Segregation now, segregation forever!

I have said over and over again that this bill was unsuccessfull.
It's because you ignore the "separate but equal" argument that they made and thus they would not be "barred" from the "benefits". It wasn't unsuccessful, it did exactly what the people passing it meant to do. Unfortunately laws are often misnamed. Things like "The PATRIOT Act" come to mind.
 
It's because you ignore the "separate but equal" argument that they made. It wasn't unsuccessful, it did exactly what the people passing it meant to do. Unfortunately laws are often misnamed. Things like "The PATRIOT Act" come to mind.

Damo, I thought you were smarter than that. It did not work because the Supreme Court said that it overstepped the bounds of Federal Power....

This was prior to Plessy. Sure later the Supreme Court changed the intent of the leglslature by making crazy statements like "seperate is equal" but read the legislative intent behind the CRA of 1875, hell just read the words... Those who inacted it were for desegregation!

Be it enacted, That all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, and privileges of inns, public conveyances on land or water, theaters, and other places of public amusement; subject only to the conditions and limitations established by law, and applicable alike to citizens of every race and color, regardless of any previous condition of servitude.
 
You are a lost cause, and you keep argueing points that I never disagreed with.


You said no elected official was for desegregation prior to 1964...

I showed you where they passed an act that reads in part...

Be it enacted, That all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, and privileges of inns, public conveyances on land or water, theaters, and other places of public amusement; subject only to the conditions and limitations established by law, and applicable alike to citizens of every race and color, regardless of any previous condition of servitude.

And you have been silly crazy since.... A rose by any other name is still a rose!

Damo, I thought you were smarter than that. It did not work because the Supreme Court said that it overstepped the bounds of Federal Power....

This was prior to Plessy. Sure later the Supreme Court changed the intent of the leglslature by making crazy statements like "seperate is equal" but read the legislative intent behind the CRA of 1875, hell just read the words... Those who inacted it were for desegregation!

Be it enacted, That all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, and privileges of inns, public conveyances on land or water, theaters, and other places of public amusement; subject only to the conditions and limitations established by law, and applicable alike to citizens of every race and color, regardless of any previous condition of servitude.

AND AGAIN FOR YOUR LITTLE IGNORANT RACIST LIBERAL ASS... SHOW ME WHERE THIS SAYS ANY GODDAMN THING ABOUT "DESEGREGATION!" IT SIMPLY DOESN'T!

In FACT... IT WAS THE CATALYST FOR SEGREGATING BLACKS FROM WHITES!

Read it carefully... it says N-O-T-H-I-N-G about not segregating! It says N-O-T-H-I-N-G about desegregating! Why are you being willfully ignorant of that FACT? It just doesn't SAY what you CLAIM it says! NOWHERE!

But you want to IGNORANTLY pretend that the Congress of 1875 was rife with John Lewis, Andrew Young types, who were standing up for Civil Rights and demanding desegregation! It is about the most blatant cast of ignorance I can even imagine. Not only do we have YEARS of history following the passage of this bill, of radical discrimination and segregation, the very act of "separate but equal" for black people wasn't even in the lexicon of thought in 1875 America! There WAS NO "separate but equal" ...it was WHITE ONLY, and we hang you from a tree if you are BLACK! It wasn't... BLACKS sit at the back of the bus... it was BLACKS don't even think about riding a bus with WHITE people because we will string you up in a tree if you do! THAT is the America of 1875, and your DENIAL of that fact is disgusting, revolting, RACIST, and an INSULT to the reality of the struggles of black Americans!
 
Originally Posted by Damocles
It's because you ignore the "separate but equal" argument that they made. It wasn't unsuccessful, it did exactly what the people passing it meant to do. Unfortunately laws are often misnamed. Things like "The PATRIOT Act" come to mind.

Damo, I thought you were smarter than that. It did not work because the Supreme Court said that it overstepped the bounds of Federal Power....

This was prior to Plessy. Sure later the Supreme Court changed the intent of the leglslature by making crazy statements like "seperate is equal" but read the legislative intent behind the CRA of 1875, hell just read the words... Those who inacted it were for desegregation!

Be it enacted, That all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, and privileges of inns, public conveyances on land or water, theaters, and other places of public amusement; subject only to the conditions and limitations established by law, and applicable alike to citizens of every race and color, regardless of any previous condition of servitude.

Fascinating: Dixie goes batshit crazy rather than just concede a simple matter of historical fact that the CRA of 1875 was enacted to combat denying the rights of specific people in America...something which segregation did. No one said the Act was successfully implemented, and as YOU pointed out it was nullified at one point....there were just some folk in the Congress and Senate who thought such a law should have been put in place. Someone should clue him in as to how things work regarding laws.....their enforcement, how they are overridden, revised, repealed, etc. He's under the delusion that if the law wasn't successful, it's intent never existed. :palm:

I, like you, was surprised by Damo's response....great explanation on your part.
 
Fascinating: Dixie goes batshit crazy rather than just concede a simple matter of historical fact that the CRA of 1875 was enacted to combat denying the rights of specific people in America...something which segregation did. No one said the Act was successfully implemented, and as YOU pointed out it was nullified at one point....there were just some folk in the Congress and Senate who thought such a law should have been put in place. Someone should clue him in as to how things work regarding laws.....their enforcement, how they are overridden, revised, repealed, etc. He's under the delusion that if the law wasn't successful, it's intent never existed.

I, like you, was surprised by Damo's response....great explanation on your part.

Stop encouraging him you stupid prick, he thinks you stroking him means he is right about something! You're a fuckwit like he is if you think the CRA of 1875 or ANY legislation of that period was intended or designed to 'desegregate' or oppose segregation! It just wasn't, and that's all there is to it. You can LIE like the sorry mutherfucking scumbucket liar you are, but you can't make the legislation say something it didn't say!

Now I will point out that you are starting your typical little tap dance for us, and parsing your words very carefully, so as not to say something as stupid and ridiculous as Jarhead, but you are still not correct, and haven't been correct on a goddamn thing you've said in this thread. The CRA of 1875 was intended to protect black people from being slaughtered by the thousands, as was happening in Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, Kansas, Nebraska, and everywhere else in America, because white people didn't want them in their neighborhoods! I'll be happy to repost the LENGTHY history lesson I gave Jarhead earlier, if you need educating on that!
 
Dixie, learn how to read for comprehension. When a text refers to "the current head of the US executive branch walked into the press conference room on Saturday," don't be like "NO PRESIDENT OBAMA WAS IN SINGAPORE!! YOU CAN'T PROVE HE WAS AT THE WHITE HOUSE, BECAUSE THE TEXT REFERS TO NEITHER "PRESIDENT" OR "OBAMA!!!"

Its the same thing with the text of the CRA of 1875. Remember, the CRA of 1868 was passed over a presidential veto, so lets not pretend like these acts weren't popular in Congress. Within 2 years of 1875, Reconstruction ended, so there was no great military presence or enlightened Northern presence to make the hicks observe the law.
 
Dixie, learn how to read for comprehension. When a text refers to "the current head of the US executive branch walked into the press conference room on Saturday," don't be like "NO PRESIDENT OBAMA WAS IN SINGAPORE!! YOU CAN'T PROVE HE WAS AT THE WHITE HOUSE, BECAUSE THE TEXT REFERS TO NEITHER "PRESIDENT" OR "OBAMA!!!"

Its the same thing with the text of the CRA of 1875. Remember, the CRA of 1868 was passed over a presidential veto, so lets not pretend like these acts weren't popular in Congress. Within 2 years of 1875, Reconstruction ended, so there was no great military presence or enlightened Northern presence to make the hicks observe the law.

The CRA of 1875 was NOT about segregation or desegregation, neither of those two things were even in existence yet. At that time, there was no "separate but equal" it was all SEPARATE and tough shit. Black people were being slaughtered by the thousands all across America, it was open season. The Feds needed some mechanism to allow them to constitutionally restore order and stop the violence, and that was why the CRA's of that era were passed. It gave them the authority to send in the National Guard.

But we really don't need the revisionist history lessons from closet racists here, our nation as a whole, practiced segregation for the next 90 years, and they certainly didn't do so with a frickin law prohibiting it! If segregation had been outlawed in 1875, segregationist practices would have been over before they began, and that was NOT the case, as history shows. You can join the other two idiots if it makes you feel good, I can't do anything about STUPID, that is up to the individual, but I know for a fact the CRA of 1875 was not designed or intended to prevent segregation. That is a lie, and an ignorant lie at that.
 
