Black Flight: Lethal Violence and the Great Migration, 1900-1930 Author(S): Stewart E

Black Flight: Lethal Violence and the Great Migration, 1900-1930 Author(s): Stewart E. Tolnay and E. M. Beck Source: Social Science History, Vol. 14, No. 3 (Autumn, 1990), pp. 347-370 Published by: Cambridge University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1171355 Accessed: 01-01-2016 08:03 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Social Science History.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Fri, 01 Jan 2016 08:03:56 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Black Flight:Lethal Violence and the GreatMigration, 1900-1930 STEWART E. TOLNAY & E. M. BECK

AFTER DECADES of relativeresidential stability, southern blacks began migratingin strikingnumbers following the turnof the twentiethcentury. Reconstruction and Redemptionsaw a fair amountof short-distancemovement as blacktenant farmers ex- changedone landlordfor another in searchof favorablefinancial arrangements.Some blacksmoved across state lines, generally towardthe Southwest,in pursuitof KingCotton and the livelihood it promised.However, these population movements pale in

StewartE. Tolnayis associateprofessor of sociologyat theState University of New Yorkat Albany.His previousresearch has been concentrated in thearea of historicaldemography, especially the history of Americanfertility patterns and change.Most recently,his workhas addressedracial violence in theAmerican Southduring the latter part of thenineteenth and theearly part of thetwentieth centuries. E. M. Beck is associateprofessor of sociologyat theUniversity of Georgia. His currentresearch focuses on racialviolence, discrimination, and economic changesin the whitelower class in theSouth. Recent articles on thesetopics haveappeared in Social Forcesand Law and SocietyReview. This researchwas partiallyfunded by grantsfrom the National Science Foun- dation(SES-8618123) and theUniversity of Georgia Research Foundation. The authorswish to thankCynthia Holiny, Linda Kelley,and JosephPark for their assistancein preparingthe lynching data used in this article. An abbreviatedver- sionof thisarticle was presentedat thenational symposium "Those Who Stayed Home duringthe Great Migration, 1915-Present," at JacksonState University, Jackson,Mississippi, 14-15 September1989. Social Science History14:3 (Fall 199o). Copyright? 199o by the Social Science HistoryAssociation. ccc oi45-5532/90/$1.50.

This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Fri, 01 Jan 2016 08:03:56 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 348 SOCIAL SCIENCE HISTORY comparisonwith the massive migration of southern blacks during thefirst half of this century. Duringthe firstIo yearsof thetwentieth century, the South lost 170,oo000blacks through net migration. The levelof netout- migrationincreased substantially during the second decade to 450,000, and even furtherduring the 1920S to 750,000 (U.S. Bureauof theCensus 1975: 95). As a resultof thismovement, theblack population of the United States exhibited a substantially differentgeographic profile in 1930 thanit had at theturn of the century.Whereas 90% of all blacksresided in southernstates in 19oo, thatpercentage had droppedto 79 by 1930 (ibid.: 22- 23). In additionto theSouth-North relocation, blacks within the Southalso wereresidentially mobile. For instance, the percentage of southernblacks living in urbanplaces grew from 17 in 19oo to 33 by 1930, and muchof thisblack urbanization was due to migration. Threegeneral types of explanationshave been offered for the increasedmobility of southern blacks in the early part of this century:(I) thosethat stress underlying economic forces, including regionalwage differentialsand expansionof employmentoppor- tunitiesin the North; (2) thosethat stress underlying social forces, forexample, educational opportunities, racial violence, and voter disenfranchisement;and (3) thosethat focus on more"precipitating"causes, such as floodsor theboll weevilinfestation. The consensusof contemporaryobservers and moderninvestigators seemsto be thatthe precipitating causes combined with festering economicdissatisfaction to triggerthe black exodus, especially as employmentopportunities for blacks expanded in theNorth. Althoughfrequently mentioned, social factors,including racial violence,generally have been accordedsecondary status as a motivefor black migration. The objectiveof thisessay is to laythe groundwork for a more exhaustiveexamination of the role played by racial violence in the migrationof southern blacks after 1900oo. While this issue has been consideredpreviously (e.g., FligsteinI98I; Johnson1923), cer- tainweaknesses in data and conceptualization prevent those analyses frombeing definitive. Yet discussionsof theGreat Migration havetraditionally downplayed the role of racialviolence, assign- ingit either a secondaryrole or noneat all. We maintainthat this assumptionis prematureand warrantsmuch closer scrutiny. At

