Black Perspective on Big Stick Diplomacy--Oct 1984 Vol 8 No 4

James Weldon Johnson: A Black Perspective on “Big Stick” Diplomacy*

WILLIAM E. GIBBS

James W. Johnson . . . is one of the few Negro editors who knows anything about international questions.

-The Messenger, 191 9

Afro-Americans have traditionally spoken out on foreign policy, especially on issues such as Liberia, Haiti, Cuba, and the Philippines where they could identify a “color affinity.”’ The dynamic nature of American foreign relations along with the emergence of a strong and vocal black press made this especially the case during the era of “Big Stick,” “Dollar,” and “Mis- sionary” diplomacy. *

Since imperialist ventures in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries were closely tied to racism at home, Afro-American commentary on foreign affairs also reflected the domestic plight of American blacks. At the outset, racists provided only lukewarm support for expansion, perceiving that annexation of large numbers of people of color would “upset racial equilibrium within the United States” and possibly even lead to agitation for similar political opportunities for American blacks. In addition, they feared that the extension of constitutional rights to the people of the empire would

*Financial support from the National Endowment for the Humanities and the generous assistance of Professor Willard Gatewood, Jr., of the University of Arkansas contributed significantly to the completion of this paper.

‘Hugh H. Smythe and Elliott P. Skinner, “Black Participation in the U.S. Foreign Rela- tions,” in Mabel M. Smythe, ed., Black American Reference Book (Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1976), p. 639; Alfred 0. Hero, Jr., “American Negroes and U.S. Foreign Policy: 1937-1967,” Conflict Resolution 13, pp. 220-36. For the growing interest after World War I see Theodore Korn- weibel, Jr., No Crystal Stair: Black Life and the Messenger, 1917-1928 (Westport, CT, 1975).

’Both Robert T. Kerlin’s The Voice of the Negro: 1919 (New York, 1920) and Frederick G. Detweiler’s The Negro Press in the United States (Chicago, 1922) provide accounts of the emergence of the Negro press.

pp. 45-45, passim.

329

330 DIPLOMATIC HISTORY

undermine the established practice of denying such rights to Negroes within the United States.3

During the Progressive Era, 1901-1917, the relationship between imperialism and racism changed. Racist arguments, especially those voiced by southern liberals to justify a paternalistic ma@ent of the Negro, began to be used to rationalize continued U.S. domination of subject peoples around the world. Such arguments, based on “the white man’s burden,” also proved quite compatible with the new brand of accommodationist racism functioning in the South during these years. Growing numbers of southern liberals who had influence with such people as Theodore Roosevelt actively e n d d the Booker T. Washington approach to the so-called Negro problem, insisting that it was also the “white man’s burden” to make the American Negro in the South the object of a similarly benevolent form of col~nialism.~ Arguments constructed to defend U.S. imperialism abroad vindicated southern racial practices at home and facilitated their acceptance by the rest of the country. The imperialist venture upon which North and South came to agree thus contributed to a national acceptance of the southern solution to the Negro problem.’

Few black leaders had a better understanding of the potential danger of this regional rapprochement on race than James Weldon Johnson. Responding to “Big Stick” diplomacy, especially in the Caribbean, Johnson argued that for Afro-Americans to condone the exportation of such practices represented (tacit approval of their continued operation in the United States. He insisted, moreover, that to fight for the political rights of people of color throughout the world would in time help to promote examples of effective self-government to refute white supremacist myths about the Negro’s alleged incapacity to govern. Johnson’s literary and administrative achievements have been ana- lyzed in some depth.6 This essay explores how his diplomatic experience, considerable literary talent, and position with the NAACP helped him to mount a campaign against “Big Stick” diplomacy which reveals an interesting and significant dimension to the struggle against “Jim Crow.”

Born in 187 1 into a middle-class family of Jacksonville, Florida, John- son was surrounded by books and the talk of faraway places such as New

’Rubin Francis Weston, Racism in U.S. Imperialism: The InpUence of Racial Assumptions on American Foreign Policy, 1893-1946 (Columbia, 1972). pp. 11-12; John Hope Franklin, From Slavery to Freedom: A Histoty of American Negroes (New York, 1947), p. 425; (3d. rev. ed., 1975). p. 313; Willard Gatewwd. Ir., Black Americans and the White Man’s Burden (Urbana, 1975). p. 320.

‘George M. Fredrickson, The Black Image in the White Mind: The Debate on Afro- American Character and Destiny, 1817-1914 (New York, 1971). pp. 283-31 1.

’C. Vann Woodward, OriginsofrheNewSouth 1877-1913 (Baton Rouge, 1951), p. 325. Also Weston, Racism in US. Imperialism. pp. 15-18.

? h e most significant is Eugene Levy’s biography Jams Weldon Johnson: Black Loader, Black Voice (Chicago, 1973). Also see Charles Flint Kellogg, NAACP: A History ofthe Nationul Association for the Advancement of Colored People. vol. I (Baltimore, 1%7); Ernest Cater Tate, ‘The Social Implications of the Writings and Career of James Weldon Johnson” (Ph.D. diss., New York University, 1959); and Bernard Eisenberg, “James Weldon Johnson and the National Association of Colored People, 19161934” (Ph.D. diss., Columbia University, 1968).

JAMES WELDON JOHNSON 33 1

York and Nassau, where his parents had lived. In his youth, he had some contact with individuals such as T. Thomas Fortune of the New York Globe, who as an editor always demonstrated considerable interest in foreign affairs. In addition, Johnson had the good fortune to have a Cuban boy, Ricardo Rodriguez, living in his home. Fluency in Spanish acquired in his association with “Ponce” Rodriguez had great influence on his later appointment to the consular service in Latin America.’

Johnson’s professional activities after his graduation from Atlanta Uni- versity in 1894 did not point toward a career in the foreign service. Upon his return to Jacksonville, he became principal of his alma mater, Stanton School. While there, he also edited Jacksonville’s first black newspaper, The Daily American, in 1895-1896, and after reading law for a couple of years, he became in 1898 one of the first blacks admitted to the Florida bar.*

These experiences, no doubt, helped formulate his thinking on race and society, but his interest in music broadened his perspective by taking him to the cosmopolitan center of New York, where he worked as a lyricist for his musician brother Rosamond. Johnson had been writing poetry for some time, and he and Rosamond decided to try their hand in New York with a comic opera called Tolosa or The Royal Document. In penning the lyrics, Johnson demonstrated an interest in international affairs, for the work satirized U.S. imperialist ventures in the Pacific.’ The Johnsons took the play to New York in 1899, and although it was never performed, it did introduce them to the Broadway scene.” Johnson initially fared quite well in this environment. He liked the city and moved with ease among both the bohemian, theater crowd and the black upper class of Brooklyn. Success on Broadway with such song hits as “Nobody’s Lookin but de Owl and de Moon” (1901), “Bamboo Tree” (1902), and “Congo Love Song” (1903), even led to a trip to Europe and a smash performance in London. With the decision of his brother and their partner, Bob Cole, to take the show on the road, however, Johnson found his role changed to that of manager.”

