WILLIAM GIFFIN
Black Insurgency in the Republican
Party of Ohio, 1920-1932
An extraordinary change in Negro voting
patterns has occurred between the post-
Civil War period and the present. The
black vote was remarkably consistent for the
party of Lincoln from the passage of the
Fifteenth Amendment to the New Deal
period, but this solidly Republican bloc
vote was broken during the 1930's. The
black vote became more and more
overwhelmingly Democratic following the New
Deal. A misleading implication of these
facts is that the disaffection of the black
Republicans, which was clearly
manifested in the 1936 election, lacked significant
antecedents in the pre-New Deal period.
A substantial number of historians and
other professionals have implied that
the alienation of Negroes from the Republican
party occurred suddenly after 1932. They
have generally emphasized the high per-
centage of black votes polled by Herbert
Hoover in 1932 and the mass exit of Negro
voters from the Republican party in
1936. Furthermore, their explanations of the
phenomenon have largely involved changes
effected during the New Deal period.
Theodore H. White, for example, wrote:
Time was, forty years ago, when Negroes
voted solidly Republican out of gratitude to
Abraham Lincoln and emancipation.
("I remember," once said Roy Wilkins, Executive
Secretary of the National Association
for the Advancement of Colored People, "when I
was young in Kansas City, the kids threw
rocks at Negroes on our street who dared to
vote Democratic.") But Franklin D.
Roosevelt changed that. Under Roosevelt, govern-
ment came to mean social security,
relief, strong unions, unemployment compensation.
... And, like a heaving-off of ancient
habit, as the Negro moved north he moved to the
Democratic voting rolls.1
1. Theodore H. White, The Making of
the President 1960 (New York, 1961), 232. Others
who have implied, by focusing upon the
black voting record in the context of the New Deal
period, that black Republicans suddenly
became disaffected are John A. Garraty, The American
Nation, A History of the United
States (New York, 1966), 741; T. Harry
Williams, Richard N.
Current, and Frank Freidel, A History
of the United States Since 1865 (New York, 1969), 538;
Richard B. Morris and William Greenleaf,
U.S.A., The History of a Nation (Chicago, 1969),
II, 842; August Meier and Elliott
Rudwick, From Plantation to Ghetto, An Interpretive History
of American Negroes (New York, 1969), 212; Samuel Lubell, White and
Black: Test of a
Nation (New York, 1964), 52-61; Harold F. Gosnell, Negro
Politicians, The Rise of Negro
Politics in Chicago (Chicago, 1966), viii; David Burner, The Politics of
Provincialism, The
Democratic Party in Transition,
1918-1932 (New York, 1968), 237; Henry
Lee Moon, Balance
of Power: The Negro Vote (Garden City, New York, 1948), 17-19; John M. Allswang, A House
for all Peoples, Ethnic Politics in
Chicago, 1890-1936 (Lexington, 1971),
205-206; Louis M.
Killian, The Impossible Revolution?
Black Power and the American Dream (New York, 1969),
37.
Mr. Giffin is Assistant Professor of
History, Indiana State University, Terre Haute.
26 OHIO
HISTORY
Similarly, in relation to the political
realignment of Negroes during the period 1932-
1940, Rita W. Gordon wrote: "This
transfer of Negro voters represents as dramatic
and sudden a change in political
behavior as has ever occurred in American politics
and poses a question about the role that
the New Deal played in causing the shift."2
A study of the record shows that in Ohio
alienation of black Republicans did not
occur abruptly during the 1930's. The
political experience of blacks in this northern
state indicates that the period between
World War I and the New Deal deserves
greater consideration to gain an
understanding of the readiness of blacks in this
state, as well as in much of the North,
to leave the Republican party during the
1930's. Negroes had participated in
World War I to make the world safe for democ-
racy. After the war they insisted that
the promises of democracy in America be
fulfilled in recognition of their
contributions in the war. This attitude was apparent
during the 1920 primary election
campaign in Ohio. Dissatisfied blacks criticized
United States Senator Warren G. Harding,
who was attempting to gain control of the
Ohio delegation to the national
Republican nominating convention. He was accused
of appealing to the white supremacist
faction of the Republican party in Texas and
Oklahoma, and was criticized for not
including a Negro on his slate of convention
delegates. In defending himself, Harding
stated:
I don't believe in preaching democracy
to somebody 5,000 miles away until our own house
has been put in order. What's the use of
fighting for democracy abroad before we have
given democracy to everyone in America?
. . .
I want the colored boys who went to the
front bravely, to have everything that is coming
to them. Don't believe that statement
that I spoke in Texas recently under the auspices of
the lily-whites. I absolutely refused to
enter the state, until the invitation was endorsed,
by both the "lily-white" and
"black and tan" organizations.3
A concession to the demand for the
inclusion of a Negro on Harding's slate of con-
vention delegates was made by including
a black alternate delegate-at-large.4 Through
these and other efforts to gain their
support, Harding won the endorsement of the
key black Republican leaders in the
primary election and in the general election of
1920, even though Cleveland Negroes
remained at home in protest to racial dis-
crimination on Colored Voters Day held
at Harding's Marion home on September
10, 1920.5
In the political context, some of the
fruits of democracy demanded by black
Republicans in Ohio were party patronage
plums. Thus, incumbent Republican
Secretary of State Harvey C. Smith was
also a target of black Republican opposition
in the primary election of 1920. The
basis of opposition to the secretary of state was
that he had been unfair to black
politicians in distributing the patronage of his office.
The method of opposition to him set a
precedent for independent political activity
later in the decade. Specifically, the
critics of the incumbent supported the candidacy
2. Rita W. Gordon, "The Change in
the Political Alignment of Chicago's Negroes During
the New Deal," Journal of
American History, LVI (December 1969), 584.
3. Gazette (Cleveland), March 20, April 24, 1920; Randolph C.
Downes, "Negro Rights and
White Backlash in the Campaign of
1920," Ohio History, LXXV (Spring-Summer 1966), 86-90,
95-96.
4. Randolph C. Downes, The Rise of
Warren Gamaliel Harding, 1865-1920 (Columbus,
1970) 386-387; Gazette (Cleveland),
March 20, 1920.
5. Ibid., June 19, September 25, 1920; a description of the
Harding strategy of keeping the
Ohio black vote and stilling the critics
is covered in Downes, The Rise of Warren Gamaliel
Harding, 535-561.
Black Insurgency 27
of a black candidate for the Republican
nomination for secretary of state.
Editor Harry C. Smith of the Cleveland Gazette
was the central figure in the black
insurgency movement against the
incumbent Harvey C. Smith. The editor was a well
known black leader who had been a
consistent and outspoken critic of those who
attempted to infringe on the rights of
his people since he had begun editing the
Gazette in 1883. He had sponsored state civil rights and
anti-lynching laws as a
Republican member of the lower house of
the Ohio General Assembly, in which he
had served three terms (1894-1895,
1896-1897, 1900-1901). He had also partici-
pated in the Niagara Movement--the black
protest effort initiated by W. E. B.
DuBois in 1905--and in the founding of
the National Association for the Advance-
ment of Colored People in 1910. In
deciding to file for the Republican nomination
for secretary of state, Editor Smith did
not consult with the leaders of the various
factions of the Republican party in
Ohio, but only conferred with politically active
Negro citizens of Cleveland and
Columbus. Of those with whom he conferred Editor
Smith wrote:
All feel that the present Secretary of
State Harvey C. Smith's persistent refusal, for nearly
two years, to give my people the
clerical representation in that office they have held under
every other Republican Secretary of
State for many years, except Charles Q. Hildebrant,
makes it absolutely necessary that some
one of my people should enter the contest.