Stop encouraging him you stupid prick, he thinks you stroking him means he is right about something! You're a fuckwit like he is if you think the CRA of 1875 or ANY legislation of that period was intended or designed to 'desegregate' or oppose segregation! It just wasn't, and that's all there is to it. You can LIE like the sorry mutherfucking scumbucket liar you are, but you can't make the legislation say something it didn't say!

Oh get over yourself, butch. You're not impressing anyone with all the cuss words...just displaying your lack of intellect regarding a discussion. Bottom line: a law that states that all shall have the same rights, defense and prosecution under the law as WHITE people sure as hell isn't just spouting off about teapots....it strikes directly at the heart of such racist policies as segregation. Stamping your widdle feet won't erase the words, as were posted here for all to see. YOU originally stated that no such intentions by Congress existed at the time....but as the two acts previously mentioned showed, there indeed were. Grow up and deal.

Now I will point out that you are starting your typical little tap dance for us, and parsing your words very carefully, so as not to say something as stupid and ridiculous as Jarhead, but you are still not correct, and haven't been correct on a goddamn thing you've said in this thread. The CRA of 1875 was intended to protect black people from being slaughtered by the thousands, as was happening in Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, Kansas, Nebraska, and everywhere else in America, because white people didn't want them in their neighborhoods! I'll be happy to repost the LENGTHY history lesson I gave Jarhead earlier, if you need educating on that!

Once again, the chronology of the post proves you to be a liar as usual. I never "parsed" any words, and I defy you to provide proof of this outside of your dubious opinion.....it is in fact YOU who have altered your original assertions every blessed time Jarod provided the bonafide FACTS that disproved you. YOU originally stated that no such intentions (anti-segregation) by Congress existed at the time....but as the two acts previously mentioned showed, there indeed were. Jarod has demonstrated this time again, as have I, along with ThreeDee.

But let's address this latest ploy of your...the CRA of 1875 states that all shall have the same rights, defense and prosecution under the law as WHITE people ....it strikes directly at the heart of such racist policies as segregation, you know, people who separate themselves from others on ALL levels of societal infrastructure. Now if the LAW says black folk have the same rights as white folks, the murders in "Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, Kansas, Nebraska, and everywhere else in America" don't have a legal leg to stand on, do they now? See genius, the smart reader understands the ramifications and logical conclusions of the Act's wording, and unlike you, doesn't need a simplistic statement like "no more segregation, it bad" to get the point.

But do keep regurgitating your claptrap and posting your moot rehash of history that Jarod has already deconstructed....it just demonstrates to all your insipid stubborness.
 
the CRA of 1875 states that all shall have the same rights, defense and prosecution under the law as WHITE people ....it strikes directly at the heart of such racist policies as segregation, you know, people who separate themselves from others on ALL levels of societal infrastructure.

LMAO... That's some trick! It strikes directly at the heart of something that didn't yet exist? Let's clarify... Restaurants and hotels in 1875, didn't have separate areas for blacks. Their policy was, blacks are NOT ALLOWED! PERIOD! Blacks didn't have separate bathrooms and water fountains, they had NONE! There couldn't have been "desegregation" at that time, because there wasn't any "segregation" at that time!

As I said, I am quite sure, if someone had suggested segregationist policies in 1875, those who voted FOR the CRA of 1875 would have thought it was the greatest breakthrough in the history of the country and would have embraced the concept of "separate but equal" but that wasn't the case. No, the reality was, white mobs were murdering black people for even walking by a restaurant or hotel!

You are a fucking half-witted moron, and Jarhead is a quarter-witted moron! You are both PRIME examples of why we still have racial turmoil in America, the sheer condescension of thinking your beloved Congress stood up against segregation in 1875, nearly 100 years before Rosa Parks, is a racist insult and devoid of any understanding regarding the plight of black Americans.
 
Another post with no new material... you bore me. Goodbye Gracie!

Translation: Our 3rd rate David Duke wanna be just realized he's been logically and factually put in a corner...so he bluffs and blusters despite the chronology of the post proving otherwise. But wait, a white supremacist blowhard just can't walk away without REEPEATING THE SAME LONG DISPROVEN BULLSHIT....that would be contrary to his propagandist aspirations. I'm sure he'll live up to his usual low standards.
 
the CRA of 1875 states that all shall have the same rights, defense and prosecution under the law as WHITE people ....it strikes directly at the heart of such racist policies as segregation, you know, people who separate themselves from others on ALL levels of societal infrastructure.


LMAO... That's some trick! It strikes directly at the heart of something that didn't yet exist? Let's clarify... Restaurants and hotels in 1875, didn't have separate areas for blacks. Their policy was, blacks are NOT ALLOWED! PERIOD! Blacks didn't have separate bathrooms and water fountains, they had NONE! There couldn't have been "desegregation" at that time, because there wasn't any "segregation" at that time!

As I said, I am quite sure, if someone had suggested segregationist policies in 1875, those who voted FOR the CRA of 1875 would have thought it was the greatest breakthrough in the history of the country and would have embraced the concept of "separate but equal" but that wasn't the case. No, the reality was, white mobs were murdering black people for even walking by a restaurant or hotel!

You are a fucking half-witted moron, and Jarhead is a quarter-witted moron! You are both PRIME examples of why we still have racial turmoil in America, the sheer condescension of thinking your beloved Congress stood up against segregation in 1875, nearly 100 years before Rosa Parks, is a racist insult and devoid of any understanding regarding the plight of black Americans.

:palm: From Merriam-Webster:


Segregation:
2 a : the separation or isolation of a race, class, or ethnic group by enforced or voluntary residence in a restricted area, by barriers to social intercourse, by separate educational facilities, or by other discriminatory means

Notice folks, that like your typical white supremacist who's lies and distortion have been exposed, Dixie goes bat shit crazy, trying to split hairs that do not exist. He makes the insane statement that black folk in 1875 had no drinking fountains or bathrooms set up for them, so segregation didn't exist! Golly, does that mean that they were seperated from the rest of society...segregated from having the same facilities? Of course, our irate sheet wearer forgets that he himself keeps telling us all how black folk were being killed because white folk didn't want to live by them. Gee, does that mean that the blacks were SEGREGATED?

First he says no one in Congress at the time had an inclination to end segregation and racist policies. Proven wrong...he now tries to not only rewrite history, but redefine the lexicon.

Someone clue this dumb bastard in, because quite frankly I'm almost embarassed for his insipid stubborness. I leave him to his painfully obvious and predictable repetitive rants.
 
Segregation:
2 a : the separation or isolation of a race, class, or ethnic group by enforced or voluntary residence in a restricted area, by barriers to social intercourse, by separate educational facilities, or by other discriminatory means

Wow, it's amazing this wasn't even addressed in the CRA of 1875. It says nothing about disallowing this practice, probably because this particular practice hadn't yet been practiced! Those were some forward-thinking liberals in Congress back then! They had the wisdom to pass a law against something that didn't exist, so white people could bring it into existence and one day, a century later, they could pass another law to stop the practice! Amazing!

You can call me all kinds of names, you can lie and distort history, but you've not disproved anything I have said, and you can't. You are resorting to your typical clown routine, appealing to your "crowd of folks" who don't exist, except in your bigoted mind. There is you and Jarhead... Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dumb! Both of your minds working together, couldn't power a small appliance bulb. You have no concept of history, you've been thoroughly schooled from one end of this thread to the other, and like a mange-infested yard dog, you keep coming back for more! So far, all you two have presented is a piece of legislation passed in 1875, and you've completely taken the words out of context to suit your insane and ignorant argument. Surely there must be some speeches or writings from these illustrious Congressmen, speaking out against segregation and demanding desegregation in 1875... I mean, this was a pretty big deal, there should be numerous cases of these people speaking out, why don't you go dig some of them up? I'll tell you why, because you're full of shit, and that wasn't what they voted for!

Take a look back at page 11 of this thread again! Does that look like a nation of constituents clamoring for desegregation to you? Now, since the white people who were murdering black people by the thousands were allowed to vote and black people weren't, I would venture to say most politicians of the time probably took a side closer to the white people than the blacks. Just a fucking guess there! But I am sure you have reams of speeches from politicians of the time, since this was such a landmark piece of legislation! ...Come on you fucking fraud, put up or shut up! Let's see something besides the misconstrued text of the bill, if what you say is true! PROVE your point, nitwit!
 
The CRA of 1875 was NOT about segregation or desegregation, neither of those two things were even in existence yet. At that time, there was no "separate but equal" it was all SEPARATE and tough shit. Black people were being slaughtered by the thousands all across America, it was open season. The Feds needed some mechanism to allow them to constitutionally restore order and stop the violence, and that was why the CRA's of that era were passed. It gave them the authority to send in the National Guard.

