools which offered advanced schooling for black social workers, in the South. The Atlanta program established in 1920 offered a general social work approach. The Bishop Tuttle School of Social Work began in 1925 and specialized in the training of social workers in 51 conjunction with religious education. lnspite of the massive efforts to train black social workers the results did not meet the growing demands of a burgeoning black urban population, both North and South. 51lbid. See also Robenia Baker Gary and Lawrence E. Gary, “The History of Social Work Education for Black People 1900-1930”, WW. Vol. XXI, No. 1, March, 1994, 67-81. 132 Jones’ untiring efforts for financial support for the NUL and its programs did not always meet with success. On numerous occasions his efforts were not welcomed. Jones’ proposals met with particular resentment in many parts of the South. In the early days of Jones’ social work activities for black people his ideas were often met with rejection. In some locales when Jones arrived in the hopes of establishing the work of the NUL he met with rebuff. In particular such sizable southern cities as Savannah and Augusta, Georgia; Charleston, South Carolina; Louisville, Kentucky; Richmond, Virginia; Charlotte, North Carolina; and Jacksonville, Florida were places which Jones’ proposals were met with disdane. Jones stated: “There, [the South] in many instances, the proposals I made for Negro welfare had not been considered seriously for whites. The excuse given for rejecting proposals was frequently frankly stated: “We are not doing that for white people. Surely you would not expect us to discuss such an undertaking for Negroes.””52 Not only were Jones’ efforts met with rejection from the 52Autoblography, p. 4. 133 white South, often his attempts were perceived as “erroneous” from some black communities. Jones stated near the end of his career in 1940: On the other hand, I often was met with rebuffs from prominent Negroes in the communities where we wished to establish Urban League branches for Negroes. Especially was this true in northern communities where the Negro leadership was based upon fights against segregation. Any social welfare effort in the interest of Negroes was immediately branded as an attempt to segregate them.53 Migration had already made relations between ‘home people and old settlers” in many urban centers uncertain. Recent black urban/migration scholarship reveals that the growing tensions between the two groups was not unique to any urban city in particular. However each city tended to have its own unique situation. For instance historian Peter Gottlieb reveals that with Pittsburgh, “tensions that arose from growing differences of class and culture within the African-American population were not overcome by the rising awareness of a common racial 53Autobiography, p. 4. For a further study of how the Chicago Urban League functioned take a look at Chapter 7, “Eny Kind of Works”, from Grossman’s book previously mentioned. He details the hopes and unfulfilled promises of the League and oftentimes misguided hopes for employment on the part of African Americans. 134 identity . . 3’54 While historian James R. Grossman states that “Chicago’s black middle-class residents assumed that the migrants had to be guided and controlled from the moment they stepped from the train.” Grossman further argues, “By inculcating restraint, the Old Settlers hoped to protect the migrants’ souls and pocketbooks, while preserving the community’s honor.”55 Chicago’s established black middle class structure oftentimes resented the idea of segregation--which grew more apparent with the arrival of southern black migrants. Historian Kenneth Kusmer discovered that the NUL’s efforts in Cleveland in the early twentieth century were also slow to gain acceptance in the black community. The League was likened to that of the Negro Welfare Association in Cleveland, “limited in 54Peter Gottlieb, “Rethinking the Great Migration: A Perspective from Pittsburgh", : - -- - : W, edited by Joe William Trotter, Jr. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1991, p.74. 55James R. Grossman, .: z : Mngatjen. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1989, p. 145. Chapter 5 from Grossman’ 8 book is appropriately titled, “Home People” and “Old Settlers”. Grossman also has a rather provocative essay entitled, "The White Man’s Union: The Great Migration and the Resonance of Race and Class in Chicago, 1916-1922', Ihejreet Ilwo-Hln‘o : -t-‘u:"‘m=tI.":‘°-III-I-::- :- :10 .Edited by Joe William Trotter, Jr., Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1991, p. 83- 105. 135 its effectiveness by the theory of social work then in vogue.” The League and Negro Welfare Association were similar to that of white welfare organizations such as the Charity Organization Society. They were viewed as having “fostered the view that poverty and economic dislocation resulted, in many instances, from the failure of the lower class to adopt bourgeois goals and standards.”56 In addition some southern urban communities were not open to Jones and the work of the NUL. In 1925 the Neighborhood Union of Atlanta refused to become affiliated with the NUL. The Union had done an enormous job of aiding the downtrodden black community of Atlanta since its inception in 1908. The Neighborhood Union had accomplished a lot through its alignment with the Community Chest in Atlanta. Black women there had worked hard to establish “free kindergartens, day nurseries, and orphanages” in addition to the Union’s day to day operations. The NUL wanted to use the organization as a model-~therefore requesting that the records of the union be turned over to the 56Kenneth L. Kusmer.A_Ghan9_Iak9§_Sham_BlacLQlexeland._i.81QJm Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1976, p.256. 136 NUL headquarters in New York. Atlanta’s established black community caretakers were not willing to cooperate with Jones 57 and the NUL in this joint venture. Lugenia Burns Hope, nationally recognized as a black southern reformer and the wife of Atlanta University’s President John Hope led the battle against the efforts of the NUL. “She made it clear . . . that the union would neither merge with the league nor totally turn over its community work in Atlanta to the league.”58 Though Jones’ motives were well intended it reveals a level of arrogance and superiority that may have accompanied the NUL and directed toward his Southern brethren. At any rate, Atlanta was a prime example of the strife that Jones confronted oftentimes in the urban South. Of all the cities the NUL encountered North and South, Detroit remained the most difficult for the work of the League, however. Jones and the NUL were confronted with a different set of 57Cynthia Neverdon-Morton. WWW W225. Knoxville: The University of Tennessee Press, 1989,p.162-163. 58Jacqueline Anne Rouse, .: ' . .-'- .. and London: The University of Georgia Press, 1989, p.118. 137 issues in the city of Detroit. The city of Detroit was divided along ethnic lines long before the NUL sought to establish itself in that city. Black Americans had begun to migrate to Detroit by the time of the Civil War and immediately after it ended. Many black migrants to Detroit went there in search of educational opportunities. By the late nineteenth century a small group of southern black business and professional men had settled there.59 To be sure, other northern cities had also experienced similar settlement patterns. Detroit remained perhaps the more challenging northern urban city for the national office of the League, before and immediately after World War I. “The pressing needs of both industry and migrants transformed Detroit into a social laboratory demonstrating the role of the Urban League in aiding southern migrants’ adjustment to urban- industrial life.”0 This was Largely due to the fact that by then the automobile industry was its main employer. 59David M. Katzman, = : z ' . : Urbana, Chicago, and London: University of Illinois Press, 1973. ”Richard W. Thomas, : - ' ' ' :. W, Bloomington & Indianapolis Indiana University Press, 1992, p.53. 138 The Detroit branch of the League was established in 1916 and John C. Dancy, Jr. became its “conservative spokesman” by 1918.61 Prior to Dancy’s tenure Forrester B. Washington was the first Executive Secretary. During Washington’s period with the Detroit Urban League (DUL) he became a “prominent national authority on black urban problems”. The Detroit League was the main supplier of black workers for such companies as Chrysler, Dodge, Studebaker, Briggs, and Cadillac.62 Washington remained a strong advocate of black economic empowerment through jobs that were available in the industries of Detroit. However it was Dancy who established the long term relationships with the auto industry of Detroit during the First World War. Dancy’s relationship with the automobile tycoons was cemented over the next two decades. In the 1920s “industrialization created the dependency relationship between 61Thomas, p. 62-69. See also John C. Dancy, WW: Wm. Detroit: Wayne State University, 1966. 59-August Meier and Elliott Rudwick, W. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979, p.18. 139 key black leaders and Henry Ford”.63 A host of black ministers and business owners aligned themselves with Ford and the industrial establishment.64 By the 1930’s growing dissension over the labor movement had created a major source of friction between the Urban League’s national office and the DUL. By this time the NUL had “endorsed collective bargaining and also the CIO”.65 Detroit’s industrial black workers were trapped between the growing union movement by white auto workers and the often violent hostility of the companies. The issue of unionism was a much larger issue than what was going on with the NUL. African Americans had been a major concern in the American labor movement from as early as the 1870s as a result of the founding of the Knights of Labor in 1869.66 As the growing concerns of American industrialization 63Thomas, p. 277. 64See Katzman. Wang 65Meier and Rudwick, p. 4. See also Richard Thomas, W Mam. P- 277-312- °5Phi|ip S Foner W New York and Washington: Praeger Publishers, 1974, p. 47. See also, Robert C. Weaver, W. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1946. 140 and world market imperialism became more entrenched in the American work place so to did the attendant concerns of Jones and the NUL with securing permanent employment for black Americans. On the eve of the Depression in May, 1929 the WM reported “no real advance in the attitude of organized labor toward the colored workers and sentiment in labor circles is still set against Negro participation.”67 Black America’s hostility to some unions and unionization in general was nothing new. Black workers were usually used as strikebreakers. They commonly did not trust unions and furthermore did not understand the nature of collective bargaining. Often black workers were dismissed once agreements were reached and white union strikers returned to work. By the time of the Great Depression, 1929-1941, black workers in the American work force were even more displaced. Jones was a much sought after expert on the economic conditions of the African American community as early as the mid-19208. He was someone from whom government officials William H Harris W New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1982. li7Foner, p. 174. 141 and practically every known sociologist and economist sought advice by the late 1920s. Karl F. Phillips Commissioner of Conciliations, in the United States Department of Labor constantly communicated with Jones and sought his recommendation of nearly every African American applicant that came before him seeking federal employment.68 Jones obliged him with the necessary information or referred him to more appropriate individuals. No doubt this contact assisted Jones in being appointed the Advisor of Negro Affairs in the Department of Commerce during the New Deal from 1933-1936. Jones accomplished an enormous amount through his work with the NUL and active role with the National Conference of Social Work during the 19205. He was a national figure of major proportion by the eve of the Great Depression. He aligned himself with other leading black and white intellectuals of the period as an “outspoken social reformer. No other African American social-economist had such a role in the total makeup of Black America as did he. The decade of the 1930s showcased 68Karl R. Phillips, Commissioner of Conciliation, Correspondence. RG-138, NO. 1400, National Archives, Washington, D. C. Letters dating December 1924-March 1 926. 142 Jones politically, socially and culturally. In addition to his learned talents in economic understanding Jones became a leading national spokesman in the quest for justice in Black America. Chapter 4 BETWEEN NEW YORK AND WASHINGTON,D.C. Although I have no idea as to where to turn for support, the need is so urgent that I shall not be satisfied until I have exhausted every possible effort to assure to the Negro population that their cause is adequately and forcefully represented in Washington by those to whom they look for action.1 Eugene Kinckle Jones, August 4, 1933 The late 1920s ushered in a new day in national reform policies. Jones had proven himself to be a progressive reformer by the arrival of the 1930s. This chapter will examine Jones’ fund raising activities, his relations with white philanthropists and his position with an important department in the federal government during the New Deal--the Department of Commerce. Over the course of the twentieth century there have been 1These words were written by Jones to Edwin R. Embree, Julius Rosenwald Fund, President and Representative August 4, 1933. Rosenwald Fund Archives, Box 306, Folder 10, Amistad Research Center, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana. Historian James D. Anderson chronicles the Rosenwald Fund as one of the industrial philanthropic foundations that was established in the early twentieth century. The Rosenwald Fund in addition to The General Education Board, Phelps-Stokes Fund, Carnegie Foundation and the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial Fund all “cooperated in behalf of the Hampton-Tuskegee program of black industrial training.“ Therefore Jones called upon most of them for the industrial work of the NUL. See Anderson, Ihe W. P. 247. And Darlene Clark Hine, Walla whin- 143 144 four American Presidents labeled as progressive within their administration. Presidents Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and Lyndon Baynes Johnson are the four most considered.2 Jones had political ties to the two President’s in office during his tenure with the NUL. Presidents Woodrow Wilson and Franklin D. Roosevelt administration sought and received advice and active participation from Jones and the NUL. Jones advised the Wilson administration in its efforts to establish in April of 1918 the Division of Negro Economics. Though the position was short lived he supported the appointment of George Edmund Haynes as the director of the newly created division. In February of 1918 Jones and a group of four other leading citizens black and white decided to urge the Department of Labor “to appoint one or two blacks in each of its bureaus concerned with the adjustment and distribution of Negro labor.”3 This act is what eventually led to 2John Morton Blurn, I. : ' . s ' ' ; Johnson. New York and London: W. W. Norton & Company, 1980. 3William Cohen, “The Great Migration as a Lever for Social Change", Black - .s . m, edited by Alferdteen Harrison. Jackson and London: University of Press of Mississippi, p. 73-78, 1991 and Parris and Brooks, W, p. 100-108. See also Daniel Perlman, “Stirring the White 145 the appointment of Haynes. It appears that some members of the black community’s leadership supported the appointment of Giles Jackson. Jackson was a successful lawyer from Richmond, Virginia after Reconstruction. “He was the first black attorney to be admitted to practice before the Supreme Court of Appeals in Virginia (November 30, 1887) without benefit of a Yale law degree or Howard University degree.”4 DuBois wrote to Jones in April of 1918 inquiring about Jackson stating to Jones, “how can I get at the facts of his career?”5 While informing DuBois of how he could “best expose” Jackson, Jones took the opportunity to inform DuBois of Dr. George E. Haynes’ offer and acceptance of the “position of labor adviser to Secretary of Labor”.6 Jones Conscience: The Life of George Edmund Haynes”. 4Patricia Carter Ives, “Giles Beecher Jackson-Jamestown Tercentennial of 1907', W. Vol. 38, No. 8, December 1975, p. 480. Patricia C. Ives Is the great granddaughter of Giles 8. Jackson. See also, Giles B. Jackson and D. Webster Davis, : ‘ :. - : : . Freeport, New York: Books For Libraries Press,1971. Originally published in 1908. 5April 19, 1918 to Eugene Kinckle Jones from W. E. B. DuBois. DuBois Papers. 6April 20, 1918 to W. E. B. DuBois, The Crisis from Eugene Kinckle Jones. DuBois Papers. 