Acquiescing to their view of the matter,
I decided to enter and have done so!6
In reference to the neglect of Negro
Republicans by some of the party's other state
office holders in making appointments,
Editor Smith declared:
Intelligent colored voters of Ohio have
reached the limit of their endurance in this matter,
and in the primary contest propose to
serve notice in a practical way on Secretary of State
Smith and all other neglectful
office-holders and members of the party that there must
come an immediate change for the better
or intelligent colored voters will carry the fight
into the elections.7
The daily presses of the state and
evidently most Ohio Republicans, black as well
as white, failed to recognize the
candidacy of Editor Smith as an independent expres-
sion of black protest on the patronage
issue. Instead, he was believed to be a tool
of a party faction that was opposing the
renomination of the incumbent secretary
of state. A challenge of the editor's
motives was brought into the open by action of
Thomas A. Goode, a black Republican from
Columbus, who was apparently a sup-
porter of the incumbent. Goode filed
with the secretary of state an affidavit charging
that Editor Smith's candidacy "was
not made in good faith" and that it was the con-
sequence of "a collusion and
conspiracy" to confuse voters by entering a candidate
with a name similar to Harvey C. Smith
and thus defeat him. Editor Smith denied
the accusation, held that his candidacy
was purely a " 'race' effort" and asked Goode
to withdraw the affidavit, which he
refused to do. The secretary subsequently held
a hearing on the issue during which the
charge of "bad faith" was repeated by Goode
and denied by the editor and his legal
counsel. The secretary ruled that the name
Harry C. Smith could not appear upon the
primary ballot. Leroy H. Godman and
Henry L. Thomas, Negro attorneys from
Columbus and Cleveland respectively,
6. Gazette (Cleveland), June 19, 1920.
7. Ibid.
carried the issue to the Ohio Supreme Court on behalf of Editor Smith. They won their case and the supreme court ordered the secretary of state to place Harry C. Smith's name on the primary ballot.8 Before and after the Ohio Supreme Court ruling, local newspapers implied or stated outright that Editor Smith was a dupe in a ruse to defeat Secretary of State Smith. The Cleveland Plain Dealer proposed this view in an editorial entitled "Smith, Smith, and Smith." A Columbus daily described Editor Smith's candidacy as a "trick." The Negro editor, nevertheless, traveled the state seeking the Republican nomination. His campaign itinerary included speeches in Lorain, Cleveland, Cin- cinnati, Springfield, Dayton, Columbus, Xenia, Toledo, and Oberlin. During the pri- mary campaign Editor Smith received moral and some financial support from the Negro electorate of Ohio. In the primary election itself Harvey C. Smith won renom- ination by a substantial margin. Yet Editor Smith claimed a moral victory in the fact that he received 61,081 votes, indicating that the black independent vote was a political force which should be recognized.9 The political effects of demographic change which would influence black political activity throughout the decade were felt in the insuing general election. During World War I Ohio, as other northern states, had received its first large scale migration of Negroes from the rural south. The overall percentage of blacks in the population of the state rose from only 2.3 percent in 1910 to 3.2 percent in 1920, but some urban
8. Ibid., July 3, 10, 24, 1920; ibid., letter to Thomas A. Goode, June 26, 1920. 9. Cleveland Plain Dealer, June 25, 1920. The third "Smith" was Harold C. Smith of Elyria who had also filed for the office. Columbus Dispatch, August 15, 1920 in August 28, 1920, Gazette (Cleveland); ibid., July 10, August 7, 14, 28, 1920, August 19, 1922. |
|
|
Negro populations had increased remarkably during the period, for example, by 307.8 percent in Cleveland and by 53.2 percent in Cincinnati.10 The Democratic party of Ohio exploited the resulting racial anxieties of whites. During the 1920 campaign the Ohio Democratic state committee issued circulars entitled "A Timely Warning to White Men and Women of Ohio" and "White Folks Don't Forget Your Negro Brothers and Sisters." The circulars, among other things, expressed anxiety about the growing migration of southern Negroes into Ohio, warned that Negroes were seeking social equality, and implied that a vote for the Republican ticket was a vote for "negro domination."11 The "A Timely Warning" circular concluded:
An ominous cloud has risen on the political horizon which should have the attention and consideration of all men and women before casting their ballots. That cloud is the threat of negro domination in Ohio. We see negro newspapers in the State boasting loudly of the increased balance of power held by their race through the enfranchisement of their women. We find them openly predicting that full social equality will be insured them by the election of the Republican candidates. It is a well-known fact that the influx of negroes from the South into the industrial centres of Ohio during the past years has been of such proportions as to give rise to a real race problem. Herded together like cattle and brought here by selfish employers to work
10. Eighteenth Census of the United States, 1960: Characteristics of the Population, Ohio, I, Part 37, p. 54; United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Negroes in the United States, 1920-1932 (Washington, D. C., 1935), 55, Table 10. 11. Gazette (Cleveland), October 23, 1920; Cleveland Branch Bulletin, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) (November 1920), 1, No. 9, Records of the NAACP, Branch Files, Ohio, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress. |
30 OHIO
HISTORY
in our industrial establishments, their
presence has brought about serious consequences
in many of our cities.
White workingmen in many communities
owning or paying for homes in factory dis-
tricts can testify to the effect which
the importation of these negroes into the community
has had upon the value of their
properties. In many of our cities it is well known that the
best residential districts have not been
free from invasion of negroes. It naturally follows
that the efforts upon the part of the
Republican candidates and leaders to further intensify
negro ambitions can only result in
greatly magnifying the evils we are already facing.
Ohioans should remember that the time
has come when we must handle this problem
in somewhat the same way as the South is
handling it, and in such a way bring greater
contentment to both whites and negroes.
We should remember what history tells us of
the dark days when negroes controlled
the Governments in the South, the enormous
expenditures and debts incurred, the
indignities heaped upon the white women and chil-
dren, the vicious attempts of the South
Carolina negro Legislature to give every negro
forty acres of land and a mule.
Men and women of Ohio, rally to the
ballot box and give such a verdict as will forever
rid Ohio of this menace to yourselves
and your children.12
The Democratic racial propaganda did not
adversely affect white Republican can-
didates; yet it did damage black
Republican candidates. The Republican party won
a landslide victory across the board in
the general election of 1920, resulting from a
number of factors which did not include
the race issue. On the other hand, it was a
bleak election for black Republicans.
Henry M. Higgins, who was a black candidate
for a seat in the State House of
Representatives, was the only Republican General
Assembly candidate from Hamilton County
(Cincinnati) defeated in the general
election.13 Similarly, black
state representative candidates B. F. Hughes and G. L.
Davis of Columbus were the only members
of the Franklin County Republican
ticket defeated in the general election
of 1920. This election proved to be indicative
of Republican reluctance to support
black candidates through most of the decade.
R. S. Huston, who was defeated in the
election of 1922, was the last black candidate
on the Republican legislative ticket in
Franklin County during the decade.14 Only
Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) elected
black Republicans to the General Assembly
during the 1920's. As a result only one
black Republican served in the legislature
during any one session throughout the
decade.15 This was a clear discontinuity with
the past when black Republicans had
greater success in being elected to the General
Assembly, although there had been fewer
black voters than during the 1920's. Black
Republicans had served in almost every
session of the legislature between 1880 and
1920; they had been elected by several
counties (including Franklin and Hamilton
as well as Cuyahoga); and as many as
three black Republicans had served during
one legislative session.16
Black Republicans quickly noted and
protested the fact that white Republicans
were dissociating themselves from black
candidates. For example, local black
12. New York Times, October 22,
1920.
13. Gazette (Cleveland), November
20, 1920.
14. Richard Clyde Minor, "The Negro
in Columbus, Ohio" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,
The Ohio State University, 1936), 180.
15. Harry E. Davis served from 1921-1928
and Perry B. Jackson from 1929-1930. See Ohio,
House Journal for the 1920's and Ohio House of Representatives
Membership Directory, 1803-
1965-66 (Columbus, 1966), 97.
16. List of Negro legislators who served
in the Ohio General Assembly, compiled by Edwin
Brooks, Cleveland Call & Post, February
13, 1960.