Are you kidding me? Have you ever looked at a chart displaying the numbers of lynchings between 1865 and 1910? There were lynchings of white people as well, which is why states like Montana and Wyoming register fairly high on the chart, but the leading states were all fucking Southern. Quit being obtuse.

But we really don't need the revisionist history lessons from closet racists here, our nation as a whole, practiced segregation for the next 90 years, and they certainly didn't do so with a frickin law prohibiting it! If segregation had been outlawed in 1875, segregationist practices would have been over before they began, and that was NOT the case, as history shows. You can join the other two idiots if it makes you feel good, I can't do anything about STUPID, that is up to the individual, but I know for a fact the CRA of 1875 was not designed or intended to prevent segregation. That is a lie, and an ignorant lie at that.

Right, because law & order are such important things in the South, that the hicks will just naturally adhere to justice. At least the people out West had some justification in taking the law into their own hands. In the Idaho Territory, there were actually 3 murderers let go by a court that found Idaho had neglected to draft a penal code, so they couldn't technically have committed "murder."

Anyway, lynchings occurred, civil rights abuses occurred, the KKK operated despite a federal law passed against it during Reconstruction, and so forth. Hell, moonshining is a famous part of Southern history, although no one is going to call you people evil for that flagrant bit of lawbreaking.
 
Please 3D, save your anti-southern bigoted hate for another thread. Two morons at a time is plenty for me to deal with. If you want to chime in, at least do it with something that actually supports the Bobbsie Twins assertions that Congress passed some kind of desegregation law in 1875. Once you've done that, maybe we can get to your insane viewpoint that it was only in the South that blacks were discriminated against. One insane viewpoint at a time, yo?
 
Please 3D, save your anti-southern bigoted hate for another thread. Two morons at a time is plenty for me to deal with. If you want to chime in, at least do it with something that actually supports the Bobbsie Twins assertions that Congress passed some kind of desegregation law in 1875. Once you've done that, maybe we can get to your insane viewpoint that it was only in the South that blacks were discriminated against. One insane viewpoint at a time, yo?

Right, because lynching is just a minor case of discrimination, on par with job discrimination and bad funding for majority black districts. The act in question, was a civil rights act, meaning that it was rather large in scope, and since institutional segregation is one of many things covered by civil rights, I guess you guys were discussing much more important things than desegregation. My bad...

Also, here's to you calling anyone on this site a moron, liberal, conservative, socialist, fascist, or elsewhere: 1/3
 
The Glenville Shootout was a series of events of violent acts that occurred in the Glenville section of Cleveland, Ohio, United States, from the dates of July 23—July 28, 1968. The violent acts resulted in the deaths of seven people, and injuries of fifteen others.


The shootout began on the evening of July 23, 1968 in the eastern section of the Glenville neighborhood when two civilian tow truck drivers, wearing uniforms similar to police uniforms, were shot in an ambush by heavily armed snipers while checking an abandoned car. Cleveland police officers were also watching Fred "Ahmed" Evans and his radical militant group, who were suspected of purchasing illegal weapons. The shootout attracted a large crowd that was mostly black, young, and "hostile". When it became clear that the police were ill-equipped to handle the situation, Mayor Carl B. Stokes called in the National Guard. Before the night was over, seven were dead (three of the seven were Cleveland Police officers) and fifteen were wounded.


The following day, Stokes decided to remove all the White police officers from Glenville stationing only African American police officers and community leaders in the predominantly black community, to prevent further rioting and ease tensions in the area. It was the first event in American history in which only African American police officers were sent in to deal with a violent riot or confrontation. While the police and community leaders prevented any more deaths from occurring, there was continued looting and arson throughout the six-square-mile area. On July 25, more police officers and the National Guard entered Glenville and by July 28, order was restored.

-----------------------------------------

The Omaha Race Riot occurred in Omaha, Nebraska, on 28-September 29, 1919. The race riot resulted in the brutal lynching of Will Brown, a black worker; the death of two white men; the attempted hanging of the mayor Edward Parsons Smith; and a public rampage by thousands of whites who set fire to the Douglas County Courthouse in downtown Omaha. It followed more than 20 race riots that occurred in major industrial cities of the United States during the Red Summer of 1919.

Three weeks before the riot, federal investigators had noted that "a clash was imminent owing to ill-feeling between white and black workers in the stockyards."[1] The number of blacks in Omaha doubled during the decade 1910-1920, as they were recruited to work in the meatpacking industry, and competing workers noticed. In 1910 Omaha had the third largest black population among the new western cities that had become destinations following Reconstruction. By 1920 the black population more than doubled to more than 10,000, second only to Los Angeles with nearly 16,000. It was ahead of San Francisco and Oakland, Topeka and Denver.[2] [3]

The major meatpacking plants hired blacks as strikebreakers in 1917. Hostility against them was high among working class whites in the city, who were mostly Catholic immigrants of southern and eastern Europe, or descendants of immigrants, and who lived chiefly in South Omaha. Ethnic Irish were among the largest and earliest group of immigrants and they established their own power base in the city by this time. Several years earlier following the death of an Irish policeman, ethnic Irish led a mob in an attack on Greektown, which drove the Greek community from Omaha.[4]

With the moralistic administration of first-term reform mayor Edward Parsons Smith, the city's criminal establishment led by Tom Dennison created a formidable challenge in cahoots with the Omaha Business Men's Association. Smith trudged through his reform agenda with little support from the Omaha City Council or the city's labor unions. Along with several strikes throughout the previous year, on September 11 two detectives with the Omaha Police Department's "morals squad" shot and killed an African American bellhop.[5]
Lynching victim Will Brown.

The violence associated with the lynching of Will Brown was triggered by reports in local media that sensationalized the alleged rape of 19-year-old Agnes Loebeck on September 25, 1919. The following day the police arrested 40-year-old Will Brown as a suspect. Loebeck identified Brown as her rapist, although later reports by the Omaha Police Department and the United States Army stated that she had not made a positive identification. There was an unsuccessful attempt to lynch Brown on the day of his arrest.

The Omaha Bee publicized the incident as one of a series of alleged attacks on white women by black men. The newspaper had carried a series of sensational articles alleging many incidents of black outrages.[6] The Bee was controlled by a political machine opposed to the newly elected reform administration of Mayor Edward Smith. It highlighted alleged incidents of "black criminality" to embarrass the new administration.[citation needed]
[edit] Beginning

At about 2:00 p.m. on Sunday, September 28, 1919, a large group of white youths gathered near the Bancroft School in South Omaha and began a march to the Douglas County Courthouse, where Brown was being held. The march was intercepted by John T. Dunn, chief of the Omaha Detective Bureau, and his subordinates. Dunn attempted to disperse the crowd, but they ignored his warning and marched on. Thirty police officers were guarding the court house when the marchers arrived. By 4:00 p.m., the crowd had grown much larger. Members of the crowd bantered with the officers until the police were convinced that the crowd posed no serious threat. A report to that effect was made to the central police station, and the captain in charge sent fifty reserve officers home for the day.
[edit] Riot

By 5:00 p.m., a mob of about 4,000 whites had crowded into the street on the south side of the Douglas County Courthouse. They began to assault the police officers, pushing one through a pane of glass in a door and attacking two others who had wielded clubs at the mob. At 5:15 p.m., officers deployed fire hoses to dispel the crowd, but they responded with a shower of bricks and sticks. Nearly every window on the south side of the courthouse was broken. The crowd stormed the lower doors of the courthouse, and the Police inside discharged their weapons down an elevator shaft in an attempt to frighten them, but this further incited the mob. They again rushed the police who were standing guard outside the building, broke through their lines, and entered the courthouse through a broken basement door.

It was at this moment that Marshal Eberstein, chief of police, arrived. He asked leaders of the mob to give him a chance to talk to the crowd. He mounted to one of the window sills. Beside him was a recognized chief of the mob. At the request of its leader, the crowd stilled its clamor for a few minutes. Chief Eberstein tried to tell the mob that its mission would best be served by letting justice take its course. The crowd refused to listen. Its members howled so that the chief's voice did not carry more than a few feet. Eberstein ceased his attempt to talk and entered the besieged building.
A crowd of people forming the riot

By 6 p.m., throngs swarmed about the court house on all sides. The crowd wrestled revolvers, badges and caps from policemen. They chased and beat every colored person who ventured into the vicinity. White men who attempted to rescue innocent blacks from unmerited punishment were subjected to physical abuse. The police had lost control of the crowd.