This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Fri, 01 Jan 2016 08:03:56 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions LethalViolence and the Great Migration 349 the core of our objectiveare twoprimary aims: (I) to propose a conceptualframework that describes how racialviolence and black migrationwere linked, and (2) to raisethe possibility of a reciprocalrelationship between migration and racialviolence, thatis, thepossibility that violence induced migration, which in turnmoderated the level of violence.

THE BLACK MIGRATION Blacks were not completestrangers to residentialmobility be- forethe turn of thecentury. Indeed, one of themost noticeable benefitsof emancipationwas thefreedman's ability to relocate. Between1870 and 19oo, manytook advantage of thisfreedom to moveto growingurban areas in theSouth, or evento leave the South(Donald 1921; Gottlieb1987). More common,however,were short-distance moves within the rural South as landless farmerssought better remunerative arrangements with new land- lords (Daniel 1985; Jaynes1986; Mandle 1978; Novak 1978; Ransomand Sutch I977). While mostof theselocally migra- toryfarmers never ventured far from home, others relocated to southwesternstates, where cotton cultivation was expandingand opportunitieswere greater. Arkansas, Texas, and theOklahoma Territoryall experiencedconsiderable in-migration of blacks be- tween1870 and 19oo (U.S. Bureauof the Census 1975: 95). After19oo thepace of migrationaccelerated, and its charac- terwas transformed.Even as manyblacks continued to circulate withinthe rural South and to gravitatetoward urban areas within theSouth, more and more migrants began to make the longer trek northward.To illustratethe extent and variationof thepost-19oo migrationof blacks,the figures in Table I reportintercensal, net migrationfor the first three decades of thecentury (ibid.). Two groupsof statesare represented:four states of theCotton South and fournorthern industrial states that were popular destinations forblack migrants. All foursouthern states experienced net out- migrationof blacksbetween 19oo and 1930. Furthermore,the generaltrend was towardheavier out-migration as the period pro- gressed,especially for Georgia and South Carolina, two bulwarks of theCotton South. Conversely, the northern states experienced netin-migration during these decades, and the pace of migration quickenedover time. Although these crude figures are onlysug-

This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Fri, 01 Jan 2016 08:03:56 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 350 SOCIAL SCIENCE HISTORY

TableI Blackpopulation changes in selected southern and northern states,1900-1930 Decade

Region 1900oo-1910 1910-1920 1920-I930 CottonSouth SouthCarolina -72,000 -74,500 - 204,300 Georgia -16,2oo00 -74,700 - 260,000 Alabama -22, o00 -70,800 -80,700 Mississippi -30,900 - 129,6oo -68,8oo IndustrialNorth New York 35,800 63, 00oo 172,800 Pennsylvania 32,900 82,500 101o,700 Michigan I,9oo 38,700 86,1oo Illinois 23,500 69,800 I119,300 gestive,it is quiteapparent that this period was characterizedby a massiveregional relocation of the black population. If one looks closerat thosestates from which most of the black migrantscame, it becomesclear thatrates of black out- migrationwithin the South were not uniform. Some counties were characterizedby extremely high out-migration; others maintained relativelystable black populations. To illustratethis regional vari- ability,we haveestimated county-level black net migration rates (per Ioo population)for two Cotton South states that experienced veryheavy losses of blacks through migration, Georgia and South Carolina.Figure I has beenshaded according to therate of black out-migrationexperienced, between 1920 and 1930.' Clearly,the heaviest black out-migration occurred in a swath runningroughly through the middle of Georgiaand SouthCaro- lina. Interestingly,this area definesthe black belt as well as the area thathad been dominatedby a plantationcotton economy (Mandle 1978). Such intrastatevariation raises interesting questionsabout the causes of the differentialmigration. Why were blacks morelikely to leave theseregions of SouthCaro- lina and Georgia?Was the cottoneconomy there particularly depressed?Were blacks subjectedto morebrutal treatment by

