Steel Valley Klan

D. Jenkins William

Description

Jenkins argues that the Klan drew from all social strata in Youngstown, Ohio, in the 1920s, contrary to previous theories that predominately lower middle-class WASPs joined the Klan because of economic competition with immigrants. Threatened by immigrant movement into their neighborhoods, these members supposedly represented a fringe element with few accomplishments and little hope of advancement.Jenkins suggests instead that members admired the Klan commitment to a conservative protestant moral code. Besieged, they believed, by an influx of Catholic and Jewish immigrants who did not accept blue laws and prohibition, members of the piestistic churches flocked to Klan meetings as an indication of their support for reform. This groundswell peaked in 1923 when the Klan gained political control of major cities in the South and Midwest. Newly enfranchised women who supported a politics of moralism played a major role in assisting Klan growth and making Ohio one of the more successful Klan realms in the North.The decline of the Klan was almost as rapid. Revelations regarding sexual escapades of leaders and suspicions regarding irregularities in Klan financing led members to question the Klan commitment to moral reform. Ethnic opposition also contributed to Klan decline. Irish citizens stole and published the Klan membership list, while Italians in Niles, Ohio, violently crushed efforts of the Klan to parade in that city.Jenkins concludes that the Steel Valley Klan represented a posturing between cultures mixed together too rapidly by the process of industrialization.

Sujets

• Histoire
• Local history
• Midwestern United States
• History of the Americas
• Catholicisme

Informations

• Publié par: The Kent State University Press
• Date de parution: 28 février 2014
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• EAN13: 9781612777962
• Langue: English

