Saturday, August 28, 2021

A European Jew in the Jim Crow South: Prof Green in South Carolina

This blogpost continues the blogposts "Intro to Simon Grünzweig," "Lincoln in the 1940s," "Grünzweig at Lincoln," "Grünzweig gets his PhD," "Philander Smith in the 1950s," "Grünzweig in Little Rock," "Tulsa in the 1950s," and "Becoming Prof Green in Tulsa."

Cover of Green's first published textbook
Photo courtesy of author

Simon Green started working at the University of South Carolina in September 1958. He arrived alongside his Tulsa colleague William A. Rutledge. Moving to South Carolina was a major change for Green. He'd previously taught at small private universities and was now at a flagship state university. Academically, USC offered a much higher level of academics than the schools Green had previously taught at. However, compared to most other flagship universities, USC lagged behind. The state's social, economic, and political problems had dragged the university down for much of the century. Hiring Green and Rutledge was part of a decade long effort to raise the level of academics.

A campus-wide effort to improve academics had begun at the start of Donald Russell's university presidency. Russell was not an obvious choice to spearhead the effort as he was not an academic.  His studies hadn't advanced beyond the undergraduate level. Prior to arriving at the university, he'd worked in law and politics. Despite this, he evidently recognized the need to make USC into a more serious academic institution. He had achieved success, in part because his political experience allowed him to increase the resources provided by the state government. 

In 1952, the year that Russell assumed the presidency, USC student enrollment stood at a low of 2,860 students. This was slightly smaller than Tulsa's student body, and only a fraction of population at neighboring state university. (The same year, enrollment at the University of Georgia was 5,197). During Russell's time as president, enrollment grew annually by roughly 10%. By 1959, enrollment stood at 5,109 students, putting the university on par with its peer institutes. The university's physical plant grew along with the student body. A number of new buildings, including a student union (the Russell House) and a library (the Thomas Cooper Library), were constructed.

Russell's main focus was not on enrollment or the physical plant but rather on the quality of the faculty. He worked to increase faculty salaries and supported the hiring of a number of prominent senior professors. Among those hired was math professor Tomlinson Fort.

Professor Fort had long served as faculty at the University of Georgia. His service included a lengthy term as department head. Fort was also active on the national-level. He had served as Associate Secretary of the AMS and as Vice President of the MAA. 

Fort was an accomplished researcher, especially by the standards of southern universities. He'd received a PhD from Harvard University in 1912. He wrote a dissertation in analysis under the supervision of Maxime Bôcher. By 1958, he'd published about twenty papers and supervised seven PhD students.

Beyond his mathematical accomplishments, Professor Fort was well-suited for employment at a southern university as he had deep roots in the region. Not only had he grown up in Georgia, but his family was prominent within the state. For example, his grandfather had served as a U.S. Congressman during the antebellum. 

Tomlinson Fort in 1948
University of Georgia Yearbook

While Fort was the most prominent hire, the math faculty improved both in numbers and in training. In 1959, the faculty stood at five full professors, nine associate professors, and five assistant professors. This was four-times the size of the University of Tulsa's math department. Moreover, twelve professors (roughly half the department) held PhDs. By comparison, when Green arrived at Tulsa, only one of the math professors had completed a doctorate. Not counting Green and Rutledge, the PhD-holding faculty were the following:
  • Wyman L. Williams: 1936 PhD from University of Chicago, 2 publications.
  • Eucebia Shuler: 1934 PhD from Peabody College for Teachers of Vanderbilt University.
  • Herman W. Smith: 1939 PhD from the University of Texas at Austin.
  • Ernest A. Hedberg: 1936 PhD from the University of Missouri.
  • Marguerite Zeigel Hedberg: 1932 PhD from the University of Missouri.
  • Talmadge H Lee: 1953 PhD from the University of North Carolina.
  • Raymond A Lytle: 1955 PhD from the University of Georgia.
  • Johann Sonner: 1954 PhD from University of Munich, 9 publications.
  • David D. Strebe: 1952 PhD from State University of New York at Buffalo, 2 publications.
  • Robert Z. Vause: 1951 PhD from the University of North Carolina, 1 publication.
(The number of publications is taken from MathSciNet.)