Two men provided Johnson with the inspiration and opportunity to pursue an alternative to what appeared to be a dead end. Professor Brander Mathews of Columbia University, with whom Johnson had done graduate work in literature during his New York years, suggested that he do some serious writing. Charles Anderson, a leading black politician of the city, who had earlier brought Johnson into active participation in the Colored Republican Club, urged him to seek a position in the consular service. Convinced that the service provided some opportunity for advancement as well as the occasion to do some writing, Johnson secured through Booker T. Washington an appointment from Theodore Roosevelt. In a letter to a friend at Atlanta

’James Weldon Johnson, Along This Way (New York, 1933), passim, pp. 5p-60, 62. *Ibid., pp. 125-50. %id., p. 149; Levy, James Weldon Johnson, p. 76. “Johnson, Along This Way, pp. 149-51. “Levy, James Weldon Johnson, pp. 97-98.


University, he explained that he was seeking the “honor and fame” which would some day put him in the school catalog as “minister to somewhere.”12

At the time of his appointment in 1906, Johnson spoke fluent Spanish and had some familiarity with the Caribbean, but there was little else beyond a certain international sensitivity, sharpened by his trip to Europe and six years in a large, cosmopolitan city, that indicated any exceptional insight into foreign affairs. His next six years as U.S. consul to Puerto Cabello, Venezuela, and to Corinto, Nicaragua, however, contributed most significantly to his understanding both of Latin America and of the modus operandi of the United States in that area of the world. This experience would equip Johnson better than most other black leaders to speak informatively and critically about U.S. foreign policy.

Puerto Cabello provided Johnson an excellent opportunity not only to learn his consular responsibilities but also to study Spanish-American society. His official duties were not burdensome, and he recalled that he spent considerable time responding to State Department inquiries about German activities and other political matters. l3 His association with the citizenry of Puerto Cabello through his acceptance into the town’s social club did afford him an excellent opportunity to compare racial attitudes. In this more intimate relationship, Johnson observed both the absence of racial prejudice in that mixed society and the presence of much hostility toward the United States.14 As a black political appointee, he knew better than to criticize publicly U.S. policy in Latin America. Privately, however, he wrote Booker T. Washington that antagonism toward the United States in Latin America emanated from the virulent racism in the states. As early as 1908, Johnson tied U.S. foreign relations to racism, arguing that the limited success of the former was attrib- utable to the strength of the latter. According to Johnson, Latin Americans feared that they too would be the object of racism if the United States were permitted to exercise greater infl~ence.’~ By late 1908, somewhat bored with the assignment, he wrote Mathews that he had “found himself” and was considering returning to his old line of work in New York.I6 A promotion to the consular post at Corinto, however, persuaded him to remain abroad.

Corinto put Johnson in a position to observe domestic conditions in Nicaragua and to participate in the implementation of U.S. foreign policy. The job was much more important than that at Puerto Cabello, because, as the primary west coast port and railroad terminus, Corinto handled considerable trade with the interior of the country. Moreover, located just four hundred

?bid.; Miles M. Jackson, “Letters to a Friend: Correspondence From James Weldon

”Johnson, Along This Way, pp. 24849. “bid., pp. 22948. ’sJOhn~n to Booker T. Washington, 9 April 1908, Louis R. Harlan and Raymond

W . Smock. eds., The Booker T. Wmhingron Papers (Urbana, 1979). 9495. 16Johnson to Brander Mathews, November 1908, James Weldon Johnson Papers, James

Weldon Johnson Collection of Negro Arts and Letters, Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Yale University (hereafter cited as Johnson Papers).

Johnson to George A. Towns,” Phylon 29 (Summer 1968): 184.

JAMES WELDON JOHNSON 333

miles from Panama, it was considered strategically valuable to the defense of the canal then being constructed. In this setting, Johnson continued to comment privately about how the more liberal racial attitudes of the Germans allowed them to adapt to the culture and marry into Latin American families. This, he continued, gave them distinct advantages over commercial repre- sentatives from the United States whose racial attitudes compelled them to keep a social distance.”

At this post, Johnson functioned more like a member of the diplomatic service than the consular corps. This was especially the case with the revolution against long-time strongman, President Jost Santos Zelaya. The out- break, which actually started in 1909, continued throughout most of Johnson’s service in Nicaragua. For the first two years, much of the action was in the Bluefields region along the east coast, but in July 1912, a concerted rebel attack against American-backed Adolfo Diaz brought the revolution to the west coast community of Corinto. Johnson reported to his wife Grace that this was no “comic opera” but a full-scale rebellion which necessitated evac- uation of American citizens from the interior to Corinto.18 The situation became especially tense when the insurrectionists cut off Corinto from the interior and demanded that Johnson, the highest ranking officer, turn over the port city. He refused and worked with Adm. W. H. H. Sutherland, in charge of the U.S. fleet lying off shore, to secure the area.I9

Even before he entered the consular service, Johnson had exhibited some opposition to imperialism in lyrics written for the unproduced play “The Presidente and the Yellow Peril”:

We’ll nail the ‘Big Stick’ to the wall, and round it we will drape No streamers red white and blue, But ordinary crepe. And beneath it we will hang A farewell epitaph, And hand to Uncle Samuel The merry ha! ha! laugh.M

Nevertheless, at this stage of his career, he placed his personal ambitions above opposition to imperialism and the protection of subject peoples. There is little evidence that he felt any remorse about his role in Nicaragua; indeed, he appeared rather proud of it and sought to parlay it into a promotion to a

”Johnson, Along This Way, pp. 25262. ‘%id., pp. 108-20, 266-81; Johnson to Grace Nail Johnson, 1 , 4 , and 6 August,

10 September, 5 October 1912, Johnson Papers. Johnson, Along This Way, pp. 282-88; Harold Norman Denny, Dollars For Bullets:

The Story ofAmerican Rule in Nicaragua (New York, 1929). pp. 71-120. Eugene Levy argues that being involved directly in these diplomatic and militfuy machinations compelled Johnson to recognize the necessity if not the value of force. Levy, James Weldon Johnson, p. 155.

m’El Residente or Yellow Peril,” Folder 476, Johnson Papers. This work is not dated but the subject matter and the context of lyrics indicate that it was written sometime before Johnson entered the consular service, probably between 1904 and 1906.

I9


European post.’’ He did get a transfer, pending Senate approval, to a post in the Azores, but the political climate of the Wilson administration was scarcely favorable to black career foreign service officers. As Johnson later wrote his vice-consul at Corinto, “It doesn’t look like the Azores post will materialize. I don’t believe the Democrats are going to put anyone out of the service, but it doesn’t look as though they’re going to put any Republicans in just now, or even promote any.”” He traveled to Washington where he had an interview with Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan, who informed him he could not expect much as a black manz3 When it became apparent that his only option was to return to Corinto, he realized he would never be the “minister to anywhere” and on 1 September 1913, he regretfully resigned, stating “it had been my earnest wish to remain in the Service.””

Johnson’s departure from the State Department was in one sense lib- erating for it freed him to express his feelings on U.S. policy in Latin America. Disillusioned that his efforts had gone urnwarded and bitter that his professional aspirations would go unfulfilled, he directed his fire at the Wilson administration for introducing the “color line” into the State Department. As an unemployed school teacher, newspaper editor, lawyer, lyricist, and consular officer, he could do little about it. Nevertheless, he did take the time during the month of his resignation to expand and refine an argument, first presented to Booker T. Washington five years earlier, attacking on racial grounds U.S. foreign policy in Latin America. In a manuscript entitled “Why Latin America Dislikes the U.S.,” Johnson conceded that Latin Americans feared U.S. designs on their temtory and that traditional bonds of language and culture drew them closer to Europe. He insisted, however, that it was not imperialism alone that the Latin Americans feared. Relating his own experience in Puerto Cabello and Corinto, he maintained that Americans further contributed to this alienation by remaining aloof and by failing even to attempt to cultivate friendly relations. He admitted that the British were equally disdainful of the Latin Americans but were not held in similar con- tempt. Such an attitude, he reasoned, resulted from the fact that Latin Amer- icans were considered colored in the United States and were occasionally the object of discrimination when visiting this country, which they greatly resented. The Latin American press was keenly sensitive to the color question and the manifestations of “Jim Crowism,” and it devoted much space to lynchings and racial conflict in the United States. According to Johnson, citizens of Latin America greatly feared that the United States would export its race prejudice as a concomitant of economic penetration. He thus concluded that

Johnson to Grace Nail Johnson, 10 September, 16 November 1912, Johnson Papers. 21

uJohnson to H. H. Leonard, 28 May 1913, ibid.. uLevy. James We&n Johmon. p. 123; Johnson, Along This Way. p. 293.

Johnson to William Jennings Bryan. I September 1913, Johnson Papers; Johnson, Along 24

This Way. p. 293.


this country would never win the confidence necessary to realize the economic opportunities available in Latin America as long as racism pre~ailed.~’

Seeking to expose racism in the United States, Johnson identified what might be termed an early twentieth-century version of “The Ugly American.” In addition, he warned against the unfavorable diplomatic consequences of such racially based arrogance. Yet, this argument might have been little more than a reflection of his personal insights had he not landed a job in September 1914, writing editorials for the New York Age. This black paper had been founded some thirty years before by the noted journalist, T. Thomas Fortune, and even though some maintained that it came under the influence of Booker T. Washington after Fortune’s departure in 1907, it remained the best known black newspaper in New York and one of the most influential in the country.26 In his column entitled “Views and Reviews,” Johnson, who saw race papers as “organs of propaganda,” helped for nine years to shape the opinion of the black public. Because of his experience, he directed considerably more attention to foreign affairs, especially to those relating to Latin America, than most of his fellow black journalists. As a result, his readers had ample opportunity to learn of the detrimental effects of racism on U.S. policies abroad.”

In his column, Johnson took a decidedly hostile position toward the Wilson administration, regularly presenting arguments tying foreign relations in Latin America to race discrimination in the United States. He made one of his strongest statements in an editorial of 31 December 1914, entitled “Why Latin America Dislikes the United States.” Building on the argument originally developed in a manuscript of the same title in September 1913, he introduced his “Ugly American” concept. He began by pointing out that Latin Americans were not considered white and were consequently treated as “niggers” while traveling in the United States. In response many returned home and com- plained to others of their humiliation. Therefore, he concluded, Latin Amer- icans feared that increased U.S. influence would lead to the exportation of the color line and make them the objects of this same discrimination in their own countries.** To substantiate this contention, he recalled examples of the

u“Why Latin America Dislikes the United States,” 30 September 1913, Johnson Papers. Brenda Gayle Plummer, in her dissertation “Black and White in the Caribbean: Haitian-American Relations, 1902-1934” (Ph.D. diss., Come11 University, 1981), pp. 24-27, provides an excellent analysis of these same observations.

%mma Lou Thomtnuugh, T. Thomas Fortune: Militant Journalist (Chicago, 1972), p. 343, ftn. 34, Levy, J a m s Weldon Johnson. pp. 151-52.

”Eisenberg, “Johnson and the National Association,” pp. 56, 64. %*Why Latin America Dislikes the United States,” New York Age, 31 December 1914,

p. 4. It is interesting to note that others held a similar opinion of the U.S. attitude toward Latin Americans, for the French charge d‘affaires in Mexico reported to his government ‘‘that it must be said that the Americans tend to consider themselves here not only in their own country but in a conquered country. Instead of mating Mexico as a free and sovereign country the Americans consider it as a country of negroes and inferior beings; as a result, there is constant disagreement between them and the Mexican authorities.” Quoted in Friedrich Katz, The Secret Wur in Mexico: Europe, The United Stares and the Mexican Revolution (Chicago, 19811, p. 493.


people of Panama, Cuba, and Puerto Rico being “Jim Crowed by American soldiers serving in those countries.29 “It is idle,” he added, “for the United States to dream that, either through the Monroe Doctrine which is sometimes spoken of more disparagingly in South America than in Europe or through diplomacy, or the Bureau of the American Republics, or efforts for closer trade relations, it will win absolute confidence and goodwill of the Latin American people so long as there is in this country a Negro problem.’” Over the years, numerous editorials either restated or r e f e r r e d to this same arg~ment.~’

Much of Johnson’s attention was directed at the State Department’s handling of Mexico and Haiti. This was especially the case in 1916 when Johnson thought he had a chance to be appointed U.S. minister to Haiti if Republican Charles Evans Hughes we^ elected to the presidency.” He believed he could make political points for Hughes by attacking Wilson’s policy in the two countries. Two years earlier he had attacked Wilson’s decision to “butt in” to force President Victoriano Huerta from office, insisting that the general was one of the few men strong enough to bring order to Mexi~o.’~ With the unchecked actions of Francisco “Pancho” Villa, Johnson in 1916 seized the opportunity to attack the administration and called for a more aggressive response both on the diplomatic and military fronts. The calamity of the Negro Tenth Cavalry at Carrizal, which resulted in twelve soldiers killed and ten wounded, especially intensified his attack on Wilson both for the failure of his diplomatic efforts and for the ineffective military incursion under Gen. John J. Pershing.”

The presence of U.S. troops in Haiti since July 1915 furnished Johnson the occasion to compare the administration’s treatment of the two countries. At the outset, he had conceded that U.S. intervention might be necessary in Haiti, but he nevertheless insisted that that country’s unstable political condition was indigenous to Latin America and not a reflection of Haiti’s innate

s‘’”he United States in Latin America,” N e w York Age, 3 April 1915, p. 4. y*‘Why Latin America Dislikes the United States.” New York Age, 31 December 1915,

”‘The United States in Latin America,”New York Age. 3 April 1915, p. 4;“The A.B.C. Peace Pacts,” New York Age, 27 May 1915, p. 4; “Along the Tropic Line,” New York Age, I I May 1916, p. 4;‘The Real Cause,”New York Age. 29 June 1916, p. 4; “The Monroe Doctrine in Latin America,” New York Age, 5 April 1919, p. 4; “As Others See Us,” New York Age. 23 August 1919, p. 4; “Latin American Prolest,” New York Age, 30 August 1919, p. 4.

W. E. B. Du Bois to Johnson, 2 April 1916, Johnson to Grace Nail Johnson, 12 June 1916. and Grace Nail Johnson to Johnson, 13 July 1916, Johnson Papers; Levy, J m s Weldon Johnson. p. 179.

33“The Mexican Situation,” New York Age. 21 January 1915. p. 4; “General Huerta,” New York Age. 20 January 1916, p. 4; ‘The Mexican Situation,” New York Age, 16 March 1915, p. 4.

Aside From the Point,” New York Age. 30 March 1916, p. 4; “Some More Foolish- ness,” New York Age. 18 June 1916. p. 4; “Somebody Blundered,” New York Age. 29 June 1916, p. 4; “Preparedness,” New York Age. 29 June 1916, p. 4; “An Incident,” New York Age, 29 June 1916, p. 4; “An Indictment,” New York Age, 20 July 1916, p. 4; “Preferencialmente.” New York Age, 21 September 1916. p. 4.

p. 4.

32

%..


incapacity to govern itself. He admitted that the political situation was deplor- able but hoped that a “sympathetic co-operation from the United States” would preserve the Haitians’ independence and allow them in time to demonstrate to the world their “capacity for self-government and self-improvement .”35 As the occupation began to appear to be more and more permanent, however, Johnson became somewhat ambivalent, telling his readers that as Negroes they should condemn the action.36 Specifically, he questioned the occupation both in terms of its merits and in terms of its harshness relative to the administration’s handling of Mexico. Johnson pointed out that while Mexico was chaotic, with numerous American citizens losing their lives and property, Haiti, on the contrary, had always protected American lives and met its financial re~ponsibilities.~’ In light of the obvious disparity in disorder in the two countries, he queried the State Department why it continued to point to the Haitian condition as “proof positive of the inferiority of Negroes.”38

As might be expected, Johnson directed much of his attention toward Europe following the U.S. entry into World War I. The debate at the peace conference over the relationship of Article X of the League of Nations Cov- enant to the Monroe Doctrine, however, provided him the occasion to resume commentary on Latin America. In these postwar observations, he reflected the growing national sensitivity to imperialist ventures. According to Johnson, most Latin Americans saw the Monroe Doctrine not as protection against Europe but as authorization for U.S. intervention. In his words, most Latin Americans “would rather take the chance of defending their independence against Europe, since that would mean their independence of the United States.”39 The race riots of the Red Summer of 1919, likewise, redirected Johnson’s attention to this side of the Atlantic. Again, he resurrected his “Ugly American” theory reminding readers of the adverse effects of racism at home on relationships with the countries to the ~ o u t h . ~ In an especially strong statement, he printed adverse Latin American press commentary on race conditions in the United States to substantiate his po~ition.~’

Johnson’s role relative to U.S. foreign policy and Latin America again changed in 1920 when, as executive secretary of the NAACP, he undertook a campaign to bring about US . withdrawal and the restoration of Haitian

Once More Haiti,” New York Age, 29 October 1914, p. 4; “Haiti,” New York Age, 15 August 1915, p. 4; ‘The U.S. and Haiti,”New York Age, 26 August 1915, p. 4; “The Haitian Situation,” New York Age, 2 September 1915, p. 4; “Interest in Haiti and Its People,” New York Age, 9 September 1915, p. 4.

35“

*‘The Haitian Situation,” New York Age. 12 July 1915, p. 4. 37‘‘A Poor Rule,” New York Age, 20 January 1916, p. 4; “Haiti and Mexico,” New York

Age, 16 March 1916, p. 4; “Words Vs. Acts,” New York Age. 8 June 1916, p. 4; “In Mexico,” New York Age, 29 May 1920, p. 4.

”‘The Mexican Situation,” New York Age, 21 January 1915, p. 4; “A Poor Rule,” New York Age, 20 January 1916, p. 4. Also see Johnson, Along This Way, p. 344.

”‘The MOM* Doctrine in Latin America,” New York Age, 5 April 1919, p. 4. “‘As Others See Us,” New York Age, 23 August 1919, p. 4. ““Latin American Protest,” New York Age, 30 August 1919, p. 4.


independen~e.~' Primarily at the instigation of board member and editor of The Norion, Oswald Garrison Villard, the association originally considered such an action as early as 1915." Actual authorization for the undertaking was voted in 1918, but the war and postwar events delayed any action.& In early 1920, the board selected Johnson to direct the effort instead of one of its own members, W. E. B. Du Bois, because it considered the secretary to be an expert on Latin America.45

Johnson's role in foreign relations had changed from that of interested Broadway lyricist to consular service participant and then to editorial com- mentator and active lobbyist. In this last capacity, he functioned as a political activist concerned primarily with the interests of people of color. U.S. imperialism per se rather than the unfavorable economic consequences of international racist arrogance became the primary object of his interest. Demonstrating characteristically sound insight, Johnson provided the following rationale for the NAACP initiative in Haiti:

Those of us in the United States, who are interested in the question of the Negro should be particularly interested in the fate of Haiti. It is in Haiti that the Negro has his one best chance of demonstrating and proving that he is capable of the highest self-development. If Haitian independence is sacrificed, and there is grave danger that it will be, this one best chance will be lost. If there is a change in political administration of the United States there is lielihood that pressure can be brought which will ameliorate, if not entirely change conditions in the Haitian Republic. It is an object worth the effort."

Johnson's rationale demonstrated a special sensitivity to the domestic consequences of international affairs. To him it was important that Haiti be afforded the opportunity to prove something to white southerners-that the white man had no burden to bear abroad and thus none to assume in Mississippi or elsewhere in the South.

Johnson, along with the NAACP director of publicity, Herbert Selig- mann, initiated the operation with a fact-finding trip to Haiti in the spring of 1920. While there both men talked with a number of important officials including former Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs Louis Borno, Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs H. Pauleus Sanon, former Secretary of the Haitian

42J0hnson joined the NAACP as field secretary in December 1916. In October 1920, he became the first black executive secretary of the organization. Levy, J m s Wekfon Johnson, p. 187; Johnson, Along This Way, p. 358.

"0. G . Villard to Robert Lansing, 3 September 1915, Subject File, 191(L1940, Latin America-Haiti, Series C, Group 1, NAACP Papers, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress (hexdm cited as Subject Fde, Haiti, NAACP pape7s). Report of the board of directors, 1 1 October 1915, Board of Dinctors (File), Series A. Group 1, NAACP Papers (hereafter cited as Board of Directors Reports, NAACP Papers).

"8 March 1920. B d of Directors Reports, NAACP Papers. UKcllogg, NAACP, p. 286.

1920, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP Papers. Special report of the field secretary on his visit to Haiti, 25 September-3 November 16


Legation in Washington Henri Price-Mars, and the most active opponent of the occupation, Georges Sylvain. In addition, Johnson toured the country seeking to familiarize himself with conditions in general as well as with the various strata of Haitian s~ciety.~’

Upon his return from Haiti, Johnson published a series of articles in The Nation. exposing Wilson administration policies over the previous five years. He attacked the harshness of an intervention in which over 3,000 Haitians had been killed by U.S. Marines, and he explained that it was much worse than that in Mexico because of the exportation of racial prejudice by numerous southern-born officials and the Marines.48 He also indicted the exploitative role of the National City Bank of New York which had established a monopoly over Haitian finances.49 Johnson observed that the excuse provided for intervention by the administration was a mere subterfuge; the real purpose was to provide for “deserving Democrats” and the National City Barkso He concluded that Wilson’s actions in Haiti not only contradicted the president’s oft-proclaimed sympathies for the rights and liberties of small nations, but also violated the American tradition of fair play, justice, and aid to the ~ppressed.~’

In order to draw public attention to Haiti, Johnson managed a successful publicity campaign through the fall of 1920. Initially, this involved circulating his articles from The Nation to influential senatorss2 and to newspapers as well as using the NAACP system of branches to disseminate the inf~rrnation.~~ In addition, he used his contacts with Republican national headquarters in New York and the Republican National Committee to introduce the issue into the presidential campaign of 1920.54 Specifically, this involved sending those same Nation articles which the NAACP had printed to Republican candidate

“Johnson to Grace Nail Johnson, 29 March, 4 April 1920, Johnson Papers; Johnson, Along This Way, pp. 346-53; Hans Schmidt, The United States Occupation of Haiti (New Brunswick, 1971). p. 120.

““Self-Determining Haiti, I: The American Occupation,” The Nation 3 (28 August 1920): 238; “Self-Determining Haiti, 11: What the United States Has Accomplished,” The Nation 3 (4 September 1920): 265-67. Also see Rayford W. Logan, “James Weldon Johnson and Haiti,” Phylon 32 (Winter 1972): 396-402.

““Self-Determining Haiti, 111: Government Of, By and For the National City Bank,” The Nation 3 ( I 1 September 1920): 347.

m‘Self-Determining Haiti, IV: The Haitian People,” The Nation 3 (25 September 1920): 347.

”bid. 5ZJohnson to Senator Medill McCormick, 3 September 1920, Johnson to Senator Henry

Cabot Lodge, 8 September 1920, and Jdurson to Senator Arthur Capper, 3 Sepember, 10 October 1920, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP Papers.

53Memorandum from association office to presidents and secretaries of branches, 28 July 1920, Subject File, Haiti, NAACPPapers; Johnson to Mooriield Storey, 18 August 1920, Admin- istrative File, Special Correspondence, 1912-1939, Series C, Group I, NAACP Papers.

yJohnson to Stmy, 18 August 1920, Administrative File, Special Conespondence, NAACP Papers; Johnson to Gen. Coleman DuPont, 15 September 1920, and Johnson to Scon C. Bone, 20 September 1920, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP Papers.


Warren G. Harding.” The disclosures by Democratic vice-presidential candidate Franklin D. Roosevelt that he had written Haiti’s constitution aroused Harding’s interest in Johnson’s In early September, Johnson visited the senator in Marion, Ohio. There he presented Harding with information about the pretense used by the Wilson administration to occupy Haiti, the exploitative role of the National City Bank, and the various atrocities com- mitted by the Marines against unarmed Haitians. He also warned Harding that the investigation of Marine conduct in Haiti being conducted by Adm. Harry S. Knapp and Marine Maj. Gen. John A. Lejeune for Secretary of the Navy Josephus Daniels would likely be nothing more than a whitewash.” Harding apparently was persuaded, for he promptly attacked the administration’s handling of Haiti.58

Harding’s decision to make Haiti a campaign issue focused extensive national press attention on the black republic. In a letter to Mary White Ovington, well-known social activist and chairman of the NAACP board of directors, Johnson commented that the matter had moved along faster than anticipated and noted with some satisfaction that “the whole city is talking about the exposure regarding the National City Bank.”59 He added that this “will result in one of the biggest things that the Association has ever done.”6o

Experiencing some success, Johnson stepped up his appeal. He provided Harding additional information and arguments while exhorting him to continue the attack on the treatment of Haiti, one of the Democrats’ vulnerable points.6’ He also worked through the NAACP’s national office and its branches, which printed his articles in pamphlet form and circulated them widely.62 Ovington pointed out in her appeal for support from the branches that the national concern for Haiti was the direct product of the labors of NAACP secretary James Weldon Johnson.63 Much of this additional attention might be attributed to Johnson’s increasing use of the press. Through the national office, Johnson, along with his able assistant, Walter White, regularly issued releases on the state of Haitian affairs. They relied primarily upon the Negro newspapers for

Johnson to Senator Warren G. Harding, 28 August 1920, Administrative File, Special Comspondence, NAACP Papers; Johnson to Harding, 2 September 1920, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP Papers.

%New York Times, 29 August 1920, p. I ; ‘’The Honorable Franklin D. Roosevelt,”New York Age, 18 September 1920, p. 4.

Executive secretary report to the board of directors, 13 September 1920, Board of Directors Reports, NAACP Papers; Johnson, Along This Way, pp. 358-60.

New York Times. 29 August 1920, p. I; New York Times, 18 September 1920, p. 14; New York Times, 19 September 1920, p. 18. Also see Johnson, Along This Way, p. 359.

Johnson to Mary White Ovington, 21 September 1920, Johnson Papers.

5s

n

5a

59

?bid. The New York Times of 21 September 1920, p. 16 canied both Johnson’s attack and Secretary of State Bainbridge Colby’s defense of the Wilson administration’s Haitian policy.

“’Johnson to Harding. 21 and 22 September, 14, 18, and 27 October 1920 and telegram, 14 October 1920, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP Papers.

Executive secretary report to the board of directors, 1 I October, 8 November 1920, Board of Dmtors Reporls, NAACP Papers. For other records of communications with the branches see comspondence of 13. 14, and 20 October 1920, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP.

=Ovington to branches, 26 October 1920, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP Papers.

67.

JAMES WELDON JOHNSON 34 1

their publicity, but they also regularly submitted copy to both the Associated and United presses as well as to the New York dailies.@ On one occasion, White even forwarded Johnson’s articles to English newspapers indicating that in light of U.S. criticism of British actions in Ireland, they might be interested in the conduct of the State Department in Haiti.65

Although Harding acknowledged that the Haitian question had contributed to his successful campaign,& Johnson realized, nonetheless, that this could mean little without a congressional investigation of the occupation of Haiti. Consequently, he immediately began to direct his energies toward that end. First, he sought to impugn through editorial commentary in the Age6’ and numerous press releases the inquiries conducted by the navy.68 Addi- tionally, he attempted through correspondence to arouse the Haitians themselves to lay their cause before the American He had been in contact with a number of prominent Haitians since his return, urging them to “stand firm” and to pull together to represent their interest^.^' He stated to Price- Mars: “The elections are over, the Republican Party is victorious, this gives Haiti a great opportunity, but the Haitians themselves must take advantage of it.’’71 Johnson apparently had some success for he reported in a NAACP board meeting in December 1920 that he had received a resolution adopted

”Press releases, “With Appointment of Naval Board of Investigation Some Results,” 16 October 1920, “Say Admiral Knapp Falsifies Haitian Facts,” 21 October 1920, “Charge Navy Department With Keeping Haiti Out of the Cox Campaign,” 26 October 1920, and Walter White to editors of Negro newspapers, 22 September 1920, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP Papers.

=White to Ivor Brown, editor of the Mmchesrer Guardian, 3 November 1920, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP Papers. White also sent this letter to numerous other newspapers in England and Ireland, as well as to George Bernard Shaw.

“Report of secretary to board of dmtors, 15 January 1921, Administrative File, Special Correspondence, 1912-1939, NAACP Papers.

““Haiti in the News,” New York Age, 20 November 1920, p. 4; “Evasive Humbug,” New York Age, 25 December 1920, p. 4; “The Veriest Sort of Rot,” New York Age, 15 January 1921, p. 4.

“Press releases, “Ask Daniels to Publish Protest from Haitians,” 20 December 1920; “Call May Report on Haiti Evasive Humbug,” 20 December 1920; “U.S. Marine Confesses Atrocities in San Domingo,” 30 December 1920; “Charge Navy With Misinforming Public,’’ 2 January 1921. For additional information on these activities see Johnson’s report to the board of directors, 13 December 1920, Board of Directors Reports, NAACP Papers. Also see Johnson to Harding, 21 December 1920, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP Papers. For further information on Johnson’s CommUnicatiDn with Harding, see Johnson’s report of meting with Harding, 15 Janua~y 1921, and Johnson to Storey, 21 February 1921, Administrative File, Special Correspondence, NAACP Papers.

-Johnson to Dr. Arthur C. Holly, 22 December 1920, Johnson Papers; Johnson to Storey, 22 August 1920, and Johnson to M. Georges Sylvain and Holly, 31 January 1921, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP Papers; Johnson to Storey, 12 February 1921, Administrative File, Special Cor- respondence, NAACP Papers. Also see Johnson’s report to the board of directors, 14 March 1921, Board of Directors Reports, NAACP Papers.

mJohnson to Storey, 22 August 1920, and Johnson to Price-Mars, 5 November 1920, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP Papers; Johnson to M. Victor Delbeau, M. Alfred Henriquez, M. Chrysostome Rosemond, and M. Louis Bomo, 5 November 1920, and Johnson to Rosemond and Holly, 22 December 1920, Johnson Papers.

”Johnson to Price-Mars, 5 November 1920, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP Papers.


and signed by fifty-five prominent Haitians pledging united action to end U.S.

In association with the managing editor of The Nation, Ernest Gruening, specific efforts were also made to establish an organization to represent Haitian interests in the United States. The Haitians sent Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs Sanon and the former president of the Haitian Senate, Stenio Vincent, to work with the Haitian minister in the United States to organize the Patriotic Union to represent their intere~ts . ’~ Johnson labored strenuously to assist the group. He arranged for them to have the legal services of well-known attorneys Moorfield Storey and Arthur B. Spingarn, as well as provided introductions to numerous political officials and others with publicity potential such as H. L. Mencken, Heywood Broun, A. Philip Randolph, and Eugene O’Neill.74 In response to Johnson’s prodding, the Patriotic Union composed a statement of facts entitled “Memoir on the Political, Economic and Financial Conditions Existing in the Republic of Haiti under American Occupation” for submission to the president, State Department, and Congress. Johnson further attempted to secure publication of the document in various newspapers and The New York Times alone printed five articles relating to the memoir and the ensuing debate over its

Johnson’s extensive involvement continued throughout the spring and summer of 192 1. He again talked with Harding, sought strenuously but unsuc- cessfully to enlist the support of Secretary of State Charles Evans Hughes, and launched a campaign to win popular support for Haiti by familiarizing the public with the black nation’s contributions to Sim6n Bolivar and the independence movement in South America. In addition, he used the NAACP national convention to publicize the Haitian cause f~rther.’~

”Report of the secretary to the board of directors, 13 December 1920, Board of Directors Reports, NAACP Papers.

Report of the secretary to the board of directors, 11 October 1920, Board of Directors Reports. NAACP Papers; minutes of meeting of board of directors, February 1921, reports of the secretary of the NAACP to the board of directors, 1915-1964, Arthur Barnett Spingam Papers. Library of Congress, Manuscript Division; Johnson to Storey, 21 February 1921, Admin- istrative File, Special Correspondence, NAACP Papers.

“Johnson to Storey, 21 February 1921, Administrative File, Special Correspondence, NAACP Papers; report of the secretary to the board of directors, 14 March 1921, Board of Directors Reports, NAACP Papers; Johnson to H. L. Mencken, Heywood Broun, A. Philip Randolph, and Eugene O’Neill, 24 February 1921, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP Papers.

Johnson to Charles R. Miller ( N e w York Times), Simeon Strunsky (Evening Post), and Allen Dawson (New York Tribune), 6 May 1921, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP Papers.

7h’Haitian Delegates Want U.S. To Get Out.” 9 May 1921, p. 17, “Denby Denounces Charges by Haitians,” 10 May 1921. p. 3; editorial, ‘The Haitian Memorial,” 12 May 1921, p. 16, “Haitian Charges,” 13 May 1921, p. 14, and “Conditions in Haiti,” 12 May 1921, p. 14, all in New York Times.

Reporrs of the secretary to the board of directors, 11 April 1921, Board of Directors Reports, NAACP Papers; Johnson to M. B. Lknache, 19 April 1921, and 0. G. Villard, 14 May 1921, Johnson Papers; Johnson to Storey, 18 March 1921, and Storey to Charles E. Hughes, 6 June 1921, Administrative File, Special Correspondence. NAACP Papers; Johnson to editors of the New York Times and New York World, 14 May 1921, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP Papers;

73

75

n


Aided by a growing postwar opposition to imperialism, Johnson’s publicity campaign in association with the continuing efforts of The Nation helped to mobilize public opposition against the “Big Stick” in the Caribbean, a change that did not go unnoticed in C~ngress.’~ At the instigation of Medill McCormick (R-ILL), the Senate finally undertook an investigation. A select committee of five members in September began to look into the occupation and administration of both Santo Domingo and Haiti. It is significant that Johnson had been in contact with McConnick and had helped secure the senator’s support for reform in Haiti.79

Both Johnson’s and the NAACP’s roles changed with the announcement of formal hearings in July 1921. In the aftermath of the Red Scare and amid the continued pervasiveness of racism, some must have questioned the advis- ability of a black man representing a black organization in presenting the case of a black nation before a white public. Consequently, Villard and Gruening organized and directed the appeal from that point.8o Johnson did not appear to resent the action and he continued to be active, but in a supporting role. He participated in organizing the Society for the Independence of Haiti and Santo Domingo which he served as vice-president. This body of U.S. and Haitian citizens worked in conjunction with the NAACP and the Patriotic Union to present the interests of the two small Caribbean nations to the country and more specifically to the Senate.*’ The NAACP’s secretary also continued to activate and coordinate the Haitians to represent their own interests more effectively at the Senate inquiries conducted in their own country.82

In December 1921, Johnson himself appeared before the Senate committee then meeting in Washington. He pointed to Haitian pride in their independence as a major cause for resentment against the military occupation.

“Haiti’s Part in Western Democracy,” New York Age, 28 May 1921, p. 4; Walter White to Pauleus Sanon, 18 March 1921, (speech) “Pan Africa, Haiti and American Imperialism,” 30 June 1921, Annual Conference File, Annual Correspondence Group I, Series C, NAACP Papers.

”John W. Blassingame, “The Press and American Intervention in Haiti and the Dominican Republic, 1904-1920,’’ Caribbean Studies 9 (July 1%9): 2743. For the information relating ‘specifically to Johnson, see pages 4143. Also see Schmidt, The United States Occupation of Haiti, pp. 120-21.

W.S., Congress, Senate, Senator McCormick introduces bill authorizing Senate inquiry into the occupation of Haiti and Santo Domingo, 67th Cong., 1st sess., 19 July 1921, S. Res. 112, in Congressional Record, vol. 61, pt. 44032, and pt. 6:4260-61, 4333. See also report of the secretary to the board of directors, 13 June 1921, Board of Directors Reports, NAACP Papers; and Johnson to McCormick, 13 June 1921, Johnson Papers.

89lohnson revealed this in several letters of 11 August 1921, in which he stated that Villard was “fronting the fight for Haiti.” Johnson to C. A. Burrows, 11 August 1921. Also see Johnson to Sanon, and Johnson to Perceval Thoby, 11 August 1921, Johnson Papers.

P“‘Memorandurn Re Conference on Haitian Situation,” 2 August 1921. Johnson to Thoby, 11 August 192 1, and pamphlet, Haiti-Santo Domingo Independence Society, 15 September 1921, Johnson Papers; report of the secretary to the board, August 1921, Board of Directors Reports, NAACP Papers; national office to branch secretaries, 7 October 1921, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP Papers.

Johnson toThoby and Johnson to Sanon, 1 I August 1921, and Johnson to M. Monsanto, 4 November 1921, Johnson Papers.

82


He also recalled his “Ugly American” argument directing attention to the negative consequences of the continued exportation of the color line. He proposed, finally, that the best tactic for the United States would be to establish promptly a Haitian national guard and to withdraw militarily. Although he made his opposition to economic imperialism well known, he recommended for purposes of effecting a smooth transition that the financial controls be

In these first years with the NAACP, Johnson experienced many dis- appointments. He had seen little come out of the organization’s efforts to defend the black troops in the Houston affair and to secure justice for the victims of the race riots at East St. Louis and during the Red Summer of 1919. So conditioned, Johnson expressed little surprise that the Senate committee recommended a reorganization rather than a termination of the occupation of Haiti. Moreover, Johnson by the spring of 1922 found himself immersed in a campaign to secure Senate approval of the Dyer Anti-Lynching Bill. He clearly set forth his position on both matters in a letter to White: “I do not wish to divide our forces between Haiti and the Dyer Anti-Lynching Bill to the extent of endangering the latter in any way.rr84 The foray into international relations led by Johnson provided an interesting episode, but most Afro-American leaders, himself included, believed that the NAACP would have to win its battles on the domestic front.

Nonetheless, Johnson was by background and by interests sensitive to foreign affairs, and he appears merely to have put Haiti on the back burner. Through press releases and his editorials in the Age, he continued to keep the issue alive. In an editorial of 16 August 1922, he questioned how Secretary of State Hughes could make a statement about his government’s sincere desire for the independence, sovereignty, and political integrity of Latin America in light of what had transpired in Haiti, Santo Domingo, and Ni~aragua.’~ After an inquiry about the actions of the Harding administration in Haiti from William H. Lewis of the Democratic National Committee, Johnson hoped he might be able to turn the tables on the Republicans and repeat his media blitz of 1920 in the presidential campaign of 1924.=

His disclosures of the continuing problems of U.S. occupation of Haiti had little influence on the outcome of the election, but his communications with the Haitians did agitate the State Department. Since his return from Haiti in 1920, he had maintained close contacts with a number of journalists there. These men were frequently the most outspoken critics of the occupation and the puppet Haitian government and thus regularly found themselves in jail.

gradually

US., Congress, Senate, “Inquiry into Occupation and Administration of Haiti and Santo Domingo,” 67th Cong.. 1st sess., 1921, S. Res. 112, U.S. Congressional Henrings 41st-73rd Congresses (1869-1934). 184.779-812. For the Johnson testimony, see pages 779-84.

83

Johnson to White, 15 February 1922, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP Papers. 84

u“Wods Versus Deeds,” New York Age, 16 August 1922, p. 4. =Johnson to Sylvain, 26 July 1923, Johnson to Pierre Hudicourt, 12 September 1922,

Johnson to (editor) New York Sun. 4 October 1924, and William H. Lewis (Democratic National Committee) to Johnson, 30 August 1924, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP Papers.


Johnson continued to take up their cause and responded to news of their condition with a series of press release^.^' These actions appear to have aroused the suspicions of local U.S. officials in regard to his motives and the nature of his involvement. Marine Col. John Russell, the highest-ranking official, reported to the secretary of state in a communication marked “strictly confidential” that Johnson was at least partially responsible for Haitian unrest in 1924. He charged that Johnson, Gruening, Villard, and “others of the Marcus Garvey group” sent information that withdrawal of the occupation forces was imminent and that Haitians should commence an active propaganda campaign to that effect.88 Johnson would probably have been flattered to have been considered an “outside agitator,” and certainly there is evidence that he consistently urged the Haitians to press for an end to occupation. He would have been dismayed, however, to have been considered a part of the “Marcus Garvey group,” which had been openly hostile both toward him and the NAACP.