By 7 p.m., most of the policemen had withdrawn to the interior of the court house. There, they joined forces with Michael Clark, sheriff of Douglas County, who had summoned his deputies to the building with the hope of preventing the capture of Brown. The policemen and sheriffs formed their line of last resistance on the fourth floor of the court house.

The police were not successful in their efforts. Before 8 p.m., they discovered that the crowd had set the courthouse building on fire. Its leaders had tapped a nearby gasoline filling station and saturated the lower floors with the flammable liquid.
[edit] Escalation

Shots were fired as the mob pillaged hardware stores in the business district and entered pawnshops, seeking firearms. Police records showed that more than 1,000 revolvers and shotguns were stolen that night. The mob shot at any policeman; seven officers received gunshot wounds, although none of the wounds were serious.
Windows broken out, people climbing the building

Louis Young, 16 years old, was fatally shot in the stomach while leading a gang up to the fourth floor of the building. Witnesses said the youth was the most intrepid of the mob's leaders.

Pandemonium reigned outside the building. At Seventeenth and Douglas Streets, one block from the court house, James Hiykel, a 34-year-old businessman, was shot and killed.

The crowd continued to strike the courthouse with bullets and rocks. Spectators were shot. Participants inflicted minor wounds upon themselves. Women were thrown to the ground and trampled. Blacks were dragged from streetcars and beaten.
[edit] The first hanging

About 11 o'clock, when the frenzy was at its height, Mayor Edward Smith came out of the east door of the courthouse into Seventeenth Street. He had been in the burning building for hours. As he emerged from the doorway, a shot rang out.

"He shot me. Mayor Smith shot me," a young man in the uniform of a United States soldier yelled. The crowd surged toward the mayor. He fought them. One man hit the mayor on the head with a baseball bat. Another slipped the noose of a rope around his neck. The crowd started to drag him away.

"If you must hang somebody, then let it be me," the mayor said.

The mob dragged the mayor into Harney Street. A woman reached out and tore the noose from his neck. Men in the mob replaced it. Spectators wrestled the mayor from his captors and placed him in a police automobile. The throng overturned the car and grabbed him again. Once more, the rope encircled the mayor's neck. He was carried to Sixteenth and Harney Streets. There he was hanged from the metal arm of a traffic signal tower.

Mayor Smith was suspended in the air when State Agent Ben Danbaum drove a high-powered automobile into the throng right to the base of the signal tower. In the car with Danbaum were City Detectives Al Anderson, Charles Van Deusen and Lloyd Toland. They grasped the mayor and Russell Norgard untied the noose. The detectives brought the mayor to Ford Hospital. There he lingered between life and death for several days, finally recovering. "They shall not get him. Mob rule will not prevail in Omaha," the mayor kept muttering during his delirium.
[edit] Siege of the Court House

Meanwhile the plight of the police in the court house had become desperate. The fire had licked its way to the third floor. The officers faced the prospect of roasting to death. Appeals for help to the crowd below brought only bullets and curses. The mob frustrated all attempts to raise ladders to the imprisoned police. "Bring Brown with you and you can come down," somebody in the crowd shouted.

On the second floor of the building, three policemen and a newspaper reporter were imprisoned in a safety vault, whose thick metal door the mob had shut. The four men hacked their way out through the court house wall. The mob shot at them as they squirmed out of the stifling vault.
Flames rage into the night from the Court House

The gases of formaldehyde added to the terrors of the men imprisoned within the flaming building. Several jars of the powerful chemical had burst on the stairway. Its deadly fumes mounted to the upper floors. Two policemen were overcome. Their companions could do nothing to alleviate their sufferings.

Sheriff Clark led his prisoners (there were 121 of them) to the roof. Will Brown, for whom the mob was howling, became hysterical. Blacks, fellow prisoners of the hunted man, tried to throw him off the roof. Deputy Sheriffs Hoye and McDonald foiled the attempt.

Sheriff Clark ordered that female prisoners be taken from the building due to their distress. They ran down the burning staircases clad only in prison pajamas. Some of them fainted on the way. Members of the mob escorted them through the smoke and flames. Black women as well as white women were helped to safety.

The mob poured more gasoline into the building. They cut every line of hose that firemen laid from nearby hydrants. The flames were rapidly lapping their way upward. It seemed like certain cremation for the prisoners and their protectors.
[edit] Lynching
Will Brown is lynched, and his body mutilated and burned by a white crowd.
Photograph taken from a different angle showing the body of Will Brown after being burned by a white crowd.

Then three slips of paper were thrown from the fourth floor on the west side of the building. On one piece was scrawled: "The judge says he will give up Negro Brown. He is in dungeon. There are 100 white prisoners on the roof. Save them."

Another note read: "Come to the fourth floor of the building and we will hand the negro over to you."

The mob in the street shrieked its delight at the last message. Boys and young men placed firemen's ladders against the building. They mounted to the second story. One man had a heavy coil of new rope on his back. Another had a shotgun.

Two or three minutes after the unidentified athletes had climbed to the fourth floor, a mighty shout and a fusillade of shots were heard from the south side of the building.

Will Brown had been captured. A few minutes more and his lifeless body was hanging from a telephone post at Eighteenth and Harney Streets. Hundreds of revolvers and shotguns were fired at the corpse as it dangled in mid-air. Then, the rope was cut. Brown's body was tied to the rear end of an automobile. It was dragged through the streets to Seventeenth and Dodge Streets, four blocks away. The oil from red lanterns used as danger signals for street repairs was poured on the corpse. It was burned. Members of the mob hauled the charred remains through the business district for several hours.

Sheriff Clark said that Negro prisoners hurled Brown into the hands of the mob as its leaders approached the stairway leading to the county jail. Newspapers have quoted alleged leaders of the mob as saying that Brown was shoved at them through a blinding smoke by persons whom they could not see.
[edit] Aftermath

The lawlessness continued for several hours after Brown had been lynched. The police patrol was burned. The police emergency automobile was burned. Three times, the mob went to the city jail. The third time its leaders announced that they were going to burn it. Soldiers arrived before they could carry out their threat.
Infantry deployed to calm the riot

The riot lasted until 3 a.m., in the morning of September 29. At that hour, federal troops, under command of Colonel John E. Morris of the Twentieth Infantry, arrived from Fort Omaha and Fort Crook. Troops manning machine guns were placed in the heart of Omaha's business district; in North Omaha, the center of the black community, to protect citizens there; and in South Omaha, to prevent more mobs from forming. Major General Leonard Wood, commander of the Central Department, came the next day to Omaha by order of Secretary of War Newton D. Baker. Peace was enforced by 1,600 soldiers.

Martial law was not formally proclaimed in Omaha, but it was effectively enacted throughout the city. By the request of City Commissioner W.G. Ure, who was acting mayor, Wood took over control over the police department, too.

On October 1, 1919 Brown was laid to rest in Omaha's Potters Field. The interment log listed only one word next to his name: "Lynched".
---------------------------------------------

Joe Coe, also known as George Smith, was an African-American laborer who was lynched in 1891 in Omaha, Nebraska. Overwhelmed by a mob of one thousand at the Douglas County Courthouse, the twelve city police officers stood by without intervening. Afterward, the mayor called the lynching "the most deplorable thing that has ever happened in the history of the country."[1]
Contents
[hide]

* 1 About
* 2 Aftermath
* 3 See also
* 4 External links
* 5 References

[edit] About

Coe was a married man with two children who lived on North 12th Street north of downtown Omaha. On October 7, 1891 Lizzie Yates, a five-year-old white child who also lived in North Omaha, accused Coe of assaulting her. A crowd of men was already gathered at the old Douglas County Courthouse the day when Coe was brought in, to witness an unrelated, scheduled hanging, an official execution.