146 remained an invaluable resource for the Federal Government through the Department of Commerce over the next three decades, 1920s-40$. By the eve of the Depression the NUL was finding it even harder financially to keep up with its operations. A climate of economic scarcity had settled in many quarters of the philanthropic world before the onslaught of the Depression. In spite of these concerns Jones was determined that the work of the NUL would not be terminated. Many philanthropists, such as Julius Rosenwald were personally swamped with request after request to help support every imaginable cause. Jones was included in this list of individuals who solicited continuously for the financial support of Rosenwald himself. Jones customarily made his financial requests directly to Rosenwald. The two had developed a personal relationship over the years through Jones’ work with the NUL. The economic concerns of the nation and particularly those of African American workers were mounting long before the concerns of the stock market crash. In March 1929 Jones was informed by E. C. Scott the 147 Secretary to Rosenwald that “the Julius Rosenwald Fund is now handling appropriations to national organizations . . .” He further stated to Jones “your appeal should be made to the Fund rather than to him.”7 Jones responded to the above request. On April 4, 1929 Edwin R. Embree, President of the Julius Rosenwald Fund wrote to Jones expressing doubt as to continual financial support of the NUL’s programs. While Embree expressed interest in the work of the League he cautioned Jones not to expect the usual financial support of the past from the Fund. He informed Jones that the Fund was “anxious to keep at a minimum our contributions to general national agencies and wish to keep on the list only those that are doing very concrete pieces of work that cannot be cared for otherwise.”8 This represented the first time in the League’s history that it was questioned whether it implemented a national agenda. Perhaps the Fund’s representatives had an even greater concern. It 7March 29, 1929 to Jones from Julius Rosenwald, signed E. C. Scott, Rosenwald Fund Archives, Box 306, Folder 9. Amistad Research Center, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana. 8Letter to Jones from Edwin R. Embree, President of Julius Rosenwald Fund, dated April 4, 1929, lbid. 148 questioned whether the African American cause was in fact a national one. Of course, as was typical of Jones’ approach to the work of the League this was not about to deter his efforts. Jones immediately responded to Embree that his letter was “somewhat disappointing” and began to address the Funds’ concerns. Jones mapped out for Embree the main points of the League’s work. They were as follows: 1. To ascertain by careful inquiry the social needs of Negroes in cities 2. To try to have these needs met if possible by existing agencies, and if not, through its own endeavors; 3. To provide for the training of Negro social workers who may attack these problems constructively either through the Urban league itself or through agencies that have already undertaken social programs for Negroes or may be induced to do so; 4. To work towards enlarging the industrial opportunities of Negroes by removing objections to employing them by whatever means of persuasion that may be possible.9 Jones sought to assure Embree, “the League is the only 9April 06, 1929, Jones to Edwin Embree, lbid. 149 organization of its kind working in interest of the Negro.”10 It seems no amount of persuasion was out of protocol for Jones’ tactics. Later during the month of April after having discussed the operations of the League in great detail to the Fund in writing, Jones developed the ultimate appeal. Jones wrote to Embree that he had received word from Ruth Standish Baldwin “who was the real founder of the Urban League movement”.11 Mrs. Baldwin had written to Jones expressing her admiration for the work of the League. He provided Embree with what he referred to as an “unsolicited” comment. Mrs. Baldwin stated to Jones, “You cannot, however, overestimate my interest in the work of the League, nor my gratification at the way in which its usefulness has grown and developed, nor yet my hopes for its future.”12 Jones felt that the words of Mrs. Baldwin were of the greatest usefulness in this time of need. Veiled in slight sarcasm, Jones stated to Embree that he was forwarding this 10lbid. “April 27, 1929, Jones to Edwin H. Embree, lbid. 12lbid. 150 particular letter “in view of suggestions from some quarters that possibly the League’s program was not quite definite enough . . ”‘3 He opined “it interesting to know just what Mrs. Baldwin thinks now of the work after nearly nineteen years of the organization’s activities.”14 The economic scarcity of the period was not about to defeat Jones’ mission of securing funding for the NUL. By the time of the Great Depression in 1929, Jones and the NUL were both important factors in addressing the social and .economic woes that confronted black America. Jones’ experiences during the first two decades at the NUL prepared him for the Depression. By the time ‘the most catastrophic period in American history had consumed the nation with economic dislocation’15 Jones was a prominent authority who could offer sound advice upon the African American condition. 13lbid. “lbid. i5Darlene Clark Hine, “The Housewives’ League of Detroit: Black Women and Economic Nationalism” , . I : . - - - : flisjonr. Brooklyn, New York: Carlson Publishing, p. 129, 1994. 151 Before the Great Depression in April of 1929 President Herbert Hoover wrote to Jones concerning the economic condition of the African American population. He stressed to Jones that “the first step toward being a good citizen is to achieve economic independence.” President Hoover further pointed out that “the work of the National Urban League to train Negroes in the city to find new lines of occupation is fundamental to the progress of the race.”16 It is likely that Jones began this communication with President Hoover as he traditionally shared the concerns of the NUL with every President that was in office during his tenure with the League. As the stock market crash of late 1929 consumed the nation’s attention the efforts of Eugene Kinckle Jones and other trained black social workers intensified. Jones and the NUL had succeeded in developing a cadre of individuals to deal with the dispossessed population of black urban people. Jones had not only worked to secure avenues to train black social workers but had fought to have them accepted as professionals of equal iiiApril 1, 1929 from President Hoover to Eugene Kinckle Jones. Rosenwald Fund Archives, Box 306, Folder 9. Amistad Research Center, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA. 152 status to white social workers. Much of the duality in American social work during the early twentieth century was based upon the separate but [not] equal principles of Jim Crow.17 As the 19303 approached Jones had already begun to systematically address the financial concerns of the overworked NUL. Other issues were mounting around the nation for black Americans, particularly the concerns of labor and employment. The labor issue did not appear in black America as a result of the Great Depression. Black Americans were dealing with the lack of employment opportunities long before there were the national concerns triggered by the stock market crash.18 The NUL had dealt with the labor issue from the time it was founded in 1910. However it was Jones’ “leadership and 1"See Leech-Quinn, W- 180“le H- Wesley, Wm AmonooLEoonomjofijstou. New York: Russell & Russell, 1967, Jacobson, Julius, editor WWW Garden City. New York Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1968.; Robert C. Weaver, W. New York. Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1946.; William H. Harris, Iho_|:lo:doLW_e_Bun; W. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1982 and Sterling D. Spero and Abram L. Harris, Who: Moxomont. New York: Atheneum, 1968. 153 character [that] shaped [the] NUL during those crucial years.”19 There were a host of field workers, social workers, and local affiliate executives and organizers who aided this national cause. As was customary Jones worked constantly to establish as many local branches of the NUL as were possible. In 1914 Jones decided to bring on an assistant to aid him in the national office. T. Arnold Hill a native of Richmond and graduate of Virginia Union University was hired for the position. Hill had also completed one year of study in economics and sociology at New York University. By December of 1916 the National Office decided that Hill would best serve the Chicago community by establishing a local affiliate there. Hill headed the Chicago branch of the Urban League until he was summoned back to New York in 1925 as the director of the newly established Department of Industrial Relations. This division of the NUL’s programs worked directly with industry to help secure employment for the local black urban populations. Overall it aimed “to standardize and coordinate the local employment agencies of the League to assure applicants for work an 19Parris and Brooks. p. 156. 154 efficient and helpful service and employers efficient ”20 workers. T. Arnold Hill became the reliable person for this 21 most important component of the NUL’s agenda. Between 1914-1925 Hill worked diligently to convince the city of Chicago of the urgency to include African Americans for industrial employment. Following the Chicago race riots of 1919 Hill and other black and white leaders of Chicago worked hard to provide the black community with “proper police protection.”22 Historian William M. Tuttle noted that “while the lynchings of the Red Summer were usually confined to the South, practically half of the epidemic of race riots burst forth in 20Dona Cooper Hamilton, “The National Urban League During the Depression, 1930-1939: The Quest for Jobs for Black Workers” (Ph. D. Diss., Columbia University, 1982), p. 62-63 and William H. Harris, W :-I°.'°I II ’I ' I-' ; -_I' I3-0I- Ila”. 33']. 3 I'°I- I3 Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, p. 21-25,1977. See also Weiss, Ins Wand Parris and Brooks. W p 185 21Arvarh E. Strickland, WWW. Urbana and London: University of Illinois Press, 1966, p. 26-28. See also Weiss, mum League p 176-201 and Jesse Thomas Moore. Jr W W. University Park and London: The Pennsylvania State University Press, p. 66- 67, 1981. 22William M Tuttle. Jr W Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1970, p. 61 and Charles S. Johnson, Iho_Nog:o . . .- .Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1922. See also Arvah Strickland. Wane 155 Northern and border states.”23 In the meantime Jones was still deep in the trenches of securing financial support for the day to day operations of the NUL. Jones remained incessant in his approach for the solicitation of monies to support the NUL’s programs. As the decade of the 19205 drew to a close the NUL financially began to encounter greater difficulty. Jones kept amongst the files of the NUL a statement entitled “The Octopus and Its Tentacles”. This document detailed the ‘Endowed Foundations’. The seven foundations were “thereby destroying faith in God and in a duly constituted and orderly government.” The seven foundations chronicled were the Rosenwald Foundation, The Laura Spelman Rockfeller Foundation, The General Education Board, The Carnegie Corporation, Milbank Memorial Fund, Common/Wealth Fund, and Russell Sage Foundation. The author of the document stated that together the ’seven’ had a combined endowment fund of about $500,000,000. They “were bound together each of the seven to do its particular work, but welded together for the destruction of civilization 23Tuttle. Emmet. P- 23- 156 and regular and orderly government.”24 The Rosenwald Fund was not believed to be one of the seven “but nevertheless is working with them for the same purpose.”25 It is not clear whether Jones gave the document much attention. He wrote to the Julius Rosenwald Fund on January 2, 1930 to thank the fund for its continual support of the NUL’s programs. While wishing the officers of the Fund a prosperous New Year he made it clear that “we are hoping that we may continue to merit your confidence”?6 Traditionally from the time of its founding the NUL did not participate in direct action agitation like such organizations as the NAACP. Most of the NULs budget came from the Altman, Carnegie, Rosenwald, and Rockfeller philanthropies therefore it “placed its stock in conciliation and private negotiations.”27 The NUL typically did 24Unknown author, “The Octopus and Its Tentacles”. The NUL Papers, Series IV, Box Miscellaneous. 25|bid. 26January 2, 1930 to Julius Rosenwald Fund from Eugene Kinckle Jones. Rosenwald Fund Archives, Box 306, Folder 9. 27Sitkoff, AMLEQLBIEQKS. P-24- 157 not advocate politics nor agitation. This was about to change by the late 1920s. In 1928 Charles S. Johnson was succeeded as editor of the Qooonohuy by Elmer Carter. The switch that occurred with the Qooononjjy’s focus was to one of highlighting economics and politics. This new approach was two-fold. Carter’s approach and the growing stress on the African American community in economics and the lack of political access signalled this change in the format of the Qooorjonijx. The African American condition in the American labor force had not improved and the AFL in 1927 still refused to accept African Americans.28 While T. Arnold Hill of the Industrial Relations Division of the NUL continued to deal with the labor issue Jones kept the national office focused on financial security for the overall operations of the League. As the NUL prepared to celebrate its Twentieth Anniversary in 1930 Jones appeared more concerned with the continual development of the League’s national agenda. He 28|bid., p. 24. See also T. Arnold Hill, “Labor: Open Letter to Mr. William Green, American Federation of Labor”, Qooonunny, vol. Vlll (Feb. 1930), p. 56-57. 158 wrote again to the Rosenwald Fund on January 22, 1930 soliciting “an appropriation of $10,000”.29 He had ‘three distinct requests for the year 1930’. First, he sought the renewal of the Fund’s annual contribution of $1,000. The second and third request were “associated one with the other.” Jones made a rather substantial request from the Fund of $10,000 to cover the cost of salaries, office assistance and traveling expenses of a field secretary for new branches. He further sought an appropriation from the Fund of a sum not to exceed $50,000 available over a period of two years. This was thought to enable the League to begin doing work in communities where there were no League activities.30 There are no records that exist to reveal the results of this request. Therefore this writer concludes that the Fund did not provide Jones with funding for such a request particularly in the midst of the Depression. The Rosenwald Fund appears to have cut its funding from 29|bid. 30January 22, 1930 to The Julius Rosenwald Fund from Eugene Kinckle Jones. Rosenwald Fund Archives, Box 306, Folder 9. 159 some of its existing contributions to the NUL as well. On July 2, 1931 Jones wrote to the Fund’s Representative George R. Arthur expressing disappointment that a “Mr. Squires was not included” as a fellowship appointee.31 Jones had assumed that the Fund would support three appointments. Arthur informed Jones a week later that . . . “I know that you are disappointed concerning Mr. Squires. . He further sought to assure Jones that “the Committee did not see its way clear to grant more than two fellowships to your organization this year. . .” He closed by informing Jones that the number of “fellowship grants this year was not as many as those granted for the 1930-1931 period”.32 In October 1931 Jones wrote to Edwin R. Embree of the Rosenwald Fund thanking him for an autographed copy of his new book, W. He assured Embree that he would review it for the upcoming edition of the Qoooflonjjy. Along with the letter he sent Embree a “personal” copy of the League’s last Annual Report. In closing he stated to Embree, “I hope that you 31July 2, 1931 to George R. Arthur, The Julius Rosenwald Fund from Eugene Kinckle Jones. The Rosenwald Fund Archives, Box 306, Folder 9. 32July 7, 1931 to Eugene Kinckle Jones from George R. Arthur. Rosenwald Fund Archives, Box 306, Folder 9. 160 can peruse it [Annual Report] so that you can gain a clearer idea of the reason I consider the Urban League’s program most important and far-reaching.”33 During the annual meeting of the National Urban League in 1932 Jones’ address to the attendees made national headlines. The NW reported that “Executive of Urban League Reports ‘Almost Criminal’ Discrimination on Jobs.” Jones stated during the Conference that “Negro unemployment had been subjected to “almost criminal discrimination in the current depression.”34 The Depression hit Black America hard and Jones and the NUL carefully monitored every sign of worsening conditions. To be sure, Jones’ commitment to the NUL and its national agenda was an intense effort. However Jones’ role in the NUL had not yet reached its zenith. By 1932 Jones had definitely turned his attention to joining with the efforts of the New Deal and what could be secured as relief in distressed black urban communities. Jones 330ctober 17, 1931 to Edwin R. Embree, Julius Rosenwald Fund, from Eugene Kinckle Jones. Rosenwald Fund Archives, Box 306, Folder 9. “Wm, Thursday, February 11, 1932. 161 appears to have been overworked by this time in his career. In conjunction with the NUL he also remained a major force on the Executive Board of the National Conference of Social Workers from 1925-1933. After his stint with the executive board of the NCSW Jones prepared to begin spending part of his time in Washington as a New Deal agent in 1933. In April, 1933 Jones submitted to President Franklin D. Roosevelt a forty-five page memorandum summarizing the “important social facts pertaining to the Negro population of the United States.” Jones declared “too often when steps are taken to ameliorate social conditions Negroes are not given equitable consideration.”35 Jones concluded for the President in excellent summation the African American condition in several categories: population, occupational status, unemployment and relief, special problems of employment, education, health, housing, recreation and leisure, delinquency, and civil rights.36 35April 15, 1935, Eugene Kinckle Jones, Executive Secretary--NUL to the Honorable Franklin D. Roosevelt, President of the United States--White House. RG 48, Box 506 Department of Interior, Office of the Secretary, National Archives, Washington, D. C. 351bid. 162 Though the activities occurring in Washington were of major importance to Jones he continued to correspond with the Julius Rosenwald Fund for financial assistance with the work of the Industrial Relations Department of the NUL. In an effort to continue to monitor New Deal regulations and agencies in July 1933 he wrote again to Edwin R. Embree, President of the Fund. The NUL wished to establish a temporary office to facilitate “the hearings on the codes for the various industries and to have a central point there where we can receive complaints from various communities of the failure. of Negroes to receive fair consideration. . .”37 Jones felt that this would keep T. Arnold Hill better informed in the New York office of the NUL. On August 1, 1933 Jones learned that Embree did not turn down the proposal right away. Nevertheless, he did suggest a rather surprising merger. Embree replied, “I have long hoped that some merger or union could be effected between the two Negro national agencies whose headquarters are New York--the 37July 28, 1933 to Edwin R. Embree, President Julius Rosenwald Fund from Eugene Kinckle Jones. Rosenwald Fund Archives, Box 306, Folder 10. 163 Urban League and the NAACP”.38 He further wrote “friends and potential givers have no single agency through which they can express their interest”.39 The Fund felt that the greatest usefulness of the two organizations could be best utilized if they met on a unified front. The Fund was concerned about the decrease in funding during the Depression years. Embree closed his letter to Jones with further surprise, “So important does this matter seem to us in this office that we feel unwilling to make further contributions to either of these organizations in their present state of division . . .”4° Jones’ response was swift and direct. He replied “the programs of the two organizations have been so different in their approach and methods that no action has been taken looking towards the consummation of the idea”.41 Jones did 38August 1, 1933 to Eugene Kinckle Jones from Edwin R. Embree. Rosenwald Fund Archives, Box 306, Folder 10. 39lbid. 40lbid. 41August 4, 1933 to Edwin R. Embree from Eugene Kinckle Jones. Rosenwald Fund Archives, Box 306, Folder 10. 164 express however a willingness to consider entertaining the proposed idea. He stated to Embree in reply, “Knowing as you do the purposes and programs of the two organizations and the differences in their respective approaches to problems we face . . .” He further opined, “I would be much interested in hearing from you as to the means you would propose for effecting the merger.”42 This idea was obviously nothing more than just that. Furthermore Jones’ attention was growing more attuned to what was happening in Washington, D. C. to relieve the suffering of black people through the aid of the federal government. During Jones’ time in Washington away from the NUL he guarded its national office with a watchful eye. Though cautious he also endeavored to make the NUL’s presence felt during his tenure in Washington. Jones repeatedly advocated the philosophy of the NUL through his internal access with the gOvernment. Two writers concluded that “Kinckle Jones’s major contribution during this time was in representing black interests at the inner core of the federal establishment.”43 42lbid. 43Parris and Brooks, BJBGKLIDJDLQIN. p.235. 