There were few signs that Calvin Coolidge would change anything in Haiti, but Johnson continued to be hapeful, especially after William E. Borah (R-ID) became chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1924.89 Johnson secured from the antiimperialist Borah considerable sympathy and some verbal support, but he hoped for more. He persistently sought out opportunities to publicize the situation and he testified in February 1925, before a Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee, on behalf of a resolution introduced by Senator Edward F. Ladd (R-ND). This measure sought to prohibit government intervention to assist a citizen to collect debts in a foreign country.g0 Johnson’s testimony before the committee reflected the extent of his transformation as a political observer. Then a spokesman for his race and an avowed opponent of imperialism, he condemned a recent U.S. intervention to protect business interests in Nicaragua. He recalled that this was the same

Press releases, “Haitian Editor Jailed for Rotesting Against Forced Loan,” 28 July 1922, p. 4; “Navy Orders Investigation into Amst of Haitian Editor,” 29 March 1923, p. 4; “Mass Meeting of Rominent Haitians Rotests Against Imprisonment of Editors,” 21 May 1923, p. 4; “Bishop Reported Jailed in Haiti for Deploring Existing Conditions,” 19 October 1923, p. 4; “Haitian Editors Mistreated in Prison Is Charged by Their Associate,” 7 March 1924, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP Papers. Johnson also tried to work h u g h his friend and assistant secretary of the navy, Theodore Roosevelt, to find out what was happening in Haiti. Roosevelt to Johnson, 27 March, 26 April, 26 May 1923, and Johnson to Roosevelt, 16 May 1923, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP Papers.

=Col. John Russell to Secretary of State Kellogg (strictly confidential), 20 October 1924, US., Department of State, Records Relating to Internal Affairs of Haiti, 1910-1929, National Archives.

89Johnson to Sylvain, 23 January 1925, 27 February 1925, and W. E. Borah to Herbert 1. Seligmann, 6 December 1924, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP Papers; Seligmann to Borah, 12 January 1925, General Office File, 1907-1940, William E. Borah Papers, Manuscript Divi- sion, Library of Congress.

?hator E. F. Ladd of North Dakota introduced a bill to investigate using government resources to collect private debts in foreign countries. US., Congress, Senate, 68th Cong., 2d sess., 2 December 1924, Senate Concurrent Resolution 22, in Congressional Record, vol. 66, pt. 1:32.

87


motive used to justify an earlier intervention in that same country in 1912 when he was consular officer at Corinto.” He did not choose to recall, however, that he had initially supported the action in 1912, and through this selective use of memory, he was able to remain on safe ground while he echoed the sentiments of the growing opposition to “Big Stick” diplomacy.=

Although Johnson insisted he had not lost interest in the Haitian cause, he appeared aware that little could be done and that the United States appeared far more attuned to domestic difficulties. Therefore, he directed more of his attention in the late 1920s to such problems as the defense of the family of Detroit physician Ossian Sweet, who in the defense of their property had killed one of the mob and were being tried for murder.93 Although he continued to battle against Jim Crow legislation, he was tired, ill, and fifty-eight years old. As a result, he gratefully accepted a fellowship from the Rosenwald Fund in 1929 to rest, write, and travel. His choice of where to travel again revealed something about him, for he promptly accepted an invitation to attend the conference of the Institute of Pacific Relations in Kyoto, Japan. The visit afforded him frecluent opportunities again to interpret publicly the race question from the international perspective that he preferred.*

Johnson’s decision to resign from the secretaryship of the NAACP in December 1930 did not prevent him from continuing to be heard on foreign affairs. His successor, Walter White, regularly conferred with him on such issues, particularly after the NAACP again tried to accelerate U.S. withdrawal from Haiti in 1931. White’s approach might be termed “Johnsonian” for it included a fact-finding uip to Haiti, publication of articles, a media blitz, and the exploitation of political divisions by using influential allies. White frequently consulted with his mentor on such matters and even recommended Johnson as a candidate for minister to Haiti.95 Their last letters prior to Johnson’s death in 1938 were somewhat ironic, however. Instead of cele- brating victory in bringing about withdrawal, both frequently lamented that the new Haitian president, SteNo Vincent, whom they had supported, appeared only interested in establishing a dictatorship. In their eyes, this would prevent Haiti from refuting the racist myth that Negroes could not intelligently govern

9’% bill was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations and Johnson testified before a subcommittee conducting hearings in February 1925. R e s s release, “NAACP Sarretary Testifies on U.S. Imperialism Before SenateCOmmittee,”27 February 1925; Johnson to Alfred L. Lazarus (telegram), 30 April 1925, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP Papers; “Would Curb Omcials,” New York Times, 26 Fehary 1925, p. 3.

“Johnson lo Grace Nail Johnson, 10 September, 5 October 1912, Johnson Papers. 93Levy, James Weldon Johnson. pp. 282-84. %Johnson, Along This Way. pp. 393-98. While on the trip, Johnson had a number of

opponunities to present his arguments on mntters of race and foreign relations. Address, San Francisco Chamber of Commerce. 27 November 1929. Johnson Papers.

pswhitc to Johnson, 19 April, 30 June 1932. and Walter White memorandum, 20 June 1932, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP Papers. For white’s efforts to secure the ministry for Johnson, see White to Dantes Bellegartie, I5 July, 30 October 1931, 19 April 1932, White to Ernest Gruening, 21 July 1931, and White to Herbert Hoover, 28 June 1932, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP Papers.

JAMES WLDON JOHNSON 341

themselves. They suspected that they had lost what Johnson had earlier called “that one best chance” to prove themselves.%

Because of his sensitivity to the international dimension of race relations, James Weldon Johnson understood better than virtually any of his fellow black leaders the changing relationship between imperialism and racism. Spe- cifically, he recognized that the accommodationist racists of the Progressive Era used imperialist arguments, such as the “white man’s burden,” to justify their paternalistic practices throughout the South. Northern acceptance of these rationalizations, in Johnson’s mind, made this a national problem contributing to a widespread acceptance of the southern approach to race problems. Con- sequently, his struggle against imperialism in Latin America constituted nothing less than a struggle against “Jim Crowism” in the United States.

%te to Johnson, 8 May 1934, 1 April 1938, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP Papers. For other corrwpondence involving Johnson on the matter, see Roger Baldwin to the NAACP national office, 28 December 1938, Subject File, Haiti, NAACP Papers.

Documents

Black Perspective on Big Stick Diplomacy--Oct 1984 Vol 8 No 4