Certainly, this faculty constituted a department largely focused on teaching, not research. In general, the math department lagged behind most departments in the region. For example, while both the University of Georgia and the University of North Carolina had well-established PhD programs, USC only offered a master's degree as the highest degree awarded. Nevertheless, the qualifications of the faculty were much higher than they'd been when Russell had been made president.

USC math faculty the year before Prof. Green arrived
Garnet and Black Yearbook, 1959

Green probably hadn't been hired during Russell's presidency. Russell resigned in December 1957, about half a year before Green arrived. However, his replacement, Robert L. Sumwalt, largely carried on Russell's program of improving the quality of the faculty.

Intriguingly, Green was not the only European that arrived in the math department in 1958. In addition to Green and Rutledge, the university hired Johann Sonner. Just before his hire, Sonner had been working for the U.S. military at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base (in Ohio). However, Sonner was originally from Germany. He was about twenty years younger than Green. He'd been born in Munich, near the border with Austria (where Green was from). Sonner was a teenager when World War Two broke out. During the war, he had served in the military for Nazi Germany. He was in the signal corps but was captured and spent time in a Soviet POW camp. It is fascinating to speculate how the Sonner, a former Nazi soldier, interacted with Green, a Jewish refugee from National Socialism. Unfortunately, any speculation must remain just that as the historical record is silent on the issue.

What was Columbia like away from the university? Columbia was similar to Little Rock in important respects. Both cities were (and are) state capitals. Columbia had a larger population, and its population was growing much more rapidly. About a quarter of a million people lived in the greater metropolitan area. (The population was reported as 257,961 in the 1960 U.S. Census.) This represented an almost 40% increase over the past decade (from an estimated 186,844 in 1950). By comparison, Little Rock's population stood at around 180,000 and grown by less than 2% over the last ten years. 

Of the residents in the Columbia metro area, about a third were African-American. (More precisely, African Americans made up 32.4% of Richland county and 17.2% of Lexington county according to the 1960 U.S. Census.) This percentage was slightly higher than the population of Little Rock (which stood at roughly one-quarter).

Politically and socially, the atmosphere in Columbia was far different from anything Green had experienced before. Columbia, Tulsa, and Little Rock were all segregated cities, but Columbia was a segregationist stronghold, while Tulsa and Little Rock were minor outposts in comparison. In Oklahoma and Arkansas, public universities had been integrated on a limited basis since the 1940s. The 1957 Little Rock High School Integration Crisis had demonstrated that major and rapid integration efforts could provoke violent backlash. However, more limited efforts were accepted. For example, during his time at Philander Smith College, Green's colleague Georg Iggers had written a Letter to the Editor of the local newspaper urging the public library to integrate and had been active in the local NAACP chapter. The college also accepted its first White student, Dorothy Martin, during this time. None of this provoked a serious response, but in Columbia, such activities were met with an overwhelming rebuke. 

In the years before Green arrived, students and professors in Columbia had seen first-hand how strong the counter-reaction to integration efforts could be. In 1955 and again in 1957, USC faculty who publicly criticized segregation were dismissed from their jobs. The campus remained completely segregated. The semester before Green arrived (in spring 1958), African American students from nearby HBCUs had come to the USC campus to apply for admission. They were met by White USC students chanting pro-segregation slogans, and university officials refused their applications. After they left, USC students burned a cross and hung an African American in effigy as further protest against integration. 

USC's neighbor, the private HBCU Allen University, had integrated the year before Green arrived. That year the university admitted a White refugee from Hungary. This action had brought the wraith of state government down on the university. The State Board of Education (headed by the governor) had withdrawn certification of Allen's teaching programs, an action that prevented Allen graduates from teaching at public schools. Certification was only restored after the Hungarian student had left and several left-leaning faculty members were dismissed.

A student dormitory built during Russell's presidency


Just as he had at Lincoln and Philander Smith, Dr. Green largely largely stayed out of the public eye and focused on mathematics. In May 1958 (a few months before he started teaching), regional newspapers like The State announced USC's new hires. The announcement of Green's hire made no mention of the fact that he'd taught at Philander Smith College. It did mention that he'd taught at Lincoln. Lincoln was not identified as an HBCU, but certainly the university's name would have raised a few eyebrows. For many White South Carolinians, Lincoln was regarded as a tyrant who had waged an unjust and destruction war against the state.