In the crowd, rumors circulated that the girl had died and the suspect's punishment was only 20 years in jail. Having seen Coe brought in earlier, the crowd decided he was guilty. Rumors flew around Omaha that the girl had died, the guilty party was in jail, and was only going to be punished with 20 years' incarceration.[2]

The next day, a mob of several hundred to 1,000 men formed in downtown Omaha early on Saturday, October 10, and overwhelmed the police at the courthouse.[3] Councilman Moriarty drove his cane through a window and led the men against the courthouse.[4] Leaders drove Coe to the assumed victim's house in the Near North Side neighborhood to be identified by the parents. The mother immediately said she had seen Coe roaming around the house, although she would not swear that it was he.[5]

When the mob brought Coe back to the courthouse to be lynched, James E. Boyd, the governor of Nebraska, and the county sheriff both appealed to the men to disperse. Instead, by midnight a crowd of 1,000 to 10,000 people had gathered at the courthouse.[6] The mob beat Coe and dragged him through city streets. He was probably already dead when he was hung from a streetcar wire at 17th and Harney Streets.[7] Omaha mayor Richard C. Cushing quickly condemned the lynching as "the most deplorable thing that has ever happened in the history of the country."[8]
[edit] Aftermath

Seven men were arrested for the crime, including the chief of police and the manager of a large dry goods store. A mob gathered outside the jail and threatened to destroy it unless the suspects were freed on bail but the County Attorney was determined to refuse them.[9]

The following day when Coe's body was set for public viewing at a downtown mortuary, six thousand spectators filed by. Hucksters sold pieces of the lynching rope as souvenirs.[10]

Ten days after the lynching, the Douglas County Assistant Coroner testified in court that Smith died of "fright", rather than of the wounds inflicted on him by the mob. Those wounds included sixteen wounds to his body and three vertebrae broken in his spine. Despite this, the coroner testified, "[T]he heart was so contracted and the blood was in such a condition that the doctor was satisfied that the man was literally scared to death." County Attorney Mahoney said he would have to modify the charges against the lynchers.[11] The grand jury decided not to prosecute.

----------------------------------------------

Johnny "Jack" Trice (1902 – October 8, 1923) was a football player who became the first African-American athlete from Iowa State College (now Iowa State University). Trice died due to injuries suffered during a college football game against the University of Minnesota on October 6, 1923.
Contents
[hide]

* 1 Background
* 2 The game, Trice's death, and aftermath
* 3 Legacy
* 4 See also
* 5 References
* 6 Further reading
* 7 External links

[edit] Background

Trice was born in Hiram, Ohio in 1902, the son of a former slave and Buffalo Soldier. As a child, Trice was active in sports and demonstrated outstanding athletic skills. In 1918, Trice’s mother sent him to Cleveland, Ohio to live with an uncle. Trice attended East Technical High School where he played football. In 1922, Trice followed five of his teammates, as well as his former high school coach, Sam Willaman, to Iowa State College in Ames, Iowa.

While attending Iowa State, Trice participated in track and football (primarily as a tackle). He majored in animal husbandry, with the desire to go to the South after graduation, and use his knowledge to help African-American farmers. In the summer after his freshman year, Trice married Cora Mae Starland. They both found jobs in order to support themselves through school.

On October 5, 1923, the night before his first college football game, Trice wrote the following in a letter on stationery at a racially segregated hotel in Minneapolis/St. Paul (the letter was later found in Trice's suit just before his funeral):
“ My thoughts just before the first real college game of my life: The honor of my race, family & self is at stake. Everyone is expecting me to do big things. I will. My whole body and soul are to be thrown recklessly about the field tomorrow. Every time the ball is snapped, I will be trying to do more than my part. On all defensive plays I must break through the opponents' line and stop the play in their territory. Beware of mass interference. Fight low, with your eyes open and toward the play. Watch out for crossbacks and reverse end runs. Be on your toes every minute if you expect to make good. Jack.[1] ”
[edit] The game, Trice's death, and aftermath

On October 6, 1923, Trice and his Iowa State College teammates played against the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis, Minnesota. It was ISU's third game that season; St. Louis refused to play against a black player. On the night of the game, Trice had to stay at a different Minneapolis hotel from his teammates.

During the second play of the game, Trice's collarbone was broken. Trice insisted he was all right and returned to the game. In the third quarter, while attempting to tackle a University of Minnesota ball carrier by throwing a roll block, Trice was trampled by three Minnesota players. Although he claimed to be fine, Trice was removed from the game and sent to a Minneapolis hospital. The doctors declared him fit to travel and he returned by train to Ames with his teammates. On October 8, 1923, Trice died from hemorrhaged lungs and internal bleeding as a result of the injuries sustained during the game.

Trice's funeral was held at the Iowa State College's central campus in Ames on October 16, 1923, with 4,000 students and faculty members in attendance.

As a result of his death, ISU did not renew their contract to play against Minnesota after the 1924 game. They would not play again until 1989.

(to be continued...)

None of this happened in the South. Are you denying it happened, or are you claiming it wasn't important? Which one is it, 3D?
 
Raymond Gunn (January 11, 1904-January 12, 1931) was a black man killed by a mob in Maryville, Missouri, United States, after he confessed to killing and attempting to rape a white school teacher there.

The case received massive national publicity because it occurred outside the Southern lynch belt and because of its brazen and planned nature; and because the sheriff did not activate National Guard troops which had been specifically deployed to prevent the lynching.

The case was frequently invoked in the unsuccessful attempt to pass a law called the Wagner-Costigan Act during the presidency of Franklin Roosevelt. This would have made it a federal crime for law enforcement officials to refuse to take steps to prevent a lynching.
Contents
[hide]

* 1 Early life
* 2 Murder of Velma Colter
* 3 Lynch mob atmosphere
* 4 The lynching
* 5 Aftermath
* 6 References
* 7 External links

[edit] Early life

Gunn was born to a local family in Maryville.

Gunn was convicted of attempted rape in September 1925, of a student at what is now Northwest Missouri State University after he accosted a woman on a rural lane outside of Maryville. Gunn never confessed to the crime, although he was allegedly beaten while in custody. He was released on January 28, 1928.

In 1929 he married a local woman and the couple moved to Omaha, Nebraska where she died of pneumonia. He returned to Maryville where he made a living as a hunter.[1]
[edit] Murder of Velma Colter

On December 16, 1930, 20-year-old teacher Velma Colter, who was the daughter of a local farm couple, was killed in the one-room Garrett schoolhouse (40°19′56.22″N 94°54′40.05″W / 40.3322833°N 94.911125°W / 40.3322833; -94.911125) about a mile southwest of Maryville. When she didn't return home as scheduled, her partially clad body was found in a pool of blood in the middle of the school and there was a bloody footprint.

Gunn was immediately suspected. A farmer said that he saw somebody matching Gunn's description near the school. Authorities arrested several black men matching the description before finding Gunn on December 18. Gunn had blood on his shirt (which he claimed was rabbit blood) and his footprint matched the one at the scene. Furthermore, Gunn had a severe bite mark on his thumb (the woman who had accused him of rape in 1925 said he stuck his thumbs in her mouth).

Gunn confessed, saying he had gone to the school with a hedge club after seeing Colter outside with a coal bucket. He said he hit her once after she bit him and then again after she hit him with the coal bucket.
[edit] Lynch mob atmosphere

Talk of lynching began immediately after Gunn was taken into custody on December 18, and crowds began to assemble in Maryville. Gunn was transferred to the Buchanan County, Missouri jail 45 miles south in St. Joseph, Missouri. Crowds gathered there as well, which prompted the sheriff to order a truck with a mounted machine gun to be backed to the door. The operator of the gun appeared to aim the weapon at the crowd (although he later said he was just oiling it) causing the crowd to disperse.

Gunn was transferred again, this time 100 miles south of Maryville to Kansas City, Missouri. At 3:30 a.m. on December 26, Gunn returned to Maryville for arraignment and then was taken back to Kansas City.

Colter's mother was quoted as saying she could not bear a trial and would not testify. Her son had been killed in France during World War I.
[edit] The lynching

Gunn's court date was set for January 12. The Nodaway County prosecuting attorney said Gunn would get a fair trial and appealed (along with many Maryville business leaders) to Missouri Governor Henry S. Caulfield to deploy the National Guard to prevent an anticipated lynching attempt. Caulfield complied and 60 troops were ordered at 7:30 a.m. to stand by at the National Guard a block north of the courthouse (at what today is the Maryville Public Library). By law, the National Guard could only be deployed at the written request of the sheriff, which was never made. Sheriff Havre English later told the press that he did not call up the guard because he did not want them to get hurt.

A large crowd occupied the Maryville square between the jail block to the northeast and the Nodaway County, Missouri courthouse. The sheriff was transporting Gunn by car, and drove directly into the mob. When he opened the door, a man pulled the sheriff aside and another took Gunn out of the car. Men who were there had said year's later that the leader bluntly said to the sheriff "either you move out of the way or die with this man, either way he's going to die today."

Gunn was chained and marched south down Main Street through the Maryville streets (avoiding the National Guardsmen). After an hour and a half, Gunn and the crowd arrived at the Garrett schoolhouse. His ears and nose were bleeding. The contents of the schoolhouse had been removed and placed on the lawn. A crowd estimated at between 2,000 and 4,000 had gathered. He was taken by 12 men inside the schoolhouse, where he is reported to have confessed again, as well as claiming he had an accomplice named "Shike" Smith.