Black Insurgency
31
Republican leaders complained
vociferously in 1922 when the Hamilton County
Republican organization failed for the
first time in over two score years to support
a Negro candidate for county office. The
Reverend J. Franklin Walker, speaking
before a meeting of black voters at the
Metropolitan Baptist Church, said:
For 45 years the colored people of
Hamilton County have been accorded a place on the
[county Republican] ticket, but this
year you will look in vain on the ballot for the name
of a colored man or woman! We have never
desired these nominations because of the
job. What we valued in them was the
recognition accorded our race. This year it has
been denied us. We resent this slight,
and what is more we will make our resentment felt
in the election.17
Again Editor Harry C. Smith took the
initiative in protesting Republican policy
by announcing his candidacy for the
Republican gubernatorial nomination in the
primary election of 1922. In his
announcement he stated, "For weeks, yes for
months, from all parts of the state, has
come the call and insistent demand that we
stand as a candidate." Negro
Republicans from Cincinnati, Springfield, Dayton,
Columbus, Xenia, Toledo, Akron,
Youngstown, Sandusky, Zanesville, and smaller
cities had sent Smith letters asking him
to be a candidate for the nomination. He
added:
During that time we canvassed the
situation carefully, considered thoroly [sic] all phases
of the matter and finally decided to
accede to the wishes of the great majority of our people
and enter the race. It is OUR candidacy
pure and simple. . .18
In explaining his candidacy, Smith
complained:
The leaders of our [Republican] party
seem determined to go on ... ignoring our people's
right to representation on the state
ticket. Therefore, it is up to us to get it in any
honorable way we can AND THERE IS SUCH A WAY....
The "way" Smith suggested was
solid Negro support of his candidacy in the primary
election.19
The daily press and white Republicans
took the editor's candidacy of 1922 more
seriously than they had in 1920.
Columbus newspaper correspondent James W.
Faulkner reported that Republican
organization men did not believe that Smith
would be nominated but feared that his
candidacy would promote independent voting
by Negroes. A Cleveland newspaper
reported that the Smith candidacy "HAS CEASED
TO BE
A JOKE AMONG REPUBLICANS" and that "the Negro solidarity is being
shaken."
The view that Smith was a pawn in an intraparty
maneuver was revived. Republican
Governor Harry L. Davis of Cuyahoga
County decided not to run for renomination
in 1922, and Carmi A. Thompson of
Cleveland sought the Republican gubernatorial
nomination. Secretary of State Harvey C.
Smith was also a candidate for the nomi-
nation. Supporters of Harvey C. Smith
believed that the candidacy of Harry C. Smith
had been promoted by the Thompson
faction in order to confuse voters by having
two Smiths on the ballot for the
Republican gubernatorial nomination. However,
Thompson's supporters were fearful of
losing the solid Negro vote in Cleveland and
17. Cincinnati Enquirer, July 20,
1922.
18. Gazette (Cleveland), April 8,
June 17, 1922; Cincinnati Enquirer, March 30, 1922.
19. Gazette (Cleveland), April 8,
1922.
32 OHIO
HISTORY
of the possible sympathy vote Secretary
of State Smith might receive, and subse-
quently declared that "they gladly
would join the forces of Secretary Smith to elimi-
nate the negro [Editor Smith] and
confine the primary election contest to candidates
of the Caucasian race."20
Editor Smith campaigned actively and won
some positive support among the
Negroes. Harry Clay Smith for Governor
clubs were organized in Cleveland, Hills-
boro, Barberton, Akron, Cincinnati, and
Youngstown. He made campaign speeches
in Youngstown, Lorain, Cincinnati,
Elyria, Barberton, Martins Ferry, and other
cities in July and August. In Elyria he
spoke to a large interracial audience in a
public park. He spoke before a meeting
at Cincinnati's Metropolitan Baptist Church,
which was jointly sponsored by the
Universal Negro Improvement Association and
the Hamilton County Negro Republican
League. The standing-room-only audience
responded to his speech
enthusiastically. In northern Ohio, one supporter, The Rev-
erend P. A. Nichols of Toledo, declared:
"Our choice for Governor is the HON. HARRY
CLAY SMITH of Cleveland. 1st, because he
is a Republican; 2nd because he is com-
petent to fill the position; 3rd,
because he is a MEMBER OF THE NEGRO RACE."
In the
primary, Carmi A. Thompson won the
Republican gubernatorial nomination. Editor
Smith obtained a relatively small number
of votes but won the consolation of running
sixth among the nine candidates and
getting more votes than three of his white oppo-
nents for the nomination.21
The motivation behind the support of the
candidacies of Smith and other inde-
pendent black Republicans during the
decade involved more than negative protest
against the failure of their party to
recognize the support given to it by black voters.
These candidacies were conceived also as
positive attempts to force the Republican
party to recognize that the black
electorate was growing more powerful than before
as a consequence of the increasing black
population of the state. Blacks constituted
3.2 percent of the population of Ohio in
1920; that figure would rise to 4.7 percent
by 1930.22 During this time Smith's and
other black candidacies were positive, then,
in the sense that the candidates
conceived of the possibility of victory without the
traditional white support. One of the
objectives of the black independents was to
convince the Afro-American voters that
they could or shortly would be able to elect
independent black candidates and, by
means of that demonstration of power, influ-
ence the Republican party to alter its
policies. As will be seen, this was a more real-
istic goal regarding local elections in
which the black population increase was becom-
ing an important factor than in state
elections. Editor Smith's argument for his
Republican gubernatorial nomination in
the 1922 primary based on Negro support
ran as follows:
Four years ago, the Hon. Frank B. Willis
was nominated as the Republican candidate for
governor of Ohio, receiving but 45,000
votes. Two years ago the editor of The Gazette
received 61,081 votes as [a candidate
for the Republican secretary of state nomination];
over 15,000 MORE VOTES THAN MR. WILLIS RECEIVED IN 1918. Remember there are more
than 125,000 Afro-American voters in
Ohio and then draw your own conclusion.23
20. Cincinnati Enquirer, March
30, April 5, 16, 1922; Cleveland Plain Dealer, April 9, 1922,
in April 15, 1922, Gazette (Cleveland);
Cleveland Plain Dealer, June 9, 1922.
21. Gazette (Cleveland), July 1,
8, 15, 22, 29, August 5, 12, 1922; Warren A.M.E. Church
Bulletin, in ibid., July 29, 1922.
22. Eighteenth Census, 1960:
Characteristics of the Population, Ohio, I, Part 37, p. 54.
23. Gazette (Cleveland), April 1,
1922.
Black Insurgency 33
The fact that there were nine candidates
for the 1922 gubernatorial nomination
made Smith's argument even more
plausible. His failure to win nominations in 1920
and 1922 primaries did not dispel his
belief in the value of his candidacies nor in
the possibility of victory for a black
candidate. Smith claimed that his campaigns in
1920 and 1922 had achieved a limited
objective. As a result of his achievements
in the two campaigns the Republican
leaders of the state had been warned. He wrote:
Our people of Ohio have tired of being
made political "doormats" and propose . . . to
force proper recognition [of
Negroes].... we are proving to the satisfaction of ALL
something they, both black and white,
would never heretofore admit and that is that the
Afro-American vote of this state is many
thousands larger than they thought it was and
that it is large enough to nominate a
candidate for THE REPUBLICAN STATE TICKET....
Several years ago, we recognized the
fact that it would take at least six years, three
campaigns, like we have twice conducted
. . .
to convince the [Republican] leaders as
well as our own people that what we have
herein stated is true.24
With a growing political consciousness
shared by many thousands of Negro voters,
Smith added:
It will not be long before "the
resentment within the party will be strong enough to result
in the nomination of Harry C.
Smith" for a state office or in the securing to Ohio Afro-
Americans the recognition so long
arbitrarily withheld. THE WORK SHALL GO ON!25
Accordingly, Smith again filed as a
candidate for the Republican nomination for
governor in the primary election of
1924. There was also a black candidate, Spring-
field carpenter-contractor George W.
Shanklin, for the Republican nomination for
lieutenant governor. Shanklin's
political biography stated that he had attended Rio
Grande College, had served in the
Spanish-American War, and had been elected as
tax assessor three times in Gallipolis.
