COMMUNICATIONS

The correspondence of the editor often has an historical value as the following communications will show:

February 13, 1922.

Dear Dr. Woodson:

Your Journal of Negro History has been so full of good material that I hesitate to call attention to two things in the last (January) number that seem unsuitable.

The first is the leading article on Slave Society on the Southern Society. For more than thirty years I have been combating with all my might the theory of slave-holding sovereignty set forth in that article. It is the essentially Southern view—a magnified view and an unreal view. The article is practically a mild form of the panegyric of the slave plantation which has been the stock in trade of defenders of slavery for a hundred years.

The reasons for slavery given on pages 1 and 2 do not accord with the facts, and if they were true would have minimized the protests against slavery, past and present. It is ridiculous to say that white men endanger their lives by working in the South when you consider how large a part of the cotton crop is raised entirely by white men.

The description of what was said to be the "usual" type of plantation house does not in my opinion apply to more than two hundred or three hundred plantations in the South at the outside. I have traveled very extensively in the South and have never seen more than three or four such mansions. The testimony of Olmsted and other writers is that ordinarily the slaveholder's house was poor and that he lived in a very poor fashion. As for the twelve sons and daughters in the planters' families, and the fifteen to twenty-five children in the negro families, it is perfect gammon. Not one family in a thousand had such numbers. None but a very few of the richest planters lived in the profusion described on page four. As for the enrolment in colleges between 1859 and 1860, and the incomes of the higher institutions, that is all bosh. Francis Lieber was a German by birth, found his service in South Carolina very uncongenial, and stood by the union. To compare slavery to apprenticeship is an affront. The day's work set down by Murat (whose history of the United States is a very obscure work) is contrary to evidence North or South. Regular nurseries were built only on a few large plantations. The arguments in favor of slavery on pages nine and ten are stated without qualification or contradiction. I deeply regret that a Journal of Negro History should admit an article so full of statements both untrue and dangerous to the Negro race.

The experience of a Georgia peon "seems to me very doubtful. I am personally acquainted with the story of Dade's stockade, and have passed within a few miles of it, and I do not believe in the least that there is now, or has been in the past thirty years, any plantation in the South where families are brought up in servitude. The only Ponce-de-Leon spring that I know is in Florida, which is not on the road between Georgia and Mississippi. The man seems to think that Chattanooga is on the west side of the river. It is a dangerous thing to accept any such statement without thorough investigation and calling upon the relater to state exactly where these things happened, and what was his course of travel.

I should not venture to write so decidedly but that you have done so much for the cause of the Negro race, and I don't like to see you give ammunition to the enemies of your race.

Sincerely yours,
Albert Bushnell Hart.

326 Flower St.,
Chester, Pa.,
June 26, 1922.

Carter G. Woodson, Ph.D.,
The Journal of Negro History,
Washington, D. C.
My dear Doctor Woodson:

The following list of Negro delegates to the Republican National Conventions from 1868 to 1920, inclusive, from South Carolina, may be of sufficient interest for publication. As the proceedings of the conventions do not differentiate as to the racial identity of the delegates it is necessary that this data should be collected before it is too late, especially as it pertains to the Reconstruction period. While a reduction in the numbers of delegates from South Carolina, as well as from most of the Southern States, was made by the Republican National Committee in December, 1913, the State still sends a majority of Negro delegates:

1868—Chicago, Ill., May 20-21.
Robert Brown Elliott, Henry B. Hayne, Stephen A. Swails,
Joseph H. Rainey, Wm. J. McKinlay, Robert Smalls,
Henry L. Shrewsbury.

1872—Philadelphia, Pa., June 5-6.
At-Large—Alonzo J. Ransier.
1st District—Stephen A. Swails, F. H. Frost, Henry J.
Maxwell.
2nd District—Robert Smalls.
3rd District—Robert Brown Elliott, Wm. Beverly Nash.
A. J. Ransier on Committee to notify nominees.
At the Convention of 1872, General Elliott was called
upon from the floor to address the convention. His
speech will be found in the proceedings of the convention.

1876—Cincinnati, Ohio, June 14-16.
At-Large—Robert Brown Elliott, Richard H. Gleaves.
1st District—Stephen A. Swails, Joseph H. Rainey.
2nd District—Wm. J. McKinlay.
3rd District—Wm. Beverly Nash.
5th District—Lawrence Cain, Robert Smalls.
Joseph H. Rainey on Committee to notify nominees.