Gunn was taken to the roof of the building where he was tied to a ridge pole. Gunn and the building were doused with gasoline. The leader of the group, only identified as a "man in a red coat", threw a lighted piece of paper into the building. Gunn screamed once and appeared lifeless in 11 minutes.

A reporter for the St. Joseph Gazette gave this description:

He twisted and revealed a huge blister ballooning on his left upper arm. Pieces of his skin blew away to the wind as the blistering heat became more intense and soon his torso was splotched with white patches of exposed flesh. His hair burned like a torch for moment then his head sagged. His body writhed. It took the appearance of a mummy.[2]

The building's roof collapsed within 16 minutes. Remnants of the school were taken away by the crowd as souvenirs.
[edit] Aftermath

No charges were ever filed in the case. Attempts to identify the man in the red coat have always been rebuffed with a claim that he was an outsider. However newspapers said all the other leaders were local.[3]

The lynching was universally condemned by newspapers across the United States. The Atlanta Constitution published an editorial cartoon with the caption of "The Torch of Civilization in Missouri."[4]

Residents were concerned that blacks from Kansas City were going to attack the city. Reportedly townspeople set up machine gun nests on Main Street.

Gunn's family home was also burned.[5]

The official 1930 census showed 90 blacks living in the town. 35 were enrolled in the Maryville school in 1930. In 1931, the number had dropped to six and eventually almost all blacks left the town.

(to be continued...)


WOW 3D... Even MORE stuff that didn't happen in the South! Are you saying this was isolated incidents? Wasn't worth mentioning? Was less detrimental to black people than what was happening in the South? What exactly IS your argument here?
 
Ossian Sweet (pronounced /ˈɒʃən ˈswiːt/, us dict: ŏsh′·ən swēt′; 30 October 1895–20 March 1960) was an American physician. He is most notable for his self defense in 1925 of his newly-purchased home in a predominantly white neighborhood against a mob attempting to force him out of the neighborhood in Detroit, Michigan, and the subsequent acquittal by an all-white jury of murder charges against him, his family, and friends who helped defend his home, in what came to be known as the Sweet Trials.

Ossian Sweet and The Red Summer

Ossian Sweet was attending Howard University, a leader in black medical education, in 1919 when he personally witnessed the Washington D.C. race riot. Like so many cities in the summer of 1919, Washington D.C. had been stretched to its breaking point. Black migrants from the south had come pouring into the city's main black areas with the promise of wartime jobs, but in 1919 with the end of the war the promise was no longer there, although new migrants were pouring into the city everyday. Thousands of white soldiers were held on the outskirts of Washington D.C. while waiting to be discharged from their service in the World War I. Boredom eventually hit; and when it did, a riot broke that lasted five days and left 6 dead and 150 wounded. Sweet was just four blocks from the riots, but could not leave his fraternity; Kevin Boyle, author of Arc of Justice: A Saga of Race, Civil Rights, and Murder in the Jazz Age, attributes his lack of composure in this harsh time to fear, and he had good reason. Sweet was “walking down the street when a gang descended on a passing streetcar, pulled a black passenger down to the sidewalk, and beat him mercilessly.” Boyle later states that Sweet did not venture from his house because he was escaping the memories of his past, a true emotion for Sweet, and one that would not leave him until his death.

Home invasion

There were dangerous occurrences happening to friends and acquaintances of Ossian in buying homes in white neighborhoods and then being attacked. There was even a group put together called the Waterworks Park Improvement, which happened to be run by real estate agents from Detroit and nearby cities, whose sole reason of existence was to create controversy against the idea of allowing blacks to move to white neighborhoods. These people were concerned with the belief that allowing blacks into their neighborhoods would lower property values. This was important because at this time, buying a home was a very difficult and lengthy process. The idea of buying land free and clear was no longer an option for most blacks, forcing them instead to take out multiple mortgages to buy a home, leading to even more debt. Also, the idea that an African American could afford what most were struggling to keep was insulting to many of the working class whites that lived in the neighborhood.

Fearing an attack, Ossian had nine other men at his house on the night of the attack to help defend his family and property should any violence arise. The men included: Charles Washington (insurance man), Leonard Morse (colleague), William Davis, Henry Sweet (Ossian's brother), John Latting (Henry's college friend), Norris Murray (handyman), Otis Sweet (Ossian's brother) and Joe Mack (chauffeur). Gladys, too, was inside the bungalow. Inspector Norton Schuknecht had been placed outside the Sweet's house on the first night and he was to keep the peace and protect Ossian and Gladys from any angry neighbors. When a mob formed for the second night in a row in front of Dr. Sweet’s home, he knew that, “Somewhere out there, standing among the women and children, lounging on the porches, lurking in the alleys were the men who would incite the crowd to violence.” As the mob grew restless, people began to throw stones at the house, which eventually broke an upstairs window. There were several of Dr. Sweet’s friends waiting upstairs, armed with weapons that Sweet had purchased prior to moving in. A volley of shots rang out from the upstairs, and in an instant, two attackers were down. One member of the mob, Eric Houghberg, was shot and suffered a minor injury. The other man who was hit, Leon Breiner, was killed from the shot. There was no turning back at this point, as a white man lay dead in the street, killed by an African American man. After the shot had been fired from the bungalow, the eleven African Americans inside were brought to police headquarters and interrogated for five hours. Interrogations would last for an extended period of time and the men would remain in the Wayne County Jail until the entire trial was over. By the next morning, September 10, the story was on newsstands all across Detroit and throughout the country.

The Sweets and their friends were tried for murder by a young Judge, Frank Murphy. Judge Murphy was considered to be one of the more liberal judges in the city, but with the media working the city into a frenzy, Murphy decided to put aside his liberal ideals and denied the defendant’s appeal to have the case dismissed. There was little hope of receiving a fair trial at this point, but Ossian Sweet and his friends remained hopeful. When word of this incident reached the desk of James Weldon Johnson, general secretary of the NAACP, Johnson knew right away that this case would be a major force in the acquisition of civil rights for African Americans.

With the help of the NAACP, Sweet and his friends gained the money and support that they needed, if there was to be any hope of winning this trial. The NAACP helped the Sweets and the rest as much as possible; they had James Weldon Johnson send Walter White to them in order to do some of his legendary investigations work. The Sweet trial was one of three main trials the NAACP supported in this year. The NAACP chose carefully which trials would have the most publicity and which trials, if won, would help the African American race and hopefully make steps towards social change. Funds were limited, and the selection of civil rights battles had to be chosen carefully to maximize the limited funds that were available.

As September passed on, life in the Wayne County Jail became slightly more comfortable for Ossian and the others. It was more difficult for jail officers to keep a close eye on them so the Sweets began seeing a steady stream of visitors, including the elder Henry Sweet, who was Ossian's, Otis's and Henry's father. In early October, Johnson invited Clarence Darrow, who was for a period of time the most brilliant defense attorney in the country, to join the Sweets' defense team. Darrow previously had been an attorney in the Scopes Trial. Publicity was what Johnson was looking for from Darrow. Darrow accepted and on October 15 it was announced he would be taking control of the defense. Several days prior to the announcement, on October 6, Gladys was released on bail by her parents' friends. This was a great relief for Ossian. On the morning of Friday, October 30, Clarence Darrow was ready for trial. As the end of November rolled in, and after the jurors' long deliberations, most came to an agreement that the eight remaining defendants should be acquitted; there were however, a few holdouts. At this point, Judge Murphy dismissed the deadlocked jury and declared the court case a mistrial. Dr. Sweet and Gladys had expectations to head back to court within a few weeks, but there were delays. During the long delay between the first and second trial, Darrow did not devote much time to the Sweets' case. Eventually, almost three weeks after it was planned, the trial began on Monday, April 19, 1926. This shorter trial led to an acquittal of Henry Sweet. The prosecuting attorney then elected to dismiss the charges against the remaining defendants.