165 Perhaps no other individual amplified the national lack of black employment and the need for economic stability as did Jones through his directly involved activities with the federal government from 1933-1936. On October 18, 1933 1mm announced that Secretary “Roper Appoints E. K. Jones, Negro Economist to Head Racial Problems Study Board.”44 Jones’ appointment was a major milestone within the Department of Commerce. He was to “head the Commerce Department unit for the study of Negro problems.”45 In October of 1933, Jones took a temporary leave of absence from his position as Executive Secretary of the NUL. From 1933-1936 he served as the Director of the Commerce Department’s division for the study of “Negro” problems. T. Arnold Hill served as the acting Executive Secretary of the League from 1933-1936.46 The W proclaimed Jones “an institution in “WW. October 18. 1933. 45lbld. “Weiss. WW. 9269- 166 himself”.47 In spite of the enormous praise Jones received for this major appointment with 'the Department of Commerce as Advisor of Negro Affairs it did not meet with unanimous support in the black community. Carter G. Woodson criticized Jones and other black leaders who endorsed the Franklin D. Roosevelt ticket for President in 1932. “Woodson condemned blacks who were appointed to “Jim Crow” Federal positions set aside to reward Negro Politicians. . .”48 Woodson was rather adamant in his stance against those who expressed any real admiration in the American political system. Most blacks had joined “Roosevelt’s bandwagon by 1936, Woodson refused to join them, contending that “the Negro should not cast his vote for a party that does not recognize him."49 He went so far as to condemn Mary McLeod Bethune who headed the Special Advisory Committee designed by the Roosevelt administration. He even admonished everyone who worked under her guidance known as "MUM. editorial. May 6. 1936- “Jaoqueline Googin. WWW Baton Rouge and London: Louisiana State University Press, 1993, p.175. 49lbid., p.176. 167 the “Black Cabinet”. Bethune was also the National President of the organization that Woodson founded-~the Association for the Study of Negro Life and History from 1935-1950.50 To be sure, Jones was engaged in the activities of the Roosevelt administration from the start. He was an important component in the makeup of the “Black Cabinet.” Shortly after Jones’ arrival in Washington he began receiving correspondence from Jesse O. Thomas, Southern Field Director of the NUL. Thomas informed Jones on December 16, 1933 that “the grossest kind of discrimination is practiced against Negroes in Jackson.”51 Thomas quoted to Jones what one man had informed him of while he was in Jackson, Mississippi. The man “claimed that he and two hundred other Negroes were working under the 50Ibid., p. 175. See also, B. Joyce Ross, “Mary McLeod Bethune and the National Youth Administration: A Case Study of Power Relationships in the Black Cabinet of Franklin D Roosevelt”. WWW. editors John Hone Franklin and August Meier. Urbana and Chicago. University of Illinois Press,1982, p. 191-219. See also, Rackham Holt, WWW. Garden City, New York. Doubleday & Company, Inc.,1964. 51 December 16, 1933 to Eugene Kinckle Jones, Adviser on Negro Affairs, Department of Commerce from Jesse 0. Thomas, Southam Field Director, National Urban League. Record Group 48, Box 83, File-~Colored Work, Interracial Correspondence. CWA General Administration/Inquiries. National Archives, Washington, D. C. See also. Elmer P. Martin and Joanne Mitchell Martin, Wm. Washington, D. 0.: National Association of Social Workers Press, p. 31-32, 1995. 168 CWA [Civil Works Administration] and receiving only thirty cents and hour when their cards were marked forty cents.”52 Jackson was an example of the major task that Jones and others like him were charged with trying to safeguard against happening throughout black America. Despite the New Deal’s national efforts its distribution had to be monitored against local acts of discrimination. For instance it was found that in Jackson, Mississippi there was much improvement needed in the local “Negro” employment situation. Thomas informed Jones: On the million dollar post office, the only Negro labor employed was unskilled labor. Some of the work included in the CWA project is the repairing of school buildings. They are using white mechanics to repair Negro school buildings when there are any number of Negro mechanics in Jackson who are competent and have been on relief.53 This was the kind of activity that Jones was referring to in April of 1933 when he urged Frances Perkins, Secretary of Labor not to overlook the concerns of “Negro” labor. “In a widely- publicized letter in April, Perkins assured . . . Eugene Kinckle Jones, that blacks would not be overlooked in the 52lbid. 53lbid. 169 administration’s vast reconstruction plans . . . for employment and relief.”54 It seems that even Secretary Perkins could not have predicted the outcome of the events in Jackson, Mississippi. As historian Clarke Chambers has noted, “of all Franklin Roosevelt’s official family, none perhaps had greater influence on the shaping of domestic policies than the spirited and pragmatic Frances Perkins.”55 Perkins was a social worker by profession. She had also advised Roosevelt while he was Governor of New York. Therefore it was no real surprise when she was appointed in late 1932 as Secretary of Labor in the 56 Roosevelt Administration. Perkins belonged to the “women’s network” in Washington, D. C. during the New Deal. The women’s network was a group of middle class white women who led the early twentieth century women suffrage movement. 54Nancy J. Weiss, : ' : EQB. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1983, p. 49-50 55Clarke A. Chambers, introduction, “Credo in a Depression Decade”, Mow W. New York: The Free Press. 1965. p.75. 55lbld. 170 By the time of the New Deal many of the individuals were close friends of Eleanor Roosevelt. Historian Susan Ware found that “the network encompassed virtually all of the women in top federal jobs in Washington in the 19305. . 3’57 Ware further states that “the only omission was prominent black educator Mary McLeod Bethune, head of the Office of Minority Affairs in the National Youth Administration from 1936 to 1944.”58 Though Ware suggested that Bethune probably saw herself as the representative of black people--it is without question that the women’s network did not include her in its social gatherings, due to her race. It was during the many social outings that these women were able to strategize. Ware concluded that due to “close friendship and loyalty”, these women created a network. Ultimately the women’s network was “both a sad and provocative commentary on the 19305 and the attitudes the 57Susan Ware. WW5! Cambridge. Massachusetts and London: Harvard University Press, 1981 ,p. 12. 53lbid. 171 other women brought to their government jobs.”59 Not to be deterred by the obvious racial attitudes of the era Bethune, Jones and a host of other black cabinet advisors to the Roosevelt administration gathered in Washington by late 1933. Notwithstanding, wrote historian Harvard Sitkoff, “the Roosevelt Administration perpetuated more of the discrimination and segregation inherited from previous decades than it ended.”60 In spite of the obvious day to day persistence of racial attitudes within society the “New Deal’s arousal of sympathy for the forgotten man generated reform impulses that would revolutionize the black freedom struggle.”61 This period would later be termed by some scholars as the ‘Second 59Ibid., p. 13. For a detailed discussion of Mary McLeod Bethune’s role In the government during the New Deal see, Ross’, “Mary McLeod Bethune and the National Youth Administration: A Case Study of Power Relationships in the Black Cabinet of Franklin D. Roosevelt” and Weiss’, W. For a detailed discussion of Frances Perkins see Susan Ware’ 5, Bolonofiuflmgs and fioldinolhoiLQm; Amonoonjlomonjnflmm. Boston. Twayne Publishers, 1982, particularly chapter four, “Feminism and Social Reform”, p. 87-115. 6°Harvard Sitkoif. W W New York: Oxford University Press 1978, p.58. 61 lbid., p. 59. 172 Reconstruction’.62 Initially President Roosevelt had no intentions of establishing a position that would allow anyone to oversee the African American interest in the recovery program. His greatest fear was that he would receive a major backlash from southern Democrats who were very influential in Congress at - the time. Will Alexander and Edwin Embree approached the President with the this idea in early 1933. The President did not approve of the position until the Rosenwald Fund agreed to pay the salary for a special assistant to work on the economic status of “Negroes”. The Chief Executive was then free to bypass Congress’ approval for such a position. Ironically, Secretary of Interior Harold lckes who usually held a liberal position appointed southern, young, white, religiously-oriented, Clark Foreman. To be sure, the black press admonished the appointment of a white southerner to address the needs and concerns of black America.63 The black community’s leadership was appalled in spite of Foreman’s 6'r-’lbid., p. 58. 63lbid., p. 77. See also, Kirby, W, p. 106-107. 173 liberal background. Aubrey Williams and Foreman were two noted southern reformers who helped to “shape and administer, respectively, the Works Progress Administration and Public Works Administration . . .”64 Williams and Foreman included non discriminatory approaches in their programs. After much resistance from black leaders over the selection of Foreman the Rosenwald Fund decided to finance a black secretary as well. Robert Weaver was picked to fill this most important position.65 Weaver was a recent graduate of Harvard University with a doctorate in economics. The appointment of Weaver met with approval from the African American community’s leadership.66 In spite of this major effort to move forward with accomplishments, prior to 1934 lckes and his assistants 64Patricia Sullivan, “Southern Reformers, the New Deal, and the Movement’s Foundation”, WWW, edited by Arrnstead L. Robinson and Patricia Sullivan. Charlottesville and London: University Press of Virginia, 1991, 9 82-83 See also. John A Salmond. W W. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1983. 65Sitkoff, WM. P- 78- 6iiWilliam H Harrie. W New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 109, 1982. See also John 8. Kirby, - - - =_ . Knoxville. The University of Tennessee Press, 1980. Particularly chapter #6: “Blacks in the New Deal: Confronting the Priorities, p. 106-151. 174 accomplished “little as watchdogs for the Negro’s welfare”. 67 By early 1934 lckes had obtained the President’s approval to form an interdepartmental committee on “Negro” affairs. Jones of the Commerce Department, Robert L. Vann of the Justice Department, Forrester B. Washington of Federal Emergency Relief Administration (FERA), and Harry Hunt of the Farm Credit Administration along with lckes, Foreman, and Weaver regularly began meeting with white representatives of the National Recovery Administration (NRA), the Civilian Conservation Corporation (000), the Agriculture Department, and the military services. By 1935 there were several young black men who were granted positions in some of the cabinet departments and the New Deal agencies in general. Despite their regular meetings very few victories could they claim during Roosevelt’s first term. Jones and William Pickens of the NAACP were “seasoned veterans for the civil rights movement”.68 It 67lbid. “lbid., p. 78-79. See also, William Pickens, Why oLA_N_ow_Noo:o, edited by William L. Andrews, Bloomington & Indianapolis. Indiana University Press, 1991 and Sheldon Avery, ULWMWQ WWW. London and Toronto. Associated University Presses, 1989. See also, Clarke Chambers.£aul_11._l$ollogo_ano_the_aun:ey; 175 was they who helped to lay the groundwork for the coming decades of the modern civil rights movement. Historian Patricia Sullivan contends that, “the New Deal era marked a departure from the national complacency that characterized the 19205.‘ For those who had not participated in the prosperity of the previous decade, it was a welcome change.”69 Jones and those involved with the inter-departmental work viewed the 19305 as a great opportunity for overall advancement in the African American community. This inter-departmental group held its first meeting on the morning of February 7, 1934 in the Department of Interior. The meeting was chaired and called to order by Clark Foreman, Adviser on the Economic Status of Negroes. This group was formulated as a result of “heads of the Departments and Administrations were asked to designate someone as responsible for the participation of the Negroes in the work of Wise Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1971. 89Sullivan, “Southam Reformers, the New Deal, and the Movement’s Foundation”, p. 82. 176 each department . . .”70 According to the minutes this first 1971 meeting “showed a large attendance. Several prominent individuals were apart of the group that began doing this most important work of securing for the “Negro” population its share of government relief. Along with Jones from the Department of Commerce the following individuals were present: E. H. Shinn, Department of Agriculture Phil Campbell, AAA Robert L. Vann, Attorney General’s Office Forrester B. Washington, CWA J. J. McEntee, Emergency Conservation Work H. A. Hunt, Farm Credit Administration Edward F. McGrady, Department of Labor Charles F. Roos, NRA William D. Bergman, Navy G. R. Clapp, TVA W. H. McReynolds, Treasury Department W. D. Searle, War Department Clark Foreman, Interior Department Robert C. Weaver, Interior Department72 Each individual was introduced and asked to “tell in two or three minutes of the work of his department as it affected 70Record Group 48, Central Classified File, 1907-1936. Minutes of Meeting held February 7, 1934, Inter-Departmental Group. National Archives, Washington, D. C 71lbid. 72lbid. 177 particularly the Negro population.”7‘3 Jones stated to the group that: his Division grew out of a conference of twelve Negroes called together by Secretary Roper to advise with him on the things the department of Commerce can do to improve the general economic conditions among Negroes, with special reference to business and business activities. Their idea has been that Negro business cannot qualify unless the Negro’s consumer purchasing power is raised.74 Jones’ division had the task of “putting new life in Negro business to avoid the unfortunate failure of the past.”75 This committee of individuals continued to meet periodically during Roosevelt’s first term in office. Despite their stalwart efforts many of their concerns and points of advice often fell on deaf ears. Social work scholar, Jacob Fisher contends that, With the exception of lckes and Perkins, perhaps no one in high office in the government considered racial discrimination of major significance when compared with the greater objectives of business recovery, the end of mass unemployment, higher farm prices, banking reform, social security, and the 73lbid. 74lbid. 75lbid. 178 other stated objectives of the New Deal.76 Even President Roosevelt refused to address the NAACP’s concerns of an antilynching bill during the 19305.77 Moreover perhaps the greatest shortcoming of the entire Roosevelt Administration was the obvious omission of black representation on the Committee on Economic Security. In the fall of 1934 the President appointed the Advisory Council to the Committee on Economic Security. Most of the council was made up of state and local politicians along with several prominent social workers. The committee was chaired by Frank P. Graham and Paul Kellogg editor of the Smyoy was 78 vice-chairman. There were no black representatives on such an important committee. It was this council that helped to formulate perhaps one the most important legislative bills of 76Jacob Fisher, In: : s . .. ; Massachusetts: G. K. Hall 8. 00., p. 133, 1980. For an overview of the 19305 and Black Americans during the Depression see, Darlene Clark Hine,Iho_Eoth_To_Eouolj1y;_Er_om I3 at so 0 ::; o I]: 3 ::‘|o o 2‘: :0: ' so :2] ; - ”g , New York and Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishers, 1995, p. 33-47. 77 Fisher, p. 133. 78Grace Abbott. Winn Chicago: The University of Chioogo Press, 1941, .199 (footnote 2) See also, Roy Lubove, IhonmgmLLoLSooioLSeoumy 18093335. pCambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1968. 179 the entire New Deal--Social Security. It was the Council’s responsibility to report to the Senate Finance Committee which then women to the President for Congress’ approval.79 The NUL and the NAACP made a joint effort to influence the Social Security Act from its inception. Walter White of the NAACP questioned Senator Robert F. Wagner of New York who ' sponsored the bill “whether it contained adequate safeguards against discrimination on account of race.”80 Although Senator Wagner assured both organization’s, it was to no avail. In the end the Social Security program “excluded agricultural and domestic employees from its provisions for unemployment compensation and old-age insurance.”81 The NAACP argued that it dealt a “direct blow at Negro workers.” While the NUL protested to President Roosevelt that it “excluded 65 percent of the Negroes throughout the country.”82 79lbid., p. 200. Bowdiss. mm. o. 275. 81lbid., p.275. 82|bid, p. 275-276. 180 Rather than become consumed by obvious omissions Jones directed his attention while in Washington toward increasing black labor opportunities. Some scholars have concluded that 83 the ‘black cabinet’ had very little success. On the surface their conclusions appear quite substantiated. Particularly, when the concerns of “Negro . . . unemployment and the need for ”84 low cost housing are the only measures by which many scholars have calculated success. To be sure the gains that African Americans achieved during the New Deal were largely because of the relentless efforts of Jones and a cadre of black professionals who worked with Mary McLeod Bethune and the Roosevelt Administration. In June of 1935 Jones reported to the Secretary of Commerce, Daniel C. Roper that he had delivered 91 public addresses since taking office in November 1933. In practically every appearance by Jones he addressed issues of economic and social welfare concerns for African Americans. He stated, “at 8("Seen Weiss. WW and Sitkoti. MW. 8“Christopher G. Wye, “The New Deal and the Negro Community: Toward a Broader Conceptualization”, JoumoLoLAmonoonjjstom, V0159, 1972, p. 621. 