Another instance concerned the Plain Dealer in Birmingham, Ala. The Ku Klux Klan paraded the streets of that city about three weeks ago and in an editorial this paper came out and stated that if that was done to frighten the colored people, they had to do something different, because whenever they began to terrorize and came down into the neighborhood where colored people lived somebody there would be ready to meet them. That is a pretty strong statement for Birmingham, and they got away with it.
The Chicago Defender gives the greatest amount of space to criminal news of a sensational type in the field of racial happenings. It is a great favorite in the South with Negroes because it publishes news condemning the practices of the South in terms forbidden to southern Negro journals. Of a circulation of 185,000, two-thirds of which is outside of Chicago, it was largely responsible for stimulating the migration to the North.
The term "Negro" is used occasionally in the Defender. Its policy is to use the term "race" man, where it is necessary to distinguish Negro from other groups. Adopting the opposite policy from the white papers, it places "white" after persons not Negroes to mark the distinction. Concerning this, Mr. R. S. Abbott, editor of the Defender, said:
We use that as a bridge, as you might say, which we intend to blow up pretty soon. We are leading the people away from the word "Negro," especially in our papers. And in cases where white men are well known in the country we never even put "white" after their names. We never put "colored" after a colored man's name in this city.
The Defender's editorials are as a rule carefully written, balanced, and critical, at times in contrast with the popular appeal of the news articles. The Whip's editorials usually are on some aspect of the general race problem in the United States. They are characterized by strong pronouncements of the views of Negroes and violent criticism of practices alleged to be inimicable to Negroes. An editorial from each of the papers will indicate the trends of interests. The first is from the Defender:
Just between Ourselves
Character is what we are; reputation is what other people think we are. We get only the respect we demand; no more, no less. One of the greatest barriers to our progress is the individual who attempts to curry the favor of the whites by whom he is employed by openly humiliating and insulting others of his same flesh and blood. Because sections of this country reek with color prejudice, must we lend a helping hand to those who foster segregation, discrimination and "Jim Crowism" in general? And yet that is just what many are doing.
In the railroad service as waiters and porters we have a monopoly, and those whose runs require them to cross the Mason and Dixon line are often confronted with situations that require good common sense in handling. In many states the law requires the blacks and the whites to be separated on transportation lines, dining-rooms, places of amusement, etc. There is no question as to whether these laws are just or unjust. They are at least temporary laws and must be obeyed. But there is something mentally wrong with the porter or the waiter who lends himself to such measures, whether under orders from his superiors or not.
Admitting that to disobey such orders means the loss of a job, there are other jobs that pay a better wage where a man does not have to sacrifice his principles to hold. What other group of people in the world have those that could be induced at any price to place their heel on the neck of even the humblest member of their race? Are we less human, less interested in the welfare of our race than they? Are we still puppets, still chattels, still ignorant of the fact that as we respect ourselves, so others will respect us? This matter is put squarely up to you, Mr. Porter; to you, Mr. Waiter. Will you play the part of a man and refuse to humiliate your people? Will you cease playing the part of a spy? Will you singly and collectively tender your resignation to employers who require you to "Jim Crow" one of your own? If you will do these things there is only one thing that can happen—a speedy repeal of the offensive legislation.
Recently a young woman who was able to "pass" entered the Washington (D.C.) railroad station café and was given a seat at a table with several other ladies. Soon there entered two refined, well-dressed, unmistakably colored, young women who took seats at an unoccupied table. Immediately a colored waiter rushed over to them and after a few minutes of whispered conversation the embarrassed patrons followed the waiter to a far corner of the café, where semi-screened off they were permitted to dine. So enraged was the first young woman that she boldly went to the desk where stood the white higher-ups and several waiters, and gave them a curtain lecture they doubtless will not soon forget, not failing to tell them her own nationality. This incident happened in Washington, the seat of our government, where the doctrine of democracy is preached but not practiced.