1880—Chicago, Illinois, June 2-8.
At-Large—Robert Brown Elliott, Samuel Lee.
1st District—Wm. A. Hayne.
3rd District—Charles M. Wilder.
4th District—Wilson Cooke.
5th District—Wm. F. Myers, Wm. J. Whipper.
Messrs. Hayne, Myers and Whipper went down to defeat
with General U. S. Grant. All received medals for
their loyalty.

1884—Chicago, Illinois, June 3-6.
At-Large—Samuel Lee, Robert Smalls.
1st District—John M. Freeman.
2nd District—Paris Simpkins, Seymour E. Smith.
4th District—Charles M. Wilder, Wilson Cooke.
5th District—Eugene H. Dibble.
6th District—Edmund H. Deas.
7th District—Wm. H. Thompson.
Samuel Lee on Committee to notify nominees. Major
John R. Lynch, delegate from Mississippi, was elected
temporary chairman, the first and only time that a colored
man ever presided over a Republican National Convention.

1888—Chicago, Illinois, June 19-25.
At-Large—Wm. F. Myers, Robert Smalls.
1st District—John M. Freeman.
2nd District—Fred Nix, Jr., Paris Simpkins.
3rd District—F. L. Hicks.
4th District—Peter F. Oliver, F. A. Saxton.
5th District—Charles C. Levy, Zachariah E. Walker.
6th District—Edmund H. Deas.
7th District—George E. Herriott.
Paris Simpkins on Committee to notify nominees.
Peter Oliver seconded the nomination of General Alger
for president.

1892—Minneapolis, Minn., June 7-10.
At-Large—Edmund H. Deas, Dr. Wm. D. Crum.
1st District—John H. Fordham.
2nd District—Paris Simpkins, Seymour E. Smith.
3rd District—A. S. Jamison.
4th District—Irwin I. Miller.
5th District—Wm. E. Boykin.
6th District—Rev. Joshua E. Wilson.
7th District—R. H. Richardson.
E. H. Deas on Committee to notify presidential nominee.
J. H. Fordham on Committee to nominate vice-presidential
nominee.

1896—St. Louis, Mo., June 16-18.
At-Large—Dr. Wm. D. Crum, Robert Smalls.
1st District—Robert C. Brown.
2nd District—Wm. S. Dixon.
4th District—Charles M. Wilder.
5th District—Wm. E. Boykin.
6th District—Edmund H. Deas, Rev. Joshua E. Wilson.
7th District—Zachariah E. Walker, John H. Fordham.
E. H. Deas on Committee to notify presidential nominee.

1900—Philadelphia, Pa., June 19-21.
At-Large—Edmund H. Deas, Robert Smalls.
1st District—Dr. Wm. D. Crum.
2nd District—Wm. S. Dixon, B. J. Dickerson.
5th District—Wm. E. Boykin.
6th District—Rev. Joshua E. Wilson, Wm. H. Collier.
7th District—John H. Fordham.
E. H. Deas on Committee to notify presidential nominee.

1904—Chicago, Illinois, June 21-23.
At-Large—Edmund H. Deas, Dr. Wm. D. Crum.
1st District—Wm. F. Myers, A. P. Prioleau.
2nd District—Wm. S. Dixon, E. J. Dickerson.
4th District—Pratt S. Suber.
5th District—Wm. E. Boykin.
6th District—J. R. Levy, J. A. Baxter.
Dr. Crum on Committee to notify vice-presidential
nominee.

1908—Chicago, Illinois, June 16-19.
At-Large—Edmund H. Deas, Thomas L. Grant.
1st District—C. M. English, P. T. Richardson.
2nd District—Wm. S. Dixon.
3rd District—G. C. Williams.
4th District—Dr. Wm. Tecumseh Smith.
5th District—Wm. E. Boykin.
6th District—J. A. Baxter, J. R. Levy.
7th District—Wm. T. Andrews.
Thomas L. Grant on Committee to notify presidential
nominee.

1912—Chicago, Illinois, June 18-22.
At-Large—Wm. T. Andrews, J. R. Levy.
1st District—Thomas L. Grant, A. P. Prioleau.
2nd District—Wm. S. Dixon.
4th District—Thomas Brier.
6th District—Rev. Joshua E. Wilson, J. A. Baxter.
7th District—Dr. J. H. Godwyn.
Rev. J. E. Wilson on Committee to notify presidential
nominee.

1916—Chicago, Illinois, June 7-10.
At-Large—Dr. J. H. Goodwyn, John H. Fordham.
1st District—Gibbs Mitchell.
2nd District—Wm. S. Dixon.
4th District—J. A. Brier.
6th District—J. R. Levy.
7th District—L. A. Hawkins.
J. R. Levy on Committee to notify presidential nominee.
W. S. Dixon on Committee to notify vice-presidential
nominee.