181 every available opportunity, in conferences and when addressing public gatherings, the services offered by the Department of Commerce through the Washington and District offices were presented.”85 Jones aided black employment by helping to create 294 white collar jobs by 1935 in thirty selected cities by outlining “a plan for the study of Negro Business Resources” through “the President’s work relief program.”86 Jones reported to Secretary Roper that “the main object of the study would be to procure data which can be utilized to improve general business practices among Negroes, and to expand their business institutions. . ”87 Furthermore Jones took this message of economic empowerment to black communities in Washington, D.C.; Massillon, Ohio; New York City; Montreal, Quebec; Canton, Ohio; Dover, Delaware; and Flushing, New York to name a few of the places he travelled. Chester H. McCall, assistant to the 8SDepartrnent of Commerce, Eugene Kinckle Jones, “Summary of Work”, April 1, to June 30, 1935. General Files, File 88449, Box 683, National Archives, Washington, D. C. 86lbid. 87|bid. 182 Secretary informed Jones that the Secretary was pleased with his work for the quarter and “the most appropriate comment we can make is keep up the good work”.88 Jones was the voice of the African American community in the Department of Commerce during this time. Secretary Roper reported in October 1935 that Jones “worked chiefly through the Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce as liaison between the Bureau and Negro business men and students of economic questions to help Negro business and to increase the purchasing power of the members of the race.”89 While Jones served as the advisor of Negro Affairs of the Department of Commerce several studies of great importance to the black community were conducted and published. Jones reported in July of 1936 that his office was continuing to “work on the four studies which have 88Department of Commerce, “Memorandum” For: Eugene Kinckle Jones, From: Chester H. McCall, July 12, 1935. General File, File 88449, Box 683, National Archives, Washington, D. C. 89Department of Commerce, October 31, 1935 to Mr. William W. Sanders, Executive Secretary of the National Association of Teachers, from Secretary of Commerce, Daniel C. Roper. lbid. 183 n90 been in progress during the past year. . They were ‘Negro Air Pilots’, Negro Chambers of Commerce’, ‘Negro Trade Associations’, and “Negro Insurance Company Failures’. Under Jones’ auspices the bureau also revised and distributed a “list of Negro chambers of Commerce” which were ”91 “distributed at strategic points. In addition Jones’ office sent out information concerning the general economic status of the African American race. The mailing list was extensive. It included students, writers, interested citizens, advertising agencies, distributors, manufacturers, promoters, educational institutions, and public libraries. The information that was usually sent out pertained to Negro aviators, Negro banks, Negro Chambers of Commerce, Negro Insurance Companies, Negro manufacturers, Negro newspapers and periodicals, Negro 92 retailers and trade associations. It was because of the enormous work conducted by Jones and his contemporaries in 90Department of Commerce, “Summary of Work”. Eugene Kinckle Jones, April 1, 1936 to June 30, 1936. General File, File 88449, Box 683, National Archives. 911bid. 92lbid. 184 Washington that much was accomplished on behalf of black Americans. To be sure, this was part of the early groundwork to the modern civil rights movement. Through the work of Jones and his colleagues in WaShington the African American community grew informed of political and economic opportunities through the federal government. As a result of the work that was done historian Harvard Sitkoff claims that, “a host of government publications and conferences made explicit the federal government’s responsibility for issues of human rights.”":3 This was the exact nature of Jones’ work during his tenure with New Deal activities. Time and time again Jones informed African Americans of assistance opportunities available to them through the federal government’s relief programs. Jones worked nonstop during his tenure at the Department of Commerce. He reported in June of 1936 that he had delivered a total of 135 addresses between November 1, 1935 through June 30, 1936 all over the country pertaining to the “Negro” 93Harvard Sitkoff. W222. revised edition. New York: Hill and Wang, p. 10-11, 1993. 1 85 economic condition.94 While in Washington Jones did not neglect contacts with such noted black intellectuals as DuBois, and historian Rayford W. Logan. In the mid 19305 DuBois prepared to launch his massive undertaking of the Enoyolooooio_of_mo_uo_g:o. Jones wrote to DuBois in October 1935, “I would be willing to cooperate in every possible way, especially in rendering service in the field in which I have had my largest experience.”5 Professor Logan wrote to Jones in November 1936 that “I am sure that Dr. DuBois will be grateful to you for suggestions that you may have to offer.”96 Jones assured Logan that he would probably have more suggestions as the project progressed. Whether in government or literature Jones worked continuously to assure the “Negro” population of a stake in American society. As Jones prepared to leave the Department of Commerce in December of 1936 there were a total of 240 African Americans 94lbid. 95October 11, 1935 from Eugene Kinckle Jones, Department of Commerce to W. E. B. DuBois, Atlanta University. NUL Papers, Series 5, Box 8. 9iiNovember 12, 1936 to Eugene Kinckle Jones from Rayford W. Logan, Atlanta University. NUL Papers, Series 5, Box 8. 186 97 working through the Department of Commerce. Secretary Roper later informed James A. Farley, Chairman of the Democratic National Committee that “because of the well organized condition in which Jones left his work, we have promoted Charles E. Hall, a Negro, who has been employed in the Census Bureau . . ”98 In 1936 Jones prepared to return to his job as Executive Secretary of the NUL fulltime. Secretary Roper felt that Jones had rendered a very valuable service “as Head of the Unit in the Bureau of Foreign & Domestic Commerce relating ”99 to Negro industrial relations. Because of Jones’ expertise in his chosen field of economics this division of the government felt that it could “render better and more effective service to the Negroes than theretofore.”100 Jones was a definite force to 97Department of Commerce, “Memorandum”, For Joseph R. Houchins Assistant Business Specialist, Negro Affairs Division, Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce from E. W. Libbey, Chief Clerk. General Files, File 88449, Box 683, National Archives. 98Department of Commerce, August 12, 1937 to Honorable James A. Farley, Chairman, Democratic National Committee from Daniel C. Roper, Secretary of Commerce. General Files, File 88449, Box 683, National Archives. 99lbid. 100lbid. 187 be reckoned with by the time of the Great Depression. He and the NUL were synomous as American institutions. Jones also proved to be effective regardless of whether he worked in government as head of a racial uplift agency or as a social worker. He was a multi-talented figure who gained national notoriety. Chapter 5 CHANGING OF THE GUARDS His character was as nearly perfect as a man’s can be. He was gentle, patient and wise. His integrity was unshakable and was equalled only by his courage. He understood the true nature of American democracy, its weaknesses and its strength, its internal group conflicts, and what needed to be done to fulfill its promises.1 Board of Trustees of the NUL, 1954 A5 Jones returned fulltime to New York prepared to assume his position as the Executive Secretary of the NUL a changing climate was underway within the social work profession. Jones returned in 1937 to the NUL and began to engage directly in the activities of providing social work services for black people. Concomitantly major changes within the social work profession, the NUL and Jones’ personal life loomed on the horizon. This chapter will discuss the changes that occurred within the social work profession in general and then illustrate how those changes impacted social work 1Board of Trustees of the National Urban League, “Eugene Kinckle Jones in Memoriam, 1885-1954”, National Urban League Papers, Series 1, Box 26, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, D. C. 188 189 education for African Americans by the late 19305. In conclusion this chapter will examine Jones’ resignation from the NUL during a time of major transformation within social work. Overall national changes were rapidly occurring within the black leadership class by the 19405. Jones” conservative leadership style received enormous challenge from a new and younger generation of African Americans. Despite Jones’ return to the NUL many social workers were convinced by Roosevelt’s second term election that New Deal policies would effectively address major social woes. Particularly following the adoption of the Social Security Act in 1935 many social reformers, black and white began looking more to government rather than community initiated relief.2 By the 19305 there was a gradual move away from the community settlement house concept toward the establishment of government welfare agencies. The 19205 model of casework as the ‘model’ in social work lost center stage during the Depression. Social work scholar John H. Ehrenreich concludes 2Josephine Chapin Brown, W232. New York: Octagon Books, 1971. 190 that with the advent of the Depression and its massive poverty, its newly energized social programs, its new social work institutions, and its transformed relationship between social workers and government, the twenties’ model of professionalism became an anachronism.3 Ehrenreich further claims that “the rapid expansion of relief programs following Roosevelt’s inauguration as president had transformed the relationship between relief and casework.”4 In short social work elites could no longer claim that social work solely operated with respect to clients and patrons. Furthermore the social work profession was deeply split between the old guards and the rank-n-filers by the 19305. The most well known of the elite settlement house/social reformers, Jane Addams, died in 1935. According to historian Judith Trolander “no one came along in the settlement 3John H. Ehrenreich. Wad WWW. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1985, p.121. 4|bid. 191 movement to replace her in the public mind.”5 Even those settlement homes that remained by the mid-19305 began to realize that certain fundamental changes had to be made in order to keep up with the changing trends in social work the profession. Perhaps the greatest failure of the settlement house movement was that it did not embrace an overall integrated agenda during this time of Jim Crow segregation. Historian Lasch-Quinn concludes that race was the main cause of the decline of the entire settlement movement. She states “Not only did the settlements’ failure to welcome black neighbors universally into their programs contribute to their long-term decline, but their restrictionism left the great promise of the movement unfulfilled.”6 There was a group of social workers, however who did attempt to address the attendant concerns of racial injustice within the social work profession during the 19305. This was New York: Columbia University Press, 1987, p. 25. See also, Jane Addams W. New York. Signet, 1960. 6Elisabeth Lasch-Ouinn, Blookjojghhms. p.8. 192 often described as the ’Rank and File’ Movement amongst organized social work. Though the organization’s greatest concern was the establishment of social work unions it played a major role in radical agitation during the 19305. It was the Rank and File Movement that most social workers referred to as the political left wing of social work. Social workers who belonged to the Rank and File often focused their energy on securing avenues “for linking the broad social objectives of social work and the labor movement.”7 Perhaps the organization’s greatest success was the establishment and publication of its major social work journal SooioLjNonLIodoy in 1934.8 It was within the journal that many of their issues were addressed. To be sure, this journal and the Rank and Filers tended to be far more radical in their expectations of social work. Social work scholar Barbara Levy Simon argues that the journal even addressed the messages of Marcus Garvey and W. E. 7Fisher. W. o- 102. See also Rick Spam. W. Washington. D. 0.: University Press of America, Inc., 1982. 8Fisher, p. 111. See also, Clarke A. Chambers, WWW. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1971, p.160. 193 B. DuBois. She states, “the influence of both leaders was evident in the multiple discussions of Jim Crow laws and racism in W.” The journal was edited by noted social work scholar Jacob Fisher of the Bureau of Jewish Social Research and advised by major figures in social work such as Gordon Hamilton, Eduard C. Lindeman, Ira Reid, Roger Baldwin, and Mary Van Kleeck.1°$ooiol_flo:ls_'[odoy was the left wing journal of social work and competitor of the Sammy which addressed more traditional and nonconfrontational issues of social work.11 Jones was active in Washington at the organization’s height. Though definite evidence is lacking, it is highly unlikely that Jones affiliated with the group due to its radical dispositions. Jacob Fisher, Chairman of the National Coordinating Committee of Social Service Employee Groups was a dominate figure amongst the Rank and Filers. Fisher wrote in December, 9Barbara Levy Simon, I. : ' fljston: New York: Columbia University Press,1994, p. 91. 1ilChambers. mm. o- 160. 11lbid. 194 1936 to Edith Abbott, President of the National Conference of Social Work and a leading social work figure at the University of Chicago acknowledging receipt of her letter concerning “equal treatment of ‘Negroes’ at the Indianapolis meeting”12 of the NCSW. The 1936 Indianapolis meeting symbolized a major turning point for social relations amongst black and white social workers. During the NCSW’s 1936 meeting African American attendees were not permitted into the bar of the hotel. Though African American members of the conference were in fact lodging at the hotel and attending all the sessions of the conference the hotel’s racial codes would not permit them to socialize in the bar. Jacob Fisher and the members of the committee took this issue up with Abbott and the executives of the NCSW. Fisher questioned Abbott as to whether the act of discrimination violated the NCSW trade union agreement. Rank and Filers refused to let the incident go unchecked. Following 12December 22, 1936 to Edith Abbott from Jacob Fisher. Jacob Fisher Papers, National Coordinating Committee of Social Service Employee, 1935-37, Box F534(6), File 8. Charles Babbage Institute, Social Welfare History Archives, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota. 195 the act of discrimination the NCSW executive officers were never to allow the conference to be held any place that did not accommodate both black and white social workers alike. This was written into the bylaws of the Conference because of the expressed concern of Fisher and other Rank and File members. Fisher instantly began a trail of correspondence with Abbott concerning the Indianapolis racial incident. Abbott’s response to Fisher was ambiguous and reason enough for concern. Though change was evident with some white social workers many were reluctant to deal with forced external change. Abbott responded to Fisher, “my reason for thinking that we should take no action is that I believe that the business of the Conference is to make it possible for all of our membership to have an opportunity to attend all of our meetings and our official social gatherings.”13 Abbott did not agree that the Conference should take up such issues as social gatherings beyond the realm of the Conference. She further stated to Fisher that “it would be a great mistake for the Conference to 13December 11, 1936 to Jacob Fisher from Edith Abbott. Fisher Papers, F534(6), File 8. 196 take any responsibility for providing opportunities of any kind in the local bars.” She stressed, “this is a matter which seems to many of us clearly outside the business of the Conference.”14 Abbott was quite adamant in her position on this issue of race relations. She used several examples to illustrate her views on social matters outside the Conference business. She declared to Fisher, I do not think that it is the business of the Conference to assure any kind of recreational facilities to any of its members. If a golf club gives privileges to men and not to women, this seems to me a matter about which the Conference is not concerned. If a bar admits men and excludes women, this seems to me again a matter about which we have no concern. This applies also to the matter of any racial lines that may be drawn in these fields.15 The Rank and File group did not let the matter go unaddressed following Abbott’s poignant opposition. They used every available avenue to denounce the actions of the hotel and the city of Indianapolis racial codes. To be sure following the incident the NCSW was cautious not to hold its meetings in locales with codes of racial discrimination. The National 1‘ilbid. 15|bid. 197 Coordinating Committee denounced the act of discrimination publically in the organization’s newsletter, W on May 23 1937. Perhaps to counteract Abbott’s position the editorial read that “the struggle for equal rights and opportunities for Negroes, for an anti-lynching law, and other such legislation requires the active support of all progressive social workers.”16 Abbott’s attitudes and lack of social conviction reveals a major lack of sensitivity for race relations within the social work profession. It was Abbott and others like her who controlled and determined the nature of many northern settlement houses. In most instances their institutions did not address the plight of African Americans. This is made evident through their noncommittal attitudes and failures to address the total social well being of all people. Aside from the overwhelming concerns of race in the settlement house movement there were other forces occurring within social work that threatened peaceable relations. During the 1937 meeting of the NCSW the American Association of 16Newsletter. WWW. Sunday. May 23, 1937. Fisher Papers, F534(6), File 9. 198 Schools of Social Work (AASSW) adopted the Master of Social Work degree as its qualifications for professional social workers to take affect in 1939.17 This decision challenged the availability of professional black social workers both North and South. Atlanta University was the only black school of social work in 1937 that offered an advanced degree. Incidentally the United States Supreme Court ruling in the 1938 Gajnos Decision impacted all professional training for African Americans for decades to come. To be sure white schools of social work were about to be challenged on their existing notions of who could and would grant advance degrees. The Gojnos__Qoso proved to be a groundswell of political and social unrest for the social work profession. In the midst of internal changes sweeping through the social work profession the Supreme Court handed down its now famous decision in 17Ehrenreich, IhLAnmsnoJmooinatjon. p. 102-138, Chapter 4, entitled, “The Crisis in Social Work, 1929-1945”. See also Bruce A. Thyer and Ma:rilyn A. Biggerstaff, ' WWW Springfield, Illinois. Charles C. Thomas, Publisher, p. 16, 1989. Also, Robert L. Barker, Iho_S_ooio]_lALo:K_Qjotjonon:. Silver Spring, Maryland: National Association of Social Workers, p. 189.1987. ELoooodjngs_ot WWW. Sixty-Fourth Annual Session held in Indianapolis, Indiana. The University of Chicago Press, published for the National Conference of Social Work, 1937. 