Smith and Shanklin supported each other
during the campaign. Shanklin campaigned
in southwestern Ohio while Smith con-
centrated upon the northeastern section
of the state. Smith continued his primary
election campaign efforts through the
remainder of the decade by filing for the
Republican gubernatorial nomination in
1926 and 1928.26
The same factors which moved Smith to
seek a place on the Republican state
ticket impelled other black Republicans
to run for election to local offices in several
Ohio cities. Generally, the black
candidates filed as independents in the general
elections after having failed to win
Republican endorsement in the primaries. The
number of these independent candidates
increased as the decade passed. The most
sustained and effective insurgent
movements in local politics were carried out in
Cincinnati and Cleveland, the cities
having the largest Negro populations in the
state. In 1921 some blacks protested
when the Republicans refused to endorse a
Negro candidate for the Cincinnati City
Council.27 They charged the Republican
party with being ungrateful for their
votes.28 There were independent black can-
24. Ibid., August 19, 1922.
25. Ibid.
26. Ibid., June 21, 28, August 9,
1924, June 12, 1926, June 30, 1928; Cleveland Plain Dealer,
June 14, 1924.
27. The Union (Cincinnati)
November 19, 1921; Ernest M. Collins, "The Political Behavior
of the Negroes in Cincinnati, Ohio and
Louisville, Kentucky" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,
University of Kentucky, 1950), 150.
28. Cincinnati Post, November 8,
1921 in Collins, "Political Behavior of the Negroes in
Cincinnati," 73-74.
34 OHIO
HISTORY
didates for council in 1921,
nevertheless most of the voters in Cincinnati's pre-
dominantly black Ward 18 supported the
white independent candidate for mayor
since Wendell Phillips Dabney, who was
the editor of the Union, while admitting
that grievances existed, had advised
Negroes in Cinncinnati to vote the Republican
ticket rather than to risk identifying
themselves with a new party, as the Negroes
of Louisville, Kentucky had done.29
In 1922 the Hamilton County Republican
organization broke a long tradition
by failing to nominate a black candidate
for any county office. This caused even
greater alienation, which was expressed
in part by enthusiastic support given by
black Republicans in Cincinnati to the
candidacy of Editor Smith for the Repub-
lican gubernatorial nomination in 1922.
Subsequently, the Hamilton County
Republican organization, apparently in
an attempt to mollify the alienated black
Republicans, endorsed the appointment of
A. Lee Beaty as an assistant in the
office of the United States District
Attorney for Southern Ohio. Beaty, who had
been a longtime regular Republican, was
a prominent black attorney of Cincinnati
and former state representative from
Hamilton County. Also, Editor Dabney of
the Union was promoted to
paymaster of Cincinnati after having served as assistant
paymaster since 1907. These appointments
did not satisfy the aggrieved black
Republicans. In fact, Dabney resigned
his post in protest against the fact that his
salary had not been increased to
correspond with his higher rank. During the 1924
election campaign Dabney, who formerly
had been a regular, expressed his political
independence. He advised blacks to
"vote for men rather than party." He added:
"Having only recently become
emancipated from Republican Party serfdom, I
most fully realize the evils that have
resulted to our race from its ownership by
that organization since the day the
ballot was given them. Parties, like people,
never respect their slaves."30
Since the Cincinnati Republicans
continued to refuse to nominate a black Re-
publican for city council, Frank A. B.
Hall, a Negro, became an independent
Republican candidate for city council in
1927. Hall was not elected but a local
daily newspaper observed that "for
the first time the colored voters partly con-
centrated on a member of their own
race." Two years later George W. Conrad
and Hall again sought council seats as
independent Republicans. Hall's campaign
was managed by A. Lee Beaty. At a
campaign meeting for Conrad and Hall,
Beaty condemned the Republicans for
failing to give Negroes proper representation
on the party's governing committees. He
stated:
We represent one-fourth of their vote,
but we are not given one of eight places on their
executive committee. We represent
one-fourth of their vote, but we are not given one of
twenty places on their ways and means
committee, and are not given one of ten places on
their platform committee, or one of ten
places on their nominating committee. Either
George Conrad or Frank Hall must teach
them to respect us.31
Neither Hall nor Conrad was elected, but
Hall received more votes in 1929 than
29. Union (Cincinnati), November
5, 1921; Collins, "Political Behavior of the Negroes in
Cincinnati," 73-74. The new party
was called the "Lincoln Party."
30. Beaty received the appointment. Gazette
(Cleveland), July 1, August 26, 1922, June 23,
1928; The Crisis, XXVII (November
1923), 8; ibid., XXIX (November 1924), 13.
31. Cincinnati Times-Star, November
10, 1927; Gazette (Cleveland), November 2, 1929.
Black Insurgency 35
he had in 1927 and demonstrated that
voter support for this black independent
candidate was growing. The Republican
party of Cincinnati apparently learned
the lesson of Hall's candidacies. In
1931 the local Republican organization backed
Hall for a city council seat and he was
elected.32
In contrast to Cincinnati and Columbus,
independent black Republican activity
was most intense and successful in
Cleveland. Yet the causal factors of this
activity were somewhat atypical. The
Republican party in the Cleveland area had
continued to nominate a black city
council candidate and black candidates for the
state legislature during the 1920's.33
Thus, unlike similar movements in other Ohio
cities, the candidacies of independent
black Republicans in Cleveland were not
protests against the failure of
Republican party to nominate any Negro candidates.
Instead, the grievances of the
independents in Cleveland related in part to dissatis-
faction with the behavior of a black
city councilman who was supported by the
party organization. In addition, the
concentrations of Negroes in three Cleveland
wards made the election of more than one
black councilman possible. This pos-
sibility in combination with the failure
of the GOP to nominate more than one
black council candidate also prompted
independent candidacies, some of which
were successful.
Politically conscious progressive
Negroes in Cleveland were appalled by the
record of Thomas W. Fleming, the black
Republican councilman from predomi-
nantly black Ward 11. A. D. (Starlight)
Boyd, black saloon keeper, headed the
Republican machine in Ward 11 and
faithfully delivered its votes to Fleming and
Maurice Maschke, head of the Cuyahoga
County Republican organization, in elec-
tion after election. As a councilman,
Fleming voted according to the wishes of
Maschke and seemingly took little
interest in the conditions of his ward or the
concerns of Negroes in Cleveland.
Consequently, progressive Negroes of Ward 11
pressed Editor Smith of the Gazette to
oppose Fleming for a seat on the council
in the local elections of 1921. Smith,
who did decide to run as an independent
Republican, was endorsed by the Civic
League, the Baptist Ministers' Conference,
the Cleveland Council of Colored Women,
the Universal Negro Improvement
Association, and several other Negro
organizations in Ward 11. Fleming, never-
theless, was reelected even though,
according to the Gazette, there probably was
"notorious skullduggery in the
election booths." Yet Smith made a good showing
32. Collins, "Political Behavior of
the Negroes in Cincinnati," 151-153; Cincinnati Post,
November 11, 1931.
33. In the primary election of 1920
William R. Green sought a Republican nomination for
the state senate and Harry E. Davis, Samuel
E. Woods, Sidney B. Thompson, and W. T. Blue each
attempted to secure a Republican
nomination for the state house of representatives. Davis was
elected to the house, after being the
only Negro to win in the primary election. Remaining a
regular Republican, Davis was reelected
in 1922 and 1924. Chester K. Gillespie, William R.
Green, and Davis sought Republican
nominations for the house in the 1926 primary election.
Again only Davis won, and he was
reelected in the autumn. Davis resigned his seat in the
house upon being elected to the
Cleveland Civil Service Commission in 1928. Perry B. Jackson
won a Republican nomination for the
house in 1928, but Peter Boult, chairman of the Cleveland
convention committee of the National
Afro-American Democratic Association, failed that year
to win a Democratic endorsement for the
General Assembly. Jackson won a house seat in the
general election, and thus Cuyahoga
County was represented by a Negro in the house during
every term of the legislature during the
decade. Gazette (Cleveland), August 7, 1920, August
7, 14, 1926, May 12, November 3, 17,
1928; see Ohio, House Journal for the 1920's. Black
candidates for Cleveland City Council
noted in text below.
36 OHIO HISTORY
in the election returns.34
During the second half of the decade
independent black political activity in Cleve-
land became more intense and effective
than before. Meanwhile, as the black
population increased, both the
Republican and Democratic organizations in Cleve-
land became more solicitious of the
black vote than they had been earlier. In 1925
independent black candidates, Dr. E. J.