1920—Chicago, Illinois, June 5-9.
At-Large—W. S. Dixon, Dr. J. H. Goodwyn.
1st District—Gibbs Mitchell.
2nd District—J. M. Jones.
5th District—G. A. Watts.
6th District—I. J. McCottrie.
7th District—L. A. Hawkins.
W. S. Dixon on Committee to notify presidential nominee.
I. J. McCottrie on Committee to notify vice-presidential
nominee.

Henry A. Wallace.

140 COTTAGE STREET, NEW HAVEN, CONN., June 26, 1922.

Dr. Carter G. Woodson,
1216 You Street, N. W.,
Washington, D. C.

My dear Dr. Woodson:

Your studies in the history of the Negro people have greatly impressed me with their value and I trust that they will be continued in the many fields which call for new and careful investigation. I think there is especial need for exact and detailed information about the period of "reconstruction" in the South. Reviewing in my memory the whole period since the civil war I find a great change in prevalent opinion in the North concerning the events of the reconstruction. It seems to me that the champions of secession, of slavery and the southern oligarchy, have been heard in justification of everything they did and in arraignment of everything that defeated their designs with an unsuspicious confidence that has enabled them to mislead sentiment in the North, especially among the younger people. For example: a Yale professor of history had an article in the New York Times, a while ago, declaring that the constitutional amendments conferring citizenship on the Negroes were wrong and that the reaction against them in depriving the Negroes of the vote was justifiable; to which I wrote a reply, mostly in the language of Mr. Flemming, a native Southerner who had represented Georgia in Congress, arguing that the amendments were not only justifiable but indispensable, and the Times would not publish it, so that I had to give it to the Post. There is a prevalent opinion that the "carpet baggers" were a sort of monsters. I have known some of them as estimable men and practical public spirited citizens of a very high type: Judge Henderson of Wilcox County, Ala. for example.

Now if you can go to the roots of history in this period and investigate the facts, with biographical sketches of leading men as they actually were and authentic records of things that were actually done, it might help to clarify history.

The incessant whining and propaganda of Southern bigots devoted to the old regime naturally have an undue influence on sympathetic listeners. I am afraid that this influence will not be counteracted as it ought to be till Negro investigators, historians and journalists learn to tell their side of the story with greater thoroughness.

Very truly yours,
G. S. Dickerman.

New Bedford, Mass., May 15th, 1916
Room 6, Robeson Bldg.

Dr. Carter G. Woodson,
Washington, D. C.

My Dear Sir:

In reply to yours of the 8th, please find herewith a contribution in the line of my suggestion to Mr. Baker. I did not mean to imply I had much material of that nature, and what is sent is that I could readily find, and would need to take time to go through my papers to really know what I have. If you can use it all right; if not, consign it to the waste basket, and no complaint will be coming.

What I had more in mind was this: In many communities can be found some one person who has contributed services of value to race, none the less appreciable from the fact that their interest and value seem circumscribed locally. That they are so limited I do not believe, but think of each as the centre of an ever widening, circling influence for good. To illustrate:

Paul Cuffee was born at Cuttyhunk, Mass., in 1758; was an early defender of the rights of colored men; when the selectmen of the Town of Dartmouth, refused to admit colored children to the public schools, and to make separate provision for their education, he refused to pay his school taxes, was imprisoned, and when liberated, built a school house at his own expense, on his own land, employed a teacher at his own expense, and then opened his school without race discrimination, a privilege which his white neighbors availed themselves of as his school was more convenient and equally as good as those of the town. The result was colored children ceased to be proscribed along educational lines. He was a ship owner, builder and export trader. His story has been published at length, in one of our dailies, with all the documents in the case. It seemed to me that such stories would be of general as well as local interest. If you agree with me in this, Mr. Jourdain would without doubt forward the clipping to you.

The first colored school-teacher in Boston, was Prince Sanders, Secretary African Lodge F. & A. M., the first Lodge of colored Masons in America. He taught a colored school in the basement of the old Joy Street Church from 1809 to 1812. The first colored school, private, was opened in 1798, at the residence of Primus Hall, corner of West Cedar and Revere Streets, Boston, and was taught by a white man, by name, Sylvester. Its curriculum was limited to the three "R's."

I am sending you in mail with this a pamphlet copy of "Proceedings" etc., on pp. 12, 16, 17, you will find statements of services given by Prince Hall, of general as well as of local interest and value.

Yours sincerely,
Frederic S. Monroe.