199 WWW December 12. 1938.18 The Goings decision led to numerous debates and concerns in programs of professional education for numerous southern states in particular. North Carolina was the first state to challenge the existing status of graduate education offered black social workers as a result of the Gojhos ruling. Lloyd L. Gaines graduated in 1935 from all-black Lincoln University in Jefferson City, Missouri with honors. In 1936 Gaines applied for admission to the University of Missouri Law School. His application was denied on the basis of his race. The Supreme Court ordered that if the University of Missouri did not admit Gaines then it must provide equal educational facilities and instruction at historically black Lincoln University.19 iiiLarry Grothaus, “The Inevitable Mr. Gaines: The Long Struggle to Desegregate the University of Missouri, 1936-1950”, W; Vol 26, p. 20-42, 1984. SeealsoMarkV. Tushnet, II: ~ - - -- :o_ - - - Eduoation._1225_-_1252. Chapel Hill and London: The University of North Carolina Press, p. 70-81,1987. Also, Patricia Sullivan, “Southern Reformers, the New Deal and the Movement’s Foundation” in Armstead L. Robinson and Patricia Sullivan, editors, . Charlottesville and London: University Press of W Virginia, p. 84-85, 1991. David R. Goldfield, W = . : - . Ba.ton Rouge and London: Louisiana State University Press, p. 58, 1990. liiRobert McLaran Sawyer, “The Gaines Case: Its Background and Influence on the University of Missouri and Lincoln University, 1936-1950” (Ph. D. Diss., University of Missouri 1966),152-197. See also, Richard Kluger, WW 200 Gaines had sought legal counsel through the NAACP. The NAACP took this opportunity to “launch a campaign to desegregate Missouri’s institutions of higher learning,”""0 that would challenge professional schools of training throughout the nation. Attorney Charles Hamilton Houston, Chief of the NAACP Legal Counsel at the time cautioned his “colleagues not to rush n21 into court without adequate preparation. He subsequently secured the services of Sidney Redmond a black lawyer from St. Louis, Missouri who began the investigation of inequalities between the University of Missouri and Lincoln University which had no professional programs at the time. Historian Darlene Clark Hine has referred to this team of black lawyers as an elite team during the 19305 and 405 who worked with Houston and = = ' ' : . - :. . New York. Alfred A. Knopf, 1976, p. 202-204. Mark V. Tushnet, W W New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994, p. 70. 2iiSawyer, p. 21. See also, Vincent P. Franklin, “American Values, Social Goals, and the Desegregated School: A Historical Perspectives, W W. Edited by Vincent P. Franklin and James D. Anderson. Boston: G. K. Hall & Co., 1978, p. 200-201. 21Sawyer, p. 23. 201 the NAACP.22 The work of the team of NAACP lawyers would eventually prove successful. The Supreme Court by a 7-2 vote in 1938 ruled with a majority opinion, favoring the plaintiff. The Court ‘secured the precedents’ that would be needed in other state and local cases that eventually culminated in the abandonment of separate but 23 equal doctrines of Jim Crow Laws. The Court’s majority opinion read as follows: A state denies equal protection of the laws to a black student when it refuses him admission to its all-white law school, even though it volunteers to pay his tuition at any law school in an adjacent state. By providing a law school for whites but not for blacks the state has created a privilege for one race and denied it to another.24 Following the ruling of the Goings Decision, Missouri zzDarlene Clark Hine, “Black Lawyers and the Twentieth- -Century Struggle for Constitutional Change”, - . - - fljsjom. Brooklyn, New York: Carlson Publishing, Inc., 1996, p. 147-168. See also, Genna Rae McNeil and John Hope Franklin, editors,Afnoon_A:nonoons_ond_tho_L|y1ng QonstiMjon. Washington, D. C.: Smithsonian Institution Press,1995. 23MaIkV. Tushnet, II : - . 1 ' - - .z. ' 12254252. Chapel Hill and London: The University of North Carolina Press, 1987, p. 70-81, Chapter 5 entitled: “Securing the Precedents: Gaines and Alston". “WW (305 U: S- 337). W goon, 2nd Edition, p. 903. 202 attempted to evade the issues of discrimination in higher education. Missouri was not serious about providing a Law School facility for African Americans at Lincoln University equal to that at the University of Missouri in Columbia. The state then was left with the now infamous decision of trying to provide education for African Americans in nearby states with scholarships. Nonresident African Americans were permitted to obtain studies in law in the states of Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa 25 and Illinois. Law professor Mark Tushnet argues that “The white resident is afforded legal education within the State; the Negro resident having the same qualifications is refused it there and must go outside the State to obtain it.” Tushnet in conclusion further laments “that is a denial of the equality of legal right to the enjoyment of the privilege which the State has set up, and the provision for the payment of tuition fees in another State does not remove the discrimination.”26 Eventually the Gaines decision ended in a law of agitation 25Joseph Tussman. editor W New York: Oxford University Press, 1963, p. 23. 261' ushnet, In: L :. A 203 for white southern educational institutions in particular. It further questioned the social systems within all of the southern United States. Houston and the NAACP team of lawyers had hoped that they would be able to further argue in the Gaines case for equalization of facilities. Throughout the 19305 Houston the NAACP and a small pool of Civil Rights lawyers created some social/racial unrest throughout the nation by arguing numerous court cases. They were in fact quite deliberate and methodical. Houston and his team of lawyers were hoping that Gaines would provide a far reaching victory. Lloyd Gaines by April 1939 could not be found for further court appearances. The case was eventually ordered dismissed because it could not be pursued any further. Despite its dismissal by the late 19305 the case had established an uneasiness throughout the nation, particularly the southern states which were not offering advanced education to its black citizens in most locales.” Though Gaines himself disappeared and the case could not be used to further argue for the 2TTilshnet p 74-75 See also. McNeil. GroundworkLQbarleLtlatniltgmtloustm anthojtmooloJoLQiyfljjgms, p. 142-151 and Lucille H. Bluford, “The Lloyd Gaines StorY" WWW vol 22. No 6.9 242-246 1959 204 equalization of facilities it did establish a major precedence for future cases. Writer Virginius Dabney wrote that “southern educational systems, which were on notice that they had to make far reaching readjustments.”28 Most white educators were in agreement that separate educational facilities would best serve - African American students. Following the NAACP major victory in 1938 with the Gaines case “southern whites recognized the implicit challenge to the segregation system.”29 Further they were equally concerned that it would be far too costly to establish two separately equal schools for blacks and whites. Advocates of black social work in the South had hoped that the Gaines ruling would insist on enormous support to establish professional schools of social work at some predominately black colleges. Historian Charles H. Wesley’s study of the situation revealed that there were some southern states which were 28Tushnet, II : 29Sullivan, “Southern Reformers, the New Deal, and the Movement’s Foundation”, p. 84. 205 laying the necessary groundwork to establish graduate departments “as additions to the State colleges for Negroes. . .”30 Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Missouri were the four southern states that made early strides to put such efforts in effect. Many of those early efforts were skillfully orchestrated by African Americans who expressed great concern over the lack of opportunity for advanced education in the professions for black students particularly in the South. Jones’ work in the field of social work appears to have come full circle by the late 19305. His earlier speeches to actively recruit black social work students received great momentum following the series of events that culminated following the Goings Decision. His argument found allies through historically black colleges, particularly in the American South. Considering that Jones remained conservative in all his work with the NUL it was no surprise when Dr. James E. Shepard of Durham, North Carolina another noted conservative took on 3°Charles H. Wesley, “Graduate Education for Negroes in Southam Universities, WW. Vol. 10, January 1940, p. 91. 206 the social work establishment following the Goings ruling. Shepard courted the white Democrat establishment of North Carolina for much of the financial security given his institution, North Carolina College for Negroes now North Carolina Central University. Shepard’s actions were always cautious and well structured within the realm of southern etiquette. Shepard was considered the “principal spokesman of Negro conservatism” in North Carolina.31 He did not support the NAACP actions to integrate the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC) in 1933. Thomas Raymond Hocutt a graduate of North Carolina College applied to the school of pharmacy at UNC and was denied admission. When Shepard was called upon for assistance by NAACP officials he declined to assist “especially if stirred by out-of-staters-would backfire and hurt the amicable status quo.”32 In keeping with his conservative approach Shepard did not engage in the fight for] African American advanced educational protest until the Supreme Court ruled in the Gojnos 31Richard Kluger, ' : . . W New York: Alfred A Knooi 1976 9157 32lbid. 207 case in 1938. Though Jones was not directly involved in the activities of North Carolina it is conceivable that Shepard’s actions met with his approval. This was the kind of approach that Jones insisted upon for the development of black social work--nonconfrontational. Moreover Jones was very much engaged in the direct activities of the NUL by 1938. James E. Shepard, Founder and first President of North Carolina College for Negroes now North Carolina Central University (NCCU) lead a major struggle to establish an advanced degree in social work at NCCU following the Gaines ruling. NCCU was established at Durham, North Carolina in 1910 and in 1925 became the first state supported black college in the state. Due to a longtime affiliation with Democrat Governor Clyde R. Hoey Shepard acquired generous amounts of money for the financial security of his institution.33 Shepard had held an important position in the leadership of the black community of Durham for quite sometime. By the Depression decade of the 3358" E- Thorpe. Winnin- Durham: Harrington Publication Company, 1984. See also, Felix L. Armfield, “Durham’s Tobacco Industry: The Black Experience, 1890-1950” (Master thesis, North Carolina Central University, 1989), p. 13-16. 208 19305 Shepard’s role was one to be revered. Historian Walter Weare states “both the sense of moral authority and the substance of community organization came more from the North Carolina Mutual and North Carolina College(North Carolina Central University)”34 of which Shepard was at the helm. Shepard worked to establish as many professional programs at NCCU during his lifetime as were possible. In 1939 graduate work was begun in the liberal arts and professions at NCCU. In 1940 and 1941 Shepard secured the establishment of the Schools of Law and Library Science respectively.35 It was a graduate program in social work that eluded him up until the time of his death in 1947. Immediately after the Gaines decision was handed down Shepard launched a campaign to create a social work program at NCCU. On November 17, 1939 Shepard informed Dr. Marion Hathway, Executive Secretary of AASSW that he desired “to make a formal application to the Executive Committee for the 34Walter Weare, “Charles Clinton Spaulding: Middle -Class Leadership in the Age Of $69regation”. WWW Edited by JOhh Hope Franklin and August Meier, Urbana and Chicago: University Illinois Press, 1982, p. 176. 35Thorpe. WWW P- 14- 209 approval of a school of Social Work for Negroes at this Institution [NCCU].”36 Shepard sought to assure Hathway that he had the support of “every social agency in the State” and was confident of the cooperation “of Duke University and the University of North Carolina in the establishment of such a department at this Institution.”37 Shepard stated that the need for the program was such that “the State already has both men and women in attendance at the Atlanta School of Social Work.” He had already begun to seek state aid for the program and was certain the program would “attract a reasonable number of ”38 students for the first year. He further made it clear that NCCU would not act on the matter unless he received the absolute approval of her office. Hathway held reservations as to the establishment of a program at NCCU. She wrote in December 1939 to Roy M. Brown, 36November 17, 1939 from James E. Shepard to Marion Hathway. Council on Social Work Education (CSWE), Box 329, Folder 2, title: North Carolina College for Negroes, Charles Babbage Institute, Social Welfare History Archives, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota. 37lbid. 38lbid. 210 Director Division of Public Welfare and Social Work at the University of North Carolina concerning her recommendation. She stated “definitely contrary to my impulse and part of the delay in sending this material is due ‘to my reluctance to believe that the North Carolina program should not be encouraged.”39 Though her personal views were in agreement with Shepard the committee appears to have viewed the situation with indifference. Therefore Hathway’s recommendations appeared to be ambiguous. Hathway’s concern however was a result of the Gaines decision. She wrote to Shepard in January of 1940, “The establishment of a school of social work at the North Carolina College for Negroes raises a series of questions growing out of the Gaines decision.”40 Despite Hathway’s plea to Shepard, to be understood, he was unrelenting in his written response to her on January 23, 1940. He stated, “I appreciate the frank way in which you have presented the matter, and your desire to be absolutely fair and considerate of all concerned. I 39December 22, 1939 from Roy M. Brown to Marion Hathway. CSWE, Box 329, Folder 3, title: N. C. College for Negroes. 40January 20, 1940 to James E. Shepard from Marion Hathway. CSWE, Box 329, Folder 12, title: N. C. College for Negroes. 211 must, however, state that I do not agree with some of your 1 conclusions fully.”4 In closing he asked that she forward the enclosed memorandum to “each member of the Executive Committee . . .”42 The memorandum that Shepard referred to was entitled, “Effects of the Lloyd Gaines decision in programs of professional education in certain states.”43 Within the memo Shepard takes to task several issues addressed in Hathway’s statement following the committee’s stated position. North Carolina and Missouri were the only two schools providing any professional training for African Americans in state supported schools as Shepard stated candidly to Hathway. Shepard’s memo forced Hathway and the committee to have to tackle the moral as well as the politically correct injunction. The moral question according to Shepard was as follows, Relative to making an exception in this case, it 41January 23, 1940 to Hathway from Shepard. CSWE, Box 329, File 12. 42lbid. 43January 23, 1940, Memorandum to Hathway from Shepard. CSWE, Box 329, File 12. 212 should be said that we as Negroes did not of our own volition create the separate school plan in the South. While we do not object to it, we feel that we are entitled as citizens to equal advantages and that the establishment of exceptional rules for us is generally another way of not assuming full responsibility for equal educational opportunities. We, therefore, feel that we are justified in objecting to any “back door entrance” into anything to which we are rightfully entitled.”44 Shepard also argued that the need for trained social workers in the black community were of the greatest need. Further he stated that the “problem can be met by the maintenance of out- of State scholarships, but does the State, in making such arrangements, fulfill its obligations to provide Negroes with advantages afforded to white students.”45 Many black students upon the completion of their studies in social work at Atlanta’s School of Social Work were not returning to North Carolina. Therefore Shepard argued that the state of North Carolina could increase its pool of available individuals to do the needed work if a school were approved for North Carolina. He closed the memo by stating to Hathway that, “lbid. 45lbid. 213 There are enough Negro colleges in the country to absorb every Negro college student in North Carolina. Does this fact suggest that there is no need for North Carolina to discharge its own obligation to its Negro citizens? In the final analysis, regardless of any statistical evidence which may be projected into the situation, the problem remains one of social justice.46 Following Shepard’s memo Brown wrote to Hathway in February expressing, “apparently what President Shepard is saying is that he wants the Association to find a way to approve the proposed curriculum in the North Carolina College for Negroes without declaring that such action is making an exception for his lnstitution.”47 Shortly thereafter Hathway informed Shepard that the outgoing committee had received his memorandum and letter with great interest and concern.“3 The new Executive Committee did not meet until May. In the meantime North Carolina was viewed as the major test case in social work education for African Americans following the stnos decision. 46Ibid. 47February 12, 1940 to Hathway from Roy Brown. CSWE, Box 329, File 12. 4iiFebruary 20, 1940 to Shepard from Hathway. CSWE, Box 329, File 12. 214 Several individuals and institutions of concern were observing the situation at NCCU. Walter White of the NAACP expressed to Shepard that “under no circumstances would his Association foster and be satisfied with regional schools . . .”49 Although White argued that the NAACP was more concerned with the equalization of teachers’ salaries at the time he also felt the situation in North Carolina was a ‘unique situation.’ Though Shepard led a gallant fight the school of social work never materialized at NCCU. Shepard’s actions were paramount in the overall struggle to secure advanced education in black social work. Instead Shepard obtained a Law School and School of Library Science rather than a school of social work in 1940 and 1941 respectively at North Carolina Central University.50 Even though Jones did not play a leading role in what was happening in North Carolina his activities with the NUL had helped to bring about such a transformation. He had worked during the first quarter of the 20th century to make social work for black people a national concern. To be sure, Jones’ efforts in 49March 1, 1940 to Hathway from Shepard. CSWE. Box 329, File 12. 5i’Thorpe. W. P- 14- 215 previous decades were aided by increasing access for Black men and women to the social work profession. It may seem that Jones was not involved with the national events occurring within the social work profession. In fact this was the level of national attention that Jones had worked for all along. Social work advocates were now able to argue for adequate social work attention in regions of the American south. Moreover Jones was confronted with several issues of major importance to his professional and personal life by the late 19305. He chose not to remain in Washington during Roosevelt’s second term in office. As Jones returned to New York the national office of the League was under enormous financial stress. In addition to the overall changes of the profession Jones lost his greatest advocate for the NUL’s programs. Ruth Standish Baldwin died in 1934 leaving the major financial burden to Jones at the height of the depression. Furthermore the League was receiving criticism from friends and foes alike by the mid 19305. E. Franklin Frazier reported to Gunnar Myrdal that much education work that should have been done was in fact not considered by the League 216 officials. He stated, “in one city where they attempted to organize 5 Workers’ Council they invited only professional people and neglected the more intelligent and more articulate members of the working class.”51 Much concern from the “Negro working class” had grown during this period. Despite these growing tensions Jones continued to push for an available pool of young black social workers through the NUL’s fellowship training. By 1938 Charles S. Johnson of Fisk University was soliciting a list of the best candidates from the League’s pool of applicants. Jones stated to Johnson in June of 1938 that “there were so many worthy applicants for our fellowships who could not be taken care of by us, that I had no choice but to send you their names.”52 Considering that Jones and Johnson understood that by 1939 the requirement of the masters degree would transform social work credentials it is no small wonder as to their urgency to get the students trained. In addition to the obvious concerns of the need for more 5‘Myrdal. An_Am5Lican_l21l5mma. p. 841. if. a. 52June 24, 1938, from Eugene Kinckle Jones to Charles S. Johnson. Charles S. Johnson Collection, Box 26, Folder 7, Amistad Research Center, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana. 217 trained social workers the changing racial climate of the 19305 factored into Jones’ career dilemmas. Jones and the NUL as well as other organizations working in the interest of African Americans experienced a backlash of concern from white interest groups. Throughout the New Deal era, the white south expressed concerns that continual federal activism and the emergence of a liberal coalition within the national Democratic party would undermine their way of life.53 Historian Patricia Sullivan contends that the white south was far more concerned with the broader thrust of the New Deal than with the NAACP. The white south felt that the New Deal “threatened to undermine the political structure of the Solid South.”54 Such southern organizations as the Women’s National Association for the Preservation of the White Race (WNAPWR) actively sought to discredit the work of the NUL. In April of 1939 Mrs. J. E. Andrews of the WNAPWR wrote to another member of the organization that “We are not unfriendly to Negroes. We object 53Sullivan, p. 84-85. 54lbid. 218 to the ruin of our white children and students by them.”55 The group’s motto was “The Teaching of God’s Word to the Children of the Nation--The Word of God--Allegiance to the National Constitution.”56 This organization felt it had a duty to ward off what it perceived as destruction. Andrews further stated that “we are organized for EBESEBNAIIQN - not even ADALANQEMENI - as the Negroes are” she further insisted that “it is not we but Negroes who are seeking to deny that right [full citizenship] to others.”57 This group questioned every possible group of individuals that ever came to the aid of African Americans. Andrews further disparaged that the continued assistance to African Americans and not whites would eventually wipe out the white race. The usual generous financial contributors of the NUL were brought into question concerning the African American cause. This brought about further heightened tension within the 55April 8, 1939, Claudia C. Andrews to Mrs. David Alter. National Urban League Papers, Series IV, Box 7, Julius Rosenwald Fund, 1930-33 8 36-37. Library of Congress, Washington, D. C. 55lbid. 57lbid. 219 NUL and other such groups. This was not the least of Jones’ concerns for the NUL. Unfortunately Jones’ relationship with T. Arnold Hill had grown distant during his tenure with the New Deal. Much of the stress between Jones and Hill centered on Hill’s radical and confrontational approach to the work of the NUL. Consequently the League’s largely liberal white Executive Board members grew more and more dissatisfied with the public persona of Hill in Jones’ absence.58 Guichard and Parris claim that during Hill’s tenure as Executive Secretary “the entire tenor of the NUL had changed.”59 Hill had sought to align the NUL with the more vocal concerns of the labor movement in the 19305. According to Parris and Brooks, Hill struggled with the question of whether the League was to become “more radical or more conservative?”60 Even still the financial situation of the NUL had grown 58Parris and Brooks, p. 260-279. 59lbid., p. 260. 60Parrls and Brooks. W. P. 262. 220 unstable for Jones and by 1936 his time became limited in his Washington office. He began spending more time back in New York to oversee the operations of the NUL. Hill had attempted to push the NUL into a much more proactive role in society. Upon Jones’ return to the League fulltime in 1937 most of his attention was consumed by the immediate events at the NUL. By 1938 Jones “slammed on the brakes and the NUL reverted to a more sedate approach to black problems in the nation.”61 lnspite of these grave issues there were other matters of even greater concern in Jones’ personal life. Perhaps the most pressing matter for Jones was his declining health. In January of 1939 Jones was stricken with Tuberculosis. Jones took several months to rest and recuperate from his stint with Tuberculosis before returning to the NUL for work.62 During Jones’ period of illness Jesse O. Thomas the southern field director of the NUL became acting director of the 61lbid., p. 263. 62See Parris and Brooks. 221 NUL.63 Thomas was careful not to make too many hasty decisions during Jones’ abscene considering the climate created by Hill during Jones’ earlier stint in Washington, D. 0.64 Following this major setback with his health, he was advised by his physician to convalesce in a more suitable climate other than New York City. Jones was forced to make a choice between his career and his health. Before Jones made this very important decision there was an even greater decision to be made in conjunction with the Executive Board of the NUL. To be sure, the Board had grown to admire Jones and his loyalty to the NUL by 1940. In January of 1940 T. Arnold Hill hand delivered his written resignation from the NUL to Jones at his home in Flushing, New York. Hill’s decision caused much concern among his friends and colleagues all around the country. Many felt that the Executive Board of the NUL had treated Hill unfairly. Moreover some allies of Hill felt that Jones had not supported Hill as best he could and that the issue should have been taken 63Parris and Brooks. p. 267. 64lbid. 222 up further with the Executive Board. Many of Jones’ supporters disagreed. In the end Hill’s decision to quit the NUL after 25 years of service was final.65 Jones was now faced with his own departure from the NUL along with the major concern as to who would become the new Executive Secretary of the NUL. Historians Guichard Parris and Lester Brooks questioned whether there was “room at the top for anyone but Jones? [and] If so, whom?”66 To be sure Hill was gone and he was not to be retrieved. Jones’ decision in this matter proved typical of his style and character, always the diplomat. He selected Lester B. Granger, Hill’s understudy and former head of the Workers’ Bureau to be the assistant executive secretary through industrial relations. This reassured those who still wished for Hill’s type of “spark and drive”.67 Granger grew up in a black middle class family in Newport News, Virginia. Both his parents were professionals, his mother 65Parris and Brooks, p. 271. 66Parris and Brooks, p. 273. 67lbid. 223 a teacher and his father a doctor. Granger graduated Dartmouth College in 1918 with a B. A. degree in economics and later received social work training at the New York School for Social Work.68 He officially took over as the Executive Secretary of the NUL on October 1, 1940 at a time of major concern for the 69 organization. It appeared to be a “seemingly hopeless situation” which Granger would set out to control during his two decades at the helm of the NUL.70 Before Jones departed from his public work, the international social economist, Gunnar Myrdal of Sweden conducted an interview with him. Myrdal was commissioned by the Carnegie Corporation to conduct a major study on the race problem in America. Myrdal thought it necessary to interview as many prominent Americans for his massive study as possible. To be sure in 1940 Myrdal met and interviewed Jones concerning 68Annie Woodley Brown, “A Social Work Leader in the Struggle for Racial Equality: Lester Blackwell Granger”, W. Vol. 65, June, 1991, p. 267. 69lbid., p. 266-280. 70Parris and Brooks, p. 275. 224 his life and work through the NUL. The finished product of Myrdal studies is considered an American classic today, A_n Emmi“: D'IIEIJJIJJi-71 Although a leading social work economist Jones’ retirement from the national office of the Urban League occurred at a time of unsettling national and international events. Jones’ departure as Executive Secretary of the NUL was overshadowed perhaps due to a culmination of several events that were more national in scope. As Jones settled into his newly designed position of General Secretary of the NUL by 1941 the nation was focused on A. Philip Randolph’s March on Washington and on the events of World War II. Randolph and his continual persistence with the federal government concerning the labor issues affecting African 71Gunnar Myrdal, MW. Vol. II, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1944, first paperback edition, 1964, p. 837. See also, “Abridged Autobiography of Eugene Kinckle Jones” dictated for Gunnar Myrdal in 1940. The NUL Collection, Miscellaneous Folder, The Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, D. C. Further, Jones is not quoted through the text of Myrdal’s work but rather he along with L. Hollingsworth Wood, and Lester B. Granger of the NUL are given credit through footnotes for much of the information compiled concerning the League. Therefore Myrdal did make use of the dictated autobiography of Jones (See pp. 837- 838L 225 Americans had consumed black America’s attention.72 Randolph’s recognition grew substantially following his major victory with the establishment of the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters Union in 1925.73 Randolph particularly focused on the wartime industries and their lack of employment opportunities offered African Americans, especially given that they all received government support and contracts. In September of 1940 Randolph arranged to begin making plans for his March on Washington which was to take place on July 1, 1941. Randolph, his supporters and many in the black community convinced President Roosevelt that their intentions were serious enough that he issued Executive Order 8802. President Roosevelt was persuaded to issue this major order declaring: “there shall be no discrimination in the employment of workers in defense industries or government because of race, creed, color or national origin.” This order led to the 7ZSee Quarles, “A. Philip Randolph: Labor Leader at Large”, pp.139-165. See also, Marc Karson and Ronald Radosh, “The American Federation of Labor and the Negro Worker. 1894-1949”. WWW. Edited by Julius Jacobson. New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1968, p. 161-162. 73Quarles, “A. Philip Randolph: Labor Leader at Large” , p. 147. 226 establishment of a Committee on Fair Employment Practices. Though this major executive order only addressed federal jobs and facilities under federal jurisdiction it set a major precedent.74 This was one of the first major victories on the road to the modern civil rights movement. Further these national events occurred as Jones was handing over the leadership of the NUL to Granger in 1940. In addition to the United States being on the eve of World War II many more issues were mounting in Black America. From the 19305 throughout the 19405 the nation witnessed vast changes in the status of the African American social, political, and economic situation. It is the decade that many historians have termed the path .to equality’. Events that began with the Scottsboro Case of Alabama to the breaking of baseball’s color barrier by Jackie Robinson highlighted the decade with numerous changes that transformed the social, political, and economic landscape of the 74Benjamin Ouarles, “A. Philip Randolph. Labor Leader at Large”, W W, edited by John Hope Franklin and August Meier. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, p. 138-165.1982. See also, Paula F. Pfeiffer, A: EmeBandolnmflgneeLoLtherixiLBlgmLngemam and William Harris. Who 227 nation.75 In the meanwhile Tuscon, Arizona became Jones’ winter residence for most of the remainder of his life.76 Due to Jones’ failing health he realized that he could no longer keep up with the major work required to operate the NUL on a daily basis. After Granger was named as the new Executive Secretary of the NUL Jones was granted the title of General Secretary. Jones served in the position of General Secretary of League for the next ten years. During the 19405 Jones continued to advise the League on most of its activities. While he spent the winter months of January-March in Arizona he remained in touch with practically every aspect of the League’s business. Jones took up residence at 516 North Granada Street, Tucson, Arizona. He soon engaged himself with the local 75See, Darlene Clark Hine, W. New York and Philadelphia Chelsea House Publishers, 1995. See also, Robin D. G. Kelley, W W Chapel Hill and London The University of North Carolina Press, 1990. 768etty Dowling Jones, granddaughter of Eugene Kinckle Jones,recorded interview. Recorded on June 15, 1995 at her home in Washington, D. C. By writer. Recording in the possession of the writer. Jones’ granddaughter recalled that she always remembered her grandfather leaving the family during the winter months for the warmer climate of Arizona. She further told of how the family would have to await his return in March or April for Important family decisions. 228 activities of Arizona’s Urban Leagues and the work going on there. By September of 1944 he had arranged for the establishment of an Urban League Branch at Phoenix, Arizona.77 In this way, Jones managed to stay involved with the national office of the League. In 1945 the NUL prepared to observe its Thirty-Fifth Anniversary. Jones wrote to Charles S. Johnson that the Qooononjjy was devoting its fall quarterly as a special edition. The special edition was devoted to discussions “of the objectives and activities of the League with special emphasis on what the League has accomplished in the field of race relations and improved opportunities for Negroes.”78 It was also Jones who arranged for the format of the special edition. He further sought Johnson’s input, We shall have six editorials of approximately 400 words each, from such persons, we hope, as Anson Phelps Stokes, Hollingsworth Wood, and Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt. We are particularly anxious that you and Elmer Carter, the only two editors Qooononjjy has 77Application Form, “Terms of Affiliation”, National Urban League, Inc. National Urban League Papers, Series 5, Box 4, Jones, General Secretary. Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, D. C. 78June 22, 1945 from Eugene Kinckle Jones to Charles S. Johnson. Charles S. Johnson Collection, Box 12, File 12, Amistad Research Center. 229 had, write short editorials as features.79 To be sure, Johnson responded with eager. It is also apparent that Jones refused to quit the NUL whether he was in New York or at his winter residence in Tuscon. On Wednesday April 2, 1947 Jones was invited to lecture at the meeting of the Tucson Council of Social Agencies at the local YWCA. Iho_A:iz_ono_Qafly_S_ta: reported that Jones declared that “the American Negro passes his life in an atmosphere of uncertainty . . .”80 Jones forwarded a copy of the newspaper clipping to his long time friend and noted author Guichard Parris to inform him of the work going on in Tucson. By the late 19405 Jones and Parris kept with a continual line of correspondence to inform each other concerning urban progress and disadvantages of the African American population. In the 19405 Jones’ attempted to decrease his daily activities. Despite his declining health he still accepted some speaking engagements and conference invitations. On June 14, 79lbid. 80”Discrimination Viewed in City”, Iho_A:jzono_Qafly_$_ta:, Thursday April 3, 1947, Tucson, Arizona. NUL Papers, Jones General Secretary, Series 5, Box 4. 230 1948 Jones addressed the Interracial Forum of New York City. He informed the audience that the aim of the NUL had been to work toward the “successful integration of the Negro in the life of the community, where no special privileges are extended nor any opportunities denied and the merit of the system is allowed to operate freely . . .”81 In 1948 the NUL held its annual meeting in Jones’ boyhood home of Richmond, Virginia. Though he had left Richmond as a young man for college it remained a place of great fondness.82 J. Harvey Kerns, Chairman of the National Urban League Annual Conference Committee wrote Jones to inform him that Dr. J. M. Ellison, President of Virginia Union University was going to deliver the Conference welcome address. He also informed Jones that he was “selected by the Conference Committee to respond to the address of welcome” . . . further stressing to 81 Eugene Kinckle Jones, “Urban League Secretary Addresses Interracial Forum”--’lnterracial Review News Service’. NUL Papers, Series I, Box 26, Jones Personal File-1948. 82June, 1995 Betty Jones Dowling, granddaughter, recorded Interview by author. Ms. Dowling spoke of the great fondness her grandfather possessed of his boyhood home in Richmond, Virginia. So much so that the entire family made an annual trip to Richmond and the Virginia Union campus once a year during the Homecoming Festivities at Union. 231 Jones that “your many admirers in Richmond whom, I am sure, will be on hand to hear one of their sons.”83 Jones responded promptly to this request by stating that “It is my plan and my hope that I shall be with you at the Conference in Richmond.”84 In July of 1948 Dr. Ellison extended a written invitation to Jones and Mrs. Jones to “be our house guests as you attend the annual meeting of the National Urban League.” Ellison further stated to Jones that “we shall want to do all possible to make your stay pleasant while on the campus of Virginia Union, your Alma Mater, and of which you have been an honored and faithful trustee through the years.”85 Jones wrote back to Ellison on July 12, 1948 thanking him for the “considerate” invitation that he extended he and Mrs. Jones and to assure him that they were 83June 10, 1948 to Eugene Kinckle Jones from J. Harvey Kems. NUL Papers, Series I, Box 26. 84June 11, 1948, to J. Harvey Kems from Eugene Kinckle Jones. NUL Papers. Series I, Box 26. 8i'IJuly 8, 1948 to Eugene Kinckle Jones from John Malcus Ellison. NUL Papers. Series I, Box 26. 232 “deeply appreciative”86 The summer months of 1948 were busy times for Jones. The Citizens’ Housing and Planning Council of New York sent Jones a copy of Robert Weaver’s IDLNQQLQJEJJEIIQ in August asking that he review it for Its organizational newsletter entitled, News. Jones wrote a favorable review of Weaver’s important publication in 1948 for the flows. He stated that Weaver “shows how the Negro in cities north and south has been shunted across the railroad track and into blighted and deserted areas by departing whites in quest of homes in suburbs and subdivisions.”87 He praised Weaver’s book by proclaiming that “a thorough job has been done to give students and city planners complete data and logical arguments to forestall future schemes to withhold decent homes from America’s ”88 minorities. This signalled one of the last formal entreaties 86July 12, 1948 to John M. Ellison from Eugene Kinckle Jones. NUL Papers, Series I, Box 26. 87 Eugene Kinckle Jones review in Moms of Ihonlsomfihotto by Robert Weaver. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1948. NUL Collection, Series I, Box 35, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, D. C. 88lbid. 233 by Jones within the social work profession. In 1950 he retired from the NUL and public work altogether. After Jones’ retirement in 1950 he could begin to reflect on what had been essential to the success of the League’s survival. In May of 1951 he declared that “progress taken from decade to decade had been tremendous.”89 Jones proclaimed about progress, “much of it to his great satisfaction, resulted not from mass pressure or political compromise but from the pressure of logic, understanding, good will and common sense.”9° By the time of Jones’ retirement from the NUL he was viewed as “one of the nation’s elder statesmen in better race relations . . .”91 In the early morning hours of Monday, January 11, 1954 Jones died as the result of a brain aneurysm at the age of sixty- eight. He had been comatose for two weeks before passing away 89"Negro Rights Champion Recalls the Good Fight”, Wm andjun, Thursday, May 17, 1951. NUL Papers, Series I, Box 26, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress. - ‘ 9°|bid. 91lbid. 234 at his home in Flushing, New York.92 To be sure the nation mourned the passing of this American statesman. W ]'_i_m_e_s_ reported on Tuesday, January 12, 1954 that “Kinkcle Jones, 68 of Urban League: Retired General Secretary, Officer 39 Years Dies--Led Group’s Expansion in U. S.” 92June, 1995, Recorded interview by the author with Eugene Kinckle Jones’ granddaughter, Betty Jones Dowling. SUMVIARY Eugene Kinckle Jones was born in 1885 in racially polarized Richmond, Virginia and into a comfortable middle class black family. Both his parents were college educated by the late 18705 and by the 18803 were noted black middle class residents of Richmond. Jones grew to maturity at a period in American history when the federal government no longer had an expressed interest in full citizenship rights of its black citizenry. Further the American white south successfully denounced and denied the rights to Blacks that the 14th and 15th amendments to the United States Constitution had guaranteed. While growing up Jones witnessed activities in racially polarized Richmond of African American race men and women struggling to hold on to the gains of Reconstruction. The activities of the. black middle class in late nineteenth century also assigned a peculiar level of responsibility to Jones and his peers, the Talenth Tenth. It was this understanding that Jones and his peers took on as their life missions regardless of their chosen careers. It has been this history that l have sought to detail by piecing together the life work of Jones. . 235 236 Jones and his many peers belonged to the group of African Americans that had it not been for their race American history would have valued their contributions long before now. In short Jones has been omitted from the pages of major social work history largely because of the racial climate in late nineteenth and early twentieth century America. I concur with much of the recent social work scholarship that Jane Adams and others like her have occupied far too long the single place at the top. Historian Earl E. Thorpe declared in 1984, that the 1901-1917 Progressive Era in “Black America produced its own very important Muckrakers and Progressive Movement.” He Further pointed out that “nationally the best-known leaders were such persons as W. E. B. DuBois, Carter G. Woodson, George Edmund Haynes, James Weldon Johnson, Ida Wells Barnett, Mary Church Terrell, and Eugene Kinckle Jones.”1 It will be the individual histories of such persons as Jones and his many contemporaries that will challenge our traditional notions of who the other social reformers were early in the twentieth century. There is a need for a much broader definition ‘Thorpe. WWW P- 73- 237 of social reform in order to understand the accomplishments of Jane Addams and her African American peers. Oftentimes the accomplishments of African American social reformers did not mirror those of their white counterparts due to the racial stratification of American society. This history of Jones and the rise of professional black social workers attempts to establish this broader definition of social reform movements in the African American community. The social reform movement in black America oftentimes was lead by individuals who in fact were of a middle class ethos. However black middle class ethos did not mirror that of the larger white society. Jones was a gaint amongst giants within the social reform movement in American history of the early twentieth century. Throughout his lifetime numerous accomplishments were achieved by Jones other than the executive directorship of the NUL. History has recorded Jones as a founding member of the nation’s first black Greek lettered fraternity at Cornell University in 1906, Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity. In addition Jones accomplished a masterful feat through the fellowship programs that were established at the NUL at a time when 238 social work for black people had not been seriously considered. Jones took the philosophy of the organization that he had helped to establish as a student (Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity) implanted it within the structure of the National Urban League. Having established the first two chapters of Alpha Phi Alpha, Fraternity beyond Cornell he quickly implanted this idea of local Urban League Branches with the NUL by the 1920s. Jones worked continuously during his early tenure with the NUL to establish as many local branches as were possible. It is this concept of local branches that helped to further the Urban Leagues national agenda. Jones placed key individuals in the directorships of the local branches which enabled him to be informed at all times of the black urban condition. In 1915 he and a group of other concerned black social reformers founded the Social Work Club to address the concerns of black social work and workers. The organization was short lived and by 1921 black social workers were actively involved with the American Association of Social Workers. In 1925 the National Conference of Social Work elected Jones as the first African American to its Executive Board as Treasurer. Jones 239 went on to serve the organization for the next six years consecutively until 1933. By 1933 Jones had risen to the position of Vice-President of the National Conference of Social Work which put him in a major position of importance within the overall structure of the national agenda of the social work profession. During Jones’ tenure as an executive officer of the NCSW he worked along with other black social workers to make known the concerns of black social workers and urban black people in general through an integrated audience. It was during this era that many white social workers first encountered the conditions of the black America. While establishing the NUL as a national institution of great worth Jones systemically help to create much local admiration for the work of the league. In 1933 Jones became one the most important persons in Washington as an advocate for jobs for African Americans during the Great Depression. Jones worked directly with the Department of Commerce as the Advisor of ‘Negro’ Affairs. No other single individual worked to the extent that Jones did while delivering to African American communities the opportunities then available to them through the federal 240 government newly initiated relief programs. He also served as the black communities voice through the NUL’s and local branches while in Washington. By this Jones skillfully continued to personify the NUL while he served in Washington from 1933-1936. Furthermore this study makes clear that Jones was the embodiment of the NUL. Subsequently he layed the foundation for future Executive Secretaries of the NUL. It was during Jones tenure as Executive Secretary during the 19205 and 30s that the NUL became an American Institution. Though George Edmund Haynes was the first executive secretary of the League his stint with the organization was far too brief to accomplish the lasting impact of Jones. When Jones retired from the NUL in 1950 it had become a noted American institution of great value. At the time of Jones’ death in 1954 he and the NUL were intricately woven into the fabric of American culture and society. Though the NUL would be another decade or two before it began to engage in direct action of the Civil Rights Movement it was firmly established as a useful organization. Jones’ stint from 1911-1950 with the NUL established it 241 as a conservative organization within the black community. By and large upon Jones’ retirement from the directorship in 1940 there were major forces that were rising in black America. There was an obvious younger generation rising to prominence on the eve of World War II. This generation of individuals were influenced by aspects of the society that had not impacted Jones’ turn of the century (19th-20th) black middle class youthfulness. Many black Americans were more discontent with the slow progress of first class citizenship status. There had been several Supreme Court victories on the part of the NAACP by the late 19303. Following the Scottsboro Case in Alabama the Communist Party had aroused the working class hopes of many southern African Americans. Furthermore the labor movement in black America had brought to the fore a new class of leadership in black America. Many were no longer willing to wait as patiently on justice as Jones and his contemporaries had been willing to do. A new style of leader would be needed of the NUL by the 19405. However Jones hand picked Lester B. Granger as his successor in 1940. For the next twenty years the NUL endured the leadership style of Granger who in many ways 242 mirrored the conservative leadership of Jones. Therefore the NUL did not engage itself in direct action confrontation with the modern Civil Rights Movement until 1960 after the appointment of Whitney M. Young as the Executive Secretary. Jones’ conservative National Urban League was slowly eroded as Young presented the NUL more and more as a direct action vehicle for the Civil Rights Movement. ems—31 APPENDICES APPENDIX A g)... on HIM O....< on Sweaaemeea .Is :2:.:......~ .11.:- . a.» a. .3! n5. 1. Esau—.33.. evil :3 Knee—.85. 3.: I53:- .3 .29. StA 'es taerzrg lrginia Courtesy of V APPENDIX B “2+ Iii Aidan-.019... I 1? I . 1“, 1””! I A. ...x¥.....x!>a r 8. .. II\ .II\1 . i\ r .r... ‘2.... 3. 4?.» =5 3.11.... r s 531‘: :3. L r ~ 3.22. :5: .3. Courtesy of Virginia State Archives 244 APPENDIX 0 Percent of Population Increase Regional 140 0 . I 1 United States The South The North [51390-1910 .1910-1930] Source. U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, W W (Washington, D. 0.: Government Printing Office,1935), p. 4, Table1. 245 APPENDIX D Increase of Population 2,500,000 2.000.000 '- ' ammo-~- Unlted States ' The South 111. North .1890-1910-1910-1930] Source: U. S., Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, W (Washington, D. 0.: Government Printing Office, 1935), p._ 4, Table 1. 246 BIBLIOGRAPHY Wm Eugene Kinckle Jones Correspondents, National Archives, 1933- 36, Washington, D. C. General Records of the Department of Commerce Records of the Office of the Secretary of the Interior Records of the Works Project Administration Records of the Bureau of Employment Security Eugene Kinckle Jones Correspondents, National Urban League Papers, Library of Congress, Washington, D. C. Eugene Kinckle Jones Collection, Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture, New York City, New York. Eugene Kinckle Jones Correspondents, Armistad Research Center, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana. Julius Rosenwald Papers, Armistad Research Center, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana. Eugene Kinckle Jones, Cornell University Alumni Files, Cornell University Library, Ithaca, New York. National Social Welfare History Archives, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis. Council on Social Work Education Proceeding of the National Conference of Social Work Richmond and Lynchburg, Virginia; City Directories, 1880s- 1890s, Virginia State Archives, Richmond, Virginia. W. E. B. DuBois Papers, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, microfilm version. 247 248 Charles S. Johnson Papers, Amistad Research Center, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana. E I E II' I' l. 0 a .' 0 I: IN. a: 00I=_ II: - J_9_Z_0_, Bicentennial Edition, Part I, U. S. Department of ’ Commerce, Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing ' Office, 1975. Witt. Elder. W W, Second Edition. Washington, D. C., 1990. Wm Betty Jones Dowling, granddaughter of Eugene Kinckle Jones, conducted by Felix L. Armfield, June 15, 1995, interview in the possession of the author. Francis Kornegay, retired Executive Secretary of the Detroit Urban League, conducted by Felix L. Armfield, February, 1991, interview in the possession of the author. E I? II I ’Ell'l llll'l' “Social Work Among Negroes”, Ihe_Mes_senge[. 1921, p. W, by Carter G. Woodson, Washington, D. C.: The Associated Publishers, Inc., 1922. Reviewed by Eugene Kinckle Jones, Meesenger, 5 (May 1923), p. 704- 722. 249 “The Negro’s Struggle for Health”, Emeeedjnmwfleeal WEEK Washington D C 1923 P 68- 72. “Negro Migration in New York State”, Qpeemfljjy, January, 1926. “Social Work Among Negroes”. WWI) WW. Vol. CXL, November, 1928, p. 287- 293. “Some Fundamental Factors in Regard to the Health of the Negro”, WWW Werkere. Memphis, Tennessee, 1928, p. 176-178. “The Negro in Community Life”, Loeeedjng of the Natienel W. San Francisco, 1929, p. 388. IDLNEQLSLQDEJIQ by Robert C. Weaver. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1948. Reviewed by Eugene Kinckle Jones, News, Summer, 1948. Original manuscript amongst NUL Papers, Series IV, Box 3, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, D. C. W “Negro Migration in New York State”, delivered at the New York State Conference of Charities and Corrections, Hotel Roosevelt, New York City, Friday, December 11, 1925, National Urban League Papers, Series IV, Box 3, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, D. C. “Go-To-High, Go-To-College”, urged by the Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity, Inc., Delivered over Radio Broadcasting Station WMCA (Hotel McAlpin, New York), Sunday, May 16, 1926. National Urban League Papers, Series, IV, Box 3, 250 Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, D. C. “The Negro’s Opportunity Today”, Commencement Address at West Virginia Collegiate Institute, June, 1926. National Urban League Papers, Series IV, Box 3, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, D. C. 251 W Books Abbott. Grace. WW f ' f r ' ' Aemjnjejretjeu. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1941. Addams, Jane. W. New York: Signet, 1960. Adam, Malaika editor W W. New York: The New Press, 1993. Anderson, Eric and Alfred Moss, Jr., editors. W E ||"E 'll [Illl EII'. Baton Rouge and London: Louisiana State University Press, 1991. Anderson. James 0. WW 1935, Chapel Hill and London: The University of North Carolina Press, 1988. Aptheker. Herbert. editor. We mum. University of Massachusetts Press, 1976. .editor. W yelume || Seleetiene, 1935-1944,. University of Massachusetts Press, 1976. Avery. Sheldon. WNW WW. London and Toronto: Associated University Presses, 1989. 252 Ayers. Edward L. Ibeimmiseflflmfimflbzifiefler 8mm. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992. Baker, Robert L. MW. Silver Spring, Maryland: National Association of Social Workers, 1987. Bishop, Morris. A_t|j_s_teg_qf_Qem_e|_l. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1962. Blackwell, James E. and Morris Janowitz, editors. B_la_c_k 0,000 :n - -., II. II =IIH-. 'sr 0: 'v. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press,1974. Blum. John Morton. WW1. W. New York and London: W. W. Norton & Company, 1980. Bracey, John H., Jr.; August Meier and Elliott Rudwick, editors. BIesLMLsteLLensflrgamzedJabsr. Belmont. California: Wadworth Publishing Company, Inc.,1971. Brooks. John Graham An_Amsnsen_QI1Izen_Ihe_LIfe_sf_WIllIam WM; Boston and New york. Houghton Mifflin Company, 1910. Brown, Josephine Chapin. W. New York: Octagon Books, 1971. Cayton, Horace R. And Mitchell, George S. W Mange. Westport, Connecticut: Negro Universities Press, 1970. Chambers. Clarke A W Wise Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1971. .editor. InLNeILQeeIJLtIsIMIdeLQad. 253 19294335. New York: The Free Press, 1965. . Seedt'lme et Beferm; Amerieen Seejel semge W. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1963. Chapin, F. Stuart and Stuart A. Queen. BeseengLMemeLanemn W New York: Arno Press 1972. Chesson. Michael. W. Richmond: Virginia State Library, 1981. Corey. Charles H. A_l:IIsjsnI_sf_tl:Ie_Bishmsnd_‘Lheslsgisal in i ' i i ’ WW. Richmond, Virginia: J._W. Randolph Company, 1895. Crocker. Ruth Hutchinson. W S III I II I . I | I l'! Q'I' [BEE- ]_9_3_0_. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1992. Chapin, F. Stuart and Stuart A. Queen. BeseemhMemeLendemJn W New York. Arno Press. 1972. Dabney. Virginius. WW Garden City. New York: Doubleday &Company, Inc., 1976. Devine, Edward T. Wm. New York: The MacMillan Company, 1939. Ehrenreich. John H. ItLe_Altr_ui§_tis_IInesiI1atisn;_A_l:li§.tsnI__Qt WWW. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1985. E"SW°rih. Scott. W 254 ef 1921. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1982. Engs Robert Francis. WNW HemetsmW Philadelphia University of Pennsylvania Press, 1979. Ferguson, Elizabeth A. W. J. B. Lippincott Company, 1963. Fireside. Harvey. WW Springfield, New Jersey: Enslow Publishers, Inc., 1997. Fisher. Jacob. WWW Boston, Massachusetts: G. K. Hall & Co., 1980. Foner. Philip 8. WW 1923. New York and Washington: Praeger Publishers, 1974. Foner. Eric. W W. New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1988. Frankel, Noralee and Nancy S. Dye. MW BetsLm_'In_the_Er_o.gLe_seiILe_ELe Lexington. Kentucky: The University Press of Kentucky, 1991. Franklin, John Hope and Genna Rae McNeil, editors. Afljeen W. Washington and London: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1995. Franklin, John Hope and August Meier, editors. BIeeLLeadereef W. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1982. Franklin, Vincent P. and James D. Anderson, editors. New WW Boston G K Hall & Co.,1978. 255 Frazier, E. Franklin. BJeeLBeuLgeejeje. Glencoe, III.: The Free Press, 1957. . Itts Nggtg Emily in mg Ilnited States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1931. . Ibeslegrsfiesejnfibisags rev. Ed. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1957. Gaines Kevin K W W. Chapel Hill and London: The University of North Carolina Press, 1996. Gamble, Vanessa Northington. MekingfleseJeLQuLselleszlhe W. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995. Gatewood. Willard B. ALI§jssLa1s_sLCslsL:_lhe_Blesls_Eli1e. _1_8_8_O;1_9_2_Q_. Bloomington & Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1990. . Jr. BlesLAmeLisanLansJILflbitLMans W303. Urbana, Chicago and London: University of Illinois Press, 1975. Gavins RaYmond. W W. Durham and London: Duke University Press, 1977. Giddings. Paula. When_end_thIe_J_EnIen_Ihe_lmsasj_oLBIesls W- New York and London: Bantam Books, 1984. Gaggin. Jacqueline. WWW Baton Rouge and London: Louisiana State University Press,1993. Goldfield. David B. W 256 W. Baton Rouge and London: Louisiana State University Press, 1990. Gottlieb, Peter.‘ ' n r ’ Wm. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1987. Grant. Nancy L. L\LA_en_d_Blesk_AmeLisase;_ELasnins_Lsmbe Sjetueflue. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1990. Grant, Robert B. T I T ' - WW W103. Chicago: Nelson-Hall Company. Green. Lorenzo J. WA W. Edited with an Introduction by Arvarh E. Strickland. Columbia and London: University of Missouri Press, 1996. Grossman. James R Lend_o_f_tlspe:_0b_isegs._Blesls_SsumemeLs. an_d_tne_QLea_t_Mj_gLa_tjen. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press,1989. Hammond, L. H. W. New York: Arno Press, 1972. Handlin, Oscar. Wampum Cheneing_Metr_o_per_s. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1959. Harding. Vincent. IheLe_is_a_Bi1eL:_ItIe_Blask_$1r_uggle_fsr W. New York: Harcourt Brace Javanovich, Publishers, 1981. Harlan. Louis Ft. W W. London and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1972. 257 Beeker I, Wesm’ngten: [he Wize rd ef Tgekegee, 15011915. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1983. Harley, Sharon and Rosalyn Terborg-Penn, editors. Ille_Af_rg_- W New. Port Washington, New York & London: Kennikat Press, 1978. Harris. William H. W o I: =9 ‘10.. o :sele 1P01; 1925: M32 Urbana, Chicago and London: University of Illinois Press, 1977. m. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1982. Harrison. Alferdteen. editor BJesk_Exsdue;_Ihs_GLeat_Misr_a1isn W0. Jackson and London: University Press of Mississippi,1991. Henri. Florette. BlesLMigretisn_._MsyemenLNsnh.J30J020 New York: Anchor Press/Doubleday, 1976. Hewitt, Nancy A. and Suzanne Lebsock editors. Mieieleflemen; Wm Urbana and Chicago University of Illinois Press, 1993. Hine. Darlene Clark. WWW Q I' . II II . E t . _ . Bloomington 8. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1989. II' 5.“, El I III I II E- WWW—HIM Brooklyn. New York: Carlson Publishing, 1994. 258 WWW . :' :r‘tkl. . :1 ‘1', 00f :1” . ‘1“. New York and Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishers, 1995. MnfleLSlateLtljetery. Brooklyn, New York: Carlson Publishing, Inc., 1996. Holt. Backham. WWW Garden City. New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1964. lckes. Harold L. W W. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1953. Jackson, Giles B. and D. Webster Davis. IbeJnduetflerjsjenLoj meilegLLBasesLmeJImIeLatatee. reprint Freeport. New York: Books for Libraries Press, 1971. Jacobson. Julius. editor. WWW Mmmem. Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc" 1968. Johnson. Charles S. IhLNesLo_in_QI1isess._A_$_tu_dy_sf_Base W. Chicago. University of Chicago Press, 1922. Johnson, James Weldon. ElaeLMenhenen. New York: Arno Press, 1930. Jones. Adrienne Lash. WNW W. Brooklyn, New York. Carlson Publishing, Inc., 1990. Jones, Beverly Washington. WW I II. I II: ‘ I I :‘ °--' Brooklyn, New York: Carlson Publishing, Inc. 1990. 259 Jones, Jacqueline. WWW W. New York: Basic Books, Inc., Publishers, 1985. Katz, Michael B. W L-IietsanUALeltamLAmeflsa Basic BookS.1986. Katzman. David M Beisre_ths_Ghettsz_Blesk_D_e_thit_in__the Nirjeteenm—Qemrrx. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1973. Kelly. Robin D. G WW LBW. Chapel Hill and London: The University of North Carolina Press, 1990. Kirby. John B. Blesk_AnIensans_in_the_Boss_eILelt_ELaz_Libera1M engLBege. Knoxville: The University of Tennessee Press, 1980. Kluger. Richard Simple__.l_ustlse._The_l:IIstsanf_BLown_y._BsaId I=.II =.II==..-II= New York. Alfred A. Knopf, 1976. Knupfer. Anne Meis. W W. New York and London: New York University Press,1996. Komweibel. Theodore Jr W Messenger,_19_1L]_92_8. Westport, Connecticut and London: Greenwood Press, 1975. Kusmer. Kenneth L. WWW W. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1976. Larson. Magali Sarfatti. Ille_Bis_e_sf_ELsLes_sjsnelism;_A 260 W. California: University of California Press, 1977. Lasch-Quinn. Elisabeth. BlasLNsIghbsMesLanmumLot Beterrn in the Arnerieen Settlement Renee Meyement, W. Chapel Hill and London: The University of North Carolina Press, 1993. Leiby. James. WW tile_y_n'rte_d_s_tetes. New York: Columbia University Press, 1987. Lewis. David Levering. WWW 1558:1919. New York: Henry Holt and Company,1993. . WheLfledermflaLMgue. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1981. Levy. Charles S. W255 Washington, D. 0.: National Association of Social Workers, Inc” 1981. Litwack. Leon F. W 5m. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1979. Locke. Alain. editor. IhLNew_NesLo:_An_lmerpLetatisn New York: Arno Press, 1968. Logan. Rayford W. W W. New York: New York University Press, 1969. . II II . E . I'[ III II'II ' - . New York: The Dial Press, Inc., 1954. Lubove. Boy. W. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1968. 261 Lynch. Hollis B. WWII: Hietery, 1855-1921. New York: Crowell, 1972. Manning. Kenneth B. BIesIs.Apslls_sf_Ssle_rIse:_me_l.iIe_sf_Emeet Eyerejt_J_u_s_t. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1983. Marks. Carole WWW Migratjen. Indianapolis 8. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1989. Martin, Elmer P. and Joanne Mitchell Martin. M Bleeijperienee. Washington, D. C.: National Association of Social Workers Press, 1995. McMurry. Linda 0. Wm $1010.3- Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1981. . B l I ll Bl I E . , E B' I W. Baton Rouge and London: Louisiana State University Press, 1985. McNeil Genna Fiae. GmndwsrthefleshemfltsnMstsnm W. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1983. Meier, August, Elliott Rudwick and Francis L. Broderick. Bjeek WM. second edition. Indianapolis and New York: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc” 1965. Meier. Elizabeth G. W Weds. New York: Columbia University Press, 1954. Meier, August and Elliott Rudwick. Wee ef_the_UAW. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979. 262 . E El . I E! II, I II I. Wm New York: Hill and Wang. 1966. . Bleek Hjetery end the ljieterieel Ereteeeien, 1915:1980. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1986. MeIer, AUQUSI- NWW WWW. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 1963. Meyer. Carol H. W Qneje. New York and London: The Free Press, 1976. Miller, Randall M. And Paul A. Cimbala. editors. Amerieen BI IE! 'EE' l’lD'l' ' Westport, Connecticut and London: Greenwood Press, 1996. Moore, Jesse Thomas, Jr. WEN-M12031 W. University Park and London: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 1981. M088. Alfred A-. Jr. Ihs_Amsnsen_Nesrs_Asademx.0LsIse_oLths WI]. Baton Rouge and London: Louisiana State University Press, 1981. Morton. Richard L. W Spartanburg, South Carolina: The Reprint Company, 1973. Myrdal, Gunnar. An_Ameriean_Qi]emme. New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc., 1944. Natanson. Nicholas W W. Knoxville: The University of Tennessee Press, 1992. 263 Neverdon-Morton. Cynthia. WM anthLAdxensemenLoLJhLBesemzs. Knoxville: The University of Tennessee Press,1989. Novak. Daniel A. W W. Lexington: The University of Press of Kentucky, 1978. Ovington, Mary White. Bertrethrn_Celer. New York: The Viking Press, 1927. Painter. Nell Irvin. WW Beeenetmetjen. Lawrence, Kansas: University of Kansas, 1986. .Sll' I! II'II !!°l|$l| 1521-1919. New York and London: W. W. Norton & Company, 1987. Parris, Guichard and Lester Brooks. Bleels§_in_the_Qitx;_A flietsnuthhLNetisnelJirbeLLeesue Boston and Torontoz Little, Brown and Company, 1971. Pfeiffer, Paula F. W Melernent. Baton Rouge and London: Louisiana State University Press, 1990. Platt, Anthony M. W New Brunswick and London: Rutgers University Press, 1991. Rabinowitz, Howard N., editor. SeutherrLBIeek_Leaders_eL_tne BeeenetruetjeLEre. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1982. Rachleff. Peter. WM- Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1989. Richardson. Joe M. ChrietIen_Bessnstulsjisn:_lhs_AmeLisen 264 II II-.I ‘ I-.II -.II I-I:I 3: . 3- - 3'0. Athens and London: The University of Georgia Press, 1986. . i 'v ' - Alabama: The University of Alabama Press,1980. Robinson, Armstead L. and Patricia Sullivan, editors. New WW Charlottesville and London: University Press of Virginia, 1991. Floss. Edyth L.. editor. WW 1935. Metuchen, N.J. & London: The Scarecrow Press, Inc., 1978. House. Jacqueline Anne. WW Bejerr'ner. Athens and London: The University of Georgia Press, 1989. Rudwick. Elliott M. W431 Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1964. Salmond. John A A_Ssuthem_BebeI:_‘Lhe_Life_and_'[imes_oI WWW. Chapel Hill The University of North Carolina Press, 1983. SantinO. Jack Milee_oj_Smiles._Y_eare_si_Str_ugglez__Stsriee_st WW. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press,1989. Senechal. Roberta. IbejssisgenseiesLLBesLBisLSpflngflsls. Itljneie__'rn_1_9_0_8. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1990. Sherman, Richard, editor. Ine_Negm_ene_tne_Qim. New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1970. ShaW. Stephanie .1. WWW EI'IIII IIII D'Ill'c E. 265 Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press, 1996. Simmons, William J., Rev. WW 316100. New York: Arno Press, 1968. Simon. Barbara Levy MW mum. New York: Columbia University Press, 1994. Sinnette. Elinor Des Verney.AnlluLAlst1ss__Sshsmb1Irg_B_lesk ijUssbflLLCsllsctsLLBjssLaphy Detriot Wayne State University Press, 1989. Sitkoff. Harvard W W Deeede. New York. Oxford University Press, 1978. revised edition. New York: Hill and Wang, 1993. Spam. Flick. W. Washington, D. C.: University Press of America, 1982. Spero, Sterling D. and Abram L. Harris. Ine_B_Ieek_1nLerter:Jne Negre_LebeL_M_o1rement. New York: Atheneum, 1968. Strickland. Arvarh E. W. Urbana and London: University of Illinois Press, 1966. Summerville, James. W Mehernr_Medieet_Qe|1ege. The University of Alabama Press, 1983. Taeuber, Karl and Alma F. Taeuber. Negrees_j_n_Q'rties_; - - - = -. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company, 1965. Taylor. Alrutheus Ambush. Ihe_Nesrs_iIL_the_Becsn§1Lustisn_sf 266 Virginie. Washington, D. C.: The Association for the Study of Negro Life and History, 1926. Thomas. Richard W.Life_f_or_Us__|s_MLl1etJNe_Meke_lt;_BuI1ding BMW. Bloomington & Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1992. Thorpe. Earl E A_C_snsi§e_tljs1sanf_Jtlsnb_Qarsline_0emr_al Uniyereity. Durham, North Carolina: Harrington Pubhcafions, 1984. Thyer, Bruce A. and Marilyn A. Biggerstaff. ErefessjeneLfieeiel ' ' | I ' : A ' Q'l'll I! E IIIB'II' l. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas, Publisher,1989. Tm'ander Judith Ann. WW I: :1 ‘31] I II. : “IV I: I I NiIhIIIIII :I= 1_8_8_6_te_tne_ELeeent. New York: Columbia University Press, 1987. Detroit: Wayne State University, 1975. Trotter. Joe William. Jr. Blesk_MineIIIsee;_lhe_Melsins_sf_en WW. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1985. . editor. Ine__Gr_eet_lIIligLatisn_in__tIi.s_tsLisal : o: .-’ ksj Ins. cl 0 ;:_ - - l- _:.o_: Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1991. Tushnet. Mark V Makins_QixiLBisms__LeIIL:_ItlIILgso_d_MershelLand W31. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994. II IIIECE’ I I fill I . | 267 W Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1987. Tussrnen. Joseph. editor MW Qisuuimjuajiuu. New York: Oxford University Press, 1963. Tuttle. William A.. Jr. W 1_9_]_Q. New York: Atheneum, 1970. Vose. Clement E W W Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1959. Walker. Sydnor H. W m. Chapel Hill, N. C.: The University of North Carolina Press, 1928. Wallace. Phyllis A. BIackJALomeLinJhLLaboLEQLce. Cambridge. Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1980. Walton. Hanes Jr. W Mus. Metuchen, New Jersey: The Scarecrow Press, Inc” 1975. Walton, Ronald G. W. London and Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1975. Ware. Susan. Wampum Cambridge, Massachusetts and London: Harvard University Press, 1981. .IIII' II'Q'! . 1!! 'll J_9_3_Q_s. Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1982. Weaver, Robert C. W. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1946. W. New York: Harcourt, Brace 268 and Company, 1948. Weiss, Nancy J.EaL61M9_L_tQ_th§_Eafly_QLLm31LL_B_La£|S_P_QUI3 iu_the_Age_9_f_EQB. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1983. . W. New York: Oxford University Press, 1974. Wesley, Charles H. [be Histgry 91 Alpha Ehi Alpha; A W. Chicago: The Foundation Publishers, 1929. Chicago: The Foundation Publishers, 1977. Wu. New York: Russell & Russell,1967. Wintz, Cary 0. editor. WWW Iasu-Iaan- III I' I DB“ 5 IE III. New York and London: M. E. Sharpe, 1996. Wage. Houston, Texas: Rice University Press, 1988. Wolkinson. Benjamin W. W W. Lexington, Massachusetts: D. C. Heath and Company, 1973. Woodroofe. Kathleen. W W. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1962. Woodson, Carter G. Magnum. Washington, D. C.: The Associated Publishers, Inc., 1922. 269 . Wm Washington. D. C.: The Association for the Study of Negro Life and History, 1918. Woodward. C. Vann. MW. rev. ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1965. Works’ Project Administration of Virginia. [he Negrg in Mirgjujg. New York: Hastings House, Publishers, 1940. Wynes. Charles E. BMW. Totowa, New Jersey: Rowman and Littlefield, 1971. 27o MAM Brown, Annie Woodley, “A Social Work Leader in the Struggle for Racial Equality: Lester Blackwell Granger”, W Review, Vol.65, No. 2, June, 1991, p. 266- 280. Brown, Elsa Barkley, “Womanish Consciousness: Maggie Lena Walker and the Independent Order of Saint Luke”, Sigus, Vol. 14, no. 3, 1989, p. 610-633. Bluford, Lucille H., “The Lloyd Gaines Story”, J_o_u_ruaj_o_f mam Vol 22. No 6.1959.P Carlton-LaNey, lris., “Elizabeth Ross Haynes: An African American Reformer of Womanish Consciousness, 1908- 1940”, MM, August, 1997, forthcoming. , “The Career of Birdye Henrietta Haynes, a Pioneer Settlement Worker”, W, (June, 1994), Vol.68, p. 254-273. , “Training African- American Social Workers Through the NUL Fellowship Program", Journal 9! Wm VoI XXI. No 1. March 1994. p. 43- 54. Chambers, Clarke A., “Women in the Creation of the Profession of Social Work”, W, Vol. 60, 1986, p. 1-33. Fogel, David, “Social Work and Negroes”, Buyjuu, Vol. 18, 1957, p. 277-285. Gary, Rogenia Baker and Lawrence E. Gary, “The History of Social Work Education for Black People, 1900-1930”, mm W. W XXI. No 1.Maroh.1994.o 67- 82. 271 Grothaus, Larry, “The Inevitable Mr. Gaines: The Long Struggle to Desegregate the University of Missouri, 1936-1950”, AflzomndeLWest. Vol 26.1984 9 20 42 Hill, T. Arnold, “Labor: Open Letter to Mr. William Green, American Federation of Labor”, W, Vol. VIII, February, 1930, p. 56-57. Ives, Patricia Carter, “Giles Beecher Jackson--Jamestown Tercentennial of 1907”, Wu. Vol. 38, No. 8, December, 1975, p. 480-483. Johnson, Audreye E., “The Sin of Omission: African-American Women in Social Work”. .LoumaLoLMultiquIuLaLBocial mug, Vol. 1(2), 1991, p. 1-15. Kogut, Alvin B., “The Negro and the Charity Organization Society in the Progressive Era”, Bmgaadiuga of the National WM, Pittsburgh, 1917, 44th Annual Meeting. Popple, Philip R., “The Social Work Profession: A Reconceptualization”, W, Vol. 59, 1985, p. 560-577. Walkkowitz, Daniel J., “The Making of a Feminine Professional Identity: Social Workers in the 1920s”, W W. Vol. 95, No. 4, October, 1990, p. 1051- 1075. Weaver, Bill and Oscar C. Page, “T he Black Press and the Drive for Integrated Graduate and Professional Schools,” Etudau, Vol. 43, 1982, p. 15-28. Wesley, Charles H., “Graduate Education for Negroes in Southern UniversitieS”. WW.10.1940.P 82-94. 272 Williams, Fannie Barrier, “Social Bonds in the “Black Belt” of Chicago: Negro Organizations and the New Spirit Pervading Them”, Quarjjjaa, Vol. 15, No. 1, 1905, p. 40-44. Wye, Christopher G., “The New Deal and the Negro Community: Toward A Broader Conceptualization”, W 515.1911. Vol. 59, 1972, p. 621-639. 273 D. I I. 5 II Armfield, Felix L., “Durham’s Tobacco Industry: The Black Experience, 1890-1950” (Masters thesis, North Carolina Central University, 1989). Brown, Elsa Barkley, “Uncle Ned’s Children: Negotiating Community and Freedom in Postemancipation Richmond, Virginia” (Ph. D. Diss., Kent State University, 1994). Hamilton, Dona Cooper, “The National Urban League During the Depression, 1930-1939: The Quest for Jobs for Black Workers”, (Ph. D. Diss., Columbia University, 1982). Hendricks, Wanda Ann. “The Politics of Race: Black Women in Illinois, 1890-1920”, (Ph. D. Diss., Purdue University, 1990. MacLeish, Marlene Y. Smith. “Medical Education in Black Colleges and Universities in the United States of America: An Analysis of the Emergence of Black Medical Schools Between 1867 and 1976” (Ed. D. Diss., Harvard University, 1978) Perlman, Daniel, “Stirring the White Conscience: The Life of George Edumund Haynes” (Ph. D. Diss., New York University, 1972) Sawyer, Robert McLaran, “The Gaines Case: Its Background and Influence on the University of Missouri and Lincoln University, 1936-1950” (Ph. D. Diss., University of Missouri, 1966). Welch, Eloise Turner, “The Background and Development of the American Missionary Association’s Decision to Educate Freedman in the South, With Subsequent Repercussions” (Ph. D. Diss., Bryn Mawr College, 1976).