Gregg and Harry Harper, challenged
Fleming in the Third District for a city
council seat, and attorney Clayborne
George was an independent black council
candidate from the Fourth District. Only
Fleming was elected. But, by 1927 the black
electorate had increased to the point
that it could elect more than one member
of the council. In 1927 George and
Gregg were elected as independent
Republicans, and Fleming was reelected with
the endorsement of the Republican
organization. Councilmen George and Gregg,
although they had been independent
Republican candidates, entered the minority
caucus of the Democratic councilmen.
They were expected to receive the support
of the Democratic minority on most of
the measures which they sponsored. Gregg
had the endorsement of W. B. Gongwer,
chairman of the Cuyahoga County
Democratic organization. This was the
first time in Cleveland councilmanic history
that a Negro had been endorsed by the
Democratic party.35
Subsequently, apparently in an attempt
to appease alienated black voters, the
Republican councilmen backed attorney
Harry E. Davis for election as a member
of the Cleveland Civil Service
Commission. However, charges were made that the
organization's motive in sponsoring
Davis, who represented Cuyahoga County in
the Ohio House of Representatives, was
to rid "itself of the responsibility of back-
ing him for the state senate." In
January 1928, Davis became the first Negro mem-
ber of the Civil Service Commission
after receiving the votes of thirteen of the
twenty-five councilmen for the post.36
In 1929, Maschke and the members of the
Cuyahoga County Republican
organization were embarrassed by the
indictment of Councilman Fleming for
soliciting and accepting a bribe to use
his influence on the council toward the pas-
sage of special legislation. He was
subsequently convicted of the charge and
sentenced to serve two years and nine
months in the Ohio Penitentiary.37 Fleming's
conviction brought Maschke under the
fire of the city's daily newspapers. One
editor wrote:
Maschke made Fleming. In turn, Fleming
has delivered to Maschke. And today, Maschke
stands responsible for the conditions
which have made Tom Fleming what he is.
The conviction of Tom Fleming is the
conviction of the rule of Maurice Maschke.38
Another editor held that Maschke should
not be permitted to name the person to
fill the council vacancy created by
Fleming's resignation. He added:
Many Clevelanders will feel that a
colored man should be named in place of the colored
ex-councilman. There are plenty of
colored residents of the Third District amply qualified
to represent both the district and the
entire city. But there should be no consideration
34. Gazette (Cleveland), March 3,
November 24, 1917 May 14, October 29, November 12,
December 17, 1921, February 4, March 25,
1922.
35. Ibid., October 17, November 7, 1925, November 12, 1927,
January 14, 1928, October
19, 1929.
36. Ibid., January 7, 1928.
37. Ibid., February 9, 16, 1929.
38. Cleveland Press, February 9,
1929.
Black Insurgency 37
whatever of any man, whether white or
colored, who would enter the Council as the
representative. .. of Tom Fleming. There
should be no consideration of any aspirant who
has even identified himself with
Fleming's past political activities.39
The Republican organization subsequently
backed for the vacancy a man of
unquestioned character, Dr. Russell S.
Brown, pastor of the Mt. Zion Congrega-
tional Church, one of the prominent
Negro churches in the city. Dr. Brown was
experienced in welfare work, scholarship
and teaching, and was not identified with
any political faction. He was elected
with the votes of the fourteen white Republi-
cans and two Negroes on the council.
This turn of events apparently reconciled
Councilmen George and Gregg to the
Republican organization. Thereafter, they
began to meet with the Republican
councilmanic caucus.40
The Democratic party in Cleveland began
to make a special appeal to black
voters in the latter part of the 1920's
in recognition of their growing political
power. In the local election of 1927
Democratic county chairman Gongwer en-
dorsed Negro candidates for city council
and municipal court judge. In the summer
of 1928 Gongwer appointed forty-two
Negroes as precinct committeemen in wards
11, 12, and 18. Thus, all the Democratic
precinct committeemen in wards 11 and
12 were black, although some of the
Republican counterparts in the same wards
were white but did not all live in the
wards. Gongwer endorsed Dr. James A. Owen
for a council seat in the election of
1929, marking only the second time the
Democratic organization had backed a
Negro council candidate.41
A considerable amount of independence
continued on the part of black candi-
dates for office in Cleveland, in the
context of the new solicitation of black support
by both parties. There were numerous
Negro councilmanic candidates in addition
to Dr. Owen in the election of 1929.
Attorney Lawrence O. Payne and Dr. Leroy
Bundy ran as independent candidates.
Attorney Chester K. Gillespie and Council-
man Gregg were identified with the
Progressive Government Committee supporting
the city manager plan. Councilman George
was a Republican candidate. Bundy,
George, and Payne were elected. In
addition, Mrs. Mary B. Martin, a local black
educator, was elected to serve a term on
the Cleveland Board of Eduation.42
Independent political activity by black
candidates and their supporters also
occurred in several Ohio cities which
had Negro populations smaller than those in
Cincinnati and Cleveland. For example,
eight black candidates, some of whom
may not have been independents, ran for
public office in Columbus and Franklin
County during the 1920's. In 1920 Dr.
Thomas W. Burton, a Springfield physician,
was a candidate for coroner. Robert W.
Pulley of Oberlin was a candidate for
sheriff in 1922. In 1925 Harry H. Stotts
ran as a candidate for councilman-at-large
in Zanesville and thereby became the
first Negro to seek elective office in that city.
Also in 1925 Wilberforce University
Athletic Director Dean Mohr was a candidate
for clerk of the Springfield municipal
court.43
39. Cleveland Plain Dealer, February
11, 1929.
40. Gazette (Cleveland), February
23, March 9, 1929.
41. Ethel Kennedy to W. B. Gongwer, May
25, 1927, George A. Myers Papers, Ohio Historical
Society; Gazette (Cleveland),
September 1, 1928, October 19, 1929; Cleveland Plain Dealer,
October 15, 1919.
42. Gazette (Cleveland), October
19, November 2, 9, 1929.
43. J. S. Himes, Jr., "Forty Years
of Negro Life in Columbus, Ohio," Journal of Negro
History, XXVII (April 1942), 145; letter of Thomas W. Burton to
Harry C. Smith, November
8, 1920, in November 20, 1920, Gazette
(Cleveland); ibid., July 29, August 5, 1922, September
19, 1925.
38 OHIO
HISTORY
The black Republican insurgency of the
1920's involved even more than the
patronage dispute, promotion of black
candidates, and the wooing of the growing
black electorate. Insurgents also
directed attention of the black electorate to white
Republican nominees' records on the Klan
issue or on broader civil rights issues.
Candidates on Republican state,
congressional, and presidential tickets were sub-
jected to scrutiny in these areas. In
1924, former governor and Republican
nominee, Harry L. Davis, was criticized
because he had been endorsed by the
Ku Klux Klan and because he had not
denied that he was a Klan member. Black
critics of the Republicans at the state
level were better organized in 1926 than they
had been before. In the autumn of 1926 a
non-partisan league of Negro voters
was formed at a meeting in Columbus. The
league elected Dr. E. J. Gregg of
Cleveland, president, and attorney Sully
Jaymes of Springfield, vice president. It
claimed representation from thirty-four
counties. Myers Y. Cooper and James O.
Mills, respectively the Republican
nominees for governor and lieutenant governor in
1926, were the chief targets of the
critics. Both men were charged with discrimina-
tion against blacks in their businesses
and with not denying that they were members
of the Ku Klux Klan or that they were
endorsed by it. In a letter to G. H. Townsley,
publicity director in the Republican
state committee, Editor Smith of the Gazette
wrote:
Permit me to assure you that a denial of
civil rights in public places of entertainment as
is said to be the case in... James 0.
Mills' chain of restaurants throughout Ohio is not
atoned for by the employment of 227, or
227 million "colored" people.
The same is true in the case of Myers Y.
Cooper... ; it is not how many "colored"
men he employs but whether or not he is
a member of the Ku Klux Klan and endorsed
by that lawless organization, as
repeatedly stated by the daily press of the state. . . and
never to my knowledge, at least, denied
by him. The statement has also been made and
not contradicted that Mr. Cooper draws a
color-line in his real estate dealings in
Cincinnati.
