Untitled - The Filson Historical Society

OHIOVALLEYHISTORYVolume 4, lNumber 1, Spring 2004A Journal of the History and Culture of the Ohio Valley andthe Upper South, published in Cincinnati,Ohio, and Louisville,Kentucky, by Cincinnati Museum Center and The FilsonHistorical Society,Inc.ContentsThis Terrible Conflict of the American People":The Civil War Letters of Thaddeus MinshallLisa Brady3Beneath the Golden Stairs":Gender,Unionization,and Mobilization in World War II West VirginiaKevin Barksdale21The Gateway to the South":Regional Identity andthe Louisville Civil Rights MovementTracy K'Meyer43Cover:Joseph HenrySharp 1859-1953), (Fountain SquarePantomime,1892,oil on canvas, 40 x60 in. (101. 6 x 152.3cm) Ṭhe Edwinand Virginia IrwinMemorial and Giftof tbe CAM DocentOrganization incelebration of its 40tbAnniversary,2000.68.Cincinnati Art MuseumReview of "Fashion on the Ohio Frontier,1790-1840,"an Exhibition at Kent State University Museum.Kim GruenwaldReview of "The Cincinnati Wing: The Story of Artin the Queen City," a Permanent Exhibition at theCincinnati Art Museum.Paul BreidenbacbReviewsAnnouncements61647390SPRING 20041

ContributorsLISA M. BRADY is Assistant Professor of History at Boise StateUniversity. This article derives from research conducted with theassistance of a Filson Fellowship.KEVIN T. BARKSDAI. E is a doctoral candidate at West VirginiaUniversity. The author expresses his gratitude to Ronald L.Lewis,Ken Fones-Wolf,Jennifer Egolf,and the staff at theWest Virginia and Regional History Col]ection for their kindsuggestions and criticisms.TRACY K'MEYER is Associate Professor of History at theUniversity of Louisville. This article derives from a paperpresented at The Filson Institute Conference, Constructing "and Reconstructing a Region: 21 st-Century Approaches to theOhio Valley' s History," held at The Filson Historical Society inMay 2003.KIM M. GRUENWAl. D is Assistant Professor of History atKent State University. Her book,River of Enterprise:TbeCommercial Origins of Regional Identity in tbe Obio Valley,1790-1850 Bloomington: Indiana University Press,2003) wasreviewed in Obio Valley History.PAUI. A. BREIDENBACH received the Ph.D. in American Historyfrom the University of California at San Diego in 2001. Hisdissertation is entitled "Art Patronage and Class Identity in aBorder City: Cincinnati,1828-1872."He teaches at BethanySchool in Glendale, Ohio.OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

1This Terrible Conflict ofthe American People":Tbe Civil Wal'Letters of Thaddeus MinsballEDITED BY LISA M. BRADYThaddeus Minshall of Chillicothe,Ohio,ew of us would relish our private correspondence was no exceptic,being made n. Inpublic,anda letter tc,a friend in 1862,Minshall wrote: Esteemed " Frieiid,With much trepidationI bring inyself to the task ot writing you a letten This may seem a strangeintroduction fc, r aletter froiii afriend. But I ha\ ein view that terrible draiverinto which it may be dropped, and produced in judgement Isicl against me inafter years. The publicatic, n of his Civil War letters nearly a centur> and a halfafter their writing is notintelided to elicit judgment against Minshall, but ratherto serve a purpose that he himself might judge appropriate and worthwhile.Captain ThaddeusArmstrongMinshall of the33rd Ohio Vounteer Intantrywl-(} te eloquent,insightful, anddescriptive lettersthat were attimes profoundlyt. 1Aserious, at others,humor() usand light-hearted.Through theseletters, Minshallbequeathed to posterity tiot the means by which to judge him, but instead anopportunity to understand the complexity of a culture and society that madeterrible war upc,nitself.Captain Minshall served with the 33rd Ohio from September 1861 throughthe end of the Civil War,when he mustered out as acting colonel at the ageThe battle of Perryville,Kentticky,fought Oct(} ber8,1862. Sketcbed byMr.H. Moster. Harper' sWeekly.November1, 1862. Tbe FilsonHistorical SocietyThe editor wishes tc, thank I) r. Mai·k Wetheringt n. 1].nies Hc)linberg, ind . the staff of The FiIsc)! iMisti,rical Society fc, rtheir assist. 111ce. The description for the letters iii the ilinshall collectic, n canbe accessed at http:// www. filsonhistc,rical. orgSPRING 20043

crisis. We canalso identify acontinued influence of Romantic ideas of nature,views that would eventually develop into the modern notions of conservation,preservation, and environmentalism. Minsh,ill' s letters also firmly establishhim as a member of the rising middle class, with access tc,an extended andliberal education. The pc, litical thoughts he espoused in his letters demonstratean intimate familiarity with American and world history.political philosophy,and a wide variety of literary genres.' As with many of his peers, Minshall alsokept abreast of the period' s popular culture,detailing in one letter the recentperfc, rmance of a noted tightrope walker.-His breadth of subjects and hisimpressive graspof the subtleties of human nature and ideas make Nlinshall' sletters essential reading for any student of the Civil War. They illustrate thecomplexity of American society and provide crucial insight into "this terribleconflict of the Anierican people."'The editc, r has included here only his early letters, written while stillin his native Ohio Valley. As the war progressed, Minshall' s uniquephilosophical view became a casualty of the conflict,and thus his laterletters, while histc,rical]>· important, lack the literary appeal of tliose writtenwhile still green."' " Except where noted.the spelling, grammar, and emphiticniarkings irc . his wn. Notes point to additic,tial infc, rmation r(,to relatedsources of interest,and,where necessary, provide broader historical context orclarification. In his letters,Minshall expounded on the justness of the Union' scause and provided vivid pictures of the wages of war, at the sallic tillie, hecommented on the resiliency of nature against the onslaught of battle and onthe tenacity of hilman hope for a better, tiiore just future.Cli. Jefferson.Near Bacc, 11 Creek Ky.Jan 2,id 1861 11862]wDear Friend,Capt. McCoy arrived yesterday and paid me a visit tc,- day handingme your letter written on hristmas. (: He took dinner with me, producingHannah' sCake, which constituted the chief ornament of the board.It was well relished and highly complimented, I can tell you by all theparticipants. Tell Hannah she has placed me under renewed obligations,and if ever I return I shall surely make her another musbstick. I must notforget to tell you what a nice mess chest we have just got. I.ie, it. Waddlehad it sent by afriend from Cinlcinnatil.' It is one of the handiest thingsfor a migratory life that ever you seen. It contains a set of Britania Cups,of large white cups, saucers and plates, tin boxes for sugar,coffee teac a castor and numerous other articles of anecessary character,allneatly &ingeniously arranged within fc, r transportation."We are nowpretty well prepared for soldiering. It would do you good to see111elihow LUCcan adapt ourselves to circumstances. I begin almost to doubt thenecessity of w)men in the social orden But hold -1 guess I will retractSPRING 2004 5

THIS TERRIBLE CONFLICT OFTHE AMERICAN PEOPLE"that. It is women's smiles and sympathies (and pound cake) which nextto country encourages the sc,]dier in his arduous life.· It is seldom wesee a woman in this distracted region. Nothing but the grim Mole,ck ofWar Ic, oins up oti every side.+ The terrc,r stricken inhabitants have fledin every direction,their deserted houses licive been turned into H(, spitals.Around hearths where a year aqo happy families were wont to assemble inall the quiet and security of homecrowds the miserable soldier uponwhoiii disease has cast his shadow,silently musing of a home far awaywhere he could know no want.'4Of all the woebegone lookingobjects I ever seen a sick sc, ldier isthe most miserable. Hope seemsLtc, fc,rsake them, ind :no wonderamilitary Hospital is the mostloathsome place in creation. Imc ștly have my men taken care ofin their tents. They as a generalthitig do much better and recoverTbe Coilfederatedestructic),1of the BaccmC. reek Bridge 0,1tbeLouisville mid NashvilleRailroad li, teiii HartCounty.Kentticky.Frank Leslie' sIllustratedNewspaper, 1/, ./, titily25, 1861. Tlie FilsonHistorical Societymuch sooner than in Hospital.'·Ah! My Dear Friend thank your stars that you live in a state untrc, d bythe fc, ot of the invader. No one canform . inidea of tile evils of warbutone who has been in the vicinity of an army.How terrible is the retributionjustice. Have Iiot these pe() ple long "sinned with a high hand andoutstreched arm" against the rights of min? And is not their hour oftribulation now come? All I have to say is so mote it be. My heart isstealed to their niisery. We - had grand review day befc, re yesterday of allthe troops in this division by Gen. Buell] I the Department Commander.Final sentence fragment omitted.1Letter fragmetit. no date Ilikely a contimiatic) 11 of lailitary 1,1862.letter].1 received from tile Squire by Capt McCoy a most amusing letter. Hetells me Hedge has broke out iii a new place. Has been all the way toPennsylvania with the running ge. irs of 1.and with whom he is cooperatiiig to bring about abroken down Catholic Priestclose to the war.That he says the sword never did do ally thing to benefit society andnever will. Well iic,w I am disposed to deal fairly with my Old Friend.I know him 111 his anc] eccenti icities and kii (,tu that beneath vorld ofa ,oddities is as genuine a heart as ever beat in (1 nian. But he will fly off intangents from the general mode of thinking. I will not quarrel with liimabout the policy of nonresistance. But I wotild like t() ask him if afterFt Sumpter Isicl was fired into our nitioiial flat;tranipled underfocvt and6OHIOVALLEY HISTORY

honor stained by the rebel ingrates of the south, he honestly believesany other alternative was left us as a people but to draw the sword andswear the insultshould be wiped o,it and the rebellion put dorvn:»Doeshe believe a peace policy would have saved our hoines in the north fromthe horrors of a southern invasic, n. And does he know b, it at this dayhad such a policy beeti persued, the beaultilful valley of the Scioto mightbe suffering all the outrages of Southern vandalism. I wish him to callto mind the incident of oui last inecting wheii he took ille 11>'the h.indas I was about to leive and said, Thad " I canl'It go with > ou - I u·ishI could -but remember here is where you will always find sympathy.How that encouraged nie, and as I turned and slowly walked away fromhis comfortable little cotage, I can't but remember how the man wasovercome b> the feelings of nature, and I wept.That last intervien· hasencouraged nie in man>·an hour of hardship and privation, yes many atime as I have lain down upon the wet ground,with but a blanket to coverme in a pitaless rain, tired and hungary [sicl. Those words have come tome, cheery with encouragement iii " me rou shall always fitid synipath>:But while I cherish the man I must break with his opinions. I subscribeto this "Whosoever draweth the sword shall perish by the sword."TheSouth has niade war upon our cherished institutions, and rot the ninicin infamy atid forgetfulness that will not rally to their defense. Theywere the price of blood and treasure, they are worth the priceim' time.I take up the refrain of the immortal Henry, Give " me liberty or give medeath. i.1 know you may say this is splendid talk,but I am read> any dayto back it up with deeds. I have counted the cost, and what is the life ofone man, oh, of a million to the World' s progress or its brightest jewelscivil liberty and self ḡovernment. Who that is a manwould not rathersee our loved America stink by an earthquake, than let it become a landof despotism. I always did admire the self abnegation of the citizens dMoscow,who burnt their city rather than submit to an invader.'1 todaywould rather see every city in the land laid waste in ashes than oerrunby the myrmidony"of the Southern rebellion. What in the nameof Goddo the people in the North mean? Are they so purblind as not to seethe tendency of things? Can they not see the sequence of yielding to thedemands of the South? Is this a mere contest between two sections. Farbe it. Far be it. I have read history with too much care to be deceivedmyself. It is a renewal of the Old contest between liberty and absolutepower. See how monarchists the world over have chuckled with delightat what they are pleased to call our " domestic troubles."How promptEngland is -monarchical England fc, r her genuine republicans are withus in sympathy - to seize on any thing for the purpose of embarrassingus. Mason &Slidell 11have been released. "But this only whets her appetitefor adifficulty with us. Rumor says she now contests our right toSPRING 2004

THIS TERRIBLE CONFLICT OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE"blockade with stone the Southern ports to - do as weplease witb wbatbelongs to us. If this be so I do sincerely hope our government will notdelay a moment in recalling our ministers and dismissing hers from ourcapitol and promptly take up the quarrel so insolently provoked and appealingas our fathers to the God of Battle fight anew the cause of 76. Butprobably I am manitesting too much feeling on this to suit a woman and Imay be infatuated, yet I believe 1 am as same as I ever was.' Be this as itmay as it is getting late I must close. I am going to Louisiana tomorrowon the cars on business for the Regt connected with this months musterand shall mail at that place. I wrote you last Christmas Eve a letter whichI suppose has reached you before this. Tell Hedge my opinions and givehim my kindest wishes. Tell Eddie I shall surely attend to nashing myteeth for his sake,but I want him to grow up a patriot. Jennie that themittens are most sensible,but not to give one to Ed unless he is a Secesh.Jona. the blanket is just the thing. Hannah well I have spoken of thecake.'+With my best wishes for all of you and the Doctor who I supposeis too busy to write I am truly yours,Respt,Tbad A. Minsball 33d OVUSA.Bacon Creek Ky,Febry 9tb 1862Dear Friend:The Rev. Capt. Byers goes home tomorrow and I improve 1[?the opportunityof sending you a few lines by him. It is Sunday and a fine daytoo the - sun shining brightly,though rather cold. Sunshine is so seldomin this region ṉotwithstanding it belongs to the "Sunny South"thatsuch a day is regard as a great treat by the soldiers. We received the newsyesterday of the capture of Ft. Henry." Capt Byers at the close of EveningParade last evening proposed three cheers for the Gun Boats which weregiven with a most lusty vociferousness. We expect to move in afew days.Col Sill directed us this morning to get every thing needed for the menin the way of pants shoes c & as it might be the last opportunity to do sofor some time as he thought we would move in the course of the week.The men are in good spirits and anxious to make strike. The numberaof available men in our regiment is small, from the amount of sicknessthat has prevailed;but what there are, I believe aseffective as any in theDivision.1- I know this is the opinion of our Col, now acting Brigadier,and we have his assurance that the 33d shall have a post of honor. I rec' da quite interesting letter from the Squire a few days ago. Give him mythanks and tell him I will answer it in a few days,unless we should move asbefore mentioned and then he will have to wait until I get an opportunity.I answered a few days ago the letter,I received enclosed with yourlastfrom Fred Hedge. I donl'It know how he will receive it but I wrote him8OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

in good faith. 1seen Capt McCoylast week. He iswell. The Squiretells methat hethinks the inatter"unalterable,"fixed betweenhim and Kate.Does any one object?I donl'It seewhy they should.Hasn' t he shownhimselfa trueAnd whatnian?VA11-lore can atruewoman want? 8-Don[' It fret aboutboring me withb /1' Il'j·'·. 1· '.11 1,your letters. I canassure youthat the>qi,· e me the greatest delight. I wrote .]ennie sonictime ago, but have not >' et received an answer. I hope she will not forgetto do so. Her letters are written with such good tastlel Ilike to readthem unusually well. And Hannah she might write and give me a fewideas from her extensive culinary experience. 1 have often wonderedif her ideas of heaven didn' t have a smack of a well arranged kitchen.And Jonny,too, couldn' t he send a few lines as well as birds. The birdsare highly relished and thankfully received, I can assure him, but thenI can appreciate something else as well asbirds. Eddy I thank him foralways sending something when others write. Ann will as usual. Hopeyou are all well.YOUrS Sifteerely,TbadBattle of Chickaniauga,1 890 Ki, r.d-Alliscm print.Cm C

THIS TERRIBLE CONFLICT OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE"held,that record his past opinions and sentiments. My mind is very muchchanged in regard to Sumner as being a martyrer Isicl to fanaticism ratherthan a high moral conviction. But only see you have me on the record,in that drawer, as one of his most unqualified admirers. Douglas neverrose to a higher atitude of moral sublimity,than when he claimed in hisspeech in the Senate the privilege to change his opinions as often as hisconvictions were changed.But some may say this was insanity: I make110 point about this, it is only the principle tliat - evry one niust adniire.37.- 'rf-/ 1IAh the record is a terrible thingfor politicians and the reportersare making it more so.But again there are myterrible critics with yard stickin hand, ready to measure thePtĀr-*», Ske--»- * 0*----- 4 6 -***,ya 0

crowd that had assembled to witness the perforiiiance. He climbed upthe structure for his ascension within agility that attested the great physicalpowers of the m.in. and was soon followed by his agent; when aftersome adjustment of his .ittire. he t(, c)k his pole ind prepared t(, 1 the walk.As he placed his foot upc,11 the rope the most death like silence ensued.Every eye was steadfastly fixed upon him; and thousands of hearts beatwith tremulous solicitude for his success.After cautiously balancinghimself upon the rope. he took afew steps as if fc, r a trial,and then ranglibly along fc, r about Iii quarter of the distance,and stopping, he poisedhimself on the tip of his foot. and with the other extended backward,bent forward until he touched the rope with his pc, le. The attitude wasstriking and the suspense painful. But when he resumed his position,and seated himself as tc) rest upon the rope with the 11cl)alatice 11()ot afarmer onhis fence, ai,Idl waied his hand iii respectful recogilitioll tc)the crowd, the shout of applause that went up hin the street, the windowsand the housetc, ps made the welkin ring. After resting a momenthe resumed his position again, and ran along to the point it which therope ascended to the cupola. Here.again, he perfc,rmed the same feat,rested as befc, reand started for the steep ascent ot the ropc. - I-his wasdone cautioiisl> but with complete success. and when he reached theparapet, took off his Indiin plumes and wazed his hand to the crowd.another niight>·burst of applause went up. He rested here about tenminutes, surve> ing the cr, wd with the seeiniiig satisfaction ot an eagleperched upon, butting crag of some high mountain: and then started forwhat was the most diftictilt part of his perforniatice, the descent from thecupola. As he descended. slowly,and cautiously placing his feet on therope, the suspense was again painful.and a breathless silence awaited theissue: but he accomplished it with entire success; rested a 111(, lilent andagain ran alc, ng to the center of the rc,pe amid the shouts of the crowd,and stepping time to the music as he went.Here he perfori»ned the niost thn]Iing exp](, its. Fastenii» lg his balancepole and plumb to the rope, he turned over several times, and thenlet himself down to the rope that hung festooned from the main one.Here he turned over several times and catching either side in his hands,he stood up in the loop and turned over and vei- (, with such 1-apidity helooked like arevolving wheel. This done,he lillegible] himself hand overhand up to the walking rope,and rested for sonie time, for he seemedmuch exhausted;and then performed his last and most thrilling exploitstanding erect upon his head with his hands upon his pole fc, r a considerablespace. This was realilly terrific; his head resting on nothingbut aninch and a half rc,pe. his feet seeming tc,prop the blue sky andthe hard street 60 or 70 feet beneath him onwhich he would have beendashed to pieces by the least tergiversation.' 4 But the whole was accom-SPRING 2004 11

THIS TERRIBLE CONFLICT OFTHE AMERICAN PEOPLE"plished without the least seeming difficulty and he returned to his pointof departure without a single accident,after having performed some ofthe most wonderful feats,in the list of human achievements. When hedescended to the street below he was borne in a chair on the shoulderof three or four men to his hotel the crowd following and cavortingat their heels. Andso ended the first ascension of Blondin. We havenot room to answer your question what will it all amount to? Sufficeit to say it was a great public entertainment by which the people weretaught to look up for their amusements a-rather uncommon thingthese degenerate days.Remember me to Hannah,Jane and Jonathan. And I had almc, stforgot Eddie but him of course. Give my respects to the Dr.Țell him Ithink [illegiblel.Written in tbe right margin]If you find mistakes as you doubtlesswill, hope you will correct them and then commit to the flames.Written in tbe left margin]Would like to have said more concerningother things but - Blondin has filled my letter as he did Chil[licothel theother day. Am well -commenced School last Monday. Dismissed lastTuesd until Mon [illegible]being too warm.'Yours Sincerely,Tbad.Camp at Edgelield Junction Tenn.Nov 26tb,1862*Dear Friend:It is so long since I have heard from you directly,that I begin to thinkmy letters must have miscarried. I have as yet received no answers to mytwo last letters. Maybe they did not merit answers, which is most likely,but I will not believe you thought so, for I know your indulgence wouldbut too freely overlook deficiencies in any one you deem a friend.I have missed your kind and sympathetic letters. I neverread them,but I am lead away from the world of fact that surrounds me into thepleasing re[ allms of human sympathy. I hear kind words, see smilingfaces and pleasing home scenes. Of course in such a life as this, suchfancies cannot long be indulged without the occurrence of somethingto recall the mind to the realities around it;but the return is made withchastened feelings and a [ illegiblel sympathy for our fallen beings. Oh!war is a terrible thing. In its tread it desolates the fair face of natureall the works of the husbandman, and tramples out all the divine partsof human nature. How long has it been since the most trifling accidentwould have shocked me a-contused wound orbroken a arm.At PerrysvilleI passed men with their arms shot away, others with their legs,andhundreds laying stuck dead or mangled in evry conceivable form, withsuch a caloused indiference that in my reflective moments I can hardly12OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

persuade myself it was areality.'=But such,and of necessity must be,thetrade of war"Ḷet us hope that "Out of evil, good will vet he educed"iii this terrible conflict of the American people. "How is Aunt Margaret? There is soinething strange in her dreams andsupernatural impressions ḇordering sc)near as ther do, the confines oftruth, in their revelations of the future. When I was home she told meshe was impressed that I, and others she named, would go through thewarunharmed. Well, since then, 1 have been in several places of moreor less danger and have passed through all unscathed. I thought of thisprediction at Chaplin Hills,whilst in the midst of the fight,and when itCEShadclosed, lying at night with our broken regiment in a ravine, close :rto the great Aleddaura"of the battle that had just closed, I reviewed jthe events of the past day. and felt, as if, indeed, I had been shieldedby the panoply ot a charmed " life."+Corporal Woolem of Co. C, this regiment has just returned. He is'20one of the number sent on last spring by Gen Mitchell to burn bridgeson the RR between Atlanta &Chattanooga. They failed in their effort,were taken prisoners, tried by a Court-Martial and condemnedto death, as spies. A number including their 1ẹader Andrews wasexecuted. But he and several others including Corporal I) orsey ofmy company broke jail and after much suffering and manyadventures Woolem and 1 . man bel(, nging to the 21 st Ohiosucceeded in reaching C:orinth. Dorsey weunderstand hasgot through safely,but where he is have not yet learned. Wehad given him up as hopelessly lost. On breaking Jail theyseparated,he and a man by the name of Hawkins Co. A,33d tc, okone directi017.Wooleni and the 21 stOhionn took another, whichfU-Sk

THIS TERRIBLE CONFLICT OFTHE AMERICAN PEOPLE"How is Milt getting along[? 1. I have been told he is going to quit soldieringand enlist in a better cause. Give him by best wishes. But MatB,poor girl,will sbe not bave to take up tbe song of BaltbazanandSigb no more, ladies,sigh no more;Men weredeceivers ever:One foot in Sea,and one onshore;To one thing constant never;The fraud of men was ever so.Since summer first was leavy."„Well I don' t think it is right tc, thus trifle with affection, but so it hasbeen in affairs of the heart ever since Cupid bent his first bow -Alice. Isuppose is still teaching and laughing. Well, I can't see, but that it is aswell to laugh away life as to brood it away. Last evening as I was returninghom a visit to the pickets I rode in by a snug little cotltlage. A youngdamsel was sitting on the porch. It was alovely evening and the sun wasjust setting -As 1 passed she looked up. Her face was pale and sad,butlovely. I sense she had no heart for a union soldier and so passed on insilence,only saluting her as respectfully as 1 could. I felt a strange interestin her story but felt to[O] modest to break with her concerning it. Was shegrieving for her country's misti} rtunes, or the absence of the object of herhearts deepest sympathy. How - is Hannah and the culinary departmentgetting along[? 1. Tell her I have a fine fat turkey that I uni going to havekilled tomorrow, with which to keep Thanksgiving. I purchased it 8 or10 days ago & have been feeding it all the corn it would eat ever since.I have employed a colored woman that lives just across the way to roastit and supply all the necessarytixins I-have also just had completed anew mess box, a moddle of my own genius. We lost our Old one in theretreat from Ft. McCook last summer.44 We are now getting tolerablywell rested, we have not been on the march for a week. Have plenty toeat are sound &hearty,and well contented. Give my best wishes to theCol. Eddy,Jennie &Hannah and believe me -Yours Truly,TbadCamp Near Murfreesboro Tenn,Mcb 16. 1 863..Dear Friend,A few days since I received a letter from you dated 26th Febry. Yc, usaid you had not received a line from me for a long time. I suppose,however, you have received a letter since as I have written. I have beena little negligent in answering letters for some time, notbecause I takeno interest in my friends, but from an idiosyncrasy continually leadingme into negligence. I have had so many letters to write that I got tired14OHIOVALLEY HISTORY

of scribbling. I like well enough to read them,but not always as well towrite answer them. This is not a very generous trait, I admit. but whynot as well acknowledge the truth as conceal it,and endeavor to slap lipa plausible apology.The spring here is coming on ap:ice but is not as fc,rward as it was lastyear. The buds of the trees are beginning to open; peach trees and plumtrees are in bloom,and the birds are busy singing and building their nests.I can but reflect how nature and man are at wan Nature is strug[ gllingtc)give evlelry thing a renewed appearance, but the grim mc,nster. warl, 1stalks onin the sameunvaried courseof desolationand ruin. Terriblewill be the condition ofthe South this season,nothing but the spontaneouseffort of nature toindicate that the pursuitof agriculture is possiblein the cotintry. The conditionof the people ofAL 2,LpL- 4- 6 @ ci- +---- 1 06- -At j-4- »-- - Cif»-k4 tr9LLr---·A-/*-1k-- G'. it ulē-a_, C/- Z£=this country is Iwire[tlched. They are half starved and almost naked. Itis folly to talk about what they might do. Man cantiot work without theencouragement that he has a reasonable hope of enjoying the proceedsof his labor. The experience of the last year has taught them the precariousnessof this,and which will be much more so this as the hostillelarniies are ten times Inreer than they were last. The people of the Southwill soon have to consider whether in the prosecution of this war theycannot spare n portion of their abundance toalleviate miseries of theT/, a,/deits Ali,isball letterwritten near Mitrfreesbor{).Ten, tessee. March26. 1 86.1. The Filst, nHistc), ical Societvpoor pec, pie of the South as far as our armies have gone. I care not fc, rthem men and hardly for the women, for many of them have done allthey could to instigate their sons and brothers to join the rebel army, butthe children innocelit of anyoffense,I'ltis hard that they should sufferfor all the most common necessities of life, through the wickedness oftheir fathers and mothers. We never goouton an expedition but we seenumerous instances of the most miserable destitution and want amongchildren. They come into our camps and gather up eagerly the refuserations of the men. A few days since we w,ere orit at Versaililies gnne12 m[ ilels from here,and alittle boy with bright blue eyes caine al(, ngon an old starved horse,with no clothing but a pair of oId ragged butternutjelalns pants,an Id (, rugged shirt and acoffee sack thrown overhis shoulders. He said he had been down to the mill to get nlittle meal,but could get none. When we were moving on Murfreesborc), our Div.started on the Franklin pike and had to cross through the country to theSPRING 2004 15