Dr. Green and his family were quickly welcomed by the Jewish community of Columbia. At the start of the semester, as Green's teaching was starting, his wife was made a member of the local chapter of Hadassah, a volunteer organization for Jewish women. Later that year she was made a member of the local branch of B'nai B'rith.

Dr. Green began reaping the benefits of the work he'd done in Tulsa. He had spend several years working with Dr. Rutledge and Dr. Schwartz on writing some mathematics textbook. The first book, written with Rutledge, was published in December. Titled Introduction of Algebra for College Students, the book is a treatment of the elementary algebra. They had written their book for college freshmen, and it covers topics like irrational numbers and matrices. The book's publication was announced in regional newspapers. Rutledge told reporters that he and Green had written the book with a specific pedagogical goal in mind. Rather than teaching students algebra through memorization, they worked to present the topic conceptually, as developing out of ten basic ideas. University of Michigan Professor Charles Brumfiel reviewed the book for the American Mathematical Monthly. Brumfiel gave a mixed review. He applauded the goal of developing the subject conceptually and de-emphasizing memorization. However, he felt the authors neglected to provide full proofs of important properties and used language in a sloppy and potentially confusing manner. Brumfiel concluded his review by stating that the book could be used by a competent  instructor, but it should be carefully rewritten to address the issues he'd raised. The textbook seems to have been reasonably successful. It was reprinted multiple times with an edition being printed in 1968, almost a decade after the first printing.

The second book that Green published was Vector Analysis with Applications to Geometry and Physics. This book was authored with Rutledge and Schwartz. This textbook was more advanced. The book developed the theory of vector calculus alongside applications of the theory to topics in geometry and physics (e.g. electrostatics and magnetism). The book was also reviewed in the Monthly, this time by Wayne State Professor Melvin Henriksen. Henriksen expressed some frustration at the book's uneven level of mathematical rigor with the treatment alternating between a level appropriate for a physics course and a level more appropriate to an advanced math course.

During the winter break, Green traveled to the annual Joint Mathematics Meeting. That year the meeting while held at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. Also traveling to the meeting were Green's colleagues Dr. Sooner and Dr. Williams. Green gave a presentation in one of the session on Geometry. The talks in this session were a mix of algebraic geometry and convex geometry. For example, Ernst Snapper gave an algebraic geometry talk in which discussed a generalization of the theory of the Hilbert polynomial. The speaker following Green was the distinguished geometer H. S. M. Coxeter. Coxeter talked about some unusual phenomenon displayed honeycomb packings in three-dimensions and why this phenomenon doesn't occur in two-dimensions.

Green's own talk, titled "Regular Transformations in Euclidean 4-Space," was a presentation on work stemming from his dissertation. The abstract describes the material as joint work with Dr. Rutledge.  The talk appears to be an update on his dissertation work.

The University of South Carolina would appear to have been a good fit for Green. With its larger and better educated faculty, the math department provided him with more opportunities than any of the other universities he'd worked at. It also afforded him a chance to continue his collaboration with Dr. Rutledge. Outside of work, he and his wife seemed to have been warmed welcomed by the Jewish community. Despite all this, both Green and Rutledge left at the end of the year. Rutledge returned to Tulsa and returned to teaching at the University of Tulsa after spending the summer working for Douglas Aircraft. Green would move to Windsor, Canada. He left to hold a professorship at Assumption University. In the next post, we'll look at what he did there. 

Authors' bio on the backflap of the textook
Photo courtesy of author


Saturday, August 7, 2021

Benedict College Mystery Solved, Part 4


Horace B. Davis in 1961
The Shaw University Bear [1961]

"I have a letter with his name signed to it. He is teaching at Benedict College in Columbia, S. C., my State. . . . I don't know why he should keep that a secret. That is a colored college down in my state." These were the words of South Carolina Senator Olin D. Johnston upon reading the letter that Horace B. Davis had submitted to Judge Whittaker's nomination hearing.

Horace had asked his former lawyer Fyke Farmer not to tell the Senate Judiciary Committee where he was teaching. Fyke had not divulged this information, and it is not entirely clear how the Johnston obtained it, although it would not have taken a lot of work. Horace was listed in the Columbia city directory as "[teacher] Benedict College."