Under the circumstances, it is simply
ridiculous to expect self and race respecting
"colored" men and women ... to
cast their votes for either of these two men....44
Smith was subsequently informed that the
state Democratic campaign committee
had circulated one hundred thousand
copies of his Townsley letter throughout the
state prior to the election in which
Cooper lost to incumbent Democrat Victor
Donahey.45 Criticism of
Cooper was revived when he was renominated for gover-
nor by the Republicans in 1928. For
example, a letter, written by a Negro teacher
at Douglass School of Cincinnati and
widely circulated before the election, charged
Cooper with using pressure tactics and
harassment to drive her and her sister out
of a house which they had purchased in
an area in which Cooper's real estate firm
owned much property.46
A similar aspect of the insurgency had
manifested itself in presidential elections
beginning in 1924. A vigorous attempt
was made to win representation for Ohio
Negro Republicans at the 1924 Republican
National Convention which was to be
44. Gazette (Cleveland), November 1, 1924, October 9, 1926; letter,
October 21, 1926, in
ibid., October 30, 1926.
45. Letter of Harry C. Smith to Governor
A. V. Donahey, November 6, 1926, in ibid.,
November 20, 1926. In the November 20th
letter Editor Smith stated that the Negroes had "un-
doubtedly furnished ... the balance
of votes necessary to insure your [Donahey's] re-election...."
46. Letter of Hettie G. Taylor, To Whom It
May Concern, October 15, 1928, in ibid., Octo-
ber 20, 1928.
Black Insurgency 39
held in Cleveland. The Abraham Lincoln
Republican Club of Dayton took the lead
in the campaign to obtain such
representation. In a memorandum addressed to the
state party leaders the Dayton
organization held that one of the delegates-at-large
from Ohio should be a Negro on the
grounds that the increasing number of Negro
voters in the state had been loyal to
the party over the years and thus deserved
representation at the convention.47
The adviser of the Dayton Negro club stated
that his organization's campaign was
given editorial support by the Negro press and
encouragement by Negro organizations.
The campaign included the circulation of
petitions in support of a Negro
delegate-at-large. Some of those who were chagrined
by the failure of the state party to
back a Negro delegate-at-large began a move-
ment to create an organization which
would apparently promote independent voting
by Afro-Americans in the fall election
in the event that Negroes should not be
represented among the
delegates-at-large.48 Subsequently, leading Negro Republi-
cans of the state met in Columbus to
discuss the subject at the request of the
Dayton Abraham Lincoln Republican Club.
The conferees resolved to ask for a
conference with the state Republican
executive committee and for a Negro
delegate-at-large, but both requests
were denied by the executive committee. In
response to the denial of a black
delegate-at-large Editor Smith wrote: "This time,
they [Afro-Americans] do not intend to
be shunted aside without making those
responsible for it pay in the loss of
thousands of votes on election day in Novem-
ber, 1924."49
Independent Republicans were appalled by
the record of the Republican con-
vention in Cleveland. The convention did
not condemn the Ku Klux Klan and
nominated Calvin Coolidge, who had
continued the racial segregation of federal
employees which had been initiated by
the Democratic administration of Woodrow
Wilson.50 As a result, the
insurgents supported either Robert M. LaFollette or
John W. Davis, presidential candidates
of the Progressive and Democratic parties
respectively. The Independent Colored
Voters League of Cuyahoga County
(Cleveland) was organized by The
Reverend Horace C. Bailey, Peter Boult,
Walter Brown, and other Clevelanders.
The league decided to send LaFollette
campaign material throughout the state.
Rev. Bailey toured Negro communities
in many towns and cities of northeastern
Ohio speaking for LaFollette at the
request of local and state LaFollette
campaign committees. Oswald Garrison
Villard, editor of the Nation and
vice president of the National Association for the
Advancement of Colored People, and old
Cleveland progressive Peter Witt, then a
47. To the State Executive Committee of
the Republican Party at Columbus
Assembled,
November 22, 1923, in ibid., December
1, 1923.
48. Letter of E. T. Banks to Harry C.
Smith, January 21, 1924, in ibid., January 26, February
9, 1924.
49. Ibid., February 16, 23, 1924.
50. Ibid., May 24, June 14, 21,
28, July 5, 19, 1924. During the 1920's the national Republican
party's policies in relation to Negroes
tended to be regressive. During the decade the national
party: 1) adopted platform planks on
civil and political rights that were more vague and inex-
plicit than before; 2) attempted to
reduce the participation of blacks in the affairs of the national
party; 3) failed to cause the enactment
of a federal anti-lynching law; 4) was generally indiffer-
ent to the issue of federal protection
of the right to vote; 5) did not discontinue racial segregation
of federal employees; and 6) gave fewer
federal appointments to Negroes than it had before the
1920's. The national Republican party's
relationship to blacks during the decade is discussed by
Richard B. Sherman, "Republicans
and Negroes: The Lessons of Normalcy," Phylon, XXVII
(Spring 1966), 63-79; Richard B.
Sherman, "The Harding Administration and the Negro: An
Opportunity Lost," Journal of
Negro History, XLIX (July 1964), 151-168.
40 OHIO HISTORY
city councilman, were among the
prominent men who addressed the league meet-
ings in September and October. League
members spoke for LaFollette in Paines-
ville, Akron, and Springfield in late
October. Among those who campaigned for
the Democratic presidential ticket were
black students at Ohio University who
formed a Davis Club. Lawrence T. Young,
who headed the group, stated:
There is just a nice little group of us
and we often discuss the political situation as best
we know it, and we talk about how we
intend to exercise our right of franchise. During
the summer, we have been condemning
Coolidge because of his insulting segregation and
his silence attitude in reference to the
Ku Klux Klan, and we decided to help Davis as
much as in our power and to exert
whatever influence we could in his behalf. We, too,
although young in politics, have come to
. . . sense that we owe no allegiance to any
party and that what we want are men and
not parties.51
It should also be noted that the
national organization of the NAACP, in reaction
against the negative record of the
Coolidge administration on racial issues, en-
couraged its members across the country
to vote for candidates on the basis of
their merits rather than on their party
affiliation. The Crisis took an independent
stance by publishing a symposium on the
relative merits of the presidential candi-
dates. Speakers representing the NAACP
were sent to various parts of the nation
to promote this view. For example, at
the September Emancipation Day cere-
monies in Springfield, Ohio, James
Weldon Johnson, Secretary of the NAACP,
urged Negroes to vote independently and
vote against any candidate who was a
member of or was supported by the Ku
Klux Klan. The tendency toward black
independence in presidential politics in
Ohio was continued in the 1928 election.
The Al Smith League of Colored Voters of
Ohio was formed in the summer of the
election year. The league was an
independent organization rather than a Demo-
cratic one, although it did campaign for
the Democratic presidential candidate. The
stated purpose of the league was to
promote Al Smith's candidacy and those of any
"such other officials as may be
considered favorable to the progress and advance-
ment of our people." Dr. Joseph L.
Johnson, former United States Minister to
Liberia, was elected president of the
organization. Other leaders of the league
represented Cincinnati, Cleveland,
Columbus, Dayton, Rendville, Springfield, and
Toledo.52
The most publicized and thorough
campaign against an Ohio Republican nomi-
nee was launched in 1930. United States
Senator Roscoe C. McCulloch became
the target of the campaign because he
had voted for confirmation of the appoint-
ment of Judge John J. Parker of North
Carolina as an Associate Justice of the
United States Supreme Court. The NAACP
and others charged that Judge Parker
had exhibited anti-black behavior
earlier in his career and thus opposed his
appointment to the court by President
Herbert Hoover. Senator McCulloch
received "an avalanche of pleas
from his Negro and white constituents" asking
that he vote against Judge Parker's
confirmation, but he voted for confirmation
anyway.53 Consequently,
leaders of the NAACP in Ohio and others began an
51. Gazette (Cleveland), August 30, September 13, 27, October 4,
18, 25, 1924.
52. "How Shall We Vote?" "The
Crisis, XXIX (November 1924), 12-15; Gazette (Cleve-
land), September 27, 1924, September 1,
1928.
53. Walter White, "The Test in
Ohio," The Crisis, XXXVI (November 1930), 373. See also
telegram of Charles W. White to Senator
Roscoe McCulloch (copy) enclosed in letter of
Charles W. White to Walter White, April
5, 1930, NAACP Records.