THIS TERRIBLE CONFLICT OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE"Nolin Pike, where a brisk fight was in progress. We passed by a houseiii what had once been a very peaceful little rural district. The roads beingbad we passed through the yard. On the porch stood a thinly clad,little blue eyed and fair haired girl of 7 or 8. Her eyes were full of tears,I stopped and asked her for a drink. She handed it to me with a timidhand but said not aword. How I wished tof. Ross ('i"ty, Ob, 01. linip ( leffers( m. 1{art unty.Kentitchz (>,1.mys"/, lUe. Kennick,4. aint (: Near 1·, igefild Itin,- tion. l' e, inesseei. Battle i,/ St„ nci Rif, er, Tear ,\Murfrees"""1 e nessce "fi. enp (] Near 1., ic:, st Gn> t,ejeffers( ii' Intl· Ḳenmicky (/6\ f,-,6124 54'' Starkweather'sin the fight:- I was only in the firstdayl']s2 , >4.- -tr-/rI.J----- 1'c, 7 7 ».-4' 54 1 Al /. Jbe able tO lilghlten her heart. I gave her sotiiemoney and passed on. I sometimes wish thatif war must be carried onit could be done insome uninhabited country.I sent you a picture sometime since of theBattle of Murfreesboro. It is a very good one,and represents the part taken by our Brig. andfight being detailed with Co. K to guard the wagons &3 prevent a Stampede among teamsters. We were attackedfrequently by the rebel cavalry but dispersedthem every bme.It is hard to tell what will be done in this dept.fc, r the present, the apprehension of another invasion ofKentucky has I think disconcerted the plans c,f the General. TheAltbot,gb Minslial[andbis regiment marchedtbr

Valley end here. Although he later participated inThe letters that Thaddeus Minshall wrote while in one of theservice in war's mostthe Ohiofamous campaigns, Minshal[' s letters while on march with Shermanthrough Georgia and the Carolinas are less compelling than those he wrotenearer to home. Perhaps the relative familiarity of the landscapes of his nativeOhio Valley roused his philosophical nature; or perhaps the march throughGeorgia wassignificantly less eventful than his experiences in Kentucky andTennessee and he feared disappointing his reader: or perhaps war simplb· hadworn him down, like it did so many other soldiers and civilians, and he couldwrite no more about it. That his letters survive at all,rather than having beetidropped into that "terrible drawerhe mentioned, allows tls to benefit fromhis observations, his perspective, and his insights on the war and the sc, cien'that fought it. 41. Thaddeus Minshall to Friend,August 9. 1862. Papers 1(,Judge Thaddeus A. Minshall, Filsc, n Histc,rical Sciciety,1.ouisville,Kentucky (hereinafter cited 31 Mitishall Letters,FHS).2. 1 he folic)wing descriptic) 11 of the 33rd hio () is taken fr() 111William l·.Fox, Regimental Lcisses in tbe Americali CivilVar, 1,961-1865 (Albaliy, NY: Albany I'liblishing, 1889):Organized in August, 1861, at I'(, rtsm, uth, Ohio.andwmmenced active service iii Kentucky,having heen assignedtc) eneral (: Nelson' scommand. 111 December. 1861, while at1.(, uisville,it was placed in Sill' s Brigade of General 0. M.Mitchel' s Division. with which it marched to Baccm Creek.Ky.,where it went into winter- quarters. In Februarv Nlitcheladvanced to Bc)wling reen, (, Ky.,and thence ti) Nashville.during the next iii(} nth his divisic) 11 marched thr(, ugh Tennessee,and then ti) Huntsville,Ala..the summer t(,1862being spent in the vicinity of Huntsville and Bridgeport.In September, upcm Bragg' s advance intc)Ke!itucky.theariny fell back tc) 1.ouisville, atic] on Oct

THISFERRIBLECONFLICT OF THE AMERICAN PFOPIE"tuty Aliicitia A Critiqui and Somt liopc)%. ils," Anze, 1-lilneteenth century, was kery popular inthe United Stitescati Ilist(} 1April 1985) 299-338,Paul FJohnon, A Slic, pkeeper sMille, intit,11 0ilety $ and Rct,ivalsMịde ot in allov ot tin and antmic,m that ts pun, rolled,and toi mid Inti) %hipe rathet than L.Șt,it r,% emble%highl>in Rckbebter,Neu, Ycirk, 16'/ pc, liehcd stlve!Wang, 1978),Mary Ryan, C radle

30. 20. Napoleon Bonaparteirivaded Russia in 1812 and attackedharles (: Sumner was aU.S. senator from Massachusetts.C: rove. len Bryant' s Death " c,f the Flowers."Minshall misquotesthe city of Moscc, w in September. Rather than allow Napoec,ntc) take the city intact, Count Fyodor Rcștopchin, theHe was an abolitionist whose views were passic,nateenough to he seenby many as extreme.governor of Mc, scow. ordered the city set afire. urtis (: Clare,31. Stephen Dc,uglas was a U.S. senatorTbe War of tbe Two Empeims:Tbe Duel Between Napoleonm Illinois. His debateswith Abraham I.incoln in 1858 gained him notcirietyand Alexander,Russia. 1811 New York: R.indomHouse, 1985),273. Fc, r afirst-hand account,see Carl vonC:lausewitz, The Can,paign c, f 18/2 in Russia (1.cindon: I.32. Quick or hot tempered.33. 011(, (: q.: made a very loud ,(,Murray, 1843, reprint; New York: Do (lapPress, 1995).14. r.quikocatic,Ii.21. Henchinen.35. It is uticlear what schoc,1 Minshall refers to.22. onfederate (: president Jefferson 1)avis tapped James Masonof Gec,rgia aiid John Slidell c, f 1. c, uisiana as the Confederacy's36. Numlier 4 on map.diplomats 37. On October 7, 1862, onteder. (:tc,Grent Britain and France,respectively.itc forces under Braxti,nThey were eli rciute to Europe via Cuba on the British mailBragg and federal fc, rces under Don Carlos Buell foughtsteamer the Trent when, on November 8, 1861, (.James Wilkes of the U.S.S. S, in Jacinto intercepted the ship,near Perryville. Kentucky ( no. 3 on map) Ạ drc,ught in thearea caused water tc, becor·Iie the nialn objective of bothfired twice upon it,and took the two emiss.iries prisc,armies. The hattlencr.was significant not only for the relativelyhigh numbers of casualties on bc,th sides -4,200 Federalsireat Britain' s Parlianient a, id pritne niinister objectedvociferously,demanditig both a fi,rnial ap(, logy fc, r theaffront and the release c, f Mason and Slidell. France tacitlysided with reat (; Britain, although without issuing its ownultimatum. President 1.incoln and his secretary of state,William Seward, freed the two men, thus appeasing thetwo European pc,wers, while at the sanie tiiiie assertilig theprinciple of neutral rights.23. Refers to the "cult of doniesticity"and its expectation thatand 3.400 Contederates but - also because the 1]nion victoryrepulsed the first Confederate invasion of Unionẖeldterritory,thereby dissipating any European recogilitic) 17 ofthe onfederacy. (: McPherson. Battle Cry of Freedom, 858).See als()Ketineth W. Noe, Perryville:7*8 Grand Haroc ofB' Lexington: University Press of Kentucky,1001),EarlHess, Banners to the Breeze:Tbe Kentucky Campaign.Cori, itb,and Stones Ril, er ( Linct,In: University of NebraskaPress,20()()), and James Lee Mci) c, nough, War in Kent!{cky:women were neither interested in tior capable of discussingpolitical 11 Sbilcib tc)Pern·ville CKnomille: University ofmatters.1 ēnnessee Press, 1994).24. This sentence in particular indicates the colinection between38. Refers to the Latin phrase nialo [)frcimex nuni;trails|.:the first and seccmd letters as being two parts of one incompleteletter.comes.evil 64)39. Slitishalllikely means adularia, or fracture.25. 'I ẖe February 6, 1862, Union capture of Fort Henry c,n theTennessee River opeiied the way t

THIS TERRIBLE CONFLICT OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE"43. Frc, m Williain Shakespearel piay, Mitch " Ado About Nothing,"Act11, Scene 3. -1 ċavy" shc,uld be "Icaty."44. Fort McC

Beneath the Golden Stairs":Gender,Unionization,and Mobilizationin World War II West VirginiaKEVINI BARKSDALEdale, West Virginia, became homen January 1934,the diverse agricultural to one of the world'and mining conimunity s most notedof Glen toymanufacturers: Louis Marx and Company.'In that same >' ear, GermanChancellor Adolph Hitler emerged as the sole ruler of Germany and beganhis quest for Nazi dominance. Less than a vear later,United Mine Workersof America (UMW) president John L. Lewis broke from the American Federationof Labor (AFL) to establish America' sfirst inclusive labor organization,the Congress of Industrial OrganizationsCIO).These three seemingly unrelatedevents ultimately collided on the banksof the Ohio River to alter dramaticallythe fortunes of many Marshall County,West Virginia,residents. Amidst the militarypreparations and industrial defenseconversion accompanying W(, rld War II,the Marx Company' s employees,largelyfemale, launched asuccessful drive forunion recognition,ultimately establishingthe United Paper,Novelty,and Toy Workers'Union, CIO,Local 149. During thetumultuous war years, the Ti, yWorkerst25¢PARKINUnion negotiated with federal and state labor agencies and a determined Marxmanagement to secure the interests of the rank and file while maintaining their Thepatriotic commitment to America' s war effort.The events surrounding the Marx Toy Workers Unic, n during World War IIdemonstrates the interconnectedness of both the Marx Company and Local 149to the regional and national labor dynamics occurring in industries across theOhio River Valley during industrial war conversion,wartime production,andpostwar industrial reconversion. By documenting the labor strife occurringwithin one of the Ohic,River Valley' s many overlooked industries,regionalPhoto provided byOfficial Marx ToyMuseum of Glen Dale,West Virginia. U.,1(11(1.marxtyniusetiniċ,mscholars can movebeyond the well- wornpaths of larger industries (such asSPRING 2 00421

BENEATH THE GOLDEN STAIRS"the automotive and mineral extraction and refinement industries) and begintobroaden their analysis of the wartime working-class and regional laboractivism.1ạbor historians have recently begun to incorporate female workers intothe story of America' s wartime economic transformation and the struggle tosecure and defend workers' rights. The historiographical debate surroundingwomen's wartime labor principally centers on whether or not World War lI wasa " watershed" moment in women's history. Historian William Chafe arguesthat the labor demands of America' s wartime economy opened employmentopportunities fc, r women, altered attitudes toward women in the public sphere,66and ultimately paved the way for women's postwar drive for equality."More recent historians have challenged Chafe' s assertions, arguing that thechanges ushered in by the wartime economy were modest, " short-lived, ornon- existent. These scholars point to the persistence of job sex " ṯyping, therigid "gender division of labor," and the postwar resurgence " of domesticity"as proof of the absence or ephemeral nature of any wartime changes.The story of the Marx toy workers offer historians a unique perspectiveinto the gender dynamics accompanying World War II. The relative smallscaleof the Glendale operation, the composition of the workfc, rce, and theradical differences between the productic, n of toy automobiles and munitionsmakes comparing the toy industry to other wartime industries challenging.In studies of the automotive and aircraft industries, Ruth Milki» nan,SherrieA. Kossoudji, Laura J. Dresser,and Sherna Berger luck (; examine pre-war,male-dominated industries whose enormous wartime production demandsrequired the utilization of large numbers of newfemale workers to fill productionquotas and positions that men vacated during the war.+ The diverserealities of women's wartime experiences are perhaps best explored throughmore focused studies. Marc Scott Miller' s examinatic, n of the textile industryin Lowell,Massachusetts, during World War II is an excellent example of thevalue of local studies in unraveling the complex and disparate wartime experi-of femaleencesworkers.'World War II had adialectical effect onthe female workers at theGlendale toy plant. Marx management continued to exclude theworkforce at the Marx factory, comprised primarily of femaleemployees before,during,and after the war, from managerial,technically challenging,and physically demanding positions throughout the 194(} s. Despitethe persistence of gender discrimination at the Marx plant and in America' spostwar economy, World War II did usher in some dramatic opportunitiesfor women workers, one of the most important of which was the increasedparticipati() n of women in CIO labor unions. As women emerged as laborleaders and activists,the CIO became oneof the "primary vehicles" upon whichwomen confronted sexual discrimination in the workplace. Despite the CIO' s22 OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

postwar failure to challenge the sexual status quo, many women remainedcommitted to their unions:The female employees of the Marx Companyparticipated in the organization and activism of Local 149 and retained theirleadership positions after the wanville and south of Wheeling, West Virginia.-With its locationP-the small town of Glendale,incorporated in 1924,lies north of Mounds-on theOhio River in Marshall County,Glendale is situated in the heart of theOhio River Valley' s coal inining,chemical manufacturing, and iron and steelproducing region,the "Wheeling steel industrial district."» The Marx Companyquickly emerged as one of Marshall County' s principal industries,providingmuch needed employment and revenue for depression-ridden West Virginia.From 1934 to 1939, the Marx Company proved to be financially successful,ultimately expanding its factory and work force.-The national emergence ofthe CIO in 1935,whose widely expanded membership base and willingnessto allow rank and file leadershipsignaled a new phase in collectivelabor autonomy and acti() n,mirrored the expansion of the4-Marx Company."'The CIO' sinfluence immediately targetedWest Virginia' smineral extractionand resource manufacturingPsectors. The emergent labor activism(which the establishmentof the CIO inspired),the GreatDepression, and the workingconditions in the Marx factoryled quickly to the mobilizationof the Glendale workers. As early as 1939,Marx workers engaged in organizationalefforts to establish a local union for their toy plant.'Prior to unionization,working conditions in the Glendale plant proved tobe less than favorable. Management streamlined the production of toy auto-mobiles by using the "piecework system," which required each employee toreach a rigidly maintained daily quota.' Marx management divided productionPhoto provided byTbe Official Marx ToyMuseum of Glen Dale,West Virginia. www.marxtuymuseunt.cominto several specific departments, including press and shear operators, ovenoperators, die setters, painters, packers, and assembly room workers. TheMarx Company also followed a strict gender division of labor that excludedwomen from operating the heavier machinery and engaging in the more technicalaspects of toy production."The gender inequalities within the Marx plantproved to be less of a concern than the immediate dangers and productionpressures placed on the workers under the piecework quota system.Describing the working conditions in the Glendale plant before the estab-SPRING 2004 23

BENEATH THE GOLDEN STAIRS"lishnient of the union, Angeline "Sally"Miller,the first fema] eproductionworker hired at the Glendale plant in 1934,paints a grim picture of her preunionexperiences:I had an accident,and I think I was new. Everyone was new. S()I wentto my fc, reman Mr. Silver land said that] my press is repeating. It' s goingupand down. He said, 'Well I'll be over in alittle while.'... You seethat was when you didn' t have a union. I could have gc,ne to someoneand said my press is repeating,then they lunion representativel wouldsay quit working... They told me that they had a guard on the press.They told me that when you run a press that the guard will knockyour hand away and not to be afraid. So I went back a third time andsaid Mn Silver my press is repeating and I' m kind of afraid. He said itwill be alright. When I went back Itc,the press] the third time,and injust a couple of minutes that press came right down. It happened soquickly,I did not feel it. I went down to pick up a ware, and I could notpick up a ware. I looked down and pulled my chair back and startedrunning. They Iworkersl grabbed ahold of me. They took me to thehospital up here at Glendale Hospital. It smashed the fingers right off.Then I cameback to work,and Mn Liden lanother foreman] wantedto know if 1 wanted to go back to the press room. He wanted me t()go the press room real bad. I did not know what kind of job he wouldgive me, but I was real nervous and did not want to go. So they giveme a jc,b at the assembly room, and I was a packer. I was a packer inthe assembly room."Miller also describes the Glendale plant' son- site medical care.She states,failure to provide adequateOh,how the girls use to cut their figures [fingers], and she [ nurse] woulduse tape to put them back together. Yc, u would see the girls getting offthe streetcars with all of their figures Ifingersl wrapped with that tape.If you would see women with their fingers Icutl ff,nine times out often they worked in the press room here.Intensifying the dangers associated with the prc, duction prc,cess,managementoften placed unrealistic piecework quotas on the employees. '+Sally Milleragain recounted the pressuresof the piecework system in 1976:At that time, the [productionl line worked individuaillyl. Each girlworked for themselves.We didn' t get no fifteen minute break in themorning or no fifteen minute break iii the afternoon. And I think westarted at three cents an hour. We started work at eight,but all the girlsuse to come in at four or five o' clock in the morning. They were afraidthey would get fired if they could not make their day' swork. I thinkat that time it was 256«[ toys] a day. [If workers did not reach theirquotal They would be after you. So then they had a platform laid outand had stairs loverlooking the workers].They called that the golden24 OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

stairs... We did not make out that day, so all the girls had to tell theforeman why we did not make out that day. I remember some womenUSe to take things home and assemble them and bring them back sothey could keep up. In order to keep a job back then.Miller also addressed the lack of grievance procedures, payment for "downtime,vacation benefits, and work breaks pric, r to the wc, rkers organizingthe plant."Under oppressive working conditions, employees of the MarxCompany launched their efforts to establish a union.Between 1939 and the end of 1940,the efforts to organize the toy w(, rkersremained shrouded in secrecy. When asked if the management of the MarxCompany " was against the union,"Angeline Miller stated, "Oh, they wereagainst the union. We just had to round people up and sign [union] cards andthings."On January 20, 1941, Marx employees held an election, directed bythe National Labor Relations Board, to determine whether the fledgling CIOunion could represent Marx employees in collective bargaining with companyofficials.,«After an overwhelming vote of support from the Marx employees,the Toy Wc,rkers Union entered into negotiatic, ns with the Marx Companyfor a "wage contract" that included a company wide wage increase of tencents an hour,working conditions improvements, vacation pay, and a unionshop.'-The Marx Company maintained two additional regional plants, inGirard and Erie. Pennsylvania. The union leadership at the Gletidale p]antimmediately sought the cooperation of the other unionized Marx plants duringthese contract negotiations, but received little support from the AFL affiliatedPennsylvania employees. 1»C ontract negotiations continued through February and into March of1941, and involved the mediation ofJohn Conner, a U.S. Departmentof Labor conciliator from the Huntington,West Virginia,office. Despitehis best efforts, the talks stalled. At 7 0' clock RM. on March 28, 1941,after two months of negotiations, the representatives of Local 149 and CIOrepresentative Nicholas C. Vrataric led the Marx day-shift employees out onstrike."Soon after,the 175 employees working the night shift walked out ofthe plant and joined their fellow employees on the newly-formed picket lines.The overwhelming support for the union and the strike (unk, nofficials calledthe strike "100 percent effective") illustrated the successof the organizationaldrives of the previous two years. "'Over the next six tense weeks, as union officials,flanked by regional CIOrepresentatives,engaged in a series of contract negotiations with Marx Companyofficials, the toy workers maintained a continual picket line surroundingthe plant. In a scene reminiscent of the tent cities constructed in the early 19205for picketing miners in the southern Appalachia coalfields, the toy workerserected a " large tent" outside of the plant to " provide shelter for those onpicket duty. - sAngeline Miller recounted her experiences on the picket lines,SPRING 2004 25

BENEATH THE GOLDEN STAIRS"asserting, We " just went across the Irailroad] tracks built a tent and went onstrike. How 'bout it!"' For the most part,the picketing was " peaceful," withstrikers stopping only a few coal trucks from entering the plant facilities. Marxemployees also staged several demonstrations in Moundsville and Glendalethat did not result in any reported problems. The Moundsville Daily Ecboreported, a"motorcade of some two score automobiles led by AlexanderRavitch,International Paper,Novelty,and Toy Workers Union (CIO) official,and by a CIO sound truck. They paraded some time through the streets of thecity, most machines bearing placards urging support of the strike." 2,Another round of contract negotiations in early April resulted in a deadlock,and the Marx workers continued to suffer under the economic pressures ofunemployment. In early April 1941, the striking toy workers applied to thelocal branch of the West11 ,j j ] ' R5 j' *.'.I9 :LifWA»-Virginia Unemployment6· Office for unemploymentcompensation, illustratingthe employee' s beliefthat the strike could pos-sibly continue for sometime. 34s the possibilitiesA for a settlementof the strike con-Pboto provided byTbe Official Marx ToyMuseum of Glen Dale,West Virginia. WWW.marxtoymuseumċomIk{1 4 9 4'«' 3,&5 S' 44.92>»», t tinued'€ to erode, unionI. officials sent a telegramto West Virginia Depart-ment of Labor officials and to the newly elected West Virginia governor, MathewNeely,drawing their attention to the deteriorating situation in Glendale. OnMay 6, 1941, West Virginia' s labor commissioner, Charles J. E Sattler, announcedthat another round of contract negotiations would occur under thescrutiny of federal and state labor negotiators. Sattler stated, that " we arevery hopeful there will be a quick settlement of differences."As union officialsprepared to enter once again into contract negotiations, they received wordfrom state unemployment office deputy, E.E. Koontz, that he had rejectedtheir petitions for unemployment compensation,stating that the toy workers'idleness is a result of a labor dispute and as such is not compensable underthe state law."Union officials immediately filed an appeal with the state unemploymentcompensation office in Charleston, West Virginia. Resolutionsof these unemployment compensation appeals continued for several monthsfollowing the termination of the strike. "The second round of contract negotiations began on May 7, 1941, andclearly benefited from Governor Neely' s direct involvement, as well as that of26OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

the state labor commission. After less than a week of protracted and heatednegotiations, on May 13, 1941, union officials accepted a companyproposalthat granted the ten cents an hour wage increase, vacation pay, and unic, nrecognition. Marx company officials announced that a number of workersreturned to their jobs this morning I May 14, 1941 1, and a 11 departments willbe working again as soon as possible."The termination of the strike requiredsix weeks of negotiations and the involvement of West Virginia' s governor, thestate's highest ranking labor officials, the National Labor Relations Board,and the United States Department of Labor,but the results proved to be worththe sacrifice. The Toy Workers Union Local 149 emerged victorious, securingrank and file support and confidence and a working contract for the tc,yworkers.'*For all intents and purposes, the history of the Local 149 begins with the1941 strike. The 1941 strike forced the Marx Company to recognize the unic, nas both a CIO affiliated industrial union and the collective bargaining agentfor Marx employees. With this formal recognition, union officials began theprocess of strengthening the union. For most of the Marx employees, 1ọcal149 was their first experience with unionization. Both regional CIO and localunion leaders spent the next few months introducing the Glendale employeesto the union structure,CIO history,and union' s agenda. In their first meeting,held at the Knights of Pythias Hall in Moundsville,after the conclusion of the1941 strike, union members elected the organization' s executive c() mmittee,established departmental grievance committees, and began their affiliationwith regional unions by electing delegates to the Tri-County Industrial UnionCouncil and applying to the Marshall County and West Virginia State IndustrialUnion Counciis.'-hroughout the second half of 1941, Local 149 fought to secure unemploymentcompensation and wage increases,engaged in philanthropiccommunity outreach programs, and assisted company officials insecuring highly-sought after defense contracts during industrial defense conversion.On June 21, 1941, union officials held a special meeting to addressthe still-lingering questions regarding unemployment compensation appliedfor during the 1941 strike. After reviewing the West Virginia UnemploymentOffice' s reasons for denying the claims, union officials, led by factory physician,Dr.D.B. Early,decided to appeal the decision "within twenty days."Theappeal process stretched into 1942, but ultimately became a secondary issueas the Marx Company,supported by Local 149,struggled to secure lucrativedefense contracts. 'MCommunity outreach emerged as one of the union' s earliest priorities andthe members of Local 149 engaged in numerous wartime civic causes and communitydevelopment projects. The Marx workers sponsored an annual LaborDay parade and picnic held in Wheeling Park, inviting other local unions toSPRING 2004 27

BENE Al' 1-1 7HE (; 0 L DEN STAIRS"attend the festivities,and collected donations for the construction of a children' splayground in Glendale. I. c, cal 149 also amassed donatiotis throughout thewarfor the United Services Organization (USO)țhe Red Cross Fund, vari-Ous war bond drives, and union members in the military.s' Clearly the toyworkers felt a high degree of civic pride, responsibility, and war patriotism,but Local 149 also launched these efforts to prevent the perception that unionmembers were unpatriotic. Wartime strikes, demands for wage increases,andbig business' s unrelenting propaganda campaigns often led many Americansto accuse union members of being Lin- American, unruly,and even trees(, nous.The members of Local 149 demonstrated that one could maintain both Ic,yaltyto one's country and afierce working-class consciousness.espite the CIC)' s support during the 1941 strike, most members of Local 149 remained unawareof the inner workings of the internationalorganization. After the Glendale workers secured victory in the 1941strike, regional CIO officials expended aconsiderable amount of time andeffort to educate Marx employees regarding the history and purposeof theCIO. As early asSeptember 1941, the union' sregional director,Tom Starks,gave a very interesting and inspiring talk on the history of the Congress ofIndustrial Organizations."Undoubtedly,Starks aimed hislectureatsecuringthe support of the union members and introducing the members to the CIO' spolitical agenda. Over the next few years, members of Local 149 relied on thesupport and direction of the international organizatic, n and the CIO regionaloffice depended on Local 149 for support in national and state elections,localand regional organizational drives,and fc, r financial support.The establishment of grievance committees and procedures proved to beone of the more difficult early effc, rts of the Tc, y Wc,rkers Union. Pnor to theresolution of the strike, in February 1941 the union elected the first " official"departmental grievance committee representatives and instructed them tc) have "a notebook and write down all suggestic, ns to cover their department." Overthe next year, the grievance procedures underwent considerable expansionand alteration. In June 1941, the number of grievance cc, mmittee menibersgrew toinclude both departinental and shift committeetnen. In July, theexecutive board established the executive grievance committee and elected twoexecutive cc,mmittee representatives to oversee the coinplaints and procedures.Most early grievances involved shift assignments, Rniority rights, concernsregarding working conditions, and of course, wage increases.part, the toyFor the mostworkers embraced the departmental grievance representativesand flooded the executive committee with suggestions and complaints. However,several of the "coirimitteemen"experienced resistance to their elevatedstanding within the union structure and their efforts to work in conjunctionwith company management and employees to address rank and file concerns.Workers expressed alarm over press roc,in grievance representative Martha28 OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

Pyrick' s fraternization with a company foreman. Press room workers accusedPyrick of "talking to the foreman too much"and using her position to "getgood jobs."After attempting to resign froni her position, Sister P;rick wasasked to keep her job as stewart [ by unic, n leadershipl as she has been doingverygood work." 'In October 1941,growing worker discontent over wages re- emerged as thecentral concernfor Local 149.a series of by-laws regardingtlie union structure andmeir, bership fining procedure,newly elected Local149 president DonaldWhorton and the executiveAs the union struggled to draft and approvecommittee engaged in aseries of negotiations withcompany officials concerningadditional companywidewage increases ot0an additional ten cents anhour.':Archie B. Marcus,Marx Vice President, flatlyrefused to " give an>·kindof raise"and union offi-cials immediately contacted regional CIO officials at the Wheeling IndustrialUnion Council tc, ask for their advice on securing a raise. By mid-December.union officials received a letter from Marcus outlining the the " steps we shouldtake regarding the raise. " Negotiations tor the wage increase continuedthroughout 1942 andquickly took precedence over the pay raises.1943. but concerns over securing defense contractsPI?(, to pr t, (, ided y[)Tbe Oficial Marx ToyMitset, niof Glen Dille,West Virgi„hi.tC [Cle.M,1i'xtol'Hl it sC'1 1 1,1.CC)T 11ate in 1941, West Virginia' s critical wartime industries began their1"practically all of the output of the state's leading manufacturers andconversion from civilian production to war production. By early 1942.the production of the natural resource industries directly or indirectly wentinto the defense or war effort. Lucrative defense contracts, industrial expansion,and employment opportunities accompanied defense conversion, andsmaller nonessentialstate industries scrambled to secure defense work. + Atthe Cilendale plant, consumer production centered on the manufacturing ofsteel toy cars., j As local Marshall County industries secured defense contractsand the newly-established War Production Board placed restrictions on steelusage, union officials grew concerned over the possibility that the Board mightexclude the plant from wartime production conversion. In a special meetingheld on January 17, 1942, union officials organized a committee to "go toSPRING 2004 29

