Crucible of a Generation

Home > Other > Crucible of a Generation > Page 13
Crucible of a Generation Page 13

by J. Kenneth Brody

but they cannot altogether alter it.” 7

  To Walter Lippmann, the philosopher king of the punditocracy, the whole aim

  of Japanese diplomacy had been not to promote peace in the Pacific, but to iso-

  late the Chinese and create an irreparable breach between China and the United

  States and Britain. Lippmann advised that there could be no settlement in the Far

  74 Last Week at Peace: December 1–6, 1941

  East other than a general settlement that respected the interests of all the parties.

  Anything else would be a repeat of Munich. It would, moreover, set the stage for

  the nightmare of two generations, a war between East and West, a war he did not

  hesitate to label a war between the “yellow peoples and the whites.”

  America’s Role: Political Responses

  American public opinion continued to be fiercely divided. America First

  announced that it would campaign actively for Senator Wayland (Curley) Brooks

  of Illinois, a leading isolationist. Its polls, it said, showed members unanimous for

  action at the polls and clamoring for a firm front against the “interventionists.” 8

  A stalwart among the isolationists—or, as they preferred to call themselves,

  the noninterventionists—was Colonel Joseph V. Kuznick of Chicago, who had

  commanded combat troops in France. He announced his resignation from the

  American Legion. In his opinion it was misrepresented by a handpicked Execu-

  tive Committee, most of whom had never seen overseas combat. Worse yet, the

  Executive Committee had surrendered to the New Deal, in Kuznick’s view part

  and parcel of “an un-American hell-bent-for-war administration.” Only one-

  third of the Legion’s members had actually fought in World War I, he grumbled,

  and three-quarters opposed fighting Nazi Germany “just to save Bolshevism.”

  The statements of a small but vociferous section of the Legion were representative

  neither of its own membership nor of the American people. 9

  *

  While the Soviet Union was engaged in massive defensive battles from Leningrad

  in the north to Rostov to the Caucasus in the south, the American Communist

  Party and its allies were also embattled. Deep suspicion of its members and its activ-

  ities was interwoven in the continuing debate about America’s role in the war and

  in the world. In New York, Actors’ Equity Association was in the process of submit-

  ting an amendment to its constitution barring members of the Communist, Nazi

  or Fascist parties or their sympathizers from holding office in or being employed

  by Equity. A January 9 final vote would require a quorum of 750 paid members

  present; if there were fewer, the council would be empowered either to accept the

  vote of a majority or to order another referendum. Also objects of the amendment

  were members of the Communist Party of the United States, the National Socialist

  Party of Germany and the Fascist Party of Italy, and in a basket clause, sympathiz-

  ers with or persons who knowingly and willingly advocated the overthrow of the

  government of the United States by force or other unlawful means. Such persons

  would be ousted from the union. 10 There were tangled loyalties involved here. The amendment provided for the ouster of members of the Communist Party of the

  Soviet Union at a moment when the Soviets were basking in favorable public opin-

  ion occasioned by their sturdy defense and now offense against the invading Nazis.

  *

  In a letter to The New York Times , Merle Miller, later to become the biographer of Harry Truman, sounded a strident call to arms. He spoke in the name of

  Wednesday, December 3, 1941 75

  his generation arguing that their fathers had not succeeded in a “war to end all

  wars.” Indeed, they had lost the peace to a group of “disillusioned old men in the

  United States Senate.” But that hardly proved them wrong, Miller wrote, citing

  the heritage of the Revolution and the Civil War.

  His generation Miller labeled a generation of idealists, but idealists who were

  hardheaded enough to know that, together with the youth of England, of Rus-

  sia, and of China, they could set free the conquered countries and the world.

  His generation, Miller wrote, might shrink from the sound and the fury, from

  meaningless slogans. But, speaking as one of draft age, he did not hesitate to claim

  that the majority of his generation were unafraid of the struggle for freedom. He

  echoed the President’s words that his generation had a “rendezvous with destiny”

  and assigned to it Lincoln’s well-known words that America could “nobly save

  or meanly lose the last best hope of earth.” He closed with his own words: “As

  courageously as we can, as wisely as we are able, we mean to say that, and now.” 11

  Joining Miller in calling for action, author and ex-Soviet agent Jan Valtin had

  told a Houston audience that America would have to adopt the methods of the

  totalitarian states, to learn that it could chop off heads, too. Democracy was all

  very well but played into the hands of the enemy.

  *

  In addition to the suspicion of communism, there was always abroad in the land

  latent anti-British sentiment. This was based in part upon Ireland’s grievances;

  in part upon concern for those hundreds of millions in the British Empire who

  did not enjoy the freedoms for which it was ostensibly fighting; and in part upon

  Americans’ distaste for so many manifestations of the British class system. But,

  Valtin assured his audience, it was not necessarily pro-British or pro-Russian

  to join in the struggle with those countries as allies. It was simply a matter of

  the preservation of America’s own freedom and of its own daily life. Until the

  Germans invaded Russia, he said, communists had been a menace to the United

  States. As soon as the war was over, they would be so again: they would resume

  their aims and their activities. Valtin spoke for many when he argued that it was

  a case of fighting now or fighting later, alone. 12

  *

  There were, to be sure, other voices, other opinions. No one is or has been more

  highly esteemed in America than its mothers. To slap the “Mothers” label on

  any activity or opinion is a much favored method of gaining public support.