Black Insurgency 41
effort to prevent Senator McCulloch from
continuing to serve in the Senate. The
president of the Cleveland NAACP branch
wrote; ". .. I am utilizing every
opportunity here to have Negro
organizations go on record as being opposed to
the candidacy of Senator McCulloch, both
for nomination and election" in the
1930 elections.
Among the Cleveland organizations that
came out early against Senator
McCulloch were the East End Political
Club, St. James Forum, and the Harlan
Club.54 McCulloch's critics
had little opportunity to prevent his nomination
because he had no opponent in the
Republican party, but an attack was escalated
after the primaries. For example, The Reverend
D. O. Walker of St. James
African Methodist Episcopal Church in
Cleveland urged his audience to vote for
Robert J. Bulkley, the Democratic
senatorial nominee, and to defeat Senator
McCulloch. Walker also stated: "It
is singular that, although colored people
throughout Ohio urged the rejection of
the appointment [of Judge Parker] both
Ohio Senators voted for it. Either the
Republican Party feels we will give it our
support no matter what it does, or it
thinks our memories are so short that we
can be slapped in the face and forget
before election."55
The national leaders of the NAACP,
apparently sensing a Negro revolt in Ohio,
decided to make the defeat of Senator
McCulloch a test of Negro political power.
A state conference of local NAACP branches
was established with the political
efficacy of the organization in mind.
The long range purpose of the conference
was to coordinate the general activities
of the local branches, but it was understood
that in the short run the conference
could promote the defeat of Senator
McCulloch. Prior to its creation, NAACP
Secretary Robert W. Bagnall observed:
"One special feature of the Ohio
Conference is that it is to serve as an attempt to
organize the state to seek the defeat of
Senator McCulloch ...."56 The Conference
of the Ohio Branches of the NAACP took
the lead in the anti-McCulloch fight.
Branch delegates, meeting in Columbus,
voted unanimously to oppose his election.
They decided to carry out an
anti-McCulloch rather than a pro-Bulkley campaign,
although there was some strong sentiment
for the Democrat.57 The delegates
stated:
In taking this action the N.A.A.C.P. is
not affiliating or co-operating with any political
party. Its action is wholly an
independent one, planned, financed and carried to con-
summation by the organization itself.
The issue is clearly drawn.
Senator McCulloch chose to override the
protests of his Afro-American constituents
and of liberal Americans throughout the
country who were against placing upon the
Supreme Court a man who had urged,
through motives of political selfishness, that parts
of the Constitution and rights of
Afro-Americans be disregarded.58
The anti-McCulloch campaign was headed
by C. E. Dickinson, president of the
conference of Ohio NAACP branches.59
The state NAACP conference made over
54. Letter of Charles W. White to Walter
White, May 28, 1930, ibid.
55. Gazette (Cleveland), September 20, 1930.
56. Memorandum to the Board of
Directors, July 14, 1930 (copy), NAACP Records. See
also The Crisis, XXXVII (December
1930), 418.
57. Minutes of the Second Conference of
the Ohio Branches of the National Association for
the Advancement of Colored People,
Columbus, Ohio, October 5, 1930, NAACP Records.
58. Gazette (Cleveland), October 11, 1930.
59. The Crisis, XXXVII (December 1930), 418.
42 OHIO HISTORY
19,000 communications with Ohio Negro
voters on the McCulloch issue. The
anti-McCulloch literature mailed by the
state organization between October 3 and
November 3 included small printed cards,
window cards, postal cards, letters,
sample ballots with McCulloch's name
crossed out, press notices, and copies of the
Democratic party platform.60 The
national organization of the NAACP also
played a noteworthy role in the campaign
against McCulloch. The progress of the
efforts against McCulloch were reported
in the Crisis. Walter White, acting secre-
tary of the NAACP, in a Crisis article
described the Negro political revolt in
Ohio. As examples of those who were fighting
McCulloch, White mentioned "a
Negro of influence [in Cincinnati] who
had been a life-long Republican," "one of
the leading ministers of
Cleveland," "one of the leading women social workers of
the state," "a prominent Negro
lawyer of Ohio and the dean of Negro novelists."
White also wrote:
The revolt is especially to be seen
among the younger and more progressive Negroes of
Ohio. One of these, a lawyer, who is
working actively against the Republican nominee,
has declared that "the minds of
Ohio Negroes are set against McCulloch. Approximate
solidarity of Negro voters against him
may spell the difference between victory and
defeat."61
National leaders of the association
visited Ohio to speak against the Republican
senatorial nominee. Both Walter White
and W. E. B. DuBois, editor of the Crisis,
addressed Ohio audiences during the days
before the election.62 The campaign
effectively aroused interest in the
issue. In Columbus, for example, "meeting after
meeting, rally after rally" were
held in opposition to the election of Senator
McCulloch, and the Columbus NAACP
membership increased to over one thousand
during the anti-McCulloch campaign.63
The results of the election were gratifying
to the Ohio NAACP organizations and
others who had engaged in the massive
anti-McCulloch effort. Robert J. Bulkley
was elected to the United States Senate.
The factors causing McCulloch's defeat
included the prohibition issue and the
general economic conditions, but the
black vote was influential. One scholar
reported: "The colored districts of
Cleveland, Toledo, Akron, Columbus, and
Canton went to McCulloch's Democratic
opponent by margins of from 50 to 86
per cent, while many voters in these
districts refrained from voting for United
States Senator."64
The anti-McCulloch campaign was a climax
of the insurgent activity which had
expanded during the 1920's. Yet the
independence movement had no substantial
effect upon the general black voting
patterns through the 1932 elections. There
were politically active members of the
black business and professional community
who remained regular Republicans and
tried to maintain the black vote for the
Republican party during the years of
growing dissent. These persons campaigned
for white Republican candidates and in
some instances campaigned against inde-
60. Letter of Geraldyne R. Freeland,
Secretary to the President of the State Conference, to
Walter White, November 4, 1930, NAACP
Records.
61. White, "The Test in Ohio,"
374.
62. Letter of Geraldyne Freeland to
Walter White, November 4, 1930, NAACP Records.
63. Minor, "The Negro in
Columbus," 188.
64. John G. Van Deusen, "The Negro
in Politics," Journal of Negro History, XXI (July
1936), 271.
Black Insurgency 43
pendent black candidates. For example,
Editor Smith estimated that about fifty
Negroes were in the employ of his white
opponents for the Republican guber-
natorial nomination in 1922. Carmi A.
Thompson was endorsed by Mrs. Harry E.
Davis, the wife of a black state
legislator, and by Miss Hallie Q. Brown, instructor
at Wilberforce University and prominent
official in the National Association of
Colored Women. Some of Editor Smith's
black opponents argued that his candi-
dacy made "enemies for the
race" and that a vote for him would be wasted
because a Negro had no chance of
winning. He was also a victim of smears
designed to curtail his popularity among
Negroes. It was alleged that he employed
only white people in his newspaper
office and that he was living with a white
woman.65
Even so, the Democratic party, because
of its identification with the racial
policies of the white South, had more
influence than the black regular Republican
campaign workers on the continuance of
the black voting pattern during this
period. The Democratic party was not
regarded as a viable alternative by most
black voters, whether or not they were
disenchanted with the Republican party,
until the Democrats' anti-black image
was altered by the inclusion of blacks in the
New Deal programs. Thus, in the
presidential election of 1932 Herbert Hoover
received 72 percent of the black vote in
Cleveland and 71.2 percent in Cincinnati.
In the election of 1928 Hoover had
obtained smaller percentages of the black vote
in these cities. Al Smith had won 30
percent of the black votes in four predominantly
Negro wards in Cleveland, and Hoover
gathered only 59.5 percent in Cincinnati in
1928.66 In the context of the
deteriorating economic situation of blacks and the
regressive racial policies of the
Republican party during the Hoover administration
it is not likely that more black voters
supported Hoover in 1932 than in 1928 because
of increasing popularity of the
President and the Republican party. A more credible
interpretation of the increased black
vote for Hoover would be that the black voters
who had expressed protest against the
Republican party by supporting the Democratic
ticket in 1928 voted Republican in 1932
because a Democratic victory was much
more probable in 1932 than in 1928.