BENEATH THE GOLDEN STAIRS"Washington, D.C. and find out why [thel Marx Plant does not have defenseorders."As the situation at the Glendale plant worsened, the union' s effortsto secure defense contracts faltered and the federal government informed theMarx Company that toy productic, n had to end by June 30, 1942.By late April 1942, the toy workers and Marx management received wordthat the War Production Board had awarded four defense contracts to thecompany. Company officials informed the Marx employees that the machineryat the Glendale plant, once used to mass- produce children' s toy automobiles,would now produce thirty-caliber artillery shell casings. M After securing thedefense contracts, Marx management began the long,arduous task of preparingboth the employees and the plant for defense production. For the employees,defense production required additional training,citizenship confirmation,anda thorough government investigation of employees and inanagement. Theconversic, n of the factory machinery began in early May and continued untildefense work began late in 1942. =Amid the preparations for defense work, unic, nofficials once again launchedtheir campaign to secure wage increases for the Marx employees. The conversionof the plant to military production required the company to negotiate anew defense " work contract"and union officials planned on using these negotiationsto secure the desired pay increases.'"During this negotiation period,the members of Local 149 confronted the growing pressures placed upon themby management, the War Labor Board, and the international governing bodyof the CIO to submerge their working-class interests for the patriotic causeof winning the war. 4' These internal pressures created tensions within theunion and between management and union officials. In May 1942, the CIOsent a large committee to the monthly union meeting to stress the importanceof labor' s cooperation with the war effort. D.K. Harris, leader of the CIOdelegation, briefly addressed the union members, stating, We must win thewar with weapons of democracy and not those of Nazis."The toy workersneeded little patric,tic rhetoric to secure their support for the wareffc, rt. Asearly as May 1942, union officials made plans for a flag raising ceremonycelebrating the defense work at the Glendale plant. The union also took timeout of meetings to applaud the effc, rts of Marshall County' s enlisted men, toraise money to purchase war bonds,and to provide financial support for warrelief effc, rts:*espite the efforts of the CIO and the high level of patriotisni that thetoy workers displayed, union officials remained dedicated to securingwage increases under the new defense contract. Once again, Marxemployees and their union proved that maintenance of working-class interestsand American wartime patriotism could exist simultaneously. As local CIOrepresentative Frank Lassic stated, Life is dear,but liberty is dearer,withoutliberty you might as well be dead!"+Throughout the remainder of 1942,unionofficials actively engaged in contract negotiations with company representa-30OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

tires. Securing the ten cents an hour pay increase proved to be exceedinglydifficult; indeed, management accused union officials of beingunpatriotic.In a speech delivered to unic, n officials in September 1942, Ray Van 1) ynerecalled that Marx Vice President Archie B. Marcus accused union officials ofbeing "unpatriotic,because Itheyl are asking fc, r a raise of ten cents an hour,just when IMarcus] was trying to begin defense orders.After meeting withMarcus and company officials throughout October,union officials reluctantlyaccepted a new defense contract on November 15, 1942. The new contractprovided fc, r a raise of five cents an hour, as well as defense work instirance,recognition of union seniority lists during the defense rehiring process, andthe opportunity for the Local 149 to organize the newly converted plant innearby McMechen. Local union officials accepted the contract. but growingdiscontent within several departments dmost assured the likelihood of laborconflict in the future:+Despite the dissatisfactic, n over the defense work wagestructure, the Marx employees embraced the opportunity tc) join the war etfort.By the end of 1942, workers at the Glendale plant began the productionof munitions.During the first four months of defense production, officials of I.ocal149 confronted the problems associated with defense conversionand industrial expansion. In January,the executive cotṉmittee establisheda safety committee to address the new dangers associated with themanufacturing of military ordnance. Union officials promoted the use of sa fetyequipment, including "safety shoes"and "defense apparel"and pressed thecompany to increase its medical staff. Local 149 also confronted the gr) wingrank and file concern over seniority hiring practices for defense work. Priorto defense production, Marx officials "laid off" most of the work fc, rce tomake the necessary factory conversion for military production. Bound by thenewly signed 1942 defense contract, the union contract required that the MarxCompany honor employee seniority when rehiring for defense production.Over the next several months, representatives of the union grievance con- 11Tlitteeaddressed dozens of complaints that the company ignored senic,rity lists andhired employees out of sequence. Despite grc, wing concerns over conipanyhiring practices and the defense work pay scale,the Marx employees embraceddefense work and set their sights on the military' s highest award for factoriesengaged in defense work, the Army and Navy "E"Flag:'In late January 1943, union officials again broached the subject of pay raises.Officials of 1ọcal 149 sent arequest to the National War Labor Board andrepresentatives ot the (70,in Washington, D.C.,to review the wage structuredefined in the 1942 defense contract:' The year 1943 proved to be hectic formembers of the National War Labor Board, as the federal agency receivedthousands of complaints, petitions, and grievances from unions confrontingmany of the same wartime problems as the Marx workers.+Ōver the nextSPRING 2004 31

BENEATH THE GOLDEN STAIRS"three months, the National War I.abor Board failed to address the petition ofLocal 149, and union officials and company employees grew increasingly impatienttc, have their grievances resolved. In mid-March, union officials againmet with Archie B. Marcus to discuss renegotiating the 1942 defense contract.Marcus retilsed to negcțiate a new contract but offered a "small"raise. Overthe next few weeks, union officials desperately sought a conference with representativesof the National War Labor Board and CIO officials, but receivedvery little acknowledgment. On Wednesday,April 26, 1943,exasperated at thesituation, the three h,indred employees of both the Ciletid.ile and McMechenplant launched their second strike in less than two years. As the MoundsvilleDaily Ecbo reported, The empk, yees are reliiaining away from their jobs inprotest against the failure of the War Labor Board to act on a demand for awage increase of two to six cents an hour." 4XC.incinnati Mtise!,) 11 Ce, Iter.Ci,lci,inati Hist(, Tical9() cie tv Lilir, tryith two critical defense contracts in the balance, company representatives hastily called a meeting with union officials. The MoundsvilleDaily Ecbo reported that "A.B. Marcus, vice president ofthe Louis Marx Cc, nipanyarrived by plane in Glendale last night in order tobegin a series of conferences today in the offices of the Glendale plant."Thenegotiations that fc,Ilowed Marcus' sarrival illustrates just how interconnectedand essential the Glendale plant prc, ved to be to the war effort. The ensuingseries of conferences invc,lved participants from the National WarLabor Board, aswell asafederal labor conciliator,thePittsburgh Ordnince1) epartment, regionalCIO representative D.K. Harris,high-rankitig officials within theMarx Company,and a coinmitteec(}inprised of membets of Local 149. By April 3(),1943,the Marx Company presetited union officialswith a new defense contract. According tc) union minutes recorded duringa special meeting held on that day,negotiations failed tc) achieve the desiredpay increases. Despite failing to secure their stated strike g(, als, unic,n officialsonce aunin reluctantly accepted the new working contract.+4Three critical realities explain why the union officials accepted the new defenseco n tract. First,the (310 pressured Local 149 to "accept the recommendationsof otir committee [the CIO Advisory C() oneil of the National War LaborBoard]atid return to work.Sec() 1id, the Nation.21 War l.abc, r Board guaranteeda ' speedy"consideration of the umon's petition for wage increases, whichultimately proved to be the central issue behind the walkout. i' Third, rumorsspread ar() und the ilendale ( plant that the War Production Board planned tocancel the artillerv shell easing contract at the Glendale plant. Together they32OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

combined to defeat the "unauthorized strike"maintained by the toy workers.On May 3, 1943, the Moundst'ille Daily Echo triumphantly announcedthat the "Marx Plants are Wc,rking."The combined pressures of the 1943wildcat strike and the increasing demand for munitions led the National WarLabor Board to resolve the labor dispute quickly. In mid-] une 1943. the WarLabor Board finally reached a settlement-of " the Marx case and provided anundisclosed pay increase for the West Virginia defense workers.'After the conclusion of the 1943 strike,unic, n officials once igain engaged inthe day- to ḏay affairs of addressing grievances,supporting national. regional.and local war relief efforts, maintaining union conimittees,assisting the CIOin organizing additional regional factories,and supporting proḻabor state andnational political candidates. In Octc,ber 1943, the Nlarx emplo> ces receivednews that the War Production Boird terminated the Glendale plant' s artilleryshell easing contract. The loss of the contract sent a wave of concern throughthe ranks of both management and employees.In late November, Marxmanagement infc,rmed empic, yees that the War Productic, n Board granted apetition to resume tc, y production fc, r a limited period of time. Iii addition,company officials secured a new defense contract, tO begin December 15,1943, to produce fragmentation bombs for the military. "As unusual as itmight sound,from November 26, 1943, to January 19, 1944, wi kers at theGlendale plant simultaneously produced toy autorilobiles and fragmentationbombs.'The dual production process waylaid many of the fears of the Marxemployees and provided the Marx Company with a guaranteed 'ar contractuntil the conclusion of the war.Acquisition of a new defense contract offered union officials an opportunityto renegotiate their newest working agreement. In January1944, realizing that the production of fragmentation bombs poseda much more dangerous manufacturing process than production of artilleryshell casings, union officials formed a "contract committee"to engage incontract negotiations with the company. Local 149 officials argued that increaseddangers of the production process warranted wage increases that wereproportionate to the hazards that workers might incur. After the companyresistance generated during the previous two rounds of contract negotiati ons,union officials realized that the 1944 contract talks required union membersto stand solidly behind each other."'+Late in January,after a series of contract discussions between companymanagement and the contract committee, both sides agreed to a workingagreement" that left open negotiations over wages but did not halt productionof the new defense line. Union officials again sent a petition to the NationalWar Labor Board "explaining the situation pertaining to the bomb wage setup,and protesting against working at the present rate of pay, although wewill work on the bomb if necessary, and under protest, until a suitable wageSPRIN G 2004 33

BENEATH THE GOLDEN STAIRS"is established."Over the next six months, the working contract Linderwentconsiderable revisions and companyofficials granted the Contract committeeseveral important concessions. Some of the more noteworthy of them included:time and a half pay for working six consecutive days and all time ovcr eighthours iii a day; uplic,lding maintenance of membership agreements by "havingnew empic, yees sign union cards when they fill in their personal records in thepers(, imell office;" increased vacation paybenefits;and a new wage structurebased upon :1 bonus " plan established by the National War Labor Bc,ard andMarx manac,ement.Members of the contract committee agreed to athirty-daybtrial period for the "bc, nus plan... rather than accepting no raise at all." "In May,after the thirty-day trial period expired, companyofficials presented thecontract committee a new contract and union officials quickly called a nieeting tovote on whether to "accept or not to accept the new contract. Ḻocal 149 membersread " the contract article by article"and accepted 111 but two of the articlesin the new contract. The contract committee voted to submit the rejected articlesto the National War Labor Board for further review. CIC)representative FrankLassick stated that " the decision fc, r this contract rests whi,] ly on the action ofthe WLB.Despite the concerns over the two articles iii question,by May unionmembers had voted to accept the newest contract and await the decision of theNational War Labor Boird.'In August 1944. the board handed down its decisic, n c,nthe wage increasesand increased vacation paybenefits being sought by Local 149. The bc,ard onceagain prc, vided a small pay increase and animproved vacatic) 11 plan fc, r the Marxemployees and "Brother Lassick"showered praise upoii the contract coinn-litteefor its efforts. Lassick stated that, he " thinks we ILocal 1491 arerather fc) rtunatein getting what we did when the Little Steel Forniula and tlic War Labor Boardare considered, He praised the efficiency of tlie officers and the committee fortheir past work and aisc,the unity ot the local and its officers."'-dramatic chaliges duringthesecond hal f ot theyear. In June,Phe McMecheii emplc,yees of the Marx Company experienced a fterhavingpreviously been engaged in manufacturing seventysomefive-millimeterartillery shell casings, the McMechen plant converted to producing three-inchartillery shells. Moreover,in July,the War Production B(ard awarded the Mc-Mechen plant with the prestigiolls Army and Navy "E"flag as a reward fc, r theemployees'high level of production and low rite of worker absenteeism. "Bythe end of 1944,workers at the McMechen plint produced both the three-inchartillery shell and a sixty-millimeter artillery shell for the military.The second half of 1944 also brc,ught profound changes to Local 149.August 1944, unic,n officials engaged in fund raising drives to Sllpp() rt theCIO' sNational Citizens Political Action Committee and worked toestablish alocal Political Action Committee for Local 149. In December,1944, managementitiformed union officials that the National War Labor Board placed theIn34 OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

ombs"being produced at both plants on the "essential list."Therefore,the Marx Company and its eniployees pressed to maintain production of thebombs seven " days a week. Being placed on the "essential list"providedMarx employees with increased eniplornient and pay opportunities. but reignitedconcerns over the company's seniority hiring practices. *concerns over wagesand the safety of the Marx ordnance workers.In what seemed like an annual event,the year 1945 opened amid gr()wingInJanuary,union officials requested a conference with Archie B. Marcus torenegotiate defense wages. Union officials calculated that the average day' s payfor a Marx employee,estimated at eighteen dollars perday,fell well below thewages of employees engaged in similar types of production in other munitionsfactories. Growing discontent reemerged over the previous wage increasesthat the National War Labor Board had grantedand the unwillingness of the Board to settle laborCincinnati Muset„,i Center,Ci,icinizati Histo,· icalSociety Librarydisputes in a timely manner. Contract negotiationsresumed in February and only in April didMarx officials finally offer the employees a newcontract. The members of Local 149 voted t()accept the contiact, though "exclusive of theWomenrates of pay. In May,after another round of nemthe wagotiations, Archie B. Marcus refused to alter payrates and union officials once again petitioned the 4lNational War Labor Board for aconciliator. Themeeting between the federal labor conciliator,Marx management, and union officials occurredin June and union officials presented the newpay rate offer to union members at the June 10,1945,meeting. In a vote of seventyṯhree for andthree opposed, union members accepted the newpay rates. «"As the war wound down in Europeand the Pacific and the War Production Boardeliminated defense contracts, the newly secureddefense contract provided but abrief moment oflabor tranquility.By the end of May,the War Production Boardcurtailed the production of artillery shells at bothMarx plants and preparations began for thereconversion of the Marx plants for the resumption of manufacturing toys.Newly-elected union president Edith Burgess led the union executive committeein preparations for industrial reconversion, a new round of companyrehiring, and, predictably, a new working contract. In preparing to convertthe Marx plants back to toy production, management halted production at theSPRING 2004 35

BENEATH THEGOLDEN STAIRS"McMechen plant and began transferring senior employees back to the Glendalefacility. Returning servicemen and a group of newly-hired female press operatorsjoined the transferred MeMechen employees: Management engaged ina repeat of the "lay offs"that occurred during the conversion process. Thereconversion period in West Virginia brought with it spiraling unemploymentfigures, leaving thousands of returning servicemen and previously employeddefense workers to compete for the scarce jobs. The transformation of theMarx workforce created enormous pressure n(,union officials tc) mailitainseniority lists, to secure employment for members, and to protect the shiftsand wages of existing and returning employees. Marx employees, eager toresume toy production, feared that the newly-hired employees could possiblyslow down toy production and reconversion.·:Local 149 officials struggledto secure positions for "laid off"union members, to control coinpany ẖiringprocedures, and to maintain supportempl(, yee transition.for the union during this period offter resumption of toy manufacturing in the fall, concerns over company pay rates again dominated union meetings. While attempting tomaintain seniority hiring lists and secure desired shifts and departmentalplacements,union officials included a request for a thirty percent "acre,ss theboard" pay increase, in a list of detiiands submitted to the conipatiy October10, 1945. Union officials gavethe company' svice president,Archic B. Marcus,seven days to respond to the wage demands in order to avoid 1 strike vote." ;In aletter sent on October 18, 1945, Marcus "advised the union that athirtypercent increase could not be granted.Union officials immediately sent lettersto United States Department of Labor,the National War Labor Board,theNational 1ạbor Relations Board, and the CIO, petitioning " the conducting ofa strike votewithin the plant.".4Indications of the tensions between the rank and file and managementbecame apparent () n October 19, 1945, when some five hundred Marx employeesengaged iii a "protest demonstration in Glendale. As worker militancyincreased, union officials received word from federal labor conciliator,Martin E. Swanger,that the current union contract required a " fc, ur weeksand two day"period of negotiations befc, re a " strike or walkout"could bevoted upon:' Swanger advised union officials to hold all demands for wageincreases in " abeyance until after astrike vote wasconducted on November30, 1945."As preparations began for the strike vte, Robert C. Edwards,Chairman of the International Organizing Committee,CIO,advised Local 149officials to attempt to " organize the Eric and Girard plants.Edwards arguedthat these plants were " holding up wage increases and stated that the threeplants "needed to be united, regardless of which plant."Edwards concludedby offering union officials any " help that was needed for the strike vote andto contact the international office and it lassistancel would be obtained.""'36 OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

With the clear support of the CIO and the sanction of the U.S. Departmentof Labor,union officials met on November 25.1945, to make final preparationsfor the strike vote and to adopt a policy to be used after the strike vote has beenconducted. Union officials prepared the secret ballots to be used for the vote.scheduled fc, r November 30 in the Glendale plant' s cafeteria. Local membersalso gave permission to the union' s executive committee to call the strike afterthe tabulation of the votes and t()send a letter to companr officials to begitinegotiations as soon as possible after the strike z-ote has been conducted.On December 1the Moundst'ille Daily Ecbo reported that "Wc,rkers of theLouis Marx Co. plant in Glendale on Frida> voted overwhelmingly in favorof a strike if necessary to support detiiands for a wage increase. In ballotingconducted by the NLRB,the workers registered 287 votes fc, r the strike and33 against."'- At the regularly scheduled union meeting held on December9, union officials discussed the results of the vote and made preparations fornegotiations with Archie B. Marcus, scheduled for the following day.»'As1945 drew to a close and Americans reveled in the defeat of the Axis forcesand the end of the war, Marx company employees and management st

BENEATH THE GOLDEN STAIRS"The 1946 strike proved to be the longest and most difficult walkout for theMarx employees. Tensions emerged between union niembers as the " unauthorized"strikecreated internal opposition from several employees. As oneworker argued, We " should go back to work and continue negotiations,becausesome of the members were not able to stand the strike insanity."Additionalpressures mounted upon the union leaders, as CIO representative Frank Lassickinformed the executive committee that " the [international]union officialsdid not approve of the work stoppage." Led by CIO president Philip Murray,international union officials discouraged postwar " wildcat"strikes. CIO leadersbelieved that the union could "trade a reconversion no-strike policy fora new higher wage formula and that a " rash ct bitter strikes would utterlydeplete the union treasury, fragment the union, and wreck the CIO' s largerchances of securing a strike-free acrossṯhe-board wage package."Despite themouiiting pressures, Local 149 officials held fast with their determination tostay out on strike, believing that "If we go back Ito work] now,we will showthe company our weakness, and chances for an adequate increase would besmall. We arefighting for a principle and should stand as a unit!"Union officialshastily made plans for picketing assignments, blockading the plant,andthe next round of negotiations:ver the next five weeks, union representatives met with federal laborcc, nciliatc, r, Martin E.Swanger,West Virginia State Labor Commissioner,Charles J.F.Sattler,and company officials in two rounds of negotiations.Despite the proclamation of the Moundsville Daily Ecbo that "Friday Parley MayBreak Marx Strike," the first series of meetings,held on March 8-9,1946,did notresult in the settlement of the strike. Union officials rejected the company's counter-proposal of a fifteen cents an hour pay increase,stating that Marx employeesare determined not to return tc) their jobs until that demand Ithirty percent raiselwas met.The second round of negotiations tc, ok place on March 28 and 29.During the conferences held between Marx officials and Local 149 representatives,ArchieB. Marcus presented union officials with a new wage proposal. Thecomplex pay arrangement essentially maintained the fifteen cents per hour payincrease,but provided awide rangeof production incentives and annual pay raises.Urged by CIO representative Frank Lassick to accept the proposal,stating that "the [ c() ntract] committee was in a bad position because of the unauthorized walkout,and als(, the fc)rthcoming coal strike made the possibility for alarger increaseslim, union officials voted to66accept the wage proposal.-Union representativesquickly reserved Eagles Hall,in Moundsville, to present the company proposal toMarx employees for a vote. On Saturday evening,Marx employees voted to endtheir five-week old strike and accept the company'sthird proposal. For the thirdtime in less than six years,members of Local 149 launched astrike that resultedin company concessions and wage increases. ' iThe chae,tic events from 1941 to 1946 surrounding the United Toy Workers38 OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

Union,Local 149, and the Marshall County Marx plants clearly illustrate the interconnectednessof the Ohio River Valley' s smaller industries to the wareffort. Duringthe war years, union officials repeatedly negotiated with the National 1ạbor RelationsBoard,the War Production Board,and the National War Labor Board. Many of WestVirginia' s highest-ranking civilian and military officials,including the West Virginiagovernor,state labc, r commissioner,and several state agencies,also participated inthe events occurring in the small community of Glendale.Local 149 also fit into the larger context of the CIO' s international orginizations.Through connections and memberships ill the United Paper,Novelty,andToy Workers' Unic, n Interiiational, the Wheeliiig Industrial Unioli Council, andthe CIO, the members of Local 149 participated in the national labor dynamicsoccurring after the Great Depression.The strikes at the Marshall Count>Marx plants corresponded with larger national periods of labor unrest. Theevents surrounding the 1941 strike fc, r union recognition in Glendale reflectedthe broader efforts of hundreds of thousands of American workers, both maleand female, tc) secure union recognition and employee rights diiring wartinieindustrial conversion.As the tenuous agreement between business, labor, andthe federal governinent suffered linder the violent stains of wartime productionand demand, hundreds of unauthorized "wildcatstrikes occurred in 1943 inalmost every industry engaged in defense production. Within this context, theyear's brief strike at the Marx plants linked the West Virginia toy workers to thegrowing concerns within the working-class ozer pa> rates and working conditionsin America' s defense industries. Finall>: the events that unfolded during the1946 work st()ppage, which accompanying industrial reconversion atid labor' sgrowing concerns over the postwar rc, 11 back of worker' s rights, paralleled thenational dynamics shaking America.factory connected the Marx employeesPhe production of essential military munitions to the millions of United Statesin West Virginia's onlydefensetoyworkers. Many of America' s defense workers experienced thesame problems and tensions resulting from industrial defense conversion,production,andreconversion. Scholars often focus on male-dominated,large industries,overlooking smaller industries or those incorrectly viewed as less essential to thewar effort. They thus neglect the vital story of unionized women in wartimeworkplaces.-«The working-class struggles and industrial dynamics occurringin Glendale, West Virginia, illustrates the central role these smaller industriesand marginalized female workers played in America' s war effort at home andabroad. 41. Mcitindst,ille IWest Virginial Daily Echo,January 5, 19,1934; U.S. Department of Commerce, 6tb Census of theUizited States 1940: 1), iractel'istics (: of the P(, pitiation. WestVirginia (Washington,1).C.:LJnited States civernment (;Printing Office, 1941),58; Marsliall C.oiitity Hist

BENEATH THE GOLDEN STAIRS"3. Ruth Milkman, Gender at Work: be '/ Dynam ·cs of Job Segregationby Sex During World War 11 (Urban:: Universityof Illinois Press, 1987);Karen Anderson, Wan ime Womm:Sex Role, Family Relations,and tbe Status of 'X/ oine,iDuring World War 11 Westport, Colin.:Greetiwood Press,1981),Susan Hartmaiin, The Noin e Froi;2 ant' Beyond:American Wonien iii tbe 1 940s (Boston: Twayiie Publishers,1982).4. Milkman,Gender at Work,passim; Sherrie A. Kossoudjiand Laura J. Dresser, The " End of a Riveting 1:xperience:Occupational Shifts at Ford After Wc,rid War ]1," AmericanEcon

11 Moundsvtile,1)ath'Ecbo,March 29. April 24, Miv 6, Mar the manutacturing of "notiessential pic, dult, On," and24, 1941, Wheelitig l,itelligeitiei larch 31, 194 1 Thi first restricted the usage cit " scarie tṉatelial,·,' (51ḷch as ilon aillddemonstratic, n occurred on Apt 11 23, 1941 steel) Thi Uar Lilic, 1lioard dii idid thi linited State;14 Motindsville l)ady Echo, Api il 4, 6, 24, 1941, K'beeling 1- / intultimate result c, t the appeal 1.n,t .8 ịlable .ziid the Unli)11 42 115. 1. 1, \ 23, 1941. Juiie 2-Juli 11, 1942, mier(, him rcil 1,meeting not

BENEATH THE GOLDEN STAIRS"raises to correct certain inequalities."From the day of itsestablishment,the National War I.abor Board maintainedcomplete control over rates of pay of defense productionindustries. Polenberg, War and Society,20-21.47. Polenberg, War and Society,160-63;Jones, "West Virginiaiii World War 11,"85-87. Several labor disputes in majordefense industries, many resulting in strikes, fo:-ced theboard to inediate these conflicts. Some of the trore noteworthyconflicts emerged in rubber industry (namely, iii Akron,Ohic,), shipyards, automobile industry,and the coal industry.Sonic 400,000 miners struck on four separate occasic, nsiii 1943.48. RS, February 21, March 21, 1943, microfilm reel 1, TWU,;Moundsville Daily Echo, April 30, 1943.49. RS, April 2, 1943. microfilm reel 1; Moundsvilie DailyLcho, May 1, 1943. Details of the new contract are notavailable.50. RS, April 30, 1943, microfilm reel 1, TWU; Polenberg, Warand Society,159-60. On December 23, 1941, the CIO andadditional spokesmen " for labor and business"agreed to ano-strike pledge."Tensions emerged between the CIO andLocal 149 over the mainteii. ince of these no- strike pledges.Clearly the recommendations of the CIO during the 1943strike reflected their desire to uphold their end of the agree-1ṉellt.51. RS, November 21, June 20, 1943, microfilm reel 2, '1'WU;Moundsville Daily Ecbo,May 3,1943. The details of thesettlement are not available.52. RS, June 30, July 15. December 19. November 21, 1943,microfilm reel 2,TWU. CIO represeittatives asked Local149 to help to organize the Pittsburgh Plate Glass Companyin Deceinber of 1943. The reasons for the cancellation ofthe contract are not extant.53. Moundsville Daily Echo, December 1, 1943, RS, November21, 1943, microfilin reel 2,TWU.54. RS, .January 9, 1944,microfilm reel 2, TWU. Frank Lassickmade this statement duriilg the union meeting of this date.55. RS, February 6.20, March 19,20,April 4, 1944, microfilmreel 2, TWU, Polen berg, War and Society, 158-. 59. Thebonus plan"consisted of a guaranteed three cents an hourraise, and increased pay for high levels ot production. Iiithe suinmer of ]942, the National War Labor Board acceptedthe "maintenance ot membership" agreement, inwhich "trade unions demanded a closed, or at least a unionshop," to protect unions against "raids by rival unions"andto assure that new " war workers would be required to joinIthe established unionsl."The compromise created a " fifteeliḏay escape period workers could resign from the unionand keep their jobs,after that,they had to remain membersfor the life of the Idefensel contract." CI() representativeFrank 1. assick and representatives of the War Labor Boardadvised union officials to accept the bonus plan.56. RS, May 7, August 14, June 4, 1944,microfilm reel 2,TWU. '1 he union rejected articles seven and eight,whichdealt with pay increases iii specific departmetits and vacationbenefits.57. RS,August 13, 1944,microfilm reel 2. The strict wagecontrol structure, established by the I.ittle Steel Formula andmaintained by the War L,abor Board, often proved difficultto circumvent during contract negotiations.58. RS, June 4, 1944, microfilm reel 2,RS,May 7, 1944,microfilm reel 2. By the end of July,both the Glendaleand McMechen plants were producing artillery shells. TheGlendale plant never received ali E"flag " owing to the frequencyof worker absentecism and the constant labor strifethat surrounded the plant' s rank and file.59. RS,August 13, 1944,microfilm reel 2, RS, Deceinber 10,1944, microfilm reel 2, RS,January 14, 1945, microfilm reel2.60. RS, February 11, 1945, microfilm reel 2, RS, April 8, 1945,microfilm reel 2,RS.May 6, 1945, microfilm reel 2,RS,January 10, 1945,microfilm reel 2. Theexecutiveboardvoted thirty-three to tweiityōne to accept the contract, butreject the rates of pay.61. RS,May 6, 1945,microfilm reel 2, RS,June 10, 1945,microfilm reel 2, RS, August 12, 1945, microfilm reel 2,RS, August 30, 1945,microfilm reel 2. Donald Whortonremained president of Local 149 from 1941 until August1945. Marx management first transferred die- setters, themore senior skilled workers, to the Glendale plant.62. jones, "West Virginia iii World War II,"167-68. Jonesestimates that "reconversion cutbacks" cost West Virginianssome twenty-five thousand jobs.63. RS, October 7, 1945, microfilm reel 2, TWU. Unionofficials began discussing the thirty percent pay increaseduring wage negotiations iii February and March 1945, butreconversion preempted further discussions on the issue.64. RS,October 19, 1945, microfilm reel 2. Marcus did agreeto previous union demands for seniorityḇased shift assignments,stating that " any employee with two or three yearsseniority shall be given their shift preference."65. Moundsvilie Daily Echo, October 20, 1945; RS, November11, 1945.microfilm reel 2,TWU. The Marx workers protestedthe low wages at the plant and apparently remaineddissatisfied with the shift arraiigernelits.66. Moundst,ille Daily Ecbo, February 22, 1946.67. RS, November 25, 1945, microfilni reel 2,TWU; MoundsvilleDaily Ecbo,I)ecember 1, 1945 .68. RS,December 9, 1945, microfilm reel 2,TWU.69. Edith Burgess to Archie B. Marcus, January 19, 1946,microfili-1 reel 2, TWU, RS, 1. inuary 16, 1946, inicrofilm reel2, TWU.70. Ray Vati Dyne to Robert C. Edwards, January 17. 1946,inicr(} film reel 2.,TWU, Ray V. in 1) yne to Alex Bail. January24, 1946, microfilm reel 2TWU.71. RS, February 10, 1945,microfilm reel 2.TWU: Mot{ndsvilleDaily Ectio,Deceinber 21. 1946.71. Moundsville Daily Ecbo,February 22. 1946; RS, February24, 1946, microfilm reel 2.TWU. Marcus made a secondotter to union officials of a " 10% 02+ cents . aithour11ḻerease.73. RS,February 24, 1946,microhim reel 2; Nelson I.ichtenstein,1ạbor' s War at Home:Tbe C.10 in W