This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Fri, 01 Jan 2016 08:03:56 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Lethal Violenceand theGreat Migration 351

,?niii~ii?~ ?: ?:?:~i:iiiiiiiiiliiiiiiir:iii:~ili iiii!ilii iiiiiiiliii i:i:iliitliiiiiiiiiiiiijiiiiii?i iiiiiiliiiiiii :ii i: I~iiiitiiiliiiiii:lfirtiiiifiiiiijili~r iiiiiiiiii "'iiiiiil ?:?;iliiiiiiiitit~Il~t IliiiIiTII:iiiifiititi iifl?ii.iijiiiiifi?li~iflff~iiii~~ ILI:I r:I:iii.:r :; niii~iii,i, i?:iii iiiiiii iiiirir'ii;l:iil!ii iriiitir liti~~ ~:Jijiii"'iliii!iiiili/jliiiliitiiiririrliltjjQiiiiiiiiiii"']jiiiiiiii''aiii~jiiiijiiiiiii :I::::::::':i: ~iIiiii: ~iiiiiiiii:Iiiiiiiiiill .::: :~:i::i:i::i:i:i:r:i:iirii:iri:i:iiiilniii~iiiiiliiiiiiiliiii?ii!itit~?;?;1: ~':::iiiiiiiiiiii iiiii Ijiiiiiii:iiijiiiiii~i~ i!! :i:iiiiiiililiiii iiiiijiiiifi ""'iiiii~iiii!i!jijj ii i; iiiii:i'i'i'i rir~sb~ri iiol: ,,ipiliiiiiiiiiiBiijiii?ii:!Iiijiii iiiiiii;iijiiiliitiiii!iiii]~l iiiijliilijir-iiiit~ilt jii;ilitiri iiiiidj?l'l'iililiiiiiii'i''~5iEiiii : iii:i:i? ::iiii :jiiiiiiiiiii~ iiiiiiiii~Iti:?iiiiiii?:tiil-iiiiijiiijiiijiiiilciiijiiilililiii~iii iiiiiiiii;i!il~ 6iifiiiiii liliiiliirjiiiiijii iiiiiiiiijiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii: Bijniiiiiiiiii iiiiiii:i:irir:rffiiir:IiiiiIIiiiii iiiiiiliirillii;illliii:i:iiiiji :il ;ii~iiiiiiliriiiiiijjiiireillilli iijljiii ;?;ii!.. ~iIi:; ri:iriiiiI ~filiii : ?: ?~ ~iliri ~jii I:i iliIifiijtiiijiijI~i Iif:iii~iiIliiiiiliijjjiiriili iiiiiiii E: ~IB iiir:iririiilriiii:ii-iiiriiiiiiiiiiifij:iiii~,: !iiriiiti:iiiiiiiiiii~;~~ iii rIflHiiti!iiii':':'i:'?'?iiiiilitiiii:?ili 1;:ijii]i:i:!iiiijiiliii~jf i:lj!iiiiiiiIi::: lii~iiiiii III :i:I:iiiiiit:i:i:i:li~i'iIiiijiii!Itiril ~iiiiiijiii! '':'ltriiiii:i~iiiii''"ifi!iiiiliiiiii!rlrrii:iiiiiiiiii~ijii;iii iiiiijrrljii:i: fiiii:iliiliiili~itjliirrjiiiifiji~fjji~~ iiiiR iiii~ii~iiii iii:::t:iiiiiii:l~:,:,:I:?;Qiiriii''iliiiirifiiiitii :liiiiiir;i;rii!iii~iil:itiiiiiiii'ttlii!lit:i ~i~iii iiiiIii--?'' iii~iifiiti!rr!iiiiiriiii?:::::-i:':'";rrlir:Itiii?it iiiijfiii~iir~niiiiiiiiiliiliiili~iiiiiiiiiiiriiiwririri liiii '"iiiiiiiii ~P~iiijiiiiiriiiiiiiiiiiiii ii !I!i::il!i?ii~iiiiiiili;Irifjff:?,t,,i:!:i:l:iiiiiIiiii m;iiriiitiiii :i:r:i:i:iiiiiii!i :I:-Itil: ii "'"''l''ii:iiiiiiiiii~ iiiiii!i:'riiiiiiii iiiiiiririr~liil iiijiiiiiiiiilililiiiiiiiiiilj[ijiij~iiiiiiiii'iiiirii:iliriiii:!:I:'i:ii' ''iiiiiiijrijii!iiiiiiiiiiii:i'i""'iiiirijfifijl~ii?