  An organization calling itself Mothers Mobilized For America, Inc. (the notion

  of incorporation also lends solidity) sent letters of “condolence” to mothers of

  American sailors whose sons had been lost in the U-boat attack on the U.S.

  destroyer Reuben James. These letters did not stop at expressions of personal sorrow or sympathy. They intimated that it was not the German U-boats but the

  administration in Washington that had been responsible for the loss of these

  lives. This, The Oregonian editorialized, was “utter shamelessness” exceeding any boundary of isolationist criticism: it smelled of Nazi propaganda and might just

  as well have borne the label “Made in Berlin” and been mailed with a Nazi

  76 Last Week at Peace: December 1–6, 1941

  stamp, so typical was it of the work of the “jabbering Herr Goebbels.” There

  would always be in America, The Oregonian said, dupes for such transparent

  ploys. Even if they were not real fifth columnists, only unwitting fifth colum-

  nists, they needed to be dragged out into the light. 13

  *
/>
  Yes, the war and its impacts were the talk of the town. In New York various

  groups gathered to consider its progress and its prospects. The Namesake Towns

  Destroyers Committee of the English Speaking Union was meeting at 4:00 p.m.

  at Rockefeller Plaza. A dinner honoring Dr. Israel Goldstein, held by the Inter-

  faith Committee for Aid to Democracy, was paralleled by a dinner at the Waldorf

  Astoria for the British War Relief Society to aid British children, and a 7:30 p.m.

  dinner at the Commodore Hotel honoring Russian Counsel Victor Felduishiny

  of the American Committee for the Settlement of Jews in Biro Bidjan.

  Economic Indicators: Massive Defense Spending

  America was going back to work and the new demand was for swords, not plow-

  shares. The New York Times listed previously unpublished government contracts.

  Transparency was important as a protection against self-serving and under-the-

  table dealing. Improprieties in government contracting were, as they had always

  been, a continuing concern.

  Instead of its standard printing presses, R. Hoe and Co., Inc. of New York

  undertook a $1,900,876 contract to produce gun-recoil mechanisms, while Otis

  Elevator Company contracted for $1,930,400 of gun mechanisms and castings.

  Growing armies needed more than guns, as indicated by a contract with Supe-

  rior Linen Company for sheets, blankets, pillows, towels, and the like. Materials

  had to be moved and they would be, to the tune of $860,000 for Mack Truck

  parts and $827,049 to La France Truck Corporation—historic producer of fire

  engines—for trucks, and more trucks.

  If many suppliers ventured into new product lines, Antoneri Fireworks Com-

  pany of Rochester was only doing what came naturally in supplying a million

  dollars’ worth of ammunition. But in the early stages of a great defense buildup,

  the real urgency was in machine tools and other essentials of the production lines

  that would be critical in filling all the other contracts. This was typified by con-

  tracts for a modest $2,600 with Manning, Maxwell, and Moore of Jersey City for

  drill presses, punches, and shears; with J. H. Williams & Company of Buffalo for

  forgings and dies for $6,410; for $4,211 with Ole Engstrom of New York City

  for punches and dies; and with Producto Machine Company of Bridgeport for

  $15,850 for milling machines. The largest of the contracts reported that day was

  with New Haven’s High Standard Manufacturing Company for over $10 million

  for guns.

  Democracy’s arsenal was gearing up and producing the spectrum of goods

  and components necessary to make fighting vehicles, planes and ships. Thus the

  Navy in the month of November was growing at the rate of a ship a day, with

  Wednesday, December 3, 1941 77

  thirty-three vessels completed in November, including the mighty battleship Indi-

  ana , destroyers, submarines, submarine chasers and auxiliary vessels. 14 , 15

  This scale of activity enabled William T. Witherow, chairman of the National

  Association of Manufacturers, to tell the opening session of its annual convention

  that American industry had already finished and delivered a volume of defense

  goods greater than had been specified in the government’s plans. Indeed, since

  March 11, 1941, when the first Lend-Lease bill had been enacted into law, industry

  had supplied nearly $10 billion in equipment against orders for $9.3 billion. “No

  matter how frequently the specifications are raised,” Witherow told his audience,

  “industry will produce to meet them.” The importance of the defense program

  was brilliantly illustrated by Witherow’s closing remarks, an unusual acknowledg-

  ment by an industry group that “only the unthinking can find fault with stricter

  government controls required to accomplish this titanic defense task with the

  speed necessary to do the job on time.” 16

  What was more usual was the warning by Senator Walter F. George of Georgia

  that federal taxes were nearing the danger line; that any increase would hurt the

  nation; and that the costs of the defense program must be spread over generations. 17

  The products of the defense program were on display for a day in a special

  defense train, one of three touring the country, that would be open at Houston’s

  Southern Pacific Station to local manufacturers and others interested in taking

  part in the defense program. More than 700 local manufacturers and machine

  shop operators were expected to visit the train in groups cycling through it every

  forty-five minutes.