The black independence movement of the
1920's and its attendant causes pre-
pared the black electorate for the
political realignment which occurred during the
New Deal. The independence movement and
the social and political situations out
of which it arose in effect constituted
a course in political reeducation for black
voters and white politicians. One of the
lessons directed at black voters was that
the Republican party was not sacrosanct
and that opposition to it was respectable.
A new generation of black voters grew to
maturity while the Grand Old Party's
image as a hallowed institution was
being eroded by harsh criticism of it in every
election from 1920 to 1932. The critics
were respected members of the black
middle class. The leadership of the
independent movement was derived largely
from the black professional class, which
included lawyers, newspaper editors,
clergymen, teachers, and physicians. Yet
it should be noted that the insurgency was
65. Gazette (Cleveland), July 8, 22, 29, August 5, 12, 1922. See
also Mrs. Karl F. Ritter,
"Teacher-Elocutionist-Writer,
Hallie Q. Brown," Women of Ohio (Martha Kinney Cooper
Ohioana Library Year Book 1973), 26.
66. Moon, Balance of Power, 18;
Ernest M. Collins, "Cincinnati Negroes and Presidential
Politics," Journal of Negro
History, XLI (April 1956), 132.
44 OHIO
HISTORY
not entirely a middle class phenomenon.
The fact that the Universal Negro Im-
provement Association (UNIA) sometimes
participated in the movement indicated
that blacks of the lower economic class
were also involved in it. Membership of
the UNIA, the black nationalist
organization founded by Marcus Garvey in 1914,
was drawn largely from the masses of
economically deprived blacks. Local and
state units of the UNIA in Ohio
criticized and opposed regular Republicans during
the 1920's. William Ware, president of
the Cincinnati division of the UNIA stated:
The Negroes' lamentable condition
here [Cincinnati] is largely caused
by sticking to
preachers and the Republican
party.... Many of them go to the
Republican campaign
managers, get about fifty dollars or a
suit of clothes and solemnly say, my church is with
you.... Our white speakers are always
talking about Abraham Lincoln, and their black
mammies. We are tired of that stuff.67
The Cleveland division of the UNIA
endorsed Harry C. Smith as an independent
black city council candidate in 1921.68
The Cincinnati UNIA division supported
the ticket of the Charter Party, a local
third party, in 1927.69 A state convention
of UNIA delegates backed the Democratic
candidate for President in 1928.70 The
growing number of independent precedents
set by the black insurgents prior to the
New Deal made opposition to Republican
candidates or affiliation with the
Democratic party a less difficult step
than it would have been in 1920 when it was
taboo to ally with the Democrats. The
change of attitude in relation to party
affiliation was apparent in Cleveland in
1930 when a young men's Democratic club
was founded there. In a report about the
club, a local black newspaper stated that
although in earlier years it had been
"a disgrace to be a Democrat. . ., colored
Democrats have become popular, and even
prominent Republicans are talking of
joining the ranks."71
There is also some empirical evidence,
derived from election statistics in pre-
dominantly Negro wards, which indicates
that the political realignment during the
New Deal was facilitated by earlier
political circumstances. Proportionately more
black voters left the Republican party
in cities which had experienced vigorous and
successful black political independence
movements during the 1920's than in cities
that had not had this experience. Black
political insurgents had been very active
and relatively effective in Cleveland
and Cincinnati. Black independents had
operated in Columbus but their
effectiveness had been severely limited by the
absence of a political ward system in
Ohio's capital city. Black political indepen-
dence in Chicago had apparently been
minimized by the exceptional efforts made
by the Chicago Republican machine in the
person of Mayor William Hale Thompson
to maintain the loyalty of black voters
to the party.72 During the 1930's higher per-
centages of black voters broke with the
Republican party in Cleveland and Cincinnati
than in Columbus and Chicago. In the
1936 presidential election 66.4 percent of the
voters in Cleveland's Ward 17 and 62.8
percent of the voters in Cincinnati's Ward
67. Wendell Phillips Dabney, Chisum's
Pilgrimage and Others (Cincinnati, 1927), 21-22.
68. Gazette (Cleveland), October
29, 1921.
69. The Union (Cincinnati),
October 1927, in Dabney, Chisum's Pilgrimage and Others, 21.
70. Gazette (Cleveland),
September 29, 1928.
71. Cleveland Call & Post, April
12, 1930, in April 26, 1930, Gazette (Cleveland).
72. Gordon, "The Change in the
Political Alignment of Chicago's Negroes During the New
Deal," 587-588.
Black Insurgency 45
16 were Democratic while only 42.6
percent of the voters in Columbus' Ward 7
and an estimated 49 percent of Chicago's
black voters were Democratic.3 True,
the New Deal was a crucial factor in the
disintegration of the black Republican
bloc vote during the 1930's, but the
alienation of Negroes from the Republican
party did not occur abruptly during the
first term of Franklin D. Roosevelt. Many
black Ohioans had long since become
disenchanted with the GOP and had been
prepared to choose an alternative to it,
which the New Deal Democrats provided.
73. The percentages for the Ohio wards
were computed by the author from figures in Ohio,
Annual Report of the Secretary of
State, 1936, pp. 260, 286, 303. The
Chicago statistic was cited
in Moon, Balance of Power, 19.
WILLIAM GIFFIN
Black Insurgency in the Republican
Party of Ohio, 1920-1932
An extraordinary change in Negro voting
patterns has occurred between the post-
Civil War period and the present. The
black vote was remarkably consistent for the
party of Lincoln from the passage of the
Fifteenth Amendment to the New Deal
period, but this solidly Republican bloc
vote was broken during the 1930's. The
black vote became more and more
overwhelmingly Democratic following the New
Deal. A misleading implication of these
facts is that the disaffection of the black
Republicans, which was clearly
manifested in the 1936 election, lacked significant
antecedents in the pre-New Deal period.
A substantial number of historians and
other professionals have implied that
the alienation of Negroes from the Republican
party occurred suddenly after 1932. They
have generally emphasized the high per-
centage of black votes polled by Herbert
Hoover in 1932 and the mass exit of Negro
voters from the Republican party in
1936. Furthermore, their explanations of the
phenomenon have largely involved changes
effected during the New Deal period.
Theodore H. White, for example, wrote:
Time was, forty years ago, when Negroes
voted solidly Republican out of gratitude to
Abraham Lincoln and emancipation.
("I remember," once said Roy Wilkins, Executive
Secretary of the National Association
for the Advancement of Colored People, "when I
was young in Kansas City, the kids threw
rocks at Negroes on our street who dared to
vote Democratic.") But Franklin D.
Roosevelt changed that. Under Roosevelt, govern-
ment came to mean social security,
relief, strong unions, unemployment compensation.
... And, like a heaving-off of ancient
habit, as the Negro moved north he moved to the
Democratic voting rolls.1
1. Theodore H. White, The Making of
the President 1960 (New York, 1961), 232. Others
who have implied, by focusing upon the
black voting record in the context of the New Deal
period, that black Republicans suddenly
became disaffected are John A. Garraty, The American
Nation, A History of the United
States (New York, 1966), 741; T. Harry
Williams, Richard N.
Current, and Frank Freidel, A History
of the United States Since 1865 (New York, 1969), 538;
Richard B. Morris and William Greenleaf,
U.S.A., The History of a Nation (Chicago, 1969),
II, 842; August Meier and Elliott
Rudwick, From Plantation to Ghetto, An Interpretive History
of American Negroes (New York, 1969), 212; Samuel Lubell, White and
Black: Test of a
Nation (New York, 1964), 52-61; Harold F. Gosnell, Negro
Politicians, The Rise of Negro
Politics in Chicago (Chicago, 1966), viii; David Burner, The Politics of
Provincialism, The
Democratic Party in Transition,
1918-1932 (New York, 1968), 237; Henry
Lee Moon, Balance
of Power: The Negro Vote (Garden City, New York, 1948), 17-19; John M. Allswang, A House
for all Peoples, Ethnic Politics in
Chicago, 1890-1936 (Lexington, 1971),
205-206; Louis M.
Killian, The Impossible Revolution?
Black Power and the American Dream (New York, 1969),
37.
Mr. Giffin is Assistant Professor of
History, Indiana State University, Terre Haute.