In any case, Horace certainly had good reason to keep his employer a secret. The day after Judge Whittaker's hearing (on March 19), someone in South Carolina, probably Senator Johnston or someone connected to him, contacted the FBI for information about Horace. The letter isn't currently available, but some FBI internal communications discussing it are. The letter stated that information was being requested "so steps deemed advisable may be taken for protection public interest and youth of state." However, FBI officials immediately connected the request to Judge Whittaker's hearing.

The person requesting the information did not limit his request to Horace. He also requested information on Forrest O.Wiggins, a professor at Allen University. It is unclear why Forrest was targeted. His name hadn't been mentioned at Whittaker's nomination hearing. His political activities had been subject to public scrutiny in 1952 when he was dismissed from the University of Minnesota, but the same was true of other professors such as John G. Rideout.

Photo of John G. Rideout that accompanied the newspaper article "Allen Professor Trouble Aired Before Legislature"
Florence Morning News [SC], January 16, 1958. pg. 1.

Whoever requested the information on Horace and Forrest received it from the FBI. On March 27 (about a week after the initial request), the FBI Director instructed the Savannah Field Office to provide the information over the telephone. The Director explained that the public should not know that the FBI was disclosing information: 

you should emphasize the fact that none of the information furnished is to be attributed to the FBI, that the information is furnished in the strictest confidence and no reference is to be made to the FBI in any manner in connection with any action taken upon the information being furnished. Additionally, you should clearly define to him the confidential nature of Bureau files and the responsibilities and jurisdiction of the FBI in the security field.

For Horace, the impact of the FBI's disclosure was limited. By the time the Bureau shared information, he'd already resigned from Benedict. He'd also been subject to intense scrutiny in the press. The day before Judge Whittaker's hearing, Senator Eastland informed the press of Horace's letter. In an article published the next day, The State newspaper not only reported on the letter, but they also identified Horace as a professor at Benedict College. Indicative of the newspaper's attitude on the matter is the title of an article announcing Judiciary Committee's approval of Whittaker: "Whittaker Okayed for Top Court. Benedict Man Raps Choice; Lawyer Rants."

The day of Whittaker's hearing, Senator Johnston announced that he planned to call Horace before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee (which the senator was a member of). He also made an implicit threat against Benedict College if they failed to dismiss Horace

I believe any eleemosynary institution or tax-free endowed school that insists on keeping in its employment a person that refuses to tell any state or federal investigative body whether or not he is or every has been a Communist could and should be required by a state to pay taxes and have its eleemosynary tax-exempt status revoked.

By March 25, Horace had resigned from Benedict College. Horace said that, once Benedict was put under public pressure, he offered his resignation to President Bacoats, and the president immediately accepted it.  According to Horace, many of his colleagues were sad to see him go. President Bacoats was supportive of him and helped Horace secure a job at Shaw University in North Carolina.

Senator Johnston told reporters that he'd ask to have Horace investigated even after he'd resigned from Benedict.  He said that he was still going to request that Horace be called before the Internal Security Subcommittee and that an investigator for the subcommittee was going to look into Horace's background. Nothing seems to have come of this, however. At least publicly, Johnston seems to have lost interest in investigating South Carolina Communists by April.

Allegations of Communists at Benedict and Allen would remain a topic of public interest for the next year. The issue would make national news in January 1958 after Governor Timmerman denounced Allen faculty at his state of the union address. Yet, on this issue, Johnston would remain out of the public eye. There was also little further mention of Horace. Although Horace's wife Marion was among those that Governor Timmerman publicly accused of promoting "racial hatred" with an "ultimate communist goal of creating civil and racial disorder," Timmerman only briefly mentioned Horace once in his speeches. (He said that Horace had aided Lewis Smith, one of the accused professors at Benedict.) The press said nothing about Horace after he'd left the state.

Johnston's apparent loss of interest in South Carolina Communists is anomalous. As a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, he was well-positioned to advocate on this issue. He could have remained silent during later developments because he recognized that Timmerman's accusations were groundless. Alternatively, he could have allowed Timmerman to act as the public face of anti-Communism in South Carolina for, say, personal or political reasons. 

Horace B. Davis in 1962
The Shaw University Bear [1962]

Monday, August 2, 2021

Benedict College Mystery Solved, Part 3

This blogpost is preceded by


The start of the 1956-57 academic year was the start of Horace B. Davis's second year at Benedict College. Horace hadn't been particularly happy working at Benedict, but his first year here had passed uneventfully. This was no small thing. His experience at the University of Kansas City had demonstrated that his involvement with Communism made him a target for politicians. 

Politicians in South Carolina were especially interested in rooting out Communists like Horace. A central goal for politicians in 1950s South Carolina was the preservation of segregationist. Challenges by the nascent civil rights movement were alleged to be the result of "agitation" by Communist workers from out-of-state. As a Communist from the northeast who was working at an HBCU, Horace was a near perfect realization of their political fears. However, initially no one seems to have noticed his presence.

Horace's situation changed rapidly and dramatically in March 1957. That month Charles E. Whittaker, the Missouri judge that had ruled against Horace's reinstatement at KCU, reappeared on the national landscape. On March 2, President Eisenhower nominated Whittaker to a seat on the U.S. Supreme Court. Two days later (on March 4), the Senate Judiciary Committee approved of the nomination. The Committee Chair reported that the motion to approve had passed unanimously and without debate or any unfriendly comment. A committee hearing on the nomination was set for March 17.

Charles E. Whittaker (on the left)  at the White House shortly after being nominated to the Supreme Court
The State, March 3, 1957. pg. 1.

Whittaker seems to have been viewed by many as noncontroversial and apolitical. In an article discussing the nomination, The State quoted Whittaker as responding to a question about his political views by saying "I read the law only for understanding of its meaning, and apply and enforce it in accordance with my understanding of its meaning." A March 6 editorial in The State titled "Has Right Idea" approved of Whittaker's judicial philosophy and endorsed his nomination. Whittaker, the editor said, espoused "a doctrine sorely needed by the present highest court." 

Not everyone supported Whittaker's nomination. Horace was strongly opposed. He wrote a letter expressing his views to the Senate. His letter, which was quoted in part by The State newspaper, read

I was fired by the University of Kansas City for refusing to answer Sen. Jenner's (R-Ind) questions about Communism, when put by the trustees of the university (after Sen. Jenner had haled [rec hauled] me before him) in the year 1953.

He went on to explain that he had filed a lawsuit, but Whittaker had dismissed it and denied him a rehearing. Horace explained that

[Whittaker] said among other things that the public will not and should not stand for having teachers in the public schools, men who will not answer questions about Communism. This statement measures not only his judicial temperament but his attention to facts.  A private school is not a public school.

I feel that Judge Whittaker's brief record on the bench should be scrutinized with care. I feel further that whatever such examination discloses, the Senate should resound with the voice of someone who is concerned with civil liberties – for a change. 

He went on to discuss the recent appointment of William J. Brennan Jr. to the Supreme Court. Brennan had been attacked by Senator Joseph McCarthy, a staunch anti-Communist, because McCarthy viewed him as insufficiently anti-Communist. Horace said the questioning of Brennan

featured questions as to whether he was likely to be sufficiently severe on Communism. This is a sad commentary on the state of our liberties.

Horace sent his letter to Richard L. Neuberger, a Democratic senator from Oregon. It is unclear why Horace contacted Neuberger specifically. Horace had no ties to Oregon, and Neuberger was not on the Judiciary Committee. Neuberger had a reputation for strongly supporting liberal causes, so Horace may have thought he would be supportive of Horace's opposition.

Sen. Thomas C. Hennings
Pocket congressional directory. 83 Cong. 1953.

Neuberger passed Horace's letter on to Thomas C. Hennings Jr, a Missouri senator who sat on the Judiciary Committee. In turn, Senator Hennings shared the letter with the rest of the committee. 

Horace's former lawyer Fyke Farmer also opposed Whittaker's nomination. Fyke submitted his own letter and then traveled to Washington D.C. to participate in the hearing. Horace helped fund Fyke's trip, giving $50 for travel expenses. 

Except for Missouri's two senator who made brief statements in support of Whittaker, Fyke was the only person to appear at the committee hearing. 

Fyke Farmer
From  Peterborough K  via findagrave

At the hearing, Fyke did not find a receptive audience . The Committee Chair was Mississippi Senator James Eastland. Just one year ago Horace had seen Eastland speak at a rally in support of segregation. In fact, Eastland wasn't the only rally speaker at the hearing. Also present was South Carolina Senator Olin D. Johnston. 

Sen. Olin D. Johnston
Pocket congressional directory. 83 Cong. 1953.

Both Eastland and Johnston had also been on the Internal Security Subcommittee when it subpoenaed Horace. In fact, almost half of the senators from that subcommittee were at Whittaker's hearing. Also present were former subcommittee members John Marshall Butler and Arthur V. Watkins. None of them had been present for Horace's testimony (Jenner was the only senator who had been present), but their presence on the committee was indicative of their attitude towards communism.

Fyke's testimony went off the rails almost immediately. Fyke was first asked to provide basic biographical information like what he did for a living. When Fyke said that he was working for world government, senators began questioning him about his political activities. For example, Eastland asked if he'd been the author of a letter protesting the Smith Act that was published in the Daily Worker, the official newspaper of the Communist Party USA.

After answering preliminary questions of this nature, Fyke was able to deliver a prepared statement. In it, he provided a basic narrative account of Horace's experience with KCU and Whittaker's decision to dismiss his lawsuit. He then strongly criticized Whittaker, saying that his decision "lent judicial sanction to the rule" that "all members of the academic community must stand up and be counted or be fired." Whittaker's legal opinion, said Fyke, was "the most fell judicial blow that has been struck on this continent against human liberty." He went on to rhetorically ask how Whittaker's view of the fifth amendment rights of school teachers compared with his view of those rights for "gangsters, gamblers,... and persons charged with crimes involving fraud and violence."

Fyke's prepared statement seems to have done little except offend the senators. Senator Hennings seemed especially offended by Fyke's remarks about "gangsters" and "gamblers." He repeatedly asked Fyke to explain what he was saying. At one point, Hennings said "[I]n undertaking to illustrate your point, you suggest that gangsters, gamblers, and others who are beyond the law, criminals are in some way or another treated more benignly and more tolerantly by the justice-designate [i.e. Whittaker] than others." When Fyke denied meaning this, Hennings asked in exasperation, "Then why did you mention it?"

The senators asked some questions about Fyke's statement, but they spent most of the hearing asking him about his political activities. For example, Eastland pulled out a pamphlet published by the "Young Communist League." The pamphlet, Eastland explained, contained two articles: a defense of Stalin and another one titled "Is Sir John Pratt right?" Eastland asked Fyke to confirm that he'd written the second one. 

Sen. Arthur V. Watkins
Pocket congressional directory. 83 Cong. 1953.

Senator Watkins posed the question made famous by HUAC: "Have you ever been a Communist?" After the question was rephrased several times, Fyke denied being a member of the Communist Party USA but acknowledged being in sympathy with international communism. 

Fyke's testimony was followed by a statement by Judge Whittaker. The senators used the opportunity to question Whittaker as a chance to mock Fyke's objections and criticize his character. For example, upon learning that Whittaker had graduated from the University of Kansas City, Senator Hennings, with tongue-in-cheek, asked, "You were not admitted, Judge, I take it, by the spirit of devotion to the dear old alma mater in your decision?" Not realizing this was a joke, Whittaker began to respond seriously, but he was interrupted by Hennings who explained "I am being facetious."

After being asked a more serious question about Horace's lawsuit, Whittaker volunteered that he'd also decided on a second lawsuit filed by Fyke. The second was a personal lawsuit for the right to refuse full payment of federal taxes on the grounds that the funds illegally used to fund the Korean War (which Fyke felt was waged unlawfully). Upon hearing this, Hennings exclaimed in exasperation: "A graduate of Yale Law School?" 

The futility Fyke's effort is demonstrated by the last question that Whittaker was asked: Senator Watkins asked him if a rode pony to school. Whittaker explained that he'd ridden the pony 6 miles each way, and Watkins said that he'd done the same "through mud and dirt." Whittaker was confirmed by the Senate two days later.

Sunday, August 1, 2021

Benedict College Mystery Solved, Part 2

This blogpost is preceded by

Horace B. Davis's fight to retain his job at the University of Kansas City dragged on from the summer of 1953 to spring 1955. Judge Whittaker's dismissal of his lawsuit made his continued employment there unlikely. Horace ended up teaching at Benedict College in Columbia, South Carolina.

It is unclear when he started teaching at Benedict. The State newspaper announced that Horace had started working there in fall 1955. However, he may have moved to South Carolina before then. The Savannah field office of the FBI began collecting information on Horace in September 1951, more than a year before he was called before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee. The Savannah office was responsible for activities in Columbia, but normally they would not have been involved with activities in Kansas City. The earliest that Horace could have started work at Benedict is fall 1953. That semester he was still employed by KCU but he was on sabbatical.

Horace ended up at Benedict through sheer chance. Benedict was only one of the many school he applied to, and he initially did not receive a response. However, shortly before the fall semester started, Benedict found itself without a chair of its Humanities Department. The person they'd hired simply hadn't shown up. 

The chair of Benedict's Social Science Department, J. S. Kennard (one of the other professors who would later be dismissed), set about trying to find a replacement to serve as humanities chair. He ended up contacting a friend of Horace's (writer and leftwing activist Grace Hutchins) who suggested Horace as a candidate. While Horace had not written a dissertation in the humanities (he was an economist), Professor Kennard was able to persuade the college president to hire him. (At the time, many of Benedict's faculty did not hold a PhD, and the college focused on offering basic coursework, so lacking a humanities PhD was not an obstacle to hiring in the way that would be at a modern university.)

Horace appears to have found teaching at Benedict to be frustrating. In a later account of his time in South Carolina, he complained that the students were badly prepared for college coursework, many of the faculty were poorly educated and maintained low teaching standards, and the general campus atmosphere was one of acceptance of South Carolina's culture of white supremacy. He was especially critical of Benedict President Bacoats. Bacoats, he said, "had been chosen for his ability to balance the books; he did not know the difference between a monograph and a monogram."

When he moved first moved to South Carolina, Horace left his family behind. His wife Marian got a job teaching in northwestern Missouri, and the rest of the family remained in Kansas City. The separation from his wife must have been especially difficult for Horace. His wife had been diagnosed with cancer, and doctors predicted she only had six years left to live. Marion was able to join him in 1956, when she was hired as an English instructor.

Horace does not appear to have been particularly politically active while in South Carolina. It would have been almost impossible for him to have engaged in the sort of labor organizing that he had long been involved in. South Carolina was one of the worst places in the county for that sort of work. South Carolina had no large cities (Columbia, the state's largest city, had a population of only about 87,000 in 1950) and little industry.

There were, however, important political developments within the state that touched on Benedict College. The civil rights movement was beginning to gain strength. In spring 1955, students at S.C. State University (the public HBCU in Orangeburg) organized major protests in support of a NAACP selective-buying campaign. Protests escalated to the point that students went on strike and refused to attend class. Protests ended when the president threatened to expel protestors. The president retaliated against protest organizers by dismissing several faculty, suspending a number of students, and expelling the student leader Fred H. Moore. Moore moved to Columbia to attend Benedict's neighbor Allen University in fall 1956.

Fred H. Moore at a March 22, 2019 presentation
Facebook post by the UofSC Center for Civil Rights History & Research (@uofsccrc) on March 23, 2019.

In Columbia, Moore and other Allen University students tested laws segregating public buses. Unfortunately, their activism isn't well-documented, so it not entirely clear what happened. Busing became a major issue in the city in July 1954 (about a year before Horace moved to Columbia). That month an African-American woman, Sarah Mae Flemming, filed a lawsuit because she'd been forced to move to the Blacks-only section of a bus. Her suit was still making its way through the legal system when Horace moved to town.

In a later account, Horace says that Allen University students organized a campaign to challenge segregation by riding in the Whites-only section of buses. The campaign, he says, was a collective effort, and his colleagues Edwin D. Hoffman and John G. Rideout played leadership roles, for example by collecting money for bus fare. Horace dates the start of the campaign to shortly after the start of the Montgomery bus boycott (in December 1955). An AAUP account of the events at Benedict mentions the campaign, but only says that Fred Moore (the expelled S.C. State student) led a group of students who tested segregation by riding in the front of buses. Moore enrolled at Allen in September 1956, so he could not have started the campaign during the previous December. 

The legal issues surrounding bus segregation were largely decided by winter 1956. The U.S. Supreme Court's Browder v. Gayle decision (concerning bus segregation in Alabama) in November and the end of the Montgomery bus boycott in December marked the defeat of legal efforts to maintain bus segregation in the south. It is unclear what the practical impact was in South Carolina. The book Profile in black and white: a frank portrait of South Carolina reports that, even after the 1956 court decision, buses in Columbia remained segregated through social practice.

John G. Rideout in 1951
Iowa State University, the Wickiup Yearbook (1951), Ancestory.com, pg. 305.

While certainly sympathetic to the movement, Horace does not seem to have been particularly involved in civil rights issues. He did lend his support in small ways. In January 1956 (during his first year at Benedict), Horace attended a rally in support of segregation. He went at the request of some African American colleagues. His colleagues wanted to know what was said at the rally, but of course, their own presence at the event would have been highly unwelcome.

Mississippi Senator James Eastland speaking at  a 1956 rally
From The State, January 27, 1956. pg. 1.

The rally was a major event that was organized by the pro-segregation South Carolina Association of Citizen's Councils. The main speaker was Mississippi Senator James Eastland. Also participating were U.S. Senators Strom Thurmond and Olin D. Johnston and state Congressman Solomon Blatt. 

The (White-owned) newspaper The State reported on the rally. The newspaper reported that it drew a wide range of citizens from all over the state. Rally participants, the newspaper emphasized, were orderly, and there was none of the rabble-rousing that one might have expected. The speakers affirmed their intention to fight to preserve segregation, especially in light of recent Supreme Court decisions that had dismantled segregationist laws. The speakers said that the integration must be strongly resisted, but this must be done in a lawful manner. The newspaper reiterated the importance of lawful resistance, telling readers that other ways of protesting would "defeat [their] own purpose." The rally was described as a success. For example, the atmosphere was described as one of "unquestioned resoluteness."

Horace's own account confirms some newspaper details but contradicts others. Like the newspaper, Horace said that there was no rabble-rousing. For example, he described Senator Eastland as a "business-man type" rather than a "rabble-rouser."  However, he did not describe the atmosphere as one of resoluteness. Rather, he says there was a feeling of defeatism. He came away with the impression that the crowd felt that  "the ground was slipping from under them."

Principals at the 1956 rally. Left-most is speaker of the SC House Solomon Blatt
From The State, January 27, 1956. pg. 1.

In March 1956, Horace and other faculty presented a play that may have, in part, been an attempt to thumb their noses at segregationists. The play they presented was William B. Branch's "In Splendid Error." This was a recent play (written in 1954) about Frederick Douglas and his relationship with John Brown. Horace played the role of John Brown, and the role of Frederick Douglas was played by Forrest O. Wiggins. Wiggins was one of the other professors who were later dismissed. 

The play was announced in newspapers such as The State. The State offered no commentary on the play, but it would have been highly provocative in 1950s South Carolina. For example, the last act of the play is set after John Brown's execution, on the day that Lincoln's election as president is announced. On Brown's behalf, his widow presents Douglas with a musket, an American flag, and a message from Brown that reads "Tell Douglas I know I have not failed because he lives. Follow your star, and someday unfurl my flag in the land of the free." The play ends with Douglas hosting the flag as people sing "John Brown's Body." The average white South Carolinian viewed John Brown as a fanatical terrorist and, had they been in attendance, would have found the play's ending to be highly offensive. However, none appear to have been in attendance, and the play attracted no special notice. 

In all, Horace's presence at Benedict does not seem to have attracted significant attention. Horace's lawsuit against the University of Kansas City had made national news and been reported on by regional newspapers like The State. However, no newspaper connected the Horace B. Davis that had been dismissed from KCU for ties to Communism to the Horace B. Davis that had been hired at Benedict. All this would change in Spring 1957.

Dolemite in Indian Territory?!

  Rudy Ray Moore in Dolemite From RogerEbert.com Dolemite! The Human Tornado! Petey Wheatstraw, the Devil's Son-in-Law! The Avenging Dis...