The Gateway toRegional Identity and tbeLouisville Civil Rights Movementthe South":TRACY E.K'MEYERA ccording to a survey conducted for the Louisville Urban I ėague in1948, "Most of the traditions of the deep South which appl>' to racerelations are observed in Louisville. On the other hand, man> relationsbetween the two races in Louisville aresimilar to those found in northern cities.White commentators considered Louisville "exceptional among southerncities in its community efforts to solve racial prciblenis.'In conti .ist, blackeditorialists argued that Louisville lagged behind Cincinnati and Springfield,Ohio;Cairo,Illinois;and Washington, D.C.,and argued that the "self-styledgateway to the South' is morally obligatedto make even greater progress tojustify its leadership claims." In'bothcases, Louisvillians employed regionalsymbols that were codes for the stateof racerelations. For most of the civilrights era, references to the deep Southor specific cities such as Birminghamserved as code for extreme segregation4and degraded race relations, whilereferences to midwestern ornorthernt*cities represented less rigid racial rulesand relative progress in civil rights.Through the use of such geographicreferences I.ouisvillians constructed aregional identity that reflected different,Louisville waterfront andand changing, assessments of the nature of race relations in the city. This essayera, the reconstruction of Louisville' s identity reflected changing national will demonstrate first how civil rights advocates and those who resisted, Clark Memorial Bridgedepicted in "Gatewayblack and white,used rhetoric about Louisville' tos regional identity to make theirtbe Sc,uth"by Williamcase iii battles over change in the racial status quo. This rhetorical struggleinformed the tone of the movement and helped to create the possibility ofprogress. Second, this essay wil] argue that, over the course of the civil rightsTbe Filson HistoricalSocietyKent Hagernian, ca. 1 956.SPRING 2004 43

THE GATEWAY TO THE SOUTH"perceptions of regional race relations,suggesting a new way of understandingthe north/south dichotomy depicted in movement scholarship.At the end of World War II,Louisville remained a segregated border city,butone that had begun to experience the economic, political, and social changesthat would r: shape its race relations. According to the 1950 census, since thestart of the war, the city' s population had grown by nearly sixteen percent to369,000,of whom 15.7 percent had been classified by census officials as "nonwhite."Thatpopulation was becoming increasingly segregated following whiteflight to the suburbs that began in the 1930sandaccelerated inthe 1950s. Asaresult,African Americans became concentrated in the oldest and most crowdedsections of tlie city' s west end. The population growth resulted in part froman expansiozi of warṯime defense industries that drew workers to the city, aresurrection in the local economy that began in Louisville' s chemical,plastics,and munitions factories. This expansion continued after thewar so that,by 1950,thirtyōne percent of the population1 ' worked in manufacturing. African Americans, however,1 , did not share equitably in the new jobs. A study by twoI social scientists at the University of Louisville showed that in1950 sixty- two percent of white men worked in white collar,skilled or supervisory positions while the same percentageof black men labored in service jobs or unskilled positions. 1Hence,these manufacturing plants helped shape not only thecity' s economic growth but, indirectly,its racial climate.in Louisville changed dramatically as well. As inrom themost1930s through the 1950s,the political climatesouthern cities,the Democratic party had dominated41 Louisville politics since the turn of the century. Unlike itssouthern neighbors, however,the city had an active Republicanparty that could muster enough votes to actually electcandidates on occasion and thereby challenge the status quo.Moreover,in the war yearsand afterward,Louisville receivedCharles Farnstey, mayor ofL)uisville 1948-1 98. TbcFilson Historical Societynational media attention for its forward-thinking, progressive Democraticmayors, particularly Wilson Wyatt and Charles Farnsley. Most important,Louisville' s African Americans had, since the 1870s, had access to the voteand in the wake of World War II, a number of factors increased the impactof their political participation. Although they made up just under twentypercent of the voting population,residential segregation concentrated AfricanAmericans into a small number of wards and districts, enabling them to electblack aldermen and state representatives on a regular basis. Another factor,much noted jn the press, that produced political clout for African Americansin Louisville was the mobility of black voters between political parties. Historicallythe majority of Louisville' s black voters had supported Republicans,44OHIO VALLEYHISTORY

ut after the New Deal they voted for Roosevelt and the Democratic Party innational elections while continuing to support Republicans at the city level.By 1956, the shift in party allegiances had created a split in black registeredvoters- 47.7 percent Republican and 47.1 percent Democrat. As a result,African Americans became a swing constituency in Louisville, forcing eachparty to work hard to keep their loyalists and to recruit from the other side,thus creating a political dynamic in which African Americans could bringconsiderable pressure to bear when they sought change:As aNorth, and Midwest.In its patterns of segregation, however, Lou-border city, Louisville combined characteristics of the South,isville remained decidedly southern. Black residents had accessonlyto separate and unequal parks, schools, and hospitals, and local ordinancesrestricted their patronage in downtown restaurants, theaters, and stores.Moreover, although Kentuckians had been divided during the Civil War,after Reconstruction white residents, including those in the state'sleadingcity,identified with their southern neighbors,memorializing the Confederacvand honoring it with monuments. Other factors, however, gave Louisville anorthern ormidwestern character.aThe city washome tobroad ethnic and religious mix, including relatively largeCatholic and Jewish populations, with both groups provid- 211* i »ing leaders and rankānd-file participants for the civil rights 14< »movement. Moreover,because outside corporations ownedand managed all but nine of the thirty-five largest plantst, :,*i »in the urban area, the economic expansion brought with it ,» 0".1.,st-'-the influence of not thern and nitional leaders. Decisions 14 1 »)>'- 4 :'»-»: pmade in national headquarters guided eveti unions in the ,St'largest Louisville plants. Finally,in contrast to the most of iff

THE GATEWAY TO THE SOUTH"ter traits rendered Louisville, although still a southern city, a unique one. Forexample,Mark Ethridge,general manager of the city' s main daily papers from1936 to 1963, wrote to a colleague, I " believe the Negro gets a better break inLouisville than in any southern city."Others noted that Louisville had "donebetter than any other city in the South"in its efforts to improve race relations,and as a result, one could find " more democracy"there than in the rest ofthe region: Indeed, throughout the movement years local media, activists,and officials circulated by word of mouth and in print as many expressions ofpride in Louisville' s " tradition of freedom"and its "reputation in race rela-tions"- which the Courier Journal described as almost " utopian"- as theydid to Louisville leading the South.7ning jn 1870 and 1871, when local African Americans successfullyrhe roots of these perceptions can be found in a series of events beginprotested segregation policies on the city' s public transportation. Later,in 1931, after several years of pressure, black political leaders convinced thecity to establish Louisville Municipal College.8During World War II, MayorWilson Wyatt ensured black participation on draft boards and rationingboards, the housing commission,and his legislative committee, earning him areputation for liberality. And in the decade after the war the city' s librariesintegrated, a biracial movement forced the opening of public hospitals,and in1951 the University of Louisville admitted its first African American students.10Each advance resulted from black pressure with sporadic assistance by whiteliberal allies. In each case, black leaders argued that, as taxpayers, AfricanAmericans deserved access to these government- owned or operated facilities.Black and white activists would repeat these successes and, in turn, woulduse them for different goals in debates over further advances throughout thecivil rights er,1.Despite the prevalence of Louisville' s progressive image, black leaders andwhite liberals during and since the civil rights movement have taken exceptionto this picture. Some charge that Louisville' s progressive reputation served toquiet black complaints. Lyman Johnson, for example, recalled that "whiteleaders would say, Look ' how good we are to you. Now,don' t bug us toomuch.White activist Ira Grupper also argues that the city' s reputation wasused to co-opt black leaders, giving minor concessions such as positions oncity boards or integrated libraries that were not available in deep South cities."Others believe that Louisville' sselfīmage allowed its citizens to deny the extentof racial problems while being "soothed"into believing they were activelyaddressing them. 12 Often these critiques of Louisville' s purported good racerelations used references to the deep Southinparticular its extreme segregationtoundercut the image. Lyman Johnson remarked that white leadersexpected Louisville' s black residents to be happy that they were not in Atlantaor Birmingham. J.C. Olden, in a column published in a local black paper in46 OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

1953, argued that Louisville should not become too self-satisfied because, insome ways, Mississippi " attitudes" wereprevalent. Indeed,the local NAACPwarned that beneath the city' sproudly liberal demeanor, There " are manyundercover Bilbos and Talmadges in Louisville."1 1The conflicted nature of Louisville' s identitysouthern,leading southern,border, or perhaps something elsemanifesteditself in debates over themeaning of civil rights advances between 1945 and 1975.While white civicleaders,for the most part conservative or moderate, described Louisville as aborder city that was ahead of and better than the rest of its natural region,theSouth, black civil rights activists and their white allies consistently challengedthat image.As early as 1947, black leaders began to argue that residentsshould not consider Louisville asthe leader of the South' s racerelations. Inthatyear, they campaigned to desegregate parks and recreational facilities;inthis effort, black leaders used two rhetorical strategies. First, they disputedLouisville' s progressive image. Indeed, the editor of the Defender argued thatin order for the city to maintain its leadership position in the South the localbaseball team needed to integrate its facilities in order to stop disgracing" "the community.14 Second and more interestingly,black leaders tried to recastLouisville' s identity by categorizing it as a midwestern city, along with St.Louis, Indianapolis, and Cincinnati.li In regional racial code, the Midwestwas a transitional place and more advanced in race relations than the South.By claiming that Louisville was more midwestern than southern, black leadersbelieved that its residents would measure its progress against the formerregion' s standards and the obviously poor comparison would goad whiteleaders to work harder to justify its progressive image. Such emulation wouldthus improve civil rights more rapidly.White city officials declined to do so, falling back upon its southernidentification. According to a newspaper report,City Law DirectorGilbert Burnett refused to integrate the public parks because,Louisville had the best race relations of any large city and [he] intended tokeep the situation that way." 16 Furthermore,the city' s mayor E. Leland Taylorargued that integrating the parks would cause racial confrontations. Angryblack spokesmen responded that there had been no such trouble in Cincinnatior St. Louis and charged that the mayor had made white Louisvillianslook like the "hoodlums of South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida." 17 In otherwords, black leaders argued that Louisvillians were midwesterners who couldbe expected to accept integration unlike racial bigots from the deep South. Inthis case, black activists had little success in framing the debate or challengingLouisville to change its regional identity. Only small steps had been takentoward opening public recreational facilities,such as the integration of a parkamphitheater,before a Supreme Court decision in 1955 forced city leaderstodesegregate the parks. Nevertheless, white Louisvillians maintained thatSPRING 200447

THE GATEWAY TO THE SOUTH"this slow pattern of progress reflected well on the city and should be a modelfor the future.' 8The event that cemented Louisville' s selfīmage and national reputation asa leading southern city was the desegregation of its public schools in September1956. At the . announcement of the Brown v. Board of Education, stateand city officials expected that Kentucky and Louisville would lead the Southtoward integration because "Kentucky has had a more liberal attitude towardsegregation than IT[ost other southern states." Indeed,the state had forged "to the front in carrying out the Court' s ruling"by already amending parts ofthe state school segregation law. School officials in Louisville in particularbelieved that " we vould not really have the problems in Louisville that othercities, say in the Scuth would have hadthedeep SouthbecauseLouisvillewas a broad-minded city. We had integrated parks,buses, street cars, all thosethings."One school principal promised that Louisville "will serve as a patternfor other southern cities." Believing " that Louisville would fulfill its role asthe leader for the S,Duth,school officials began a two ȳear process of planningfor and implement ng school desegregation.s in the debate over desegregation of the parks,local black leaders triedto urge quick progress by challenging Louisville' s self-construction as aleading southern city. In this case, they compared Louisville to schoolsystems in West Virginia,Missouri,and in Maryland in order to beat the drumfor rapid school integration. A month after Brown,the Defender described theprogress in Baltimore,like Louisville a border city described as similarly torn "between northern ind southern practices," and asserted that West Virginiahad surpassed Louisville and thus threatened the latter' s reputation. AfricanAmerican publisher Frank Stanley pointedly argued that,compared to theseother places, "Louisville,the self-styled number ōne ḻiberalcityof the South islagging behincl."Later,NAACP president George Cordery issued a challenge,Certainly the citizens of Baltimore are not more enlightened than those ofLouisville. 2() On the occasion of Cordery' s remark, the NAACP,hoping toforce the city to prove itsel f the most enlightened place in the region,submitteda petition calling for immediate school integration in the fal] of 1955. Schoolofficials responded with a plan and a promise for integrating one year later.With school integration defined as a southern problem,Louisville receivedlavish praise for being a southern city that could lead the region toward asolution to its racial problems. On September 4, 1956, Louisville' s publicschools integrated with minimal public opposition. The integration plan assignedstudents to schools by district, and provided a " safety valve"in theform of a transfer option for students who did not want to attend a schoolin which they were a minority. In contrast to the mob scenes and violencethat attended school integration elsewhere, in Louisville five lonely picketerspaced in front of the Board of Education office. The story of this "peaceful48OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

integration"made a splash in the national media and earned the city and itsofficials national and eveninternational praise. Benjamin Fine,wrote in theNew York Times, When the history of this proud southern city is written,thisday will undoubtedly go down as a historic landmark.... Even in the South,itwas shown here,integration can be made to work without violence." 11 Nationalmagazines picked up the story and,in articles titled "The Quiet Zone,How to Integrate," The"Quiet Way," and "It Works in Louisville"describedhow Louisville' s acting school superintendent,Omer Carmichael ( a native ofAlabama),had led the city to integrate without the confrontation that plaguedother locales.22Superintendent Omer Carmichael soon received a White Houseinvitation aswell as anumber of honorarydegrees. The National NAACP gavetizilllU.S. Information Agency and National 44.its Kentucky branch an award and the . 1/yal4.li-I-3 MITaa-Broadcasting Corporation collaborated -VUIEP 4043*on a film about the Louisville story for 4 *rdistribution in Europe,Asia,and Africa.Indeed, the Assistant Director of theSouth African Institute of Race Rela- . 2tions viewed Louisville as a model for {j{« »4* jj0, .desegregation.23r-throughfew voices questioned thethe din of extent »»-. celebration,a * »« 4 f /and meaning of Louisville' s inte- -««« -gration of its schools. In her 1956 reporton the situation,Anne Braden wrote that while Louisville was the "first major Proni left to right: Earlesouthern city to begin desegregation... that does not mean that there is Pruitt,Beecber TerracenotHousing Project Manager;much bitter anti-integration feeling among sections of the white population."In fact, she concluded, pressure from black and white liberal activists, notconservatives,had prevented school officials from taking five years to integrate.Similarly,James Crumlin, president of the state NAACP,called Louisville' sintegration token."But " critics of Louisville' s school integration plans and actioilsreserved their strongest criticism for the city' s failure to integrate teachers,a cause the Defender took up and championed for years. The paper pointedout in September 1958, for example, that teacher integration in Louisvilletagged behind Detroit as well as Missouri, West Virginia, Ohio, and interestingly,Washingtonstate. Once more, black commentators used northern andmidwestern cities as the yardstick to measure progress. But these criticismsfailed to dent the generally positive reputation the city had gained locally andnationally, nor did they challenge its identity, now even more firmly cemented,as a leading southern city. Indeed,in 1959,when the school board finally didintegrate faculties, an editorial in the Defender admitted that Louisvillenow "5Frederick K.Bollman,Project Manager for tbeEconomic CooperationAdministration;MayorCharles Farnsley;PẠ.M.Mellbye,Interpreter.Picture taken at BeecherTerrace ontbe occasionof tbe visit of Norwegianarchitects,engineers andbuilders to Louisville undertbe sponsorship of E.C.A.for an inspection tour ofpublic housing onMonday,October 15. 1951. TheFilson Historical SocietySPRING 200449

THE GATEWAY TO THE SOUTH"will further deserve its title of the 'South' s most desegregated city."' 14Even before school integration,black leaders in Louisville warned againstcomplacency and satisfaction with Louisville' s progress, calling for the City totake the next step by integrating public accommodations,and using midwesterncities as a model. As early as March 1954,staff writers for the Defenderwarned that we " are not in the position to boast."Despite some progressdiscrimination still existed in jobs and facilities and, most damning, a deep "southern feeling is still in the hearts of many Kentuckians."The challenge,theDefender editorialized, was to beat back complacency and move full " steamahead" or risk being bypassed by the deep South.25 Specifically,Louisvilliansneeded to follow the model of African Americans in Kansas City,St. Louis,Chicago, and other midwestern cities and fight for a law against public accommodationdiscrimination.P-Mthroughout canthe multiȳear campaign for open accommodations Afri-American leaders employed rhetorical strategies that built uponthose earlier employed. The first was familiar: to cast Louisville as alagging midwestern city instead of a leading southern one. In March 1954Frank Stanley launched this effort by pointing out that "unlike Ohio,Illinois,and Indiana,"Louisville had no civil rights law. He continued, It"is timefor Louisville to cover up its southern exposure and look to the North, East,and West for the best example of how to protect the rights of all its citizens.Later,at the height of demonstrations held downtown,the Defender reiteratedthis theme, saying that "Louisville cannot be an exception to the pattern ofborder,northern,and western cities. 26More specifically,Louisville activistsreferred to events in Kansas City and St. Louis to prod local blacks out of theircomplacency,criticizing the community for riding its post- school integrationlaurels while in " Kansas City an aroused citizenry is marching in zero Idegree]weather in protest of bias." 27 And later,after the movement for desegregatingpublic accommodations had gained steam among local black residents, thecomparison was employed to urge white officials to follow those examplesand desegregate.Stanley justified the models by saying that the two citiesare identical to I ọuisville in civil rights privileges."And, at the height ofthe movement, the steering committee leading the demonstrations comparedprogress in the cities by stating, "Our expectation of desegregation in Louisvilleis not unrealistic when you consider that in a three week period St. Louisdesegregated 200 downtown restaurants, Kansas City 121 But .... here inLouisville,working on the problem for seven weeks,only 10 restaurants haveintegrated. 28To some extent black leaders were successful in casting St. Louis as theappropriate model for Louisville. In April 1961, Mayor Bruce Hoblitzell announcedhe would take a delegation to Missouri to discuss with city leadershow they had managed desegregation. The meeting,however,did not go as50OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

civil rights leaders had hoped. One member of the delegationtheowner ofone of the targets of the demonstrationscalledthe move a publicity stunt.And the mayor made a public statement saying that he believed Louisvillehad already gonefurther in desegregation than any other city,including St.Louis." 29 Nevertheless,the Coririer lottrnal pointed out that Hoblitzell' s planfor testing the extent of segregation in downtown shops mirrored one that hadworked in the sister city.wit or not, they were following midwestern models.Whether Louisville officials were willing to admitA second strategy employed the specter of the deep South as a challenge toLouisville' s identity. At first, these references were used to shame Louisvillebusinessmen into taking action. Early in the Defender' s effort to raise the issueof segregation in public facilities, reporters pointed out that ēven in theworst of the South"theater owners admitted black patrons, albeit with separateseating. Staff writer Clarence Mathews challenged theater owners by asking,Can it be that local theater owners are moreshallow than those of the deepSouth ? " 31 Once the sit- in demonstrations in the deep South begati to h. ire aneffect, this unfavorable comparison became a call for action. In June 1960,the Reverend C. Ewbank Tucker asserted that Louisville waslagging behindmany cities in the deep South."A yearlater,during the sit-in campaign indowntown Louisville,black leaders argued that because Atlanta was planningto desegregate by September,there could be no reason that Louisville in " lightof its past and present atmosphere of good relations should not desegregateimmediately.321hen the official reaction to sit-in demonstrations hardened, civilrights activists became frustrated and adopted a iii(, re accusetorytone, characterizing Louisville as no better than the worst ofits southern neighbors. In June 1961, Juvenile Court Judge Henry Triplettestablished his own " behavioral code"for youngpeople who participatedin demonstrations. Those who violated this code risked detention, as didadults for contributing to the delinquency of minors by failing to enforce thecode. Neither aspect of the code had a basis in local law,but it was used bypolice anyway. Triplett' s order stirred repeated comparisons to the posterchild of deep South racism: Mississippi. Critics charged Triplett himself asbeing "lower than any judge in Mississippi."And a year later,when policeand theater owners pushed and even attacked demonstrators, the ReverendTucker, oneof the victims, wrote to the mayor that "I had to look three timesto tell whether I was in Kentucky or Mississippi."Meanwhile, a young demonstratornamed Paul Duffy told the police they "would make good cops inMississippi."Duffy was later detained and given a psychiatric evaluation, aIBtactic civil rights leaders called the Mississippi treatment. Mississippi,likeBirmingham, was code for the most extreme form of segregation,and repeatedassociations between Louisvi]le and its benighted southern cousin challengedSPRING 2004 51

THE GATEWAY TO THE SOUTH"the city' s identity,and the assumptions about progressive racial attitudes thatunderlay that identity.dvocates of an open accommodations ordinance also used Louisville' sreputation for racial progressiveness as an argument for quick desegregation.The Defender argued that there existed "plenty of evidencethat Louisvillians will accept integration, specifically the "almost perfect nearten yeai record"of integration in public education. Moreover, a civil rights lawwould bring public facilities in "step with Louisville' s inherentspirittoleranceand acceptance." Martin Luther King, during a visit in April 1961 similarlyinvoked the inspiring " example"of school integration andthe "good will in your community. 34In a more challengngvein, black leaders repeatedly accused Louisville ofstanding still and resting on the laurels of a past record ofcompliance with integration. They argued that the city' srecord lulled whites into a false sense of superiority,blindingthem to the problems that remained to be conquered.3&/ Moreover,they pointed out when the "over-praised city"4 was embarrassed by racist slights to black visitors. 35 Thecontinuing problems,after a history of progress, endangeredLouisville' s good reputation, black leaders argued, as "asouthern city with a northern outlook." 36 To preserve itsposition as a leader for the region, Louisville, and localBruce Hoblitzell, mayor ofLoitisville 1957-1961. TheFilson Historical Societybusinessmen in particular,needed to take immediate stepsto eradicate segregation in the downtown.3The threat to Louisville' s reputation did move powerfulwhites, most notably the publisher and editor of the CourierJournal and Louisville Times,Barry Bingham and MarkEthridge, to advocate desegregation. In February 1961,soon after large scale downtown demonstrations began, an editorial writer forthe Courier Journal weighed in on the issue. The writer' s primary concern wasLouisville' s good name and leadership position in the region that he regardedas acivic asset, one not available to cities such as New Orleans and LittleRock where racial strife over school integration had tarnished reputations.The editorialist pointed out that cities such as Houston and Richmond,whichhad " far a deeper southern tradition," had desegregated with a minimum ofdisturbance. Asserting that "We cannot stand still in the midst of a fast-flowingstream," the writer called for public facilities to integrate voluntarily. Atthe same time,however,the editorial writers at the Courier Journal frownedon demonstrations or any other disorder that could threaten the city' s reputation.In short,the primary consideration of the two local newspapers was topreserve Louisville' s standing relative to other southern cities, not necessarilyto improve conditions for African Americans. In fact, the latter was only a52OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

means to the former. When demonstrations renewed after ahalt for negotiations,for example, the Coltrier Joltrlial criticized impatient black leaders andpraised those businesses that desegregated without finfare.4+ In doing so, thepaper spoke for white moderate business and civic leaders who took pride intheir city' s record, saw advantages in maintaining it, and willinglr supportedgradual change tc, the extent that it reinforced Louisville' s identity as a leaderin the South.The response by white officials,specifically the city' s ma>' ors and candidatesfor mayor, during the campaign fc, r an open accommodations law similarlydrew on Louisville' s reputatic, n. In 1957, when Bruce Hoblitzell ran for themayor's office and he was asked about a potential public acconimodationsordinance, he first asserted his own lack of prejudice. Then he stressed thathe did not want tc, force any particular act of integration for tear of upsettingthe progress for which Louisville was fatiious. Three > ears later as ma>or headopted the same position. He elaborated in February 1960, claiming thatbecause Louisville had already made "excellent progress in race relations,he believed that "if the accommodation issue wasleft alone it would 'takecare' of itself."During the demonstrations, Hoblitzell maintained that progressdid not need to be rushed because Iċ,uisville was alreadv "ahead of anvcomparable city," including St. Louis. The Democratic candidate who soughtto become his successor, William Milburn. ad(, pted the same pc șition. In acandidates' debate in February 1961, he said he was proud " of the fact thatLouisville is a national model and I hope to Ciod we can keep it that waybut he believed that forced integration would be "disastrotis tc, ur () steadypeaceful progress." 3 Civil rights advocates claimed that argunients sucli asthese allowed white conservative leaders to use the city' s reputation as a wayto slow down racial change.nation in public accommodations,however,worked only temporarily.P'he attempt to delay change by refusing to adopt a law against discrimiIn May 1963, after a yearand ahalf of demonstrations, debate,anddelay subsequent to the election of a new mayorand Board of Aldermen, theBoard passed a city civil rights ordinance,the first of its kind in asoutherncity and realized a full year before the national law. The ordinance once againraised the city to national prominence and earned it praise as aleader for itsregic, n.Chester Morrison,in anarticle for Look magazine entitled "The CityThat Integrated without Strife, argued that Louisville "has shown how thingscan be done."Later in the essay, he described a black man in Louisville readingabout violence elsewhere, observing "He wasn't in heaven, but he was not inBirmingham.Louisville native Hunter Thompson,writing in Tbe Reporter.went further,claiming that,based on the city' s progress,Louisville has integrateditself right out of the South."The highest praise for the city came in1964 when Louisville won the American Municipal League' s AllĀmericanSPRING 2004 53

THE GATEWAY TO THE SOUTH"City Award,specifically for passing an open accommodations ordinance,whichinitiated several years of self-congratulations.40In the wake of the open accommodations movement, local activists continuedto press for further steps toward total desegregation,using arguments similarto those that helped get the law passed. The Defender editorialized that thegains in which the city took such great pride were in jeopardy and did notsuffice to declare victory. Indeed, the writer accused the city of doing "onlythat which is necessary to keep us from being in the same category as a Mississippior Alabama. The problem, the writer argued,lay in the temptationto "measure Louisville and Kentucky progress by what has been achieved inthe deep South and not by our neighboring midwestern and sister northern,eastern, or western states. 41"Immediately after the passage of the open accommodations law,Louisvillecivil rights leaders began calling for an enforceable open housing ordinance.Open housing activists used arguments that echoed those employed duringearlier battles. The West End Community Council, for example,argued that,because Louisville lay "between North and South"it had a unique opportunityto produce a model solution to the problem of segregated housing inboth regions. As early as 1963, the Defender pointed out that such modelsalready existed. Indeed, all " sections except the South are considering openoccupancy laws"and current campaigns for such laws in Illinois,Indiana,andOhio (by now familiar examples) were underway. Later,during the debate overan open occupancy law,Clarence Matthews reviewed bills in other locations,emphasizing that in St. Louis, a city located " similarly as Louisville, the lawcalled for jail time and fines.42Playing on fears that demonstrations mightharm Louisville' s image, black leaders pleaded with city officials to head themoff by approving an open housing ordinance. For example, long-time leaderMaurice Rabb begged, Please " don' t send me into the streets. I don' t want todemonstrate. It is not good for Louisville."Meanwhile Hulbert James askedthe mayor to call a meeting on the issue to "save Louisville from the turmoilof demonstrations." 43ost interesting, open housing advocates changed the regionalreferences for what Louisville should avoid. Since the time of thepublic accommodations ordinance,national events had changed theatmosphere in which civil rights battles were waged. In particular,the openIIhousing campaign took place in the shadow of the long hot summers of riotsin northern and western cities. Moreover, a year earlier,demonstrations foropen housing in Chicago had led to racial violence. Now,although studentsand faculty from the University of Louisville issued a statement supportingopen housing saying that they did not want to see Louisville become the "next Selma or Birmingham," black leaders also warned against following theexample of "Watts,Hough, or Harlem."They argued that the key to prevent-54OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

ing violence lay in demonstrating for,and succeeding in, the procurement ofan open housing ordinance.44 In short,Louisville activists implicitly warnedcity officials that this border community could be hurt as much b>becotiiinglike a northern city as it would one in the deep South.Anothersignificantchange inthedebateduring the late 19605, over openhousing lay in the fact that white civic leaders, pro- civil rights city officials,andthe CourierJot,/ iial adopted many of activists'traditionalarguments, albeit in somewhat milder forms. Iii late 1966, for example, theHousing Committee of the Louisville Human Relations Commission (LHRC)debated whether the city' s applicatioii for federal money under the model-cityprogram would be accepted if the city failed to enact an open hotising ordinance.Thereafter,the Courier Journal took up the issue and repeatedly usedit to press for a quick passage of the law: i Moreover,the paper emulatedthe civil rights movement'sfocus on St. Louis as a model for Lotilsville in itscoverage of the open housing issue, publishing detailed articles about how,the former managed to get a strong law.46 The Courier Journal warned a\ soagainst actions that would render Louisville a deep South cit>:Most colorfully,theeditorial writers warned that if a law didn' t pass and denionstrationsresumed, it would make Louisville look " like Zilchville,Alabama or Mississippi."47 Similarly,early in 1967,Monsignor Alfred Horrigan, chairman ofthe city' s Human Relations Commission,asserted that Louisville had aliberalreputation and a strong record but needed to pass open housing legislationto maintain that reputation and prc,gress. A few months later. as contrc,versyover the issue increased, black ilderwoman Louise Reynolds expressed her fearthat "Louisville stands in danger of losing her good image by oppcșition andfailure to act. The Courier Journal' S editorial writer went further saying thatdelay can only make it more difficult still for Louisville to hold its reputationas a city of calm,reasoned progress. Indeed,the city' s preeminent daily paperessentially mimicked the Defender' s earlier position when it argued that "itdoes no good to recite the litany of progress" from the past. 48take the next step in civil rights.The city mustIronically,the Board of Aldermen did just what the Courier Journal warnedagainst;it relied c,n Louisville' s past record of progress as an excuse for votingdown the proposed open housing ordinance in the spring of 1967. In justi fyingthe vote, the aldermen expressed pride that Louisville was the first southerncity to pass a civil rights law,arguing that "Our Negro community is betterhoused and better employed than any city of comparable size.Their decisionto disapprove the housing ordinance,they asserted,had resulted from disordersand demonstrations and they maintained that they would not approve such anordinance as long as outside extremists were present in the community.49 TheCourier Journal immediately attacked the decision,calling it disingenuous forthe aldermen to cite Louisville' s past progress and yet refuse to take the nextSPRING 2004 55

THE GATEWAY TO THE SOUTH"step. Moreover,their antagonism toward outsiders resembled the "xenophobia"of"Ku Kluxers and other civil rights opponents in the most backwardareas of the deep South." 50 Meanwhile, open housing advocates pledged tokeep up their work,threatening to demonstrate during Derby Week and steppingup the campaign to get Louisville' s model city application denied.51 In theend, a concerted political campaign installed a new mayor and a new Boardof Aldermen that within a month passed an open housing law.Louisville'Phe passagesof reputationthe openashousing a leader for the South. The national medialaw,however,came too latehad already decided the pedestalto savewas broken. The main source ofcriticism of the city focused not on failure to approve the law but rather onthe city's reaction to demonstrators at the height of the campaign.Newsweekdescribed "mobs of snarling white youths"who surrounded open housingmarchers and pelted them "with curses, racial slurs, rocks, eggs, tomatoesand firecrackers"and police "armedECONTINUESIVIL RIGHTS PROG*IN CITYp/oyment,Housingli New Targets510. ......Negro Leciders Are Neither DḞ.< 8 SegigHoon Schools Possib/ eH( R¢DA 3jLy z.witha¢#'Complacent Or InactiveI .........:..0.>N.K&......%hard hats, 3-foot riot staves,teargasand yellow smoke bombs"whostopped the confrontation by arrestingthe demonstrators. This scene, Newsleaceomit Od,¢] gl:$01 a¢ 1 ifth SreLfFapt,6,L),t,rell 10[,r . e * d(irs ltle stghr Lhir,g .re-jijit are# bu ior, hely.1ċejṁ.. I. %..). .... C... r.. tr4=. ... te... [. t- ... progiİ. .. .... mo ' hl. ........'... s.' riteehe NAACP dr dbi -eu wbeṄro: t mov .week contended, was the " year's ugh-est racial confrontation." il Lawrencet 'i,f... 3 Jn . narneysad . ed twee: = At:țln but 0$;1rh (itere . *srutlt ṡ 0

the community as a northern city with all that implied about attendant racialproblems. As early as 1963. Hunter Thompson wrote that Louisville hadintegrated itself out right out of the South"and that it now " faces problemsmore like those of a northern ormidwestern citv." Si The public accommodationslaw had eliminated a problem that most obviously identified Louisville,to use an earlier phrase, as " southern in its approach to the Negro."However,between the passageof the local civil rights ordinance in 1963 and the openhousing conflict in 1967, riots in northern and western communities had drawnattention to problems of overcrowding in slums, job discrimination, and policebrutality. These issues became identified as northern," " and thus a newnegative racial reference was added to Birmingham: Harlem. Soon Louisvilleactivists began to identify similar probleis in their city and used the northernreferences as a warning. Black leaders asserted that Louisville' s schools hadbegun to re-segregate by way of white flight to the suburbs,the West End wasbecoming overcrowded and sinking into slum conditions, black residents facedgrowing employment discrimination as jc,bs moved to the south and east ends,and incidents of police harassment were increasing.i(, The West End CommunityCouncil vacillated between ati optimistic and pessimistic rendering ofthe situation. At times it argued that as a border city,L()uisville could lead theway out of these problems for both regions. But at other times it warned thatwithout progress, Louisville will simply move from the old problems of theSouth to the frightening racial problems of the North."'" Others argued thatLouisville needed " to learn the lessons from other cities where there have beenoutbreaks of racial violence"such as Cleveland,Watts, orHarleni.il{ Indeed,in late May 1968, a month after riots ravaged American cities in the wake ofthe assassination of Martin Luther King, Louisvillians learned that it couldhappen here.For four days, Louisville suffered from a civil disturbancestemming from anger over a police harassment case and simmering frustrationovercontinued housing and job discrimination.· 09The May 1968 riot received little attention from the national media.But afew years later,another kind ofriotwhiteviolence during antibusingprotestsonceagain put the city' s racial and regional identityiii the national spotlight. White residents commonly associated busing withnorthern cities and in the national coverage of the controversy, Louisvillefrequently appeared alongside Boston in articles describing scenes of mobsdamaging buses and shopping areas. One author wrote at the start of schoolyear in 1975 that "Louisville found itself abruptly face- to- face with a cornmunitycrisisandwith a violently racist image to rival that of Birminghamand Boston. 60 Ironically,Louisville' s realization of its midwestern identitycoincided with a change in the South' s racial code; to be "northern" nowevoked problems of intransigent racism.During the late 19605, changes in national perceptions of regional racialSPRING 2004 57

THE GATEWAY TO THE SOUTH"codes transformed the construction of Louisville' s racial and regional identity.When southern meant " bad, white leaders saw Louisville as a border city onthe leading edge of the South, a racially liberal city at the forefront of regionalprogress. However, black leaders continually contested Louisville' s identity,pushing the city to emulate midwestern cities,considered better in racial terms,in order to maintain its reputation. White conservatives, meanwhile, usedthe reputation to call for gradualism; in effect, to slow down change. By themid-1960s, however,white liberals and moderates began to employ some ofthe activists' rhetoric,pushing for the city to emulate midwestern neighbors inorder to preserve Louisville' s identity as a leader in race relations. Ironically,just as whites adopted the new rhetoric, two changes reconstructed Louisville' sregional and racial identity. First,the conflict over open housing undercut thecity' s position,in image and in reality, as a leader in racial change for the South.Continuing racial problems,culminating in the riot and the violent reaction tobusing, then cast the community in a much different light. Second,the meaningsof regional racial codes changed. When Jim Crow was the most obviousmanifestation of racism,the South served as a negative pole for race relations.According to this code, Louisville was a southern city primarily because ofsegregation in its schools and public facilities. By the late-19605, however,theNorth became associated,perhaps more than the South,with intransigent racialhostility, poverty, and discrimination. Louisville remained a border community,but the meaning of that position had changed. Instead of marking Louisvilleas a progressive leader in a benighted South, now the city became identified inthe new code with the racial problems of both North and South.North/South dichotomy in the scholarshiphat does the reconstruction of regional codes on the civil rightstell us about movement?Recently,historians have begun to challenge the narrativethethat divides the movement between a not» violent southern phase and a violentseparatist northern phase. Part of this new historiography stems from an effortto find new ways of talking about regional racial problems. Louisville' srhetorical conflict over its regional identity,including its assumptions about thenature of its race relations,shows that people at the time did speak in regionalcodestheSouth as the seat of Jim Crow,the North as the "promised land,"and the Midwest and West as places without rigid moresandthat those codeschanged in the late 1960s. This pattern gives weight to the narrative dichotomybetween North and South.But the Louisville example also illustrates howsome people tried to change regional identities and the assumptions about racerelations that underlay them. Historians need to examine similar rhetoricalchallenges to understand how northerners and midwesterners,before the mid-19609 riots,tried to undercut the regional code and the underlying assumptionsabout race in their communities. 458OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

1. J. Harvey Kerns, A"Survey of the Economic and CulturalConditions of the Negro Population of Louisville, KY,"1948, Arthur Kling Papers, File 2,University of 1ọuisvilleArchives, Louisville (hereafter cited as ULA); Urban "League Told Life Not So Bright For Negroes," CourierJournal, 13 April 1948; Judge " Shelbourne' s Decision,"De/ ender, 22 September 1951.2. U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census of Population:1950.Part 17 Kentucky Washington: U.S. Government PrintingOffice, 1952); Louisville: " A Blend of Almost Everywhere,Business Week, 7 May 1955; Scott Cummings and MichaelPrice, Race " Relations in Louisville: Southern Racial Traditionsand Northern Class Dynamics,"Urban ResearchInstitute Policy Paper Series,June 1990, 13.3. On leadership in Louisville and media attention on Wyattand Farnsley, see Louisville: " A Blend"; Webb Waldron,Wilson Wyatt Gets Things Done,"Reader' s Digest, February1944; "Wyatt of Louisville,"New Republic,27 August1945. On factors influencing changes in black votingbehavior in the 1940s and '505, see Ernest Collins, "ThePolitical Behavior of the Negroes in Cincinnati,Ohio andLouisville,Kentucky" (Ph. D. diss.,University of Kentucky,1950);and Louis C. Kesselman, "Negro Voting in a BorderCommunity: Louisville,Kentucky," Journal of Negro Editcation17 1957):273-80.4. On segregation in Louisville in this period, see George C.Wright,Life Behind aVeil:Blacks in 1-ouisville,Kentucky,1865-1930 Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press,1985).On Louisville' ssouthern orientation, see OmerCarmichael and Weldon James,Tbe Louisville StoryNewYork: Simon and Schuster,1957),12-14. On Louisville' snorthern character seeWilson Wyatt. interview by JohnEgerton, 12 July 1990, Southern Oral History Collection,Wilson Library,University of North Carolina, Chapel Hillhereafter cited as SOHC); " Louisville: A Blend."For anexample of how one union' s support for integration wasinfluenced by national union policy see Toni Gilpin, LeftBy Themselves':A History of the Farm Equipment and MetalworkersUnion, 1938-1955,"Ph. D. diss.,Yale University,1992. For a more detailed description of Louisville' s borderposition, see K'Meyer, Building " Interracial Democracy:The Civil Rights Movement in 1ọuisville,Kentucky,1945-1956," in Adam Green and Charles Payne, eds. ȚimeLonger Tban Rope New York: New York University Press,2003).5. Wyatt, interview, Louis C. Kesselman, Kentucky " NegroSuffrage Fact-Finding Project," September 1956, SouthernRegional Council Papers, Reel 10 Folder 15;Kerns, A"Survey...," 1948 Kling Papers, File 2, Ul,A.6. Mark Ethridge to Virginius Dabney,8 June 1939,MarkEthridge Papers Box 1, File 5, Southern Historical Collection,Universityof North Carolina, Chapel Hill,NC, UrbanLeague Told Life Not So Bright for Negroes," Cotirier"Journal, 13 April 1948; "Speaker Hails Cooperation ofRaces Here,"Courier Journal,1 April 1952; Council " onInterracial Cooperation Formed to Aid Negroes in Kentucky,"Courier Journal, 15 February 1941.7. "Town' s Attitude on Race is 'Sobering' NCCJ Believes," Defender,10January 1951; Robert A. Warner Letter to Editor,Courier Journal,6 September 1945; Let " Us in LouisvilleKeep Our Perspective," Courier Jolțrnal clipping [January1942],Murray Walls Papers Box 2, File 12,ULA.8. For information on struggles for black equality and theirresult before 1930, see Wright, Life Behind a Veil.9. "Negroes Active in Louisville Municipal Government," TheAmerican City,April 1945;Wyatt,interview.10. Lists of Louisville' sinterracial accomplishments can befound in numerouslocations. For examples, seeJohn BenjaminHorton, Not Witbozit Struggle New York: VantagePress. 1979),179-80; Kentucky' sBlack HeritageKentucky Commission on Human Rights, 1971).Frankfort:11. Lyman Johnson, interview by John Egerton, 12 July 1990,SOHC.Ira Grupper,interview by Tracy K'Meyer,9 May2000 in Oral History Collection, ULA (hereafter cited asOHC).12. Deedom Alston, interview by lunknown],9 june 1978,OHC;John Filiatreau,interview by Tracy K'Meyer, 19March 2001, HC. ()13. Johnson, interview. J.C. Olden. "Militant Church,-Defender. 19 November 1953. Louisville Branch NAACPNewsletter,26 October 1946, 2:C66, File marked Louisville,Kentucky,1945-49, NAACP Papers onmicrofilm.14. "Judge Shelbourne' s Decision,"Defender,11 September1951; Frank Stanley, Being " Frank About People, Places,and Problems, Defender,11 November 1953.15. I. Willis Cole. 1. etter to Editor,Courier journal,19 July1946: "Farnsley Promises to Poll Louisvillians on Segregationin Parks,"Courier Joitrnal, 25 May 1948.16. "Negro' s Suit to Open Parks and Amphitheater Put Off,"Courier Journal,30 July 1947,17. "The Mayor' s Ghost," Louisville Leader.9 August 1947:J. c. Olden, "T. Byrne Morgan- His Record."Defender,9February 1952.18. "On the Racial Front,Quiet Progress," Courier Joilrnaleditorial),16 March 1954.19. Hugh Morris, "Decision Voids State' s Day Law." Courierjoitrnal, 18 May 1954; Joe Reister, State " is Urged toLead Fight on Racial Bar."Courier Journal.11 July 1954;William Paterson, interview by Darlene Eakin, n. d.,OHC;What Louisvillians Think of the Supreme Court Decision,"Defender. 20 May 1954.20. Frank Stanley. Being "' Frank About...," Defender,17 June1954; "Will Kentucky Be Last?" Defender,17 June 1954;George T. Cordery,Jr.,Letter to Editor,Defender,19 July1954; Frank Stanley, Being " Frank About...," Defender,21 October 1954; 20 " Demand Integration Here Now,"Courier journal,11 July 1955,21. Benjamin Fine, editorial originally in New York Times,reprinted in Courier Journal,11 September 1956.22. "Quiet Zone," Newsweek,14 September 1956; How " ToIntegrate," Time, 24 September 1956; The " Quiet Way,"Newsweek,29 July 1957; It"Works In Louisville," TheReporter, 18 February 1960.23. "Carmichael Will Tell Ike about Integration," Courier Journal,18 September 1956;Jean Howerton, Quiet "'HeardAround the World,'- School Integration in Louisville,"clipping, 28 January 1957,Anne Braden Papers, Box 10,File 1, State Historical Society of Wisconsin,Madison, WIhereafter SHSW); NAACP " Kentucky Unit Draws Praise,"Courier Journal,28 June 1 957; "City' s Integration will beFilmed,"Courier Journal,19 April 1957; School " IntegrationSuccess Has Put Louisville on Map,"Courier Journal,20 November 1956.24. Draft Report on School Desegregation in Kentucky, 1956,Braden Papers,Box 53, File 12,SHSW; Negro " CriticizesToken Integration' Here," Courier journal,5 August 1957;Teacher Segregation Believed Unlawful," Defender, 18September 1958; Frank Stanley, Being " Frank About...,"Defender,15 September 1958; School " Board Takes NextLogical Step,"Defender,6 August 1959.SPRING 200459

THE GATEWAY TO THE SOUTH"25. Frank Stanley, Being " Frank About...," Defender,15March 1954; "Our Challenge,"Defender,10 May 1956.26. Frank Stanley, Being " Frank About...," Defender,18March 1954; "Without Communication There Can Be NoDesegregation Progress,"Defender,25 May 1961.27. Nat Tillman, Taylor' s Serve, Refuse Within 2 Blocks,Defender, 29, January 1959; Tillman, "St. Louis StudentsBegin Boycott,No Support Given in Louisville," Defender,19 March 1959.28. Stanley, Being " Frank About...," Defender.11 October1959; George Gill, "10 Downtown Eating Places Hit AsNegroes Resume Sit-In Plans," CouTier Journal,16 April1961.29. "Committee Plans St. Louis Visit,"Courier Journal,15April 1961; Stanley, Being " Frank About...," Defender,17April 1961; "Mayor Plans Tests for Desegregation,"Courierjournal,26 April 1961.30. "This is a Crucial Time for Decision on Desegregation,"Courier Journal,27 April 1961.31. Clarence Mathews, Louisville " Public Places Present DismalPicture of Discrimination," Defender,19 November 1956.32. "Group Formed to Speed up Integration Here,"Couriaournal, 10 June 1960; Statement "is Presented by NegroUnit,"Courier/ournal, 10 March 1961.33. William Shelbourne, Letter to Editor Defender,11 June1961; "Negro I.eaders Assail Judge..." Defender,11 June1961; News from SCEF,June 13, 1962, Braden Papers, Box55, File 3, SHSW.34. "Louisville' s Great Decision ot 1960,"Defender,18 February1960;Ora Spaid, Dr.King " Says 'Segregation is Dead,Courier Journal, 20 April 1961.35. Frank Stanley, Being " Frank About...," Defender,15 February1960; Frank Stanley, Being " Fratik About Defendey. ..,"3 March 1960; Tucker " Sets Civil Rights Body," Defender,16 June 1960; "Avoidable Shame,"Defender,27 ctober1960.36. Lois Beam, I. etter to Editor,Defender, 14 January 1960.37. George Kimbrough, Letter to Editor,Courier Journal,17February 1960.38. 1.ouisville " at a Crossroads of Spirit and Substance,"Courier Journal,17 February 1961, "Time Enough Left fora Decent Human Influence,"Courier Journal,11 March1961; "Don' t Overlook this Progress in Integration," COUrierJournal,22 April 1961.39. Clarence Matthews, "Frontiers Quiz Candidates onRightsBill,"Defender,14 October 1957; "Mayor Refuses Stand inAccommodations Issue,"Defender,7 January 1960; InterracialGroup Views Porgy and Bess,"Defender,4"February1960; Bruce Hoblitzell tO Fred Fulford, 1 May 1961,NAACP Papers,3.CSO; " 4 Clandidates for Mayor GiveRacial Views,"Courier Journal,14 February 1961.40. Chester Morrison, The " City that Integrated WithoutStrife," Look, 13 August 1963; Hunter S.Thompson, "ASouthern City with Northern Problems," Tbe Reporter,19 December 1963; "Louisville Wins US City Award,"Defender,1 April 196441. "Integration- Still our Most Urgent Need," Defender,13February 1964; Frank Stanley, Being " Frank About...,"Defender 19 March 1964.42. C. Gresham Marmion to Rev. James R Morton, 27 January1964,West End Community Council (WECC) Papers, Box9, File 7,SHSW. "Housing Discrimination Gets Going Overin 13 States...," Defender, 14 March 1963; Frank Stanley,Being Frank About...," Defender, 29 August 1963; ClarenceMatthews, "Other States Have Tough Open OccupancyLaws,"Defender, 9 March 1967.43. Vincent Crowdus, "Aldermen Offered New Housing Plan,Courier Journal, 15 February 1967; Press Release,26 February1967, Braden Papers, Box 82, File 3, SHSW.44. "Statement froin Students and Faculty for Open Housi, 16,Spring 1969, Ray Bixler Papers, Box 5, File 1961-1967,ULA; "Open Housing and an End to the Vietnam Draft,1967,Braden Papers, Box 78, File 4; "West End LeaderCalls for Coalition,"Detknder.20 March 1967.45. LHRCĪ IRC Minutes,21 December 1966, Bixler Papers,Box 5, File 1961-1967,ULA. Open " Ilousing and theModel Cities Concept,"Courier Journal, 14 January 1967;How St. 1.ouis Would Becc, ine a ' Model City, Courierjournal,28 January 1967; Can " an AllĀmerican CityBecome a Model City,Too?" Courier Journal,15 March1967.46. "St. I.ouis I Iousing Penalty 'Dusty.-Coitrier Journal,19January 1967.47. "Louisville E. titers a Critical Period in Race Relations,Cotiriel /ournal, 20 January 1967.48. Vincent Crowdus, City " Aldermen will Conduct HousingDebate," Courier journal, 11 January 1967; "Two NegroAldermen Urge Action on Housing Law," Courier Journal,11 March 1967; The " Fever Rises on Open Housing in Louisville,"Courier./ournal,31 March 1967. The " High Costof Inaction oil Open Housing," COUTier Journal,16 March1967.49. "Text of A]dermanic Cominittee' s Report on Open Housilig,"Courierjournal, \ 1 April 1967.50. "Louisville Fails Itself on Open Housing,"Courier journal,13 April 1967.51. Ad Hoc Committee on Open Housing, 3 May 1967 Meeting,WECCPapers, Box 8. File 15; Kentucky Chapter ofthe National Association of Intergroup Relations OfficialsMinutes, 9 May 1967,WECC Papers, Box 8, File 12, bothin SHSW.52. "Whose Kentucky Home?" Newsiveek, 1 May 1967.53. Lawrence Grauman,Jr., The " Derby Runs Scared,"T/, eNation,19 May 1967.54. William Peeples, "Open Housing," 7'be New Republic,13 January 1968; Louisville' "s Race: Derby Bogs I) own,"Christia/;Century, 21 June ]967.55. Thompson, Southern " City with Northerii Problems."56. Nat Tillman. Riot " Root Problems Exist Here in Louisville,"Defender,27 July 1967: "Rev. W.J. Hodge DecriesLack of City Race Relations Progress,"Defender.10 February1969; "Human Rights News," June-July 1972, SocialAction Collection File 24,Kentucky Commission on HumanRights, 51 ISW.57. History and Intentioits of the West End CommunityCouncil, March 1965, I larry C. Webster Papers, Box 2,File Labeled WECC 1961-1968, ULA;Operation West EndProposal, 1965, WEC(] Papers, Box 1, File 1, SHSW.58. "Racial Turmoil and the City,"Defender,11 August 1966;West End Leaders Call for Coalition,"Defender, 20 March1967; "Open Housing and an End to the Vietnam Draft,"1967,Braden Papers, Box 78, File 4, SHSW.59. "Reality Belatedly Comes to Louisville,"Defender,6 June1968.60. Roger M. Williams, "What 1.ouisville Has Taught Us AboutBusing," Saturday Review, 30 April 1977. The " BusingDilemma,"Time,22 September 1974.60OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

Review EssayFashion on the Ohio Frontier,1790-1840."An Exhibition at Kent State University Museuni,Kent,Obio,July 26,2003,to January 18,2004.Curated by Anne Bissonnette.ention of the Ohio frontier usuallysummons up images of hilly terrain andremote cabins, of men chopping downtrees and plowing fields, and of women churningbutter and making homespun. Well-known woodcutsand lithographs of the period reinforce thisimpression. But Anne Bissonnette, curator of theKent State University Museum, has put togetheran exhibit that provides us with a very differentview of life in frontier Ohio. In "Fashion ontheOhio Frontier,1790-1840," she encourages us toput aside our ideas about early Ohio as an isolatedunwilling tc, relinquish the comfort and joy andmarks of distinction that bright colors and softfabrics could provide. They wanted to be as up todate asthe residents of eastern cities. ind merchantsin frontier Ohio did their best to supply them withwhat they Lvinted.When visitors enter the exhibit, they see almostimmediately a grouping of ladies and gentlemendressed in rich, colorful fabrics. The ladies appearin openrobe-style dresses made of blue andtaupe silk damasks that allowed petticoats to peekthrough the outer garment. These fabrics originallyhad been used to make stylish dresses in the 17504but thirty years later these dresses were cut downand altered to suit the taste of post ṟevolutionaryAmericans. The blue wool coat and brown velveteenknee breeches that adorn a man'sfigure alsoILeft to right: Gold silk gc, lun witb pointed attachedcollar, Ii țknown maker and place of origill, ca. 1 83 61838, possibly tbe woril 11 (}Coiinecticut Western Reserve,Obio. Collection of tbe Western Reserve HistoricalSociety.Right: Ivory silk organza gotun witb geometricprint,unknown niaker and place of rigin,ca. (, 1832-1835,possibly worit in Ross County,Ohio. Collection of tbeRoss County Historical Society.4 - t..place cut off from the larger world. While readilyacknowledging that not everyone in Ohio couldacquire for themselves the goods on display here,she nevertheless challenges uS to understand waysin which the pioneers who could afford to be fashionableattempted to maintain their connections toeastern culture. In short, life on the Ohio frontiermay have been hard, but clearly the settlers wereTaupe silk daniask open robe (robe 8 l'Anglaise)andmatching petticoat,unknown maker,Connecticut,originally made in tbe 17505 and altered ca. 1 780searly 1790s.made of Spitalfields silk damask,London,England.mid 1750s.used as a wedding gown,possiblyworn in the Northwest Territory. Collection of tbeObio Historical Society. Right: Blue silk damask openrobe (robe &l'Anglaise)unknown maker, gown fromConnecticut,originally made in orbefore 1756 andaltered ca. 1780s-early 1790s,made of Spitalfields silkdamask,London,England,mid 17505, worn by SusannahSmith at ber niarriage to Brigadier General Job, iDouglasin 1756,possibly worn in tbe Northwest Territory withintbe Connecticut Western Reserve. Collection of tbeWestern Reserve Historical Society.SPRING 200461

REVIEW ESSAYbI.ẹft to right: White linen shirt.unknown maker andplace of origin, ca. 1800-1825,possibly luorn in Obio.1 / 08 Collection oftbe Objo Historical Society. White andi.. 5 blue vertically striped cotton Cossack trousers,unknown5.1 ,' » maker and place of origin, ca. 1814-18205, worn in tbell /1 '.. Connecticut Western Reserve,Obic). Collection of tbeI. . .: j _j f »» Western Reserve Historical Society. Right: Beige morning+coat in cotton mixed witb tuool,ivory linen man'sshirtfro, it and neck stock, black wool Cossack trousers,' * red tuoo! sasb,unknorun maker and place of origin,I. 4 1826,possibly made in New jersey, worn by BenjaminI .. . k.:. 43 Titus Blackwell during military training in New Jersey,possibly worn in tbe Connecticut Western Reserve,Obio.appear to have been carefully tailored and meantto convey an impression of cultural sophistication.placeElsewhere in the exhibit,visitors will find examplesof military dress,rapidly changing tastes in fashion,Collection of the Western Reserve Historical Society.Blue cotton plaid morning coat,Linknown maker andof origin. ca. 1820-1825, possibly from tbe UnitedStates of America. Collection of Bruce and Susan Greene,Alfred Station,New York. Center: Gray linen morning1830s,possiblyments worn by African American settlers. One ofthe most effective displays is composed of footwearclothing that expressed religious culture, and garcoatụnknown maker and place of origin. ca. I 8205-and hats. Two pairs of women's slip ōn shoes withn,high heels-- one made of green, ivory,and pink floralsilk and another pair of red and ivory leather-- producea very ornate visual spectacle, and a pair ofworn in Obic,.Collection of Tbe ObioState University Historic Costume dr Textiles Collection.Right: Blue and white boundstootb cotton morning coat,ade by Ann Tetrick,unknolun place of origin,1836,possibly worn in Obio. Collection of tbe Obio HistoricalSociety.men's boots in a vivid green is equally beautiful. York,and Louisiana. Although the provenance ofAn elaborate silk bonnet and a sleek wool bicornesome of the clothing cannot be firmly established,were obviously made to stand out and attract atten- by comparing evidence from different sources, Bistion.And the section of the exhibition on children sonnette persuasively argues that we can speculateincludes comfortable,practical suits and dresses in in a meaningful way about how and why somebright pinks, florals, and stripes.early Ohioans dressed as they did. She does so,In the exhibit' s labels, Bissonnette explains for example, with a very small green wool boy' show she compared contemporary portraits and jacket that is displayed alongside a portrait of onetravel accounts with garments found in collections John Fox who sat for his painting in 1825 in a verythroughout Ohio and beyond. In addition to the similar coat. This coat served not just as a means ofOhio Historical Society and Ohio State University keeping warm, but as an icon of culture and wealthin Columbus, most of the clothing,accessories,andartwork came from collections in the Western Re-serve Historical Society in Cleveland,the Cincinnati toMuseum Center,the Kent State University Museum,the Massillon Museum,and the historical societiesof the following counties: Clinton, Muskingum,worth preserving in an oil portrait for exhibition tofamily,friends,neighbors and posterity. In additionidentifying the garments, labels throughout theexhibit provide visitors with the political,economic,and cultural context of the times. Hanging on thewalls and displayed throughout the exhibit areRoss, Salem, Summit, and Warren. Bissonnette portraits, reproductions, and silhouettes of men,supplemented these materials with others from women, children, Native Americans and soldiersprivate collections, as well as related stylish period that show how the clothing displayed in the exclothingfrom museums in Massachusetts, New hibition was worn in the early Republic. Finally,62 OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

lived and what they valued inthe early Republic.colorful enlarged period lithographs allow visitorsto place the exhibition' s clothed figures in scenesfrom Ohio' s early days.Fashion onthe Ohio Frontier"makes anexcellentcontribution to the growing number of studiesthat focus onwestward expansion between 1750and 1850. Over the last fifteen years,historians ofthe backcountry have explored tensions between theforces of separation and integration. Settlers whocrossed the Appalachian Mountains to make theirhomes along western rivers often felt cut off fromthe East and sometimes resented those who meddledin their affairs. Yet, at the same time, westernersnurtured family,commercial,and political ties thatbound all Americans together asthey worked toclaim the continent for the newUnited States. Thisexhibit allows visitors to make a connection to thepast that books cannot always provide. On onehand, social historians have used census records,probate records, and other statistical evidence touncover the lives of those who did not leave behindcollections ofpapers. On the other hand,traditionalThis exhibit has much toofferto a variety of visitors. Professionalhistorians will profitfrom envisioning people whothey usually encounter only inwords on paper in an archives,especially those historians ofthe frontier who have moved beyond FrederickJackson Turner' scharacterization of westwardexpansion as a siniple safery valve fc, r rough- cutfarmers seeking independence tO delve deeper 111 tOthe efforts western merchants, professionals, andfarmers made to maintain commercial and culturalconnections tc, the East. Other Ohio residents willenjoy seeing the colors, textures, and styles thatrepresented high fashion to people on the frontier,and thitiking abotit what purposes mid valties thosechoices implied then and now. In short.both groupswill come away from the exhibit with a more complexunderstanding of Ohio' s past. " Fashion onthe Ohio Frontier" canstill be viewed virtually byvisiting the Kent State University Museum's websiteat: http:// dept.kent.edu/ museum/exhibit/ohio/main.htm. A catalog is available as well: Anne Bissonette,Fashion ontbe Obio Frontier.1790-1840Ohio: Kent State University Museum, 2003).Kent,Kim M. GruenwaldKent State Universityhistorians have utilized letters and diaries to portraythe lives of society' s better sorts. But walk ngthrough the groupingsof men, womLinknown mciker and place of Origin, ca. 1 834-36, lu() en, and chil dre n 4 ·, $« ,... „, by,Phillip Dennis,possibly in Ohio. Collection of thedressed in period . Obio Historical Society. Center: Pink oinbri verticallyv.striped cotton bodice and disassenibled skirt,unknotunclothing brings that »maker and place of origin, ca. 1 825-1 816,possibly wornera to life by allowing visitors to reallyin Warren County,Ohio. Collection f(,tbe WarrenCounty Historical Society. Right: Pink floral cottonimagine to some , » sextent at least howjwell-to ḏo Ohioans %«« 85= F4], t»'16'„Wj"' ' i 0% ., iir -*,.* 9%' F'sit»„}' Id., y#, 42»White and red vertically striped cotton skeleton suit.printed dress,unknown maker,Marysville,Ohio, ca.1830. Collection of tbe Obio Historical Society.SPRING 2004 63

Review EssayThe Cincinnati Wing:The Story of Art inthe Queen City."A Permanent Exhibitionat the Cincinnati Art Museum.museumentrance, visitors are enticed toward the exhibi-by oneInseum openedtheits Cincinnatispring ofWing,2003, therenovatingCincinnati Art Mu-tionart and society in America generally.The opening of the Cincinnati Wing makes thea much moreinviting place, and drawsvisitors toward the newexhibition. Inside the mainof its best physical features, the floorsome18,000 square feet of gallery space in to-ceiling window that ends the central hallwayits imposing building that overlooks the c ty from directly opposite the main entrance. Previously,Eden Park. A new permanent exh bto there museum guests, put in a humble, reverent frameThe Story of Art in the Queen City, ' app es deas of mi id by huge Dorie columns and mighty oakdeveloped in recent contextual-and glass doors, faced a centralist art history in an attempt to ' w : ha [ way as inviting as a cave.demonstrate Cincinnati' s ia , 64 ,r Now day ght beckons, leadingtional prominence,mainly n the Sa one toward the window and the% SEnineteenth century, as a center ' new w g, which is guarded byI =for the production of art. The .. - 1 . ... ..,. ; '' Eve D sconsolate," a large nudeexhibition places this story n a f' figure ' n narble by Hiram Powlargerhistorical context by casting Cincinnati as a case study of « »: 4 . .1 i '· :* ' ' . ers, the liost famous sculptor of7 Sm d n ieteenth century America,the intertwined development ofwho began his career with extenartand industry in the Un ted ·« , 1 "1 ':.»'s ve help from wealthy Cincin-States. Fittingly, the curators naticins. The sculpture servestake abroad view of what conas an apt symbol of the city' sstitutes art, display ng house · ·. 48 · aw tr 4 att stic leadership in that era,hold luxury items, some of them t»* j,» , , » and perhaps also in its display oft,»factory-produced,in additon to , nudity as an ironic reference topaintings,sculpture,the art pot-Robert S.Dulicalison, Portrait ottery of Rookwood and its local N cholas I.ongworth, 18 FR1:. 11the Mapplethorpe fiasco,whichhelpedOilestablishO,a more recent1competitors,and samples from a canvas, 84 x 60 1/4 in. 213.4 ( x 153 reputation for Cincinnati as renationalwood-carving craze,of cni) Ụniversity of Cincinnati Fine Arts flexively conservative in matterswhich Cincinnati was oneof theCc,1le c ti onartistic and sexual.provides an appealing introduction to the exhibi-primary centers. Although quitesuccessful in documenting the impressive artisticachievements of the city,the exhibition succeeds toa lesser degree in the much more daunting task ofreconstructing the social context of art in Cincinnati,or in shedding light on the interplay betweenThe small orientation gallerybehind Eve, with its excellent video presentation,tion. Beautifully composed and projected digitallyon a wide fiat screen. the short video dazzles theeye while it introduces the exhibition' s main themes:64OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

Patronage," The"Rise of Industry," Art"Education,"and,finally, Identity."The "video' srenditionof these themes culminates in a veryaffectingimageaslow pulling back from paintings in thecollection that depict a variety of local cultures,until gradually the images lose their individuality,only to resolve themselves into pixels in a largermovie of the Tyler Davidson Fountain,perhaps thebest known symbol of Cincinnati'sidentity and civicpride. It is asplendid way tosuggest the infjuence of manycultures in Cincinnati' sworld and public life.artThe "Identity" themeforms the basis of the exhibition'sunderlying civicslesson, a plea for avibrant,inclusive,tolerant public cultureanchored by art. Giventhe city' s recent travails andlong- term trendsriots,aboycott, depopulation, andeconomic stagnationthisplea has particular urgency.And the museum seems tobe doing its part to make realthe ideal it portrays: Thanksto a large donation from Loisand Richard Rosenthal, admissionto the museumhasbeen free to all since the newwing opened. The CincinnatiArt Museum therefore couldbecome agathering placeHiram Polvers (1 805-1873),Eve Disconsolate,designed 1 859-61, carved 1873-74.marble,b.76 3/16 in.,diam.of base 22 1/6 in. (b. 1 93.5,diam. 56 cm).Gift of Nicholas Longwortb,1888.86,Cincinnati Art Museumfor Cincinnatians of manyclasses and backgrounds,carrying out the upliftingand unifying functions that advocates of Americanart have sought to produce since the early 1800s.Yet, however laudable a vision it presents, this civicslesson interferes with historical understanding.The curators present a story that comforts morethan it illuminates, especially with regard to theclass dynamics that underlay the art world depicted.Multiculturalism and disdain for hierarchy mayinfluence the art world today,but especially in thenineteenth century, Cincinnati' s leaders, as in othermajor cities with cultural ambitions, had no conceptof the tolerant and democratic multi-culturalattitude that the exhibition evokes.The curators largely limit their discussion ofpatronage to the first gallery,where African Americanpainter Robert Duncanson' sstriking full ḻength portraitof patron Nicholas Longworthbeckons the visitorinto agallery dedicated tothe city's artistic accomplishmentsfrom its fc,undinguntil the Civil Wan As befitsLongworth' s record as theantebellum period' sleadingpatron, he receives specialattention. His portrait dominatesthe space, Longworth' sfigure framed in the paintingbythe archway of a luxuriousfront hallway that graced themansion of oneof his fellowelites.Longworth, famousin his day as ahorticulturalinnovator and gadfly andfounder of the region' s wineindustry,proved to be a savvyand lucky real estate investorwho bet heavily on the city' sgrowth. He also was an artpatron of immense wealthand plain manners, whose generosity to local artistsearly in their careers remains unsurpassed in Cincinnatitoday. Indeed,it is safe to say that without thefortune he established and that his family dispensedfor three generations,Cincinnati's art world wouldnot have attracted the attention it did in the nineteenthcentury.SPRING 200465

REVIEW ESSAYGiven his influence, Longworth in particularrepresents a missed opportunity for the curators t)investigate the complex motives of the early leadersof the city' s art world. The city' s leading patron, hewas also something of a cultural philistine. On thesubject of "Ginevra," a bust by Powers that is displayedin the gallery next to Duncanson' s portrait,Longworth had this to say tothe sculptor: ȲourGinevra attracts attention,but our friend Symmesdoes not find the [illegible] as large as those of ourcornfed country girls who Ihe] has been in thehabit of handling."He refusedto seePowers' nude "GreekSlave,"siding with thosewho thought there shouldbe separate viewing times I '-*' ' 1·»'for menand women. And I *he supported the work of 4Duncanson, but was hardlythe fierce opponent of slaveryfor which today' s sensibilitiesmight hope. "Your rank -ji :,abolition letter this moment -.reed," he wrote to Powers iiithe 1850s. If"your views arecarried out, half the Congoesand half the whites at theSouth would be murdered ina short time. And the poor Congoeswhen free, as poor asuffering set of Devils,andas much degraded, asthepoor whites in your aristocraticRegion, where blackslavery is deemed the greatestsin of the age." Clearly,Longworth was amorecomplex and contradictoryfigure than the curators let on, and our understandingof the city' s art world would have been enhancec.by some engagement with these contradictions.The pre- Civil War gallery in the Cincinnati Wingdoes a good job of showing the rapidity with whicha " frontier outpost"became a true city. As early asthe second decade of the nineteenth century, craftsmenof luxury goods could find buyers for refineditems such as an imposing "tall- case" clock madeof five kinds of wood, and a silver beaker,bothon display here. They share space with elaboratesilver items from mid- century,as well as furnitureproduced in large factories rather than small workshops.Paintings and sculptures in this gallery byCincinnati artists who became nationally known--Worthington Whittredge,William Louis Sonntag,f1-,Lilly Martin Spencer, James Beard, ThomasBuchanan Read, and, of course, Duncansonand Powers-- suggest the sophistication of thegi- owing city at mid- century. Even if manylocal artists left for greater fame in New Yorkand Europe, the support they received inCincinnati evidences an elite with significantwealth and a desire to transcend the almightydollar.Like Longworth, other patrons of theABen, 1 Pitman (1822-19.0),designer,Adelaide NoursePitman (1 859-1893), ccrver,and Elizabeth Nourse1859-1938), painter,Bidstead,1882-83,mabc, ga,iyand painted panels.11( x 59 1/4 x 85 in. (279.4 i150.5 x 215.9 cm). Gilt of Mary ane ] Hamiltonin memory f (, ber motb, 7, Mary Luella Hamiltonmade pcissible through tita S. Hudepc,bl,ituardia, 11994.61. Cincinnati Ar, Museumperiod are represented in whiteI marble busts,including ReubenSpringer who endowed Music1 Hall in addition to supportingI painters, and Sarah WorthingtonKing Peter, founder ofthe Ladies' Academy of FineArts, the nation' sfirst exclusivelyfemale arts society.Springer, the curatorssuggest, was a " selfmademan,"and nodoubt he worked hard,since he proved himselfworthy of marryingthe boss' sdaughter andthereafter being given apartnership in her father' s mercantile firm. SarahPeter, onthe other hand, was an American aristocratwith politics to match. Daughter of Ohio' sfirstgovernor, she married the dissolute sonof SenatorRufus King of New York, survived him,and mar-66OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

ied a wealthy English widower when her childrenwere grown. She traveled extensively in Europewhere she acquired an education in art,a close andworshipful acquaintance with aristocracy, and afascination with the Catholic Church, to which sheconverted in the 1850s. She was a consistent advocateof social hierarchy,whether she was defendingslavery or insisting that women of her class were asworthy as men to judge the merits of art.But viewers of this exhibition areprovided withlittle such information. Without getting mired inbiography,the exhibition might have enhanced ourunderstanding of the nineteenth- century art worldin Cincinnati by giving viewers at least a taste ofthe conservative views of those who financed thatworld.Indeed, visitors tothe Cincinnati Wingought to be informed as well about more recentpatrons of the art on these walls. After all,the notionthat individual patrons became unimportantafter the nineteenth century is questionable at besteven if corporations and foundations have playedanincreasingly significant role in the acquisitionand public display of art. As the influence of theRosenthals and the names in discreet and gracefullettering high on the walls of these galleries suggest,individual patrons and their taste and theirpolitics remain important. Rules of polite societyprevail in the new wing, however, and beyondseveral references to the Longworth family whichinfluenced Cincinnati artwell into the twentiethcentury, there is almost no mention of how moneymight have shaped the story of the art displayed inthe Cincinnati Wing.Across the hall, the curators have devoted anentire gallery to the work of favorite son FrankDuveneck, whose unsparing portraits and paintingsof ordinary folk, with their dark colors andthick brushstrokes, pulled Cincinnatians towardan appreciation of Impressionism and inspired ageneration of American artists. Indeed, he becamea pioneer in this region, rejecting the lofty andbloodless history painting that most Cincinnatipatrons preferred in the late nineteenth centuryfor work that morenearly reflected the Europeanavant- garde, or at least its early variant in Munich.Duveneck also taught art in Cincinnati for decadesat the Art Academy,and the work of his studentsRobert Blum, John Twaclitman, Joseph DeCamp,and Edward Potthast,all leading American Impressionists,appears in another gallery.Duveneck' scareer as a painter and a teacher probably representsthe height of Cincinnati' s influence in Americanart, but this gallery' s appeal comes mainly fromthe tragic love story that the curators highlight.Elizabeth Boott, a young patroness from a richBoston family,having bought a Duveneck paintingand later having studied with him, fell in lovewith the artist. Over time, the couple apparentlywore down her father' sobjections tOthe match,because they w'eremarried some seven A·ears aftershe became Duveneck' sstudent. Within two yearsof their wedding,she died of pneumonia. This is,of course, a variation of the classic American storyof social mobility,made more poignant by untimelydeath; a young man of genius but humble originswins the heart of the rich man's daughter,who overcomesthe prejudices of her ClaSS to welcolne hilliinto her charmed circle. But beyond the clichO,thestory of Frank and Elizabeth Duveneck also hintsat the complicated class dynamics between artistand patron that shaped the American art world inthe late nineteenth century.Even more so than "Patronage," The"Rise ofIndustry" as a theme echoes throughout the CincinnatiWing. The labels and accompanying catalogof the exhibition generally describe the artisticmovements or trends represented in the new wingas reactions against the aesthetic and social consequencesof the Industrial Revolution. For instance,the subject of the next galleryarather sudden interestbeginning in the 1880s among Cincinnati' s elitesin the decorative carving of wooden furnitureischaracterized as part of a larger international "AestheticMovement"among those persons distressedby pervasive ugliness, specifically, the shoddinessand poor design of mass- produced consumer goods,SPRING 200467

REVIEW ESSAYand the physically and spiritually stifling conditionsthat workers who produced those goods endured.Led by English philosophers of art John Ruskin andWilliam Morris,adherents of the movement soughta return to the beauties and mystery of medievaltimes, when artisans could derive both emotionalsatisfaction and a good living from creating by handunique finished objects.Ultimately,of course, the movement did nothingto slow the spread of mass production Or to makefactory workers' lives more tolerable. Indeed, inthe exhibition' s orientation video,Ruskin counselsattentiveness to nature as a way to find beauty,butthis advice probably better suited people with moretime ontheir hands than those who worked in afactory six days a week for at least ten hours a day.And Morris is heard saying that art " is the expressionof joy in man's labor,"another observationof questionable relevance to factory or sweatshopworkers. Far from representing a struggle againstthe emerging industrial economy, the AestheticMovement and similar trends arebetter understoodas a means by which the middle classtheprincipalbeneficiaries of the Industrial Revolutionsoughtto adapt themselves and their culture to new andunfamiliar circumstances in the industrial age.The art- carving crazeespeciallyin Cincinnati, amajor center in America for such activitygavemiddie-classmen and women, mostly women, it turnsout, for example, an opportunity to create objects ofbeauty that represented a protest against emergingindustrial conditions,without actually challengingthose conditions in any meaningful way. Considera bedstead designed by Englishman Ben Pitman,one of Cincinnati' s leading teachers, and carvedby his wife Adelaide Nourse Pitman,with paintedpanels contributed by her sister,painter ElizabethNourse. Made of ebonized mahogany,it featuresaheadboard with deep and detailedrelief carvings of aflock of swallowsj flying over flowers. Its virtuoso level01 of detail calls to mind a journalist' s remarkabout a similar project on a muchlarger scale, the carvings in HenryProbasco' s " Oakwood"mansion, executedby the city' s other main carvingteacher,Henry Fry. According to JamesParton writing in the Atlantic Monthly,the interior of Probasco' shouse wasmuch"highly moneyinteresting,to the square inchas showing can behowspent in the decoration of a house."Tbe Rookwood Pottery Company (1880-1967),KataroSbirayamadani (1 865-1948),decorator,Plague: A Trinityof Dragons -Earth, Fire and Water, ca. 1 892,eartbenware,standard glaze line,25 x 31 1/2 x 1 1/2 in. (63.5 x 80 x3.8 cm). Gift of Wm. Held MacDonnell,James M.Smith,and Ernest V.Thomas,1974.365.Cincinnati Art MuseumFrom the perspective of a museum visitor,the headboard also calls to mind aswarm of bats, an impression probablyenhanced for its original owners by theexperience of waking up underneath it. These bedsand dressers and chestsprimeinstances of Victorianfussiness and overḏecoration worthy of theGothic tradition they were meant to evokeshouldbe understood mainly as expressions of the masteryby middle class Cincinnatians who both produced68OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

and consumed these fantasies in wood of the leadingedge of middle class culturetheaesthetic rules andregulations of early modernism.Although a much more a commercial venture,the production of art pottery in Cincinnati workedculturally much like decorative woodcarving, andsince both media involved beautification of thehome,they wereconsidered suitable for women toproduce. Ceramics,however. even though it commandeda large market unlike carved furniture,didnot represent aviable avenue of expression or asteady source of income fc, r womenof lesser means,s0171( thing that elite women had at least talkedabout since the Ladies' Academy of Fine Arts ofthe 1850s. Like the Ladies' Academy,Rookwoodand the Pottery Club of Cincinnati represented theconsiderable aesthetic authorit>·wielded by womenof wealth in Cincinnati.Given their class background,theway in which these women fit into thetheme of "Identityrequires more attention thanthe curators Hive the issue. Is their work evidence ofdiversity in the art world? Might it not just as wellshow how thoroughly dominated by the wealthythat world was?The curators have organized the gallery dedicatedto Cincinnati art pottery as a contest betweentwo women- Maria Longworth Nichols Storer,heir to Nicholas Longworth' sfortune, and MariaMcLaughlin, a less well-off member of Cincinnati' selite.McLaughlin preceded her rival in masteringthe technique of painting beneath glaze andin founding apottery club, but Storer outshoneMclaughlin by founding Rookwood Pottery, oneof the nation' s most important centers of ceramicproduction. In addition to this rivalry,the exhibitionhighlights the struggle between Storer andMcI-aughlin as womenthatis asfemales seekingto have their art taken seri ously.The arrangement of Rookwood pieces on oneside of the gallery and works from McLaughlin' sCincinnati Pottery Club onthe other allows visitorstoappreciate the artistic differences betweenthese two groups. While both did ceramic paint-ing (and metalwork) that incorporated figures andpatterns from nature, Rookwood borrowed muchmoreliberally from Japanese niodels than did themembers of the Cincinnati Pottery Club. ThereforeRookwood ceramic paintings tend toward the grotesqueand often feature bug-eyed sea creatures andd>namic visible brushstrokes in the Japanese style.For exitiiple, oneof the most arresting pieces inthe gallery, aplague produced by Japanese painterKataro Shira-amandani, depicts three dragonswhose long bewhiskered faces evoke the bemuseddetachment of very old menrather than the menaceof the elementsearth,fire, and waterthattheyrepresent. Similarly, Storer' s decorative pieces inmetal. arranged in a sub-gallery opposite thosemade b> Mclaughlin, show the former' s attractionto the bizarre. Her laughing witches,monkeys,andshellfish-encrusted goblets would not be out of placeamongimages in comic books today. Paintingsunder glaze by members of the Pottery Club. bycontrast, appear more sedatetidyfloral arrangements,aportrait of a young lady, a peaceful nest offat young birds, all neatly outlined with novisibleevidence of a painter wielding abrush.Art, whether in pottery orpainting, however,could not have been just about aesthetics or artisticinfluences, but also must have been about class. Asthe curators of this exhibition correctly point out,art produced in the early industrial age represents invarious ways an evasion of the politics of emergingeconomic realities. For example,the late-nineteenthcentury popularity of depictions of European peasantlife,according to one label,bespeaks a desire tolook away from life in the machine age. Industrial-"ization had brought the lower classes to the cities insearch of employment in the factories. The destitutecould not be avoided, with labor unrest a constantthreat and the unemployed as conspicuous remindersof society' s failures."Thus,artists and patronsboth took refuge iii nostalgic recreations of simplertimes. Robert Frederick Blum' sbeautiful "VenetianLace Makers" (1887),which gracesthe coverof theexhibition catalog, provides a case in point. TheSPRING 200469

REVIEW ESSAYlace workers depicted in the foreground of the largecanvas, lovely and elaborately dressed, illuminatedby the soft light of an open window, seem healthyand content while in the background five womenlabor intently on their needlework. But of the youngwomen working in the foreground, only one actuallyconcentrates on her work; a second looks ather nearest companion as if in conversation; a thirdrests, her chin on her hand and her gaze dreamilyfocused in the middle distance;while a fourth cocksher head and smiles flirtatiously at the viewen It isa happy, relaxed scene, but, as the label suggests,probably an idealized one that had little to do withthe realities of lace production.The curators of this exhibition, however,missedother and even better opportunities to discuss therelation between art and industrial production.Consider,for example,the elaborate sofa and otherwares on display that were made in the latter partof the nineteenth century by the furniture companyMitchell and Rammelsberg. This firm ran thelargest and most mechanized shop floor in the city,and was one of the first firms to use steam powerin production. A exhibition label quotes mid- centurycity booster Charles Cist who claimed thatmechanization relieved workers of the " coarsestand roughest" parts of their work,allowing them toconcentrate on the " more delicate operations,whichgive play to the exercise of skill and judgment.But skilled craft workers of the time often had adifferent perspective on mechanization,seeing it aspart of a trend that increased the division of labor,giving each worker responsibility for ever- simpleroperations, thus making their skills irrelevantand themselves interchangeable. It should not besurprising then that, in 1886, when a city-widestrike for an eight-hour day paralyzed Cincinnati,Mitchell Company workers were among its leaders,and succeeded in shutting down the furniture factory.Clearly,the factory workers at Mitchell andRammelsberg did not feel adequately compensatedby the mere satisfaction of helping to produce theexquisite furniture on display,the claims of CharlesCist notwithstanding and despite what visitors tothe Cincinnati Wing may be led to believe.A gallery devoted to the work of Henry Farnyand Joseph Henry Sharp,nationally known paintersof Indian life, real and imagined, illustratesanother facet of how art in Cincinnati has oftenevaded the reality of the modern world. Canvasesin "Cincinnati Looks West"share a nostalgic qualitycommon to depictions of Indians from the earlynineteenth century through the present. There isevident throughout these paintings a melancholyattitude toward the inevitable disappearance of anoble and colorful people, and in painting theirlikenesses an attempt to preserve them, albeit in atwo ḏimensional form convenient to white peoplewho did not then and do not nowwish to dealwith the messy reality of peoples dispossessed oftheir lands and thereby impoverished. The Farnycanvases on display serve as especially apt illustrationsof this outlook. In "Renegade Apaches," forinstance, a group of young men huddle stoicallyon the floor of a narrow rocky canyon, their daysas masters of the terrain clearly over. In "The Lastof the Herd," an Indian hunter contemplates thebuffalo he has just shot with his rifle, symbolizing,according to the curators, the displacement bytechnology of an older way of life. The idea thattechnology doomed Native Americans,rather thandisease,forced migrations to barren landscapes,andwar, is, of course,a comforting evasion, as are thepaintings that regretfully depict their passing. Insome respects,as the excellent audio tour points out,Farny' s work can be usefully compared to BuffaloBill Cody' s Wild West Show,which also traded ona need to see Indians as noble but no longer dangerous,and,sadly,doomed to extinction.Joseph Henry Sharp was less captivated by thedrama c,f decline and disappearance than by theequally accurate story of persistence and adaptationamong Native Americans in the West. His largestand most crowded canvas, Harvest " Dance,"depicts a Pueblo ceremony with dozens of participantsand hundreds of spectators,most of the latter70OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

perched on the high walls of a vast adobe village.In this painting, Sharp gives little hint of adoomedpeople.Indeed, the permanence of the buildingsportrayed, the size of the crowd,and the strength of the dancerssuggest continuity rather than decay.Also, as in many of his othercanvases, there are no explicit reterencesto white encroachment.Nevertheless, his paintings, likeFarny' s,fit into along traditionof "salvage ethnographythatbegan with the Puritans whoalso felt twinges of regret thatsuch colorful peoples had beendoomed to extinction through thesettlement of the West by peopleof European descent. Cincinnaticannotclaim leadership in thattradition of painting, but Farnyand Sharp stand out among itsbest known practitioners.The two galleries in the Cincinnati Wing dedicatedto work of the city' stwentieth century artrepresent a final evasion, not by the artists representedhere by the curators themselves. The "history of painting, sculpture, and decorative artsin Cincinnati in the twentieth century has not yetbeen written," according to the exhibition catalog,and the new wing devotes only two galleries,withtwentyōne paintings and four displays of manufacturedgoods, to the period. This decision to slightrecent art is puzzling,especially given the hopes thecurators expressin the exhibition and its catalogfor an artistic renaissance in Cincinnati. If, as anintroductory label enthuses, the exhibition offersa wealth of insight into the history of a great cityand the vital role arts continue to play in shapingits character," then surely that vital role could wellbe illuminated by paying the kind of attention tothe recent past that the curators afford to earljerRoberteras. Instead, visitors curious about the twentiethcentury must infer a great deal from little evidence.Frederick Blum (1857-1903),Venetian LaceMakers, 1887, oilon Canvas, 30 1/8 x 41 IN in. (76.5 x104.8 cm).Gift of Elizabeth S.Potter,1905.8,CincinnatiArt M 11 SetilllOne gallery displays a mere eleven works from thefirst quarter of the century, and of these only one,79th and Riverside Drive"by Dixie Selden, a studentof Duveneck, pushes impressionism towardabstraction. the leading style of art in the twentiethcentury. Worse,the gallery dedicated to works since1925 displays a mere ten paintingsmid-centuryrepresentational paintings to the right as one enters,and to the left modernist works by Paul Chidlaw,Jim Wesselman, and Jack Meanwell, the latter " akey figure for promoting modernism in Cincinnatiart, according to the label. Large nonṟepresentationalcanvases by Robert Knipschild and Jim Dine,perhaps Cincinnati' s most celebrated modern artist,anchor the display on either end of the gallery.Why so little attention to modern art? Conservativetaste, the exhibition catalog suggests:decrease in the immigration that had fueled thecity' sdynamic nineteenth-centuryculture createda more stable environment favoring tradition overinnovation.©41As an analysis of cultural history,this is remarkably unsatisfying, especially givenSPRING 200471

REVIEW ESSAYItt744£ :.1 IIU % r &t.6,„f, -::UUf34.33»I»L3 5»1:-ltt140rthe acknowledgment by the curators that growingJoseph Henry Sharp (1859-1953),Harvest Dance,enthusiasm for abstract art began " to splinterthe artworld of the city" by 1939,the year the Modern ArtSociety, precursor to the Contemporary Arts Center,wasfoundedIt would seemthat the conflictbetween champions of modern art and advocatesof tradition would be central to any treatment of189 3-94, oil on canvas, 27 11/16 x 48 5/8 in ( 70 2 x123 5 cni) Museum Purchase,1894 10,CincinnatiArt Museumrating und defending a conservative elitist cultureIn short, the Cincinnati Art Museum and its newCincinnati' s twentieth-century art world But any Cincinnati Wing does not share the CAC' s interestserious treatment of that conflictorany otherm rocking the boat That is a pity Celebrating theconflict,for that matterwouldJar the happy story achievements of the past does not require it to doof achievement and consensus that the Cincinnati so, making sense of them historically wouldArt Museum prefers to tell In this respect, theContemporary Arts Center provides a useful pointPaul Breidenbacbof comparison for the new wing There are, of Cincinnati, Obtocourse, important parallels At the same time asthey guaranteed free admission to the Art Museum,the Rosenthals also funded the Contemporary ArtsCenter buildingAnd to Judge from its first exhibition,theCAC,like the Art Museum, envisions art asan important element in an active public culture inCincinnati But the CAC does so in ways explicitlypolitical, impolite, and conflict-ridden while theCincinnati Art Museum remainsdedicated to elabo-72 OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

Book ReviewsNeal 0. Hammon and Richard Taylor.Virginia' s Western War, 1775-1786.Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania: StackpoleBooks,2002. ISBN: 081171389X (cloth),29.95.r-"the settlement of the Trans-Appalachian Westby white Americans and African Americanslaves constitutes oneof the most dramatic and farreachingconsequences of the American Revolution.In 1770, only a few thousand white traders andmen fought alongside federal troopS who defeatedthe Northwest Indian confederacy and opened thefuture state of Ohio to white settlement.is aNeal Hammon and Richard Taylor' s new booklively and lavishly detailed account of thestruggle of Kentuckians first for survival and laterfor dominance of the region during the Revolutionaryera. The authors describe the first surveys otthe Bluegrass region, Shawnee raids on Kentuckyfarms in1776-77, Indian sieges of Fort HenryWheeling) and Boonesborough, George Rogersand thereby staked Virginia' s claim to the OldNorthwest. Later,in the 17905,Kentucky militia-squatters lived between the Appalachian Mountains Clark' s counter- offensive against Native Americanand the Mississippi River, and3 towns north of Ohio in the earlyNative Americans controlled theregion. By 1800, however, over Virginia's Western War150,000 white farmers resided1775-1786in Kentucky, Tennessee, and ther.- 4 'Northwest Territory, and i --- 1Indians found themselves the , ons :".''2 1,ri, r

BOOKREVIEWSthe 1779 Virginia land law,which allowed settlersto preempt up to 1,000 acres if they occupied andimproved them, led to an upsurge in white migrationto the Bluegrass and helped turn the war's tidein the west.Henry Clay Alden A History ofJonathanAider:His Captivity and Life witb tbe Indians.Edited by Larry L. Nelson. Akron:The University of Akron Press,2002. ISBN:1884836801 (cloth), $ 34.95.The authors of Virginia' s Western War write in aclear and unpretentious style,and their thorough treatmentof Kentucky land surveys and battles betweensettlers and Indians ( not to mention their detailedmaps) make the book an invaluable reference tool forspecialists in the region' s history,in the RevolutionaryWar,and in genealogy. However,it is not a particularlyuserfriendlywork for non- specialists. Hammonand Taylor' s passion for what theyforthrightly call "minutiae" ix) (causes them to bury the central narrativeof their book in ablizzard ofsettlements, court days, surveys, andskirmishes. They provide few signpOStsto tell readers where the storyis going, and do not clearly frametheir thesis which makes it difficult todetermine the book' s historiographicalsignificance. Moreover,while theauthors have based their book onextensive primary research in countycourtrecords, legislative journals,and the Draper Manuscripts, theirn 1792, Native Americans captured nine yearold Jonathan Alder near his Virginia home andtook him to Ohio. As the adopted son of a Mingowarrior and his Shawnee wife,Alder lived amongIndians for thirteen years. Eventually, he left thenation and settled among whites in central Ohiowhere,in his old age, he composed his memoin ThisEAHISTORYOFJONATHANALDERamc* tivityandIi#wifh lh,Inda" s14»'> s41"8 :,4.Ir' T'. 1....I .. 1%'.is the story told in A History ofJonathan Alder. As with most captivitystories, Alder' s begins withhis capture and sojourn westwardand then addresses his adoption,life among the Indians, and theescalating violence between Indiansand whites onthe northwesternfrontier. While not biologicallyNative American, Alder providesa distinctly "Indian"perspectiveof major frontier events, includingthe Battle of Fallen Timbers, andpersonalities such as Simon Girtyand Simon Kenton.The memoirnotes include almost no references tothe exciting recent historical scholarship on early Kentucky.During the last ten to fifteen years, historianslike Steve Aron, Craig Frjend, and Elizabeth Perkinshave published detailed and insightful studies of theethnicity of early Kentucky migrants,their economicaspirations,and the social institutions that they createdor re- created) on the frontien Hammon and Taylordismiss most of this research as excessively narrow,but a critical dialogue with other historians of thesame period would have enriched and enlivened theiranalysis and narrative.also relates his continued interestin and assocation with northwestern Indians afterhis decision to return to white society.While agood read, it is difficult, however, toknow what to make of A History of JonatbanAldenViolence, gore, survival, and celebrationfill the pages of this memoirveryentertaining, asmid-nineteenth- century romantic novels tended tobe, but quite problematic as historical truth. Onemay argue, as does Nelson,that "historians laborunder the knowledge that their understandings ofthe past will always be incomplete, particularlywhen aging individuals to whom imagination mayDavid A.NicbolsUniversity of Pittsburgh at Greensburgseem as real asfacts write those memoirs. (18) Buthistorians traditionally do try to ascertain whether74 OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

their sources possess a degree of verity that makesthem valuable in examining the past. Therein liesthe problem with this memoir;the editor has drawnthis text from the document written by the son JonathanAlder, not the father who originally wrote thememoin While composed in first person, the storyprinted here is actually a recreation by JonathonAdler' s son Henry Clay Alder who, without accessto the original manuscript, penned a new narrativefrom memory following his father' s death in1849. In 1935,another descendent transcribed themanuscript,also a problem because both the elderand the younger Alders' original versions have gonemissing. Hence, this latest recounting of the Adlerstory cannot be considered a primary source, andtherefore cannot be relied upon either to documentJonathan A]der' sof frontier Ohio.life or add to our understandingOf course,the editor acknowledges the disjunctionbetween primary source and later interpretations.Indeed, Ne] son claims that Henry ClayA]der' searlier recollection of his father' s storycannot be considered particularly reliable becauseit "told publicly about his experiences with theIndians," und therefore we may assume that anyunsavory aspects of the story went untold.interpretations of the same narrative,the author argues, representthe story that Alder [the son] waswilling to tell only privately"andbeing " moreemotionally deep andcomplex"should be considered themoretrustworthy version. (23) Butis it not also reasonable that theearlier version related by the fatherhad been told in the intimacy ofparent-child relations, and thereforerepresents a more authenticversion of Jonathan Alder' sowninterpretation of his life and times?Laterest editor to tackle this manuscript,has taken careachievedto preserve commentary from earlier edited versionsiFortunately,Larry lNelson,the latsoas to provide a fuller portrait of how narrativecomes to be created and recreated by successivegenerations.As a reliable story of the Ohio frontier,this bookis suspect. Rather,its strength lies in Nelson' s intricateweaving of various versions into one narrative.Scholars interested in nineteenth- century memoirs,the history of books, and public memory will findA History of Jonatban Alden and Nelson' s editingof it,fascinating. Historians of the frontier will beless impressed.Donald F. Melhorn, Jr.Craig Thompson FriendUniversity of Central FloridaLest We BeMarsball'd:Judicial Powers and Politicsin Obio, 1806-1812. Akron: Universityof Akron Press, 2003. ISBN: 1931968012cloth), 44.95. $1. 1-ST I\\BE MARSHALL'l)This well written, wonderfully researched, andeffectively argued book captures a fascinatingepisode in the legal history of Ohio. Between1806 and 1812, that state, like the nation as awhole,struggled with the politicallycontroversial question of whethercourts should exercise judicialreviewthepower of judges todeclare unconstitutional the actsoflegislatures. At the national level,President Thomas Jefferson andhis Congressional supporters railedagainst the federal courts in generaland the Supreme Court in particutar.They condemned Chief JusticeJohn Marshall' sfamous decision inMarbury v.Madison (1803), whichprovided the constitutional basisfor federal judicial review. Theypartial revenge in 1805 when the UnitedStates Senate failed by one vote to convict JusticeSPRING 200475

BOOK REVIEWSSamuel Chase who had been impeached.In Ohio,the contest over the judiciary followed asimilar pattern. Ohio' s judges,both at the commonpleas and the supreme court levels, seemed assuredin their ability to reverse legislative acts. Manyof these judges, however, were Federalists, whileJefferson' s supporters controlled the General Assembly.The two political campsandbranches ofgovernmentcollidedas a result of the decisions of,first,Common Pleas Judge Calvin Pease and,shortlythereafter on appeal,Supreme Court Judge GeorgeTod. In Rutherford v. M'Faddon,both judges nullifiedthe so- called Fifty Dollar Act. That law,in1808, the Ohio House of Representatives,dominated by Jeffersonians and acting on aprecedentset by the impeachment of Justice Chase,votedarticles of impeachment against Tod and Pease. TheSenate, however,acquitted both judges by a singlevote, one short of the required two ṯhirds. Thedecision, while it supported the judges, undercutsubstantially the claims of the Ohio judiciary tothe supremacy of its constitutional interpretations.Unable to remove the two judges,their Jeffersonianopponents passed a resolution that provided thatjudges appointed to fill a vacancy,as the case hadbeen with Tod,would hold their offices not for sevensimplest terms, set the amount required to bring acase to court in every instance except casestriedbefore a justice of the peace. Since these courts heldby a justice of the peace had no juries, Pease andTod concluded,the legislation effectively denied theright to a jury trial to some litigants whose causesinvolved less than fifty dollars.Their decisions stirred strong reactions fromJeffersonian Republicans who condemned theiractions as another example of being "Marshall'd," the General Assembly repealed the measure. Onea phrase that Melhorn uses in the title of his bookmeaning that Tod and Pease merely perpetuatedwhat Jeffersonian critics believed had been ChiefJustice Marshall' s wrongẖeaded decision in Marbury.The most radical of Ohio' s Jeffersonianscharged that judges lacked the power to reviewthe constitutionality of state legislation, and thatthe task of constitutional interpretation belongedto each of the departments or branches of the stategovernment,not the judiciary. This departmentaltheory of review seemed especially appropriate inOhio since,unlike the federal judiciary,judges owedtheir offices to the legislature that appointed them.The strongest support for judges and their powerof judicial review came from Charles Hammond,the winning lawyer in M'Faddon, a journalist,andauthor of Tbe Rights of tbe Judiciary. Rights cogentlystressed the unique responsibility of judges,Inno matter who appointed them, to exercise fidelityto the law, not to popular whims.years but only for the length of the term remainingto the judge who was being replaced. In practicethis "sweeping resolution"made clear that judicial "supremacy had been overwhelmingly rejected as adoctrine of Ohio constitutional law,whatever mightbe left of the courts' claim to the power of judicialreview." 118) ( Cooler heads, however,ultimatelyprevailed. In 1812, with threats of war with Englandcrowding out public interest in the judiciary,of the architects of the reversal proved to be Todhimself,who resigned from the bench to run suecessfullyfor a seat in the Senate. As a result, thejudiciary recovered some of its independence,andthereafter benefited from a plausible assumptionthat judges might pass onthe constitutionality oflegislative acts.Melhorn' svaluable work effectively connectsevents in Ohio to developments at the national level.Moreover,Melhorn has astriking gift for telling hisstory from the state level up, instead of from thenational level down. This results in fresh, arrestinginsights into the decentralized and contentiouspolitics of judicial review at the nation' s beginning,and in an important reminder of the significanceof the states and their judiciaries in founding theAmerican Republic.Kermit L. HallUtab State University76 OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

Marion B. Lucas.A History of Blacks inusually kept their slaves in a hut or two,not in largeKentucky: Front Slavery to Segregation,1760-1891. Frankfort: Kentucky HistoricalSociety,2003, Second Edition. 430 pp.ISBN: 0916968324 ( paper), 24.95. $quarters." Thus the relationship between ownerand owned could often be morepersonal than in theDeep South' sBlack Belt. Coleman also argued thatslaves themselves thought their plight easier thin inother states. To this, Lucas objects,declaring thatn 1992, the Kentucky Historical Society publishedMarion B. Lucas' sA History of Blacks inKentucky:Prom Slavery to Segregation,1760-1891as a part of Kentucky' s " Black History Project"funded by the Kentucky legislature in 1978. KHShas nowreissued the book, with a newintroduction,in paperback.Lucas, aprofessor of-historyat Western Kentucky University,aims in this bookto recount the story of slaverv in Kentucky and itsaftermath from its victims' vantageSlavery in Kentucky was not amild form of servitude,for, to the modern mind, no such conditionexisted." 43) ( He goes on to call slavery in ati\ forma " heinous evil"before agreeing that slaves actuallyfared better in Kentucky than elsewhere.Lucas must have had Barbara Jeanne Fields inmind when he wrote those words. Shortly bet(,rehe published the first edition of his book FieldsIvrote her orrii studv of slaverv in .in upper Southstate, Maryland, titled Shit, en, andpoint, so much so that he alertsreaders that all persons appearing inthe book should be assumed blackunless indicated otherwise. Thebook,extensively researched,drawsonrecords in the National Archives,manuscripts from repositories allA History of Blacks in KentuckyFrom Slavery to Segregation,1760- 1891Freedom onthe Middle Ground:Maryland During the NineteentbCentilry (1985).In that book, Fieldsindignantly repudiated any suggestionthat slavery could be "mild."She also attacked the idea thatMaryland, the first southern stateoverKentucky, church records,county archives, newspapers, anda vast array of published sources.The notes and bibliography areawesome.Using this rich panoplyof sourcematerial, Lucas successfullysketches a picture of black lifein nineteenth- century Kentucky and its origins inthe previous century.This volume now serves as the standard historyto end slavery, deserved any creditfor doing so. Unlike Lucas, Fieldsapplied a Marxist theoretical modelto her study of slavery,arguing thatcapitalism had already renderedslavery largely obsolete. Maryland,increasingly urbanized, found slaveryless appropriate"for advancing capitalismthan free wagelabon (Fields, 55)Although doubtless familiar with Fields' work,of Kentucky slavery,unseating abook by J.WinstonLucas finds his inspiration in twomuch olderColeman, Slavery Times in Kentucky,published in1940. Coleman most memorably called Kentuckyslavery the mildest in the entire United States.works: Kenneth R Stampp' s,Tbe Peculiar Institution:Slaveryin tbe AnteḆellum South C1956) andStanley Elkins'Șlavery: A Problem in AmericanLucas does not highlight this question, raising itInstitutional and Intellectual Lifeonly briefly and not until page forty- two, but hedoes agree that slavery in the commonwealth was1959). Historiansusually credit Stampp as the first whitehistorian to treat slaves sympathetically and Lucasa small timers' affair. Slaves lived on farms moretakes asimilar tone.Elkins is harder to figure:often than plantations and typically worked sideby-sidewith their owners. And Kentucky farmershistorians usually criticize his work for comparingslaves to concentration camp inmates,arguing thatSPRING 2004 77

BOOK REVIEWSslave owners successfully broke the personalities ofbe congratulated for making this work available intheir victims. But,unlike Elkins,Lucas does not evenhint that slavery defeated African American people.Nor does he engage the provocative questions raisedby Fields. Unlike Maryland, Kentucky held on toa new, and handsome, editionĊhristopher Wald» repSan Francisco State Universityslavery as long as possible. The legislature and courtsrejected federal attempts to end slavery,resisting emancipationuntil the Thirteenth Amendment renderedfurther opposition futile at the very end of 1865. Eventhen,they did not really give up. The legislature didnot so much discard its slave code as revise it for thenew era. This meant,among many other things,thatKentucky blacks could not testify against whites until1872. White racists therefore literally could get awaywith murder, as long as they made sure that the onlywitnesses to their bloody,vicious, wanton crimes werethe black people they hunted down and brutalzed.And get away they did. Lucas quotes one observel ascalling the post- emancipation reign ofterror the meanest in the entire South.188) An exaggeration, surely, butLucas does a good job of documenting the savagery of violent racial hatein Kentucky.It must mean something that what p * st'historians oncecalled the "mildest' >slavery yielded what at leastoneobserver called the crue est mobbing, terrorism, and lynch ngthe South after the Cvil Wan But *what? Was violence prevalent afterthe war because Kentucky slaveryhad remained profitable even at the end? PerhapsKentucky slave breeders reaped such profits as toparticularly wed whites to racism and slavery? Orperhaps Fields' Marxist analysis is simply wrongand Kentucky provides the proof that capitalismand slavery orsomething like it can prospertogether.Lucas does not tackle these questions,preferring description instead. Nonetheless, he hasproduced an excellent survey of slavery in Kentucky,valuable for the picture it paints of Kentucky' s racialhorrors. The Kentucky Historical Society shouldnJames D. Dilts.Tbe Great Road:TbeBuilding oftbe Baltimore Obio,tbe & Nation'sFirstRailroad,1828-1853. Stanford,California: Stanford University Press,1993;reprint,2003. 472 pp. ISBN: 0804726299paper), 31.95. $ublished more than adecade ago, Tbe GreatRoad remains the most comprehensive study ofan early American railroad. In intricate,loving deta1,Ja nes Dilts covers almost every aspect of howthe Baltimore and Ohio Railroadcompleted one of the most importantl'nks from the East Coast to theOhio River Valley. Dilts does notput forward an over- arching thesis,bt t a general theme quickly emerges.In an often-compelling manner,Dilts highlights the multitude ofB .1 mposing barriers that stood in ther*:way of the Baltimore and Ohio. Ini. contrast to accounts by historianswho have all to often portrayed therailroad as aseamless and inevitablepart of American economic development,Dits succeeds in capturing the uncertainty ofsurrot iding the enterprise, leaving one to marvelthat the Baltimore and Ohio ever got built.A large part of the uncertainty that hung over theenterprise resulted from the application of a newtechnology to a most inhospitable terrain. Begunin 1828 atthe instigation of Baltimore businessmendesperate to reach the West, the Baltimoreand Ohio had precious few examples to follow.Everything from track construction to bridgebuilding to locomotive design had to be learned78 OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

through an expensive and exasperating process oftrial and erron Nor did nature give the Baltimoreand Ohio much help. The winding Potomac Riveroften proved more hindrance than help, and steepmountain ridges in a sparsely settled wildernesspresented a series of difficultengineering problems.Politicaland economic barriers,however,turned Out to be moreimportant than geographicalchallenges.State legisl aturessometimes dictated uneconomicalroutes; financial panics leftthe company without capitaltofinish the line; competingimprovements threatened tosiphon off traffic and revenue;and laborers violently protested when bankruptcontractors could no longer pay them.No wonderit took twenty- five years to complete the road fromBaltimore to Wheeling.Dilts includes a large cast of characters in hisstory, but Tbe Great Road ultimately focuses onhow afew committed individuals overcamethesemany hurdles. The hero of the story is BenjaminH. I ạtrobe,Jr.,who supervised the complex task ofbuilding the railroad from Cumberland, Maryland,to Wheeling, Virginia, and Dilts excels at explainingthe solutions engineers such as Latrobe devisedwhen extending the railroad westward.Variouspolitical supporters of the railroad and its presidentsreceive somewhat less sympathetic treatment, andthe politics surrounding the road, Dilts suggests,ranged from shady dealings to outright corruption.Yet politics, however shady and corrupt, proved tobe ascrucial to the road' scompletion as competentengineers. Like many other internal improvementsin the antebellum period, the Baltimore and Ohiodepended upon government investment for its verysurvival and that government investment came tothe railroad through political means.Dilts fits together all the elements of railroadbuilding into acomprehensive account, but some-times he includes too much detail and the storybecomes hard to follow. His steadfast narrativeorganization contributes to the confusion. Theauthor,for example, addresses labor unrest wheneach strike or riot occurred,thus interrupting otherthreads of the story. Storeover,Dilts focuses sointently onthei railroad' s construction that heWNneglects to analyze its impact,and for those interested in the1]1_- __.,_ t»i ''' history of the Ohio Valley,perhaps the biggest disap-41*- 11 pointment in this book lies inthe author' sfailure to tracetherailroad' s increasing influence9.4 Ḳ onthe West. Finallv, Diltsnotes in his prologue that thebuilders of the Baltimore and Ohio " werefollowingGeorge Washington' s plan of binding togethera young nation, commercially and politically." 4) (Yet it is far from clear that the railroad succeededin this task, if that is what the railroad' s builderssought to do. Wheeling and West Virginiatheareamost affected by the Baltimore and Ohiobecamepart of the North rather than the South after all,suggesting that the railroad contributed more tosectional conflict and perhaps to the coming of theCivil War than to national unity.Jobn MajewskiUniversity of California,Santa BarbaraJerome Mushkat, ed. A Citizen-Soldier' sCivil War:Tbe Letters of Brevet MajorGeneral Alvin C. Voris. DeKalb: NorthernIllinois University Press,2002. ISBN:0875802982 (cloth), 36.00. $n the aftermath of the Civil War,many veteranscarefully put away the letters and diaries that theyhad written,saving for posterity their chronicles ofwhat they knew would be the most important andSPRING 200479