  Other special groups would be formed of OPM representatives, city council

  members, and other officials not only from Houston, but also from Mississippi,

  Arkansas and Louisiana.

  Liberty and Justice for All: In the Matter of Race

  The contrast between the American promise and American performance was

  evident every day in the area of race relations, and it often took extreme, not to

  say grotesque, forms. In Jacksonville, Texas, the Central Texas Colored Meth-

  odist Conference in convention condemned the unjustifiable, indefensible, and

  horrible slaying of Matt Flournoy, a seventy-year-old black farmer, in the very

  courtroom where he stood trial on November 24 at Lufkin for the alleged assault

  and attempted slaying of Ray Morehouse, a nineteen-year-old white woman.

  Flournoy was stabbed to death in open court. His assailant, Ray’s twenty-five-

  year-old husband, was charged with the killing and released on a $3,000 bond.

  The Conference wrote to the U.S. Attorney’s office lamenting the negligence of

  the officers in the court and their failure to protect Flournoy. It asked in turn for

  a thorough investigation of the case. 18

  Was there hope for justice in such an environment and in the face of such

  attitudes? Modest progress appeared on the same day in a Georgia courtroom

  where a prison camp warden was convicted of involuntary manslaughter in the

  death of black inmate Lewis Gordon. The victim and twenty-one others had

  78 Last Week at Peace: December 1–6, 1941

  been confined in a “sweat box” for eight or ten hours. The warden had left the

  camp after ordering the punishment. When the prisoners cried out that they were

  dying, the warden’s deputy had refused to reverse the fatal order.

  The defense made the unlikely claim that the cause of death was shock from

  cold water poured upon the dying inmate in an attempt to revive him. This did

  not go down well with the jury, which took only forty minutes to return with its

  guilty verdict; the warden was sentenced to three years in the penitentiary. 19

  *

  For blacks in the South, the first priority was survival in a world where a black

  defendant was stabbed dead in the courtroom and a black prisoner became the

  victim of prolonged confinement in a sweat box. Against the odds, there were

  African Americans who fought to maintain their dignity, their sense of pro-

  portion, and a degree of participation in the system that so degraded them.

  Mrs. Mary Lee had written to “The Pulse of the Public,” the letters column of

  The Atlanta Constitution , expressing her fear that an increase in the number of

  “negroes” registered to vote was a threat—she did not hesitate to say it pl
ainly—

  to white supremacy. Her letter evoked a penetrating response from Benjamin J.

  Davis of Atlanta. Mrs. Lee ought not to be alarmed, he wrote. White supremacy

  was nowhere in danger and she ought to look on Negro voters not as a menace

  to white supremacy but as a complement to real democracy. If white supremacy

  was unable to take care of itself, he observed, then it ought to get out of the way

  of real democracy.

  Mrs. Lee would do well, Davis wrote, to inform herself of the facts—that

  Atlanta had been so thoroughly gerrymandered that no ward had the possibility

  of a black majority. So Mrs. Lee, whom he had the grace to describe as “this good

  woman,” would do better to help her neighbors qualify to vote.

  The deep sense of inferiority imposed upon blacks over three centuries of sub-

  mission is evidenced in Davis’s forthright declaration:

  I am a Negro man and I confess that the Negro is not prepared to take over

  and run this government and the white man has no cause to fear calamity

  if he has faith in his own intelligence. . . .

  The Negro, he continued, didn’t want to dominate the white man, but taxation

  without representation was as onerous now as it had been in 1776. All the Negro

  wanted, he concluded, was a fair voice in a system administered in the interests

  of all and not only of a part of the people. His closure was as eloquent as it was

  simple: “The Negro wants a working democracy based upon the principles of

  Christianity.” 20

  Deflationary Times: A Lingering Depression

  If delivery of goods for the growing defense program was measured in the bil-

  lions, there were millions of Americans whose economics were on a humbler

  Wednesday, December 3, 1941 79

  scale. In Carrollton, Georgia, following a custom that had outlasted the memory

  of the oldest inhabitant, the first Tuesday in every month was Trading Day.

  Trading Day this week found a crowd of more than 200 milling around in the

  wagon yard between Louis Heatin’s mule barn and the Masonic Hall. What

  they brought to trade were the fraying and hard-worn goods of a hard-pressed

  peasantry. They brought their dogs: rabbit dogs, coon dogs, fox dogs, and bird

  dogs. There were all manner of musical instruments, guitars, banjos, fiddles, and

  mandolins. On display were broken shotguns crudely wired together. There was

 

‹ Prev