Extrait

Steel Valley Klan
STEEL VALLEY KLAN
The Ku Klux Klan in Ohio’s Mahoning Valley
 
WILLIAM D. JENKINS
THE KENT STATE UNIVERSITY PRESS
Kent, Ohio, and London, England
© 1990 by The Kent State University Press, Kent, Ohio 44242 All rights reserved Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 90-34701 ISBN 0-87338-415-6 ISBN 0-87338-694-9 (pbk.) Manufactured in the United States of America
First paperback edition, 2000. This is a Docutech Xerographic edition of the first printing.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication data Jenkins, William D., 1941– Steel valley klan: the Ku Klux Klan in Ohio’s Mahoning Valley / William D. Jenkins
p.   cm.
Includes bibliographical references (p.    ). ISBN 0-87338-415-6 (alk. paper) ∞ ISBN 0-87338-694-9 (pbk.) 1. Ku Klux Klan (1915– ) –Mahoning River Valley (Ohio and Pa.)—History. 2. Mahoning River Valley (Ohio and Pa.)—History. 1. Title.
HS2330.K63J44 1990 90-34701
322.4'2'0977139—dc20 CIP
British Library Cataloging-in-Publication data are available.
Contents
Preface
1 The Klan’s Resurrection
2 A City Is Reborn
3 The Election of 1923
4 Into the Rest of the Valley
5 Many Are Chosen
6 The Millennium
7 The Niles Riot
8 The Judgment
9 The Residue
Conclusion
Appendixes
A. Occupation Listings
B. Population Composition
Notes
Bibliography
Index
To the memory of my father, W ILLIAM , a Welsh Methodist; to my mother, D OROTHY , an Irish Catholic; to my wife, P ATRICIA , an Italian Catholic; and to my children, M ICHAEL and C ARRIE , where all these cultures blend.
Preface
S ecrecy has often clouded our knowledge of the operations of the Ku Klux Klan during the 1920s. Because meeting records and membership rosters disappeared once the Klan began to decline, historians interested in the Klan have had to rely on insider’s accounts, court records, congressional hearings, contemporary observations of journalists and students, and, of course, newspaper accounts. Although the credibility of these sources varies, as well as the extent to which historians have utilized them in constructing a comprehensive portrait, there have emerged a number of generalizations regarding the Klan about which most historians can agree.
The Ku Klux Klan of the 1920s was an intolerant fraternal society composed of white, Anglo-Saxon Protestants. Members located in both rural and urban areas resented blacks, immigrants, Catholics, and Jews. The leaders—in particular the founder, William Simmons, his successor, Hiram Evans, recruiter Edward Y. Clarke, and D. C. Stephenson—were personally corrupt and more interested in power or money than in a cause. Scandals involving these leaders alienated many members and prompted the decline of the Klan. The opposition of Irish and Italian Catholics, funneled through the American Unity League and its tactics of stealing and publishing membership lists, also played a vital role in its decline.
Although most historians can agree with the above generalizations, it is troubling to note that such conclusions rest upon research still sparse in its coverage. Because of the paucity of documents and the tediousness of searching through newspapers, only a few historians have undertaken in-depth studies of local Klans. Thus, a synthesis such as that of David Chalmers rests at times upon incomplete coverage of what was a nationwide movement. 1
Both Charles C. Alexander and Robert A. Goldberg have produced local studies based on a more intensive use of available sources; both raise questions about our present understanding of the Klan. In Oklahoma, Texas, Arkansas, and Louisiana, the southwestern portion of the Klan empire, Alexander discovered a Klan that flourished in spite of the small numbers of immigrants and blacks in those states. Although Klan rhetoric included more than a sprinkling of prejudice, its growth depended on its moral authoritarianism and its efforts to enforce—even by extralegal and violent means—laws regulating the vices of the community. According to Alexander most Klan members blamed local government officials for failure to enforce the laws properly. Thus, they thought it quite proper to assume the role of enforcer. Laws regulating sex, marriage, and drinking were their primary concern. They took little direct action against Catholics, Jews, or blacks unless they were involved in violations of the law. 2
Goldberg has studied Colorado, an area remote from the flood of immigration affecting the eastern industrial states, yet the Klan was as powerful there as in Indiana, long considered one of the Klan strongholds. Because of the availability of evidence, Goldberg limited his study to five cities, each of which differed in its response to the Klan. It is Goldberg’s contention—indeed, it is his main point—that the Klan fed on local, rather than national, concerns and that each appearance of the Klan requires intensive study of local documents to understand its appeal. 3
This study of the Ku Klux Klan in the Mahoning Valley, located in northeast Ohio, represents an effort to continue the work begun by Alexander and Goldberg. It is hoped that its conclusions will become part of a more comprehensive synthesis regarding the Klan of the 1920s.
Historians have often treated the Klan as peculiar to the twenties. Following Arthur Schlesinger’s model of alternating cycles of liberalism and conservatism, these historians have cited the Klan’s rise as evidence of the lessening ability of religious, ethnic, and racial groups to live together in the “Tribal Twenties.” They also cite the passage of the Immigration Restriction Act of 1924 as a culmination of the movement to maintain white, Anglo-Saxon supremacy in the United States. Their studies point to World War I and its nationalistic tendencies, the Red Scare after the war, and the labor strife of 1919 as generators of the frictions that produced the Klan. 4 This study would suggest, however, that, although the war and subsequent events were certainly irritants, the Klan is best seen as a consequence of a cultural conflict that resulted from the overly rapid mixing of divergent cultures within a society already undergoing the wrenching changes of industrialization. The conflict became evident in the 1890s and intensified during the Progressive Era. The passage of a literacy test—blocked by presidential vetoes until the advent of World War I—and the activities of the Anti-Saloon League were indicators of the escalation of the conflict. The Klan was a culmination, not a sudden flowering.
This study has benefited from the work of Richard Jensen and Paul Kleppner regarding pietistic Christianity and its involvement in politics. Both men have moved beyond traditional interpretations that highlight economic explanations for membership in political parties to a synthesis that includes moral and ethnic reasons as well. Their most important theme is the idea that pietistic Protestants have continuously involved themselves in midwestern politics as a means of imposing a conservative moral code on American society. Methodists, Baptists, Presbyterians, Disciples of Christ, and Scandinavian Lutherans constituted the pietistic sects; they emphasized personal conversion and revivals over the doctrinal and liturgical emphases of the Episcopalians and German Lutherans. Less concerned about achieving perfection in this world, these liturgicals relied on the moral authority of the church rather than the legal imperatives of the state to transform individual members. Jensen noted also that in 1890 pietists outnumbered liturgicals by two to one in Ohio and Indiana, later the centers of midwestern Klan activity. 5
The efforts of these pietists to serve as “their brother’s keeper” began with Puritan New England and continued in the new republic. 6 Having accepted the principle of religious freedom, pietists assumed the role of inculcating in the population those values considered important in the preservation of a democratic society. Through revivals they sought the perfection of individual moral habits; by the late nineteenth century, they had designated control of the desire to smoke, drink, or dance and the willingness to spend all day Sunday in a prayerful fashion as the hallmarks of Christian character and a sound democracy. Pietists were not content, however, with revivals as a means to spread personal holiness; they turned also to the passage of prohibitory legislation. 7
In the 1870s pietists formed the Prohibition party, which advocated federal action to outlaw liquor, as well as legislation to promote a Christian Sabbath, use of the Bible in the public schools, and curtailment of prostitution. Many pietists, however, were unable to sever their loyalties to the mainstream parties—they tended to be Republican—and thus resorted to nonpartisan organizations, such as the Women’s Christian Temperance Union and the Anti-Saloon League, to pressure mainstream parties and politicians to take action on behalf of Protestant moral legislation. 8
Many women participated in this pietistic crusade. By the mid-nineteenth century, the rate of participation of women in organized religion had fostered an image of them as morally superior to men. It was the role of moral guardian that encouraged them to join temperance and social purity societies. Eventually, one of the key arguments on behalf of suffrage drew on the belief that the participation of women in politics would purify the society. 9
Although the United States was a multicultural society, most pietists advocated their moral code as a universal imperative for all citizens. They usually did not challenge the principal of freedom of religion, but they did believe that their moral insights represented what was best for America. Such arrogance would inevitably lead to clashes with ethnic groups that did not agree with, much less practice, the strict pietistic code. As a result, Irish Catholics found the Democratic party a much more receptive home for