~ii iiijffj ::I::iiiiir: jiiji iiiiiiijjiit~iijiiiililii';isi;iii iiti;i:ilitriir:J:iiij~iiiiifrj.if iiiijiiil!ill!illlii:i:iiiiiiiiiiiiii~iiiij~li~ ~iiiiiiiiiiiii;iiiIit!::tr;?;?;?;?; ~:?i:r:i:iiiiiiiiiiiiliiii:iiirrtr:;t:i:iiiiiii~iifiiiriiii~"'iiiiiiriji!iiifiiijiliiiii iiiiiiiiiriilti?iiiiiti:iliiir"'''"' ':':' iiiiiiliiiirr :-:r: iiiiiiriiiilii ~iiii IiijIi iiiii:i::ri::::iiit~iiiiiiliiiii:iii?:?I?:iitirIi';Iiii~iji-- ? iiji:::ijiiiiii:iiirriiiiiiriiitii;i :~:I:l:l:li:,:c:?:?iiiiiiiiii:':":'.:~:,~,:.::.~~iiiiijiiiiiiii~itiiiii~:;: iiiiii Wiii~IillitiiliiiiiIi~ ijiiiiii"i'""'""'llilii:''i"t;:'iiti'I:IQitiiiiiiiiiiiji]!~jiiii~jiiiii'"""':lriiifiliiiiiiiii':ii'"ri :i:iiiii niliiiiiiiii iii ii~iiiiii iji "''''iii jiiiiii~ititir ~I::iji:i:,:diiii:iliiliIiliiiiiiiiiiilllIi i~iiiiiIiiii~.ir ~ti~itii ~i~ i~ii[litlilIlI~i:iil~iiiIiii:iiiiiliiiijiirtiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiririririi iiii!r ~ijiiiji iifiiiiifit~i~Iriiifjitilr::ili~iliir ::~i~ iiiiiih i~iiiiii!ii -iiit I:::i:IiiI~iirriI:iiiiifiijii ?~iisiriiisililiilifii ~ii ~fi Iiiiiirii: ii D iliiiiiii iiiil itiiiii:l iiiiiii 1iiiiiii iiiiiiiiiil IIrilijfiiiiiiir.ifii~irrriiiirinii iiriii:iiiliitiiiiif~'jiiijijii~i~i~~jii:iii:iii ii:rrt:r;iiii::iir;i:ii iiiiiiiiiiiiii tiiiiiiiiiiiiilJllliiifitfi.ii riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiifi/iiiiilii :i:;: :':: iif!iltiiiiiii ii:ii:rrrIiiir""iiiiiiiSiitiiii: Pliiii jiiiiiiiiiiciiifif!f i!'iiiir:::":liri;iriiiiiiiiii iiiii liiii itii ,iiii !''i.iifijijiili:?:iiiiii fji:i::ii;r?.;?;?:I :t::i: iiiiiiiii~i~ijji iirr ~fl~jj iiiirii'iili!Iiiiii:i'";::::::':"'': iiiii:iiQi:riililijiiri~ :i:ifif):ti.;.iijiijjijjifl :rt: ililiiiIi I --j In-migration i:r: ijj~iijririiiliiii iii iijiiifj iiiruiirirn k?:?:?:?:?:?:?~Out-migration L o, < 15 ii?:jjiiiiiili''::i'''if~""'"lt;i:i:r:r:fiiitiiiil iiiiir iiiii~;iiilititiiiiiii,;iiiiiliii~;ii liI:i:i!iiiiiial iiiiiiiiii riiiijiii~ 'ijiii~ii!iiiliiiiiiiiiiiii i:r:iiiiiiti:i,::;? :ilililili' I~iii:iiiiiiiii:iiiii:iii:ii~ii:l Out-migration L 15, < 35 itiif:i:iiijijiiiiiriiriiii~ifi:iiiliiiiiiililli!lgiiiiiiiiii~iiijiliiii tilliiiCiiiihiiiijti:?:?:iiiiiii :iiitiiWiiii:iiifiiirrrif:: :i:im iij~!ilii ~:~iirilirliti:iiiiirifiii.iiii i ::?:;::; Y~1 No migration data