After Henry was acquitted, life for the Sweets was not as joyous as hoped. Both Gladys and her daughter, Iva, were suffering from tuberculosis, which Gladys contracted during her incarceration. Two months after Iva's second birthday, she died. During the two years following the loss of their daughter, Ossian and Gladys lived apart; he was back at the apartment near Dunbar Memorial and she went to Tucson, Arizona, in order to benefit from the drier climate. By mid-1928, Ossian finally regained possession of the bungalow, which had not been lived in since the shooting. A few months after Gladys returned home, she died, at the age of twenty-seven. After the death of his wife, Ossian bought the Garafalo's Drugstore. In 1929, he left his practice to run a hospital in the heart of the ghetto. He would eventually run a few of these small hospitals, but none ever flourished. As he began to approach the age of fifty, Ossian started to buy land in East Bartow, as his father had. Finally, in 1930, he decided to run for the presidency of the NAACP branch in Detroit, only to lose by a wide margin. In the summer of 1939, Ossian realized that his brother had also contracted tuberculosis; six months later, he died. By this point, Ossian's finances soon failed him. It took him until 1950 to pay off the land contract and he then assumed full ownership of the bungalow. He faced too much debt after that and, instead of losing the house, Ossian sold it in April 1958, to another black family. With the bungalow out of his possession, he transformed what had been his office above Garafalo's Drugstore into an apartment. Around this time, Ossian's physical and mental health began to decline; he had put on weight and had slowed in his motions. On March 20, 1960, he went into his bedroom and committed suicide with a shot to the head.

----------------------------------------------

The "Johnny Bright Incident" was a violent on-field assault against African-American player Johnny Bright by White American player Wilbanks Smith during an American college football game held on October 20, 1951 in Stillwater, Oklahoma. The game was significant in itself as it marked the first time that an African American athlete with a national profile and of critical importance to the success of his Drake University team had played against Oklahoma A&M (now Oklahoma State University) on their home field. Bright's injury also highlighted the racial tensions of the times and assumed notoriety when it was captured in what was later to become both a widely disseminated and eventually Pulitzer Prize winning photo sequence. The event later came to be known as the "Johnny Bright Incident".

Johnny Bright's participation as a halfback/quarterback in the collegiate football game between the Drake Bulldogs and Oklahoma A&M Aggies on October 20, 1951 at Lewis Field was controversial even before it began. Bright had been the first African-American football player to play at Lewis Field two years prior (without incident). In 1951, Bright was a pre-season Heisman Trophy candidate from Drake, and led the nation in total offense.[1] Bright had never played for a losing team in his college career. Coming into the contest, Drake carried a five game winning streak, owing much to Bright's rushing and passing abilities. During the first seven minutes of the game, Bright was knocked unconscious three times by blows from Oklahoma A&M defensive tackle Wilbanks Smith. While Smith's final elbow blow broke Bright's jaw, he was still able to complete a 61-yard touchdown pass to Drake halfback Jim Pilkington a few plays later.[1] Soon afterward, the injury finally forced him to leave the game. Bright finished the game with less than 100 yards, the first time in his three year collegiate career at Drake. Oklahoma A&M eventually won the game 27–14.[1]

Bob Spiegel, a reporter with the Des Moines Register, interviewed several spectators after the game, eventually publishing a report on the incident in the October 30, 1951 issue of the newspaper. According to Spiegel's report, several of the Oklahoma A&M students he interviewed overheard an Oklahoma A&M coach repeatedly say "Get that nigger" whenever the A&M practice squad ran Drake plays against the Oklahoma A&M starting defense, prior to the October 20 game.[2] Spiegel also recounted the experiences of a businessman and his wife, who were seated behind a group of Oklahoma A&M practice squad players. At the beginning of the game, one of the players turned around said, "We're gonna get that nigger."[2] After the first blow to Bright was delivered by Smith, the same player again turned around and told the businessman, "See that knot on my jaw? That same guy [Smith] gave me that the very same way in practice."[2]

Drake University and fellow Missouri Valley Conference member Bradley University withdrew from the Conference in protest for several years, not only in response to the Bright incident, but also because both Oklahoma A&M and the Conference refused to take any disciplinary action against Wilbanks Smith.[4] The "Johnny Bright Incident", as it became widely known, eventually provoked changes in NCAA football rules regarding illegal blocking, and mandated the use of more protective helmets with face guards.[2]

Recalling the incident without apparent bitterness in a 1980 Des Moines Register interview three years before his death, Bright commented: "There's no way it couldn't have been racially motivated." Bright went on to add: "What I like about the whole deal now, and what I'm smug enough to say, is that getting a broken jaw has somehow made college athletics better. It made the NCAA take a hard look and clean up some things that were bad."[2]

---------------------------------------------

Dick Rowland (born c. 1902) was an African-American teen-age shoeshiner whose false arrest in May 1921 was the impetus for the Tulsa Race Riot. When he was arrested for attempted assault, Rowland was 19 years old. The white teen-ager, who was supposed to have been the victim, declined to prosecute. The arrest was prompted after Rowland tripped in an elevator on his way to a segregated bathroom, and a white store clerk misconstrued the incident as an "assault."

Rowland's birth name was Jimmie Jones. [1] It is not known where he was born, but by 1908 he and two sisters were orphans living in Vinita, Oklahoma. Jones was informally adopted by Damie Ford, an African-American woman. In approximately 1909 Ford and Jones moved to Tulsa, Oklahoma to join Ford's family, the Rowlands. Eventually, Jones took Rowland as his last name, and selected his favorite first name, Dick, as his own. Rowland attended the city's segregated schools, including Booker T. Washington High School.[2]

He dropped out of high school to take a job shining shoes in a white-owned and white-patronized shine parlor on Main Street in downtown Tulsa. As Tulsa was a segregated city where Jim Crow practices were in effect, black people were not allowed to use toilet facilities used by white people. There was no separate facility for blacks at the shine parlor where Rowland worked and the owner had arranged for Black employees to use a segregated "Colored" restroom on the top floor of the nearby Drexel Building at 319 S. Main Street.

On May 30, 1921, Rowland attempted to enter the Drexel building elevator and, although the exact facts are either unknown or in dispute, according to the most accepted accounts, he tripped, and while falling, latched on to the arm of the elevator operator, Sarah Page, then 17 years old. Startled, the elevator operator screamed and a white clerk in a first floor store called police to report seeing Rowland flee from the elevator and the building. The white clerk on the first floor reported the incident as an attempted assault.

Rowlands was arrested the following day, on May 31, 1921. Subsequent actions by white citizens in an apparent attempt to lynch him, and by black citizens to protect him, sparked a riot that lasted 16 hours and caused the destruction by fire of 35 city blocks and 1,256 residences in Tulsa's prosperous African-American neighborhood of Greenwood, and over 800 injuries and the deaths of at about 300 blacks and 13 whites.[3]

The case against Dick Rowland was dismissed at the end of September, 1921. The dismissal followed the receipt of a letter by the County Attorney from Sarah Page in which she stated that she did not wish to prosecute the case.

According to Damie Ford, once Rowland was exonerated he immediately left Tulsa, and went to Kansas City.[4] Little else is publicly known about the remainder of Rowland's life.Dick Rowland (born c. 1902) was an African-American teen-age shoeshiner whose false arrest in May 1921 was the impetus for the Tulsa Race Riot. When he was arrested for attempted assault, Rowland was 19 years old. The white teen-ager, who was supposed to have been the victim, declined to prosecute. The arrest was prompted after Rowland tripped in an elevator on his way to a segregated bathroom, and a white store clerk misconstrued the incident as an "assault."

Rowland's birth name was Jimmie Jones. [1] It is not known where he was born, but by 1908 he and two sisters were orphans living in Vinita, Oklahoma. Jones was informally adopted by Damie Ford, an African-American woman. In approximately 1909 Ford and Jones moved to Tulsa, Oklahoma to join Ford's family, the Rowlands. Eventually, Jones took Rowland as his last name, and selected his favorite first name, Dick, as his own. Rowland attended the city's segregated schools, including Booker T. Washington High School.[2]

He dropped out of high school to take a job shining shoes in a white-owned and white-patronized shine parlor on Main Street in downtown Tulsa. As Tulsa was a segregated city where Jim Crow practices were in effect, black people were not allowed to use toilet facilities used by white people. There was no separate facility for blacks at the shine parlor where Rowland worked and the owner had arranged for Black employees to use a segregated "Colored" restroom on the top floor of the nearby Drexel Building at 319 S. Main Street.

On May 30, 1921, Rowland attempted to enter the Drexel building elevator and, although the exact facts are either unknown or in dispute, according to the most accepted accounts, he tripped, and while falling, latched on to the arm of the elevator operator, Sarah Page, then 17 years old. Startled, the elevator operator screamed and a white clerk in a first floor store called police to report seeing Rowland flee from the elevator and the building. The white clerk on the first floor reported the incident as an attempted assault.

Rowlands was arrested the following day, on May 31, 1921. Subsequent actions by white citizens in an apparent attempt to lynch him, and by black citizens to protect him, sparked a riot that lasted 16 hours and caused the destruction by fire of 35 city blocks and 1,256 residences in Tulsa's prosperous African-American neighborhood of Greenwood, and over 800 injuries and the deaths of at about 300 blacks and 13 whites.[3]

The case against Dick Rowland was dismissed at the end of September, 1921. The dismissal followed the receipt of a letter by the County Attorney from Sarah Page in which she stated that she did not wish to prosecute the case.

According to Damie Ford, once Rowland was exonerated he immediately left Tulsa, and went to Kansas City.[4] Little else is publicly known about the remainder of Rowland's life.

(to be continued...)

The evidence keeps mounting 3D... This is the "Welcome Wagon" blacks were receiving up North! Defend it, mutherfucker! Defend it! Tell us all how this kind of thing ONLY happened down South!
 
The Springfield Race Riot of 1908 was a mass civil disturbance in Springfield, Illinois, USA sparked by the transfer of two African American prisoners out of the city jail by the county sheriff. This act enraged many white citizens, who responded by burning black-owned homes and businesses and killing black citizens. By the end of the riot, there were at least seven deaths and US$200,000 in property damage. The riot led to the formation of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, a civil rights organization.

At the turn of the century, Springfield, Illinois, was a rapidly-growing industrial center, with the highest percentage of African Americans of any comparably-sized city in Illinois. Racial tensions were high at the time due to fierce job competition and the use of black workers as "scabs" during labor strikes.[1]

On July 4, 1908, someone broke into the home of mining engineer Clergy Ballard. Ballard awoke and rose to investigate, finding a man standing near his daughter's bed. The intruder fled the house and Ballard gave chase. After catching up with the intruder, Ballard's throat was slashed with a straight razor. Before he died, Ballard identified the assailant as Joe James, a black man with a long record of minor crimes. White citizens of the town were enraged by this crime, thinking that the murder was the result of a thwarted sexual assault of a white woman by a black man. A crowd of whites caught James and beat him unconscious. The police rescued James, arrested him, and locked him in the city jail.[2]

On Friday, August 15 of that year, the local Illinois State Journal newspaper ran the story of a white woman, Mabel Hallam, who had allegedly been raped by a local black man, George Richardson. The 21-year-old wife of a well-known streetcar conductor claimed that the black caretaker had dragged her out of bed and assaulted her the night before. Police arrested Richardson and took him to the city jail as well.[3]

Later on August 14, a significant amount of mob action took place. A crowd of white citizens gathered in downtown Springfield, outraged by the fact that two black men had allegedly committed brutal crimes against white townspeople. The crowd demanded the release of the prisoners, but Sheriff Charles Werner was able to remove the two from jail and transport them to safety in Bloomington 64 miles away, with the help of restaurant owner Harry Loper.[4]

When the crowd learned that the two black prisoners had been moved with the help of Loper, they walked to his restaurant to exact revenge. Despite the fact that Loper stood in the doorway, the mob trashed the building and torched his expensive automobile. [5] Realizing that the local authorities were overwhelmed by the crowd, Governor Charles S. Deneen activated the state militia.[6]

The crowd now directed their anger toward the rest of Springfield's minorities. They proceeded to Fishman's Hardware, owned by a Jewish businessman, and stole weapons to use in the further destruction of homes and businesses. Then the mob moved on the Levee, a predominantly African American area, and destroyed numerous black-owned businesses.[7]

As the crowd moved on towards the Badlands, another black neighborhood, they encountered a black barber named Scott Burton. Burton attempted to defend his business with a warning shot from a shotgun, and was killed when the crowd returned fire. Burton's shop was burned and his body was dragged to a nearby saloon, where it was hung from a tree.[8]

The mob then burned black-owned homes in the Badlands. By this time, an estimated 12,000 people had gathered to watch the houses burn. When firefighters arrived, people in the crowd impeded their progress and cut their hoses. African American citizens were forced to flee the town, find refuge with sympathetic whites, or hide in the State Arsenal. The National Guard was finally able to disperse the crowd late that night.[9]

The next day, Saturday, August 15, as thousands of black residents fled the city, five thousand National Guard troops marched in to keep the peace, along with curiosity seekers and tourists who had read about the riots in the newspaper.[10] The peace was soon broken, however, when a new mob formed and began marching toward the State Arsenal, where many black residents were being housed. When confronted by a National Guardsman, the crowd changed direction and instead walked to the home of black resident William Donnegan, who had committed no crime, but had been married to a white woman for 32 years; Donnegan himself was either 84 or 76-years old.[11] When Donnegan came outside, the mob captured him, cut his throat, and lynched him in a tree in the yard of what was later known as The Hay-Edwards School across the street from his home.[12]
[edit] Aftermath

The riots ended at this point, leaving 40 homes and 24 businesses in ruins, and seven people confirmed dead: two black men and five white people who were killed in the violence. Some of the white casualties were shot by blacks defending their homes and businesses. There were rumored to have been several more unreported deaths.

A grand jury brought 107 indictments against nearly 80 individuals who had allegedly participated in the riots (including four police officers), but only one man, a 20-year-old Russian Jewish vegetable peddler named Abraham Raymer, was convicted. His crime was stealing a saber from a guard. Raymer had previously been put on trial for the murder of William Donnegan, of which he was acquitted, and he was also subsequently acquitted of other serious charges in two later trials, results which would set the tone for the rest of the cases.[13] Kate Howard, a white woman who had directed much of the violence, committed suicide before facing the charges against her. Mabel Hallam later admitted that her accusation of rape against George Richardson was false, and Richardson was released from jail. Joe James was convicted of the murder of Clergy Ballard and was hanged in the Sangamon County Jail on October 23, 1908.[14]

As a direct result of the Springfield Race Riot, a meeting was held in New York City to discuss solutions to racial problems in the U.S. This meeting led to the formation of the NAACP, a well-known civil rights organization.[15]

Visitors to Springfield, Illinois, can take a self-guided tour of nine historical markers that describe key moments in the Springfield Race Riot of 1908.

------------------------------------------------

In 1892, a police officer in Port Jervis, New York, tried to stop the lynching of a black man who had been wrongfully accused of assaulting a white woman. The mob responded by putting the noose around the officer's neck as a way of scaring him. Although at the inquest the officer identified eight people who had participated in the lynching, including the former chief of police, the jury determined that the murder had been carried out "by person or persons unknown."[29]

In Duluth, Minnesota, on June 15, 1920, three young African American travelers were lynched after having been jailed and accused of having raped a white woman. The alleged "motive" and action by a mob were consistent with the "community policing" model. A book titled The Lynchings in Duluth documented the events.[30]

----------------------------------------------

Louie Sam (1870? – February 24, 1884) was a Stó:lō youth from native village near Abbotsford, British Columbia who was lynched by an American mob.

Sam was 14 at the time these events occurred. He had been accused of the murder of James Bell, a shopkeeper in Nooksack (today Whatcom County, Washington). The people of his band, today the Sumas First Nation at Kilgard turned him over to the B.C. government to settle the matter.

Following this, an angry mob crossed the border into Canada on February 24 and captured Sam, who had been in the custody of a B.C. deputy. They then hanged him from a tree close to the U.S. border.

A subsequent investigation by Canadian authorities strongly suggests that Sam was innocent, and that the likely murderers were two white Americans who were leaders of the lynch mob. [1] They were William Osterman, the Nooksack telegraph operator who took over Bell's business, and David Harkness, who at the time of Bell's murder was living with Bell's estranged wife. Neither man was ever prosecuted.
---------------------------------------------------

The United States of Lyncherdom was an essay by Mark Twain written in 1901,[1] after the lynching of three men in Pierce City, Missouri, his home state. It blames lynching in the United States on the herd mentality that prevails among Americans.[1] Twain decided that the country was not ready for the essay, and shelved it.[1] A redacted version was finally published in 1923, when Twain's literary executor, Albert Bigelow Paine, slipped it into a posthumous collection, Europe and Elsewhere.

-----------------------------------------------

Read through some of these events. NONE of which took place in the South, and ALL of which took place post-Civil War. Chicklet and Jarhead would like you to think these things didn't happen because Congress had passed a CRA in 1875. From their perception, this sort of thing only happened in the South, and in direct violation of the laws passed by Congress. It is this sort of stubborn refusal to accept responsibility and flagrantly cast blame on others, while ignoring history, which has prevailed in our society throughout America since the Civil War. Through this sort of mindset, these clowns can excuse themselves and their respective states or regions of the country from any blame whatsoever for the history of discrimination against blacks.

Keep bumping this thread Jarhead, you and Chicklet keep showing your racist viewpoint! I am all FOR that!

Wow 3D... I never knew Montana, Illinois and Washington were in the SOUTH!
 
Back
Top