BOOK REVIEWSmemorable years of their lives. So many of them didand gender dominate the writing of academic hisso,and so many of their descendants treasured and torians, Voris' s 423 letters to his wife Lydia seempreserved these documents,that even oneẖundred- at times almost too good to be true. If you arefifty years later it is still possible for a scholar to find, interested in gender roles, read about how Claraedit and publish a new and worthwhile collection of Barton herself nursed Voris back to health after hesoldiers' letters, as Jerome Mushkat has done with had received his second wound. If race is centralthe letters of Alvin C. Voris.to your concerns you will want to examine Voris' sVoris lived in Akron at the beginning of the C vil deas on the subject. He opposed slavery from theWar,and volunteered as a private instart, fought along side the glorious1861. Because of his social standing 546 Massachusetts at Fort Wagner,as a locally prominent attorney,he « aid wrote home jn praise of thewas quickly promoted lieutenant coonel and assigned to recruiting duty.regiments of United States ColoredTroops that he commanded inDespite Voris' s efforts, his regiment »%*,0»». I.:t'» »'«» 1864. W th respect toclass, muchfailed to secure its full complement,' f- , »»scan be teased out of letters in whichand in December,it was consolidated 7 : 44 Voris describes his relations withwith the 67' Ohio Volunteer Infanthe ne i he led, as well as his contry,with which Voris would serve 1fte upt for Eastern soldiers, whommost of his military career. The 676 1 he regularly contrasted unfavorablyi.& I.1/' 4/ w th his own Ohio troops. For theparticipated in the Valley ca npa gnof 1862 where Voris was wounded f - old-fashioned historian who readsat the battle of Kernstown, and in « * ** '' * to learn about theJuly,the regiment was transferred to the Pen nsula, pc, lit cs of command and the experience of combat,just a fter the conclusion of the Seven Days' Battles. Voris provides superb descriptions of what it felt likeVoris, who had led the regiment for most of its to be under fire, to suffer a wound, and to secureexistence in the absence of its incompetent colonel, victory not only over rebels on the battlefield butthen became a full colonel. He commanded the also in his regiment' s internal politics. The latter671,during its service in southeastern Virginia andin the siege of Charleston, including the assault onFort Wagner,where Voris was again wounded. Inincludes details of tussles first with his regiment' soriginal colonel and later with other regimentalofficers that Voris had to defeat in order to secure1864, Voris and his men were assigned to Benja- the colonelcy for himself.min Butler' s Army of the James. Although P.G.T.While the dust jacket makes much of Voris' s pro-Beauregard' s Confederate forces outmaneuvered gressive views,the text reveals that he remained athe field army in which Voris served, Voris and hismen performed well,indeed so well that he received comradesman of his time. He respected his African Americanin arms, but he also continued to use thetemporary command of a brigade of African Ameri- n- word to describe them. Also, his letters showcan regiments. He ended the war with his original great respect and affection for his wife,but becauseregiment, and then served another eight months as her replies were not preserved, it is impossible tocommander of a military subdistrict in south-central do more than imply the nature of their relation-Virginia, where he faced the knotty problems ofReconstruction onthe front lines.This brief outline does little justice to the breadth toof Voris' s experiences. In an era where race, class,ship. The editor deleted " passages that repeat hisyearning for Lydia and their children,and referencestheir friends and family," Cxi) a reasonable andcommon practice in editing Civil War letters ( see,80 OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

e.g. Milo Quaife' s edition of the letters of AlpheusWilliams),especially in a collection of this length.Still,the inclusion of afew samples of such passagesmight have shed more light on the Voris family andmade the soldier himself sound less stoic than hesometimes does in these pages. That minor suggestionaside, Jerome Mushkat has done an excellentjob of editing these letters; the notes, chapterintroductions,and maps provide sufficient contextto follow Voris' scareer,without being intrusive.In short,he publisher and editor have performed areal service to both historians and Civil War buffsin producing this fine volume.W.Carey McWilliams and Frank X.Gerrity,eds. Tbe Collected Works ofWilliam Howard Ta/), Vol. VI:TbePresident and His Powers 0 TbeUnited States and Peace. Athens,Ohio: Ohio University Press, 2003.200 pp. ISBN: 082141500X (cloth),44.95.hen contemporary conservativestraceGerald 1. ProkopowiczEast Carolina Universitytheir ideologicallineage from George W. Bush andRonald Reagan and then back 01through George Washington andeventually sometimes even to Jesus, they seldominclude William Howard Taft among their luminaries.In his distinguished public career țhis son of theOhio Valley served as Secretary of War,Presidentof the United States and the Supreme Court ChiefJustice. Indeed,he is the only man ever to serve asthe head of two of the three branches of the federalgovernment. It seems, however,that he is oftenbest remembered for his girth,and for suffering bycomparison with the presidents who preceded andsucceeded him- Theodore Roosevelt and WoodrowWilson, respectively.Yet as the sixth volume otOhio University' sTbe Collected Works of Willia,)?Howard Taft makes clear,the Cincinnatian still hasmuch to offer students of late nineteenth century orearly twentieth century history,American politics,pre-World War 1 diplomacy,and those interested inlimited,Constitutional government.This volume contains two short essays publishedin 1914 and 1915- consideration of relationsaamong the three branches of government entitledThe President and His Powers," and an examinationof foreign policy issues entitled "The UnitedStates and Peace."Taft wrote as aformer Presidentto consider issues deserving "careful study from anunbiased standpoint of the historian and the jurist.12) Introductory essays by Rutgers Universitypolitical scientist W. Carey McWilliams and longtimediplomatic historian FrankX. Gerrity do acommendable jobof introducing their topics.someWhilereaders with less knowledgeof the pei iod nia>,Ivish the editorshad provided more background onsomeof the issues that Taft discussesascurrent events, McWilliamsand Gerrity identify the importantthemes in Taft' sworks, and theiressays serve to whet the reader' sappetite for the main course, Taft' s, writings.Taft' sbroad-ranging essay on thepresidency explores some topics ofprimarily historical interest but also addresses issuesthat remain relevant today such as the sources andlimits of presidential power and the impact of theConstitution on the president and Congress.addressing presidential powers, Taft distinguishedbetween his limited view and Theodore Roosevelt' smore expansive approach,although he did discussimplied powers that could strengthen the executive.Taft also emphasized that executives and legislatorsat both the federal and state levels should considercarefully the constitutionality of any proposedInSPRING 200481

a practitioner and performenThe appendixes also provide,without comment, a survey ofLunsford' recollections ands2Lamar Lunsford remains a significantand rich contributionto Appalachian studies and tothe exploration of folk arts anda selection of his tales, anecdotes,and songs.Solicited asLunsford' sofficialbiographer by the Lunsfordchildren, Loyal Jonesbrought to this work the insiderperspective of an Appalachiannative, along withaccess to manykey individualsin Lunsford' s life. Readers of this book will especiallyvalue its interviews with Lunsford as well aswith his contemporaries and family that togetherconvey a closeness in time to the life and personalityof its subject. It should not be surprising thenthat Jones paints a largely affectionate portrait ofBascom Lamar Lunsford,the man,and the MountainDance and Folk Festival, his life' scalling. Theauthor,however,does not shy away from identifyingLunsford' sfaults and shortcomings, nor fromdiscussing controversies Lunsford incited amongsome of his neighbors,other performers and outsideactivists. Following the lead of Archie Green,Jonesattributes these conflicts to Lunsford' s politics ofculture. A mountain native of the yeoman class,Lunsford fought strenuously against stereotypesprojected onto Appalachia and sought to promoteits beauty and art. And as director ofthe Mountain Dance and Folk Festival,he certainly promoted his ownaesthetic,but he did allow room forother views,particularly in the introductionof a popular clogging step inplace of a more traditional runningstep. Lunsford positioned himself asamediator between traditional andmodernist culture,but wanted morethan anything to promote aand continuing tradition.livingLoyal Jones' biography of Bascomfbs,cultural tourism of the region.It is only regrettable that thenew edition did not includeanThat is Native and Fineindex, which would havemade the book moreuseful asareference sourcefor scholars.Though not nearly asthorough orcritical as DavidE. Whisnant' sanalysis in All1983) of the more troublingWhite Top Festival,Jones presents a fair andhonest portrait of a Lunsford and the festival thatdefined his life.Elizabeth MatsonUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillWinona L. Fletcher, Senior Editor. CommunityMemories:A Glimpse of AfricanAmerican Life in Frankfort, Kentucky.Frankfort: The Kentucky Historical Society,2003.33.95.Illte*NZABRCOMMUNITYMEMORIESA limpse (, of Afrkin,American Ldcin Fral,kjort.kenfw, hyISBN: 0916968308 (cloth),Kentucky, approached a numbern 1995,John Gray of Frankfort,of state heritage agencies with theidea of preserving the history ofthe city' s African American communityby copying and archivingfamily photographs. That germ ofan idea grew into an experiment incommunityḏriven collaborationbetween local residents and the staffmembers of these heritage agenciesf>: to collect photos and oral histories,j and eventually to write this book.2*'SPRING 200483

BOOK REVIEWSCommunity Memories,however,qualifies neither asa scholarly exploration of the subject nor as an appropriatetext for classroom use. Rather,it shouldbe considered a gift book that presents a nostalgicdepiction of daily life in the black neighborhoodsof a mid-sized Ohio Valley city.Community Memories brings together words andimages from thirty-six oral history interviews andfifty- two personal photographic collections. A teamof editors has organized this material into chapterson community, family, employment, religion andeducation. Each chapter begins with a short introductionthat summarizes the contents and keythemes in the informationthat follows, consistingmainly of photographswith captions and excerptsapproximately aparagraph in length frominterviews, although theeditors include afew longerstories. Elsewhere inthe volume, readers willfind a time-line of keyevents,a list of significantchurches and schools,andmaps of Frankfort' s neighborhoods. This bookfocuses especially on close interconnections amongschools, churches, and social organizations, andtheir importance to their communities. Indeed,theeditors hint that the very notion of community itselfarises out of the shared experiences, relationshipsand bonds between people acting through theseinstitutions. The book also argues that family,pride in work, and place in neighborhoods formsthe basis for African American identity in Frankfort.The chapter on education,however, conveysa sense of regret that accompanied the integrationof community schools and the subsequent loss ofschools as sources of pride in African Americanneighborhoods. Finally,the editors emphasize therole of churches as commun ity centers and as placesin which African Americans traditionally have or-ganized themselves for a variety of purposes.The title of this volume illuminates both its majorstrengths and its limitations. The strength of thisbook lies in the fact that a local community trulyproduced it, and therefore it can serve readers effectivelyas a window into the li fe of that community,literally a window given the wealth of photographsincluded in its pages of families and of members ofneighborhood organizations. Neither professionallyshot nor framed, and some cracked, fuzzy, orinscribed, these photographs convey a compellingfolk quality that draws the viewer into the everydaylife of the people documented here. Likewise, theinterviews printed in thisbook bring the readerinto intimate conversationwith many AfricanAmerican residents ofFrankfort. The title ofthis book, however,alsobetrays amajor weaknessor limitation in thisbook, the fact that thevolume provides only arather narrow glimpseof the life and history ofFrankfort' s black community. Readers may wonderwhy the interviewers who contributed to thisvolume did not challenge their interviewees to gobeyond sentimental reminiscences. Moreover,theeditors provide little historical context that mighthave given the stories of individual lives told herea broader meaning. Indeed, most of the interviewsquoted here unfortunately remain undated andinclude few period references. The editors by omittingsuch crucial information may have intended topresent the community as tin»}eless,but instead theyhave created an aẖistorical,even static portrait ofwhat must have been adynamic community. Inshort, while Community Memories succeeds as anostalgic portrait, it fails to provide deeper understanding.As a community collaboration, this book cer-84OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

tainly succeeds in presenting the words and imagesof African American residents in Frankfort. Butscholars and teachers interested in athorough historicaltreatment of ablack community in Kentucky,should look forward to the forthcoming work byone of this volume' s editors, Doug Boyd, entitledReconstructing Craw, that includes a discussion notfound in Community Memories of the relationshipbetween oral history,public memory, and nostalgiain avanished neighborhood.Tracy E. K'MeyerUniversity of Louisvilleenslaved,has to be considered among their book' smost important contributions. Using several firsthandaccounts, the authors explore the occupations,household structures, migration patterns, and experiencesof black people, as well as considerablediversity within this group.Before they begin their story, however, Billingsand Blee consider two theoretical explanations previouslyused to explore the meaning of Appalachianpovertytheculture-of- poverty model and theinternal colony model. On the one hand, accordingto the authors, the culture-of- poverty modelhas a serious methodological flaw in its reliance onethnography to define the limits and possibilities ofDwight B. Billings and Kathleen M.Blee. Tbe Road to Poverty:Tbe Makingof Wealth and Hardship in Appalacbia.Cambridge,England:Cambridge UniversityPress, 2000. 448 pp. ISBN: 0521655463paper), 30.00. $n The Road to Poverty,DwightBillings and Kathleen Blee presentalongitudinal, sociologicalhistory of the "Beech Creek"community in Clay County,Kentucky.Their work builds upon anin ḏepth study conducted by JamesBrown in the 1940s. But,insteadof looking forward to the predictthe consequencesof poverty asBrown did, Billings and Blee tracethe community' s developmentfrom the late eighteenth to earlynineteenth centuries looking forTEE HOAU TOI 3OVER YHa„The Making of Weakh andiship in Aplizhhiaa researcher' s questions,in addition to its rampantstereotyping of Appalachian residents, of course,and its tendency to blame victims of poverty fortheir (») wn plight.In short ethnography focusesexclusively on the present and pays little attentionto the past which the authors consider crucial to athorough understanding of the current economicsituation in Appalachia. (10,14) On the other hand,the internal colony model,although itemphasizes the importance of history,has become fixed onindustrializationin the late nineteenth century, and itcompletely ignores the complex economicdevelopments that occurredmuch earlier in the century. ( 14) Thismodel also tends to view subsistence,_» »'

BOOK REVIEWStake instead a postmodern perspective, arguing County, Billings and Blee first focus sharply onthat dichotomies such as "commerce vs. subsis- salt. Beginning in the early 18005, salt from thetence"or capital vs. morality"implicit in the county supplied both farmers and meatpackersolder models will not hold up in the face of careful locally and in central Kentucky and Tennessee,research. They also consider the varied economicand social "trajectories"of different communityand local elites who profited from the productionand trade in salt chose to invest mostly m land andmembers, rather than creating a few stereotyped farming,and failed to use their capital to 1nveSt Incharacters frozen in time and place. The authors technology or to diversify the local economy. ( 76)thereby represent residents of Appalachia as com-plex individuals who embody multiple, intersectingelements of identity ( race, sex, class) that create awide range of experiences for different individuals.The authors, however,seek to createa history that not only chronicles the st»' *lives of individuals but also points to 4,* 2Therefore, when the salt market began to declinesharply in the 1850s, county residents who hadbenefited from the salt trade had little choice butto return to subsistence agriculture which, in anycase, other local residents had never4»._. abandoned, and this shift led toincreased isolation. The authors'new guidelines that they outline in ,{ 3%% 14' . st'* ,»PS» exploration of Clay County's saltthe book's epilogue for public policy 4>4*** « 9]5'*St*@»]Sti»„ industry offers three important newin Appalachia. Billings and Blee >5'-*» )J* *'»44J,i arguments about early Appalachianargue, Without " understanding the 21,development that overturn severalhistorical dynamics that V »6-create poor0E-4 widely-held misconceptions. First,places and poor people, it is impos- , the salt Industry actually wipedsible to develop effective policies to 'out many trees before the timber-alleviate contemporary regional pov- .»== »« industry gained a foothold in Aperty."51) ( In this way țhe authorscombine a radical politics that lookspalachia. Second, 1ndebtedness tocompany stores mayhave begunto the roots of social and economic f'..+....with wageḻaborers in the antebel-I iot*»,„ '_ ,« »problems, seeking to change what ! „„ k . . ' , lum salt industry, not later after thethey consider an oppressive politicalsystem,with a postmodern perspec-tive that re]ectsdichotomies, analyzes multiple saltdiscourses, and explores intersecting elements ofidentity. Like Wilma Dunaway, Billings and Bleef')' ' ',5 't»»»»» tjtt« = »»,, timber industry began to employmen for wages. ( 86) And third, theindustry in Clay County depended heavily onslaves, debunking the myth of Appalachian racialhomogeneity and the absence of slaves from theargue that market capitalism came to Appalachia region. ( 94)well before the onslaught of the coal and timber In their chapter on State " Making," Billings andindustry, during the antebellum period in ClayBlee explore local political control in Clay County,County, in fact. Relying on Immanuel Wallerstein' s and they document the coercive power of thoseexplanation for the rise of a world capitalist system, elites who held office, something the authors callthey view Appalachian Kentucky as the periphery "clientelism."Specifically,the authors argue thatof aperiphery,that iS to say Appalachia may beconsidered peripheral to the Blue Grass region ofKentucky which is itself peripheral to world capital-ism. ( 30-31, 48)intenselocal political elites traded influence in the courtsfor economic advantage and votes, especially later inthe midst of local feuds. (131) They also documentfactionalism among elites that hindered ClayIn their search for the roots of poverty in Clay County' s social development by disrupting civic86 OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

activities and thereby impeding democracy. (134-36) Factionalism in Clay County,in fact,eventuallyled to afeud"involving" its wealthiest families andtheir clients that produced niiny killings and seriouslydisrupted local politics. Like Altina Waller,Billings and Blee argue that feuds like the one inand reinforcing poverty through factionalism andclientelism,and make appropriate changes to reduceboth proble Ills. 327) Finally,Billings and Blee arguethat only a long term study of communities, asopposed to presentist snapshots of community lifethat sociologists and anthropolc,gists produce, canClay County stemmed in the nineteenth cennuyfrom multiple causeslocalpolitical struggle, theeconomic impact of the coal and tilliber industries,and increased outside influences over the county'seconomic development.Specifically, local eliteslost control of economic change after the c() al andtimber industries moved into Clay County,but localbusinessmen and investors also gained in wealthlargely by squeezing by coercive means ever greaterprofits from farmers and laborers who worked theirland. (280) The resulting Clay County feud, likethe Hatfield and McCoy feud, attracted nationalmedia coverage that reinforced widely Circulatintiimages of Appalachians as violent hillbillies. And,like Waller,Billings and Blee argue that these itiiagesallowed outsiders toand exploitation in the region asanecessary and even progressiveremedy to " backwards mountainculture." ( 314-15)liwiltions.Finally, The Road to Pot,ertyBillings and Blee claim thaten development has not rescuedthe region from poverty and in facthas increased the problem.view industrializationCitinglead tc, policies that will effectively combat povertyand inequality. (328) Taken as a whc,le. The Roadt()Pot' el'ty makes a very strong case tor these policydirectives. In short, only by looking to the past forthe roc,ts of Appalachian poverty, they argue, canwe begiti to think about how tc) chatige it.Rebecca J. BairdApt), ilacbia, 1 State UniversitrFrances McGovern. Fun,Cheap,6 Easy:My Lifein Obio Politics, 1949-1964. Akron: University ofAkron Press. 2002. 162 pp. ISBN 1884836798cloth), 29.95. $IJLL# di,PJ24%11'A:' li ./..their story shows that "market-driviuNbEheah#.E< q*@SI*** «,a*, 1 _, iLIFE:.0.10Richard Couto,they also argue for .the development and encourage- #**mentof "cultural strategies thatmaintain social capital" 323).In (other words,policy makers ought to look to the Appalachianpast for local ideas and practices that canhelp bolster community sustainability,rather thanattack mountain customs as retrograde, as somescholars have done. (324) Policy makers must alsoexamine the role of local government in creatingPOLITICS, lili-19.4e=tes, Slf»31 s .. :'rbc,litical menioirs often conform1-- to a certain standard. tendingtoward gravitas-laden tomes by1I important political figures that focussf » ' on their major accomplishmentswhile downplaying or spinning" "their shortcomings or defeats. It isf .41 precisely this expectation that makesFrances McGovern' sFun, Cheap,6Easyalighthearted,brief,and selfdeprecatoryaccount of a relativelyminor figure in Ohio politicssucharefreshing and welcome additionto this otherwise predictable genre.Frances McGovern, alawyer now retired from theOhio Edison Company, served as a Demc,craticmember of the Ohio House of Representatives fromAkron in the 19505 and as amember and chair ofthe Ohio Public Utilities Commission in the 1960s.A female public figure in the days when this was stillSPRING 2004 87

BOOK REVIEWSunusual in Ohio state politics, McGovern uses herown records,photos, and a fairly straightforward,chronological approach to recount her fifteen ȳearpolitical career. Far from using this opportunity totout her own significance or pioneer Status,though,she focuses instead on the nature of Ohio politics inthe days before it became a serious,big- money operationwhenit was still "fun, cheap,and easy."In a style disarmingly lacking in pretense, Mc-Govern fondly and vividly recalls the events andpeople surrounding her campaigns and her time inoffice.Colorful anecdotes abound, including hermeeting with John E Kennedy which left her unapologeticallystar- struck,and her peek into the Ohio St» »* j«- , 2 ,3 ''..]delegation at the 1960 4* *** f' f»-,-, 'Democratic Convention. 4214* ]Bit'', 1iAlmost as colorful are her te'» * .* 'sage pieces of political ',*:wisdom from less compli-cated times. She describes,. '1:/ Id" 1.' El, £ 4S@, ' 44/ 45{'*for example, all aspects A' 31 1. 'of running a successful :statehouse campaign forS,250 in the days beforecandidates relied on slick television political advertisementsand spin doctors. These include meetingsin boards of election offices, endless covered-dishsuppers, the vagaries of effective hand-card andsign distribution,and especially the strategic roundsshe made as a candidate to local picnic grounds onSundays.Perhaps the most unique contribution of thisbook, however,lies in the insight it provides intothe connections between politics and gender in the1950s and 1960s. Although never a major figure4meeting with some " elderly suffragettes"during hertime in the Statehouse.If this book has a major shortcoming,it has todo with context. For example, although she givessome attention to the high points of her politicalcareer, McGovern devotes relatively little spaceabout four chapters out of the nineteen) either tothe major issues facing Ohio politics at the time orto her legislative and regulatory accomplishments.Instead, she favors her impressions of variouspolitical figures.Similarly, national politics onlyenter into the narrative toward the end of the bookwhen McGovern served as a delegate to the 1960I«]1)"kft.Democratic conventionand when Lyndon Johnsonand Hubert Humphrey1. 4,0 Ill, campajgned in the Akron1 si area during her unsuccessfful runfor the U.S. House61 of Representatives in 1964.Admittedly, the authordid not intend to provide4 a comprehensive look at1 the politics of the time.But perhaps afew morepages might have been in order providing greaterinformation on her specific role in the halls of statepower and a nod to the national issues of the day asthey affected her. Conversely,McGovern providesa bit too much specific context on the local level,especially in the first few chapters. It is perhaps notsurprising that the author of Written ontbe Hills:Tbe Making of tbe Akron Landscape would makenumerous references to local geography and landmarksbothextant and extinct. But readers notfamiliar with northeast Ohio in general and Akronin Ohio politics, McGovern can be considered arelatively successful female politician in the dayswhen the few women legislators in the Ohio Househad their own sitting room and other legislatorswould call her "Miss Representative."She seemsuncomfortable with the mantle of "pioneer," however,pointing to a poignant memory of an awkwardin particular likely will feel lost among the streetsand buildings to which MeGovern so familiarlyrefers, although these references do contribute tothe charm and character of her account.Despite these weaknesses, Frances McGovernsucceeds in accomplishing what she sets out todopresentinga rich, textured and very personal88OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

view of the local and state politics of a bygone era.The obvious affection and enthusiasm she displaysfor the topic and the unique insights she providesrecommend this book to anyone with an activeinterest in Ohio history or politics.Kevin Ker, 1University of AkronSPRING 2004 89

AnnouncementsGertrude Polk Brown LectureSeries presentsRobert Dallek,An UninisbedLife:Jobn F.Kennedy,1917-1963Tuesday,May 4 at 6:30 p.m.Fine Arts Center at Ballard Higb School6000 Brownsboro Road,Louisville,KYr«he Filson Historical Society welcomes RobertDallek as the upcoming speaker in the GertrudePolk Brown Lecture Series. Dallek discusseshis presidential biography An Un/inisbed Life,which provides a full, detailed portrait of John EKennedy' spublic and private life.A professor of history at Boston University,Dallek is the author of seven books, including atwo-volume biography of Lyndon Johnson. HisThe 1lth Public Conference ofThe Filson InstitutePlantation LandscapesFriday -Saturday,May 21-22Oxmoor Farm720 Oxmoor Avenue,Louisville,KYhe Filson Historical Society devotes the 11thPublic Conference of The Filson Institute tothe southern plantation system. Conference eventsinclude a tour of Louisville' shistoric Oxmoor Farm,a reception, and a series of lectures. Presenters includeCamille Wells,John Michael Vlach, DennisPogue,Karl Raitz, and Dennis Domer.For registration information, call The FilsonHistorical Society at (502)635-5083, or visit www.filsonhistorical. org.American Foreign Policy wonthe prestigious BancroftPrize. Dallek is a frequent commentator onradio and television concerning the presidency andcurrent events.Tickets are $ 10, free for members of The FilsonHistorical Society. Send ticket requests with aself-addressed, stamped envelope to: GPBL Tickets,TFHS, 1310 S. Third Street, Louisville, KY40208.90 OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

Fellowships and Internships ofThe Filson Historical SocietyTbe Filson Historical Societyinvites applications for fellowshipsand internships.Applications must be received byOctober 15ellowships and internships are funded byvariety of sources. Fellowships encourage theascholarly use of The Filson' s nationally significantcollections by providing support for travel and lodging.Internships provide practical experience in collectionsmanagement and research for graduate students.Fellows aswell as interns are in continuousresidence at The Filson. Applications are reviewedtwice a year, February 15 and October 15. Applicantsshould indicate how The Filson' s collectionsare relevant to their research topics. Fellowshiprecipients will have the opportunity to present theresults of their research to scholars and the generalpublic as appropriate. For more information aboutfellowships and internships, application procedures,and to view The Filson' s online catalog, please visitwww. filsonhistorical. org, or call 502-635-5083.The Filson is Kentucky' s largest and oldestindependent historical society with research collectionsdocumenting the history and culture ofKentucky, the Ohio Valley,and the Upper South.The Library and Special Collections include rarebooks, maps, and 1.5 million manuscripts, formingthe best research holdings in Kentucky for thefrontier,antebellum,and Civil War eras in additionto extensive collections for the late-nineteenth andtwentieth centuries.FellowshipsMaster' s Thesis FellowshipsEligibility:M.A. candidate at the thesis stageTenure ofFellowsbip.·One weekAmount ofAward: 500 $Note: Full support is available for one- week fellowshipsto encourage use of Filson research collectionsby M.A. students developing and researching thesistopics.Partial support is available for studentsresiding in Kentucky who travel from beyond thegreater Louisville area.Filson FellowshipsEligibility: Ph.D. or equivalent, or doctoral candidateat the dissertation stageTenure of Fellowship:One weekAmount ofAward: $ 500Note: Full support is available for a one- week fe]-lowship period. Partial support is available forscholars residing in Kentucky who travel frombeyond the greater I.ouisville area.C. Ballard Breaux Visiting FellowshipsEligibility:Ph.D. or equivalentTenure of Fellowship:One monthAmount ofAward.· $ 2,000Note:Full support for postḏoctoral scholars livingoutside of Kentucky is available for a one- monthresidence. Partial support is available for scholarsresiding in Kentucky who travel from beyond thegreater Louisville area. Applicants for Breaux VisitingFellowships are automatically considered forFilson Fellowships.Continued on page 92SPRI NG 2004 91

ANNOUNCEMENTSInternshipsFilson InternsEligibility: Current enrollment in or recentcompletion of a graduate program in history or arelated fieldTenure of Internsbip:Two sernestersAmount of Award: 1,000 per semesterNote.·Interns work with appropriate curatorial staffand faculty advisors in areas of collections managementand research.H. E Boehl Summer InternsEligibility: Current enrollment in or recentcompletion of a graduate program in history or arelated fieldTenure of Internship:One to three months summerresidenceAmount ofAward.· 1,200 $monthperNote:Interns work with appropriate curatorial staffand faculty advisors in areas of collections managenientand research.92 OHIO VALLEY HISTORY

Submission Informationfor Contributors toObio Valley HistoryTheThree paper copies of a manuscript should besent by postal mail to:Christopher Phillips or Wayne K. Durrill, EditorsObio Valley HistoryDepartment of HistoryRO. Box 210373University of CincinnatiCincinnati,Ohio 45221-0373Preferred manuscript length is roughly 22 to 25pages, exclusive of endnotes, on one side of 8.5x 11 inch papenPlease use 11 or 12-point type.Double- space text and notes, with notes placedat the end of the manuscript text.Author' and institutional affiliation s name ontitle page only.Illustrations, tables, and maps that significantlyenhance the article welcome.areRegarding general form and style, pleasefollow the 15th edition of the ChicagoManual of Style.Please include a working postal address, withtelephone, fax, and e-mail information forhome or office, as well as for extensive holidaysabbatical residences.orrefereeing process for manuscripts is blind.Referees aremembers of oureditorial board orotherspecialists in the academy most appropriate to eachmanuscript. We have no quotas of anykind withregard to authorship,topic,chronological period, ormethodologythepractitioners via their submissionsdetermine what we publish. Authors must guaranteein writing that the work is original,that it has not beenpreviously published,and that it is not under considerationfor publication elsewhere in any form.Should a manuscript be accepted for publication,the author will be asked to provide a computer disk,clearly labeled with the name of the author,file, andsaved in Microsoft Word. We do not have the capacityto translate alternative programs.Accepted manuscripts undergo areasonable yetrigorous editing process. We will read the manuscriptvery closely as to style, grammar, and argument. Theedited manuscript will be submitted to the author forconst deration before publication.The Filson Historical Society (FHS),CincinnatiMuseum Center (CMC),and the University of Cincinnati(UC) hold jointly the copyright for all materialpublished in Ohio Valley History. After awork ispublished in the journal,FHS/CMC/UC will grant theauthor, upon written request,permission to republishthe work, without fee, subject to the author givingproper credit of prior publication to Obio Valley History.Each author will receive five free copies of thejournal in which the published article appears.SPRING 2004 93