FigureI Netblack out-migration rates (per Ioo population)from countiesin Georgiaand SouthCarolina, 1920-30. Source:See Fligstein1981.

whitesin thoseareas? Did economiccompetition between whites and blacksrestrict economic opportunity and therebyencourage out-migration?2

EXPLANATIONS FOR BLACK MIGRATION Theoreticalapproaches to migration,in one fashionor another, generallyuse "push"and "pull" factorsto accountfor movement (or stability).Simply put, if thenet attractiveness of a potential destinationoutweighs the net attractiveness ofthe place of origin, migrationis expectedto occur(e.g., Lee 1966;Ravenstein 1885, 1889). Whilethe basics of this rational human-choice model seem sound,identification and measurementof therelevant push and pullfactors often pose significantchallenges. Many contemporary accounts,written during the early part of thecentury, attempted to identifythe primary explanations (push and pull factors)for

This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Fri, 01 Jan 2016 08:03:56 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 352 SOCIAL SCIENCE HISTORY thedramatic migration of blacks.The explanationsproposed for theGreat Migration can be divided,crudely, into economic and social forces.3

EconomicForces Economicforces figured prominently inearly discussions of black migration.In fact,most contemporary observers ascribed primary importanceto economicfactors. For example,Scroggs (1917: 1040) wrote,"The causeof themigration, like that of practically all greatmovements of peoples, is fundamentallyeconomic." Scott (1920: 13) observedthat "the economicmotive stands amongthe foremost reasons for the decision of the group [blacks] to leave the South." These sentimentswere also expressedby manyothers (e.g., Donald 1921; Kennedy1930; Lewis 1931; U.S. Departmentof Labor 1919;Woodson 1969 [I918]; Woofter 1920). The economicpush factors operating on southernblacks were formidable.Since Emancipation,southern rural blacks had lan- guishedin a plantationeconomy, with little hope of movingup the"agricultural ladder" or of findingemployment outside farm- ing(Mandle 1978). At thebottom of a peckingorder defined by class and caste,they were also caughtin theclash of competing class intereststhat split the white community. On theone hand, southernplanters and employersbenefited from the availability of cheap, black laboras longas it remaineddocile and servile. On theother hand, poor whites competed with black labor. This "split labor market"generated conflict between poorer whites andblacks which often erupted in violence (Bonacich 1972, 1975; Wilson1978). Further,it was in theinterest of southernplanters and employersto restrictalternative opportunities available to the blacklaboring class, as wellas to preventa coalition of black and whitelabor. In short,the economic advancement of ruralblacks was notin the interest of either class of whites, but their economic subordinationserved the interests of both. Althougha fortunatefew were able to purchaseland, most re- mainedsharecroppers, tenant farmers, or farmlaborers (Daniel 1985; Flynn1983; Higgs 1977; Mandle 1978; Novak 1978; Ran- som and Sutch 1977). Subjectto the whimsof landlordsand the vagariesof cottonprices, most black farmers scratched out

This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Fri, 01 Jan 2016 08:03:56 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions LethalViolence and theGreat Migration 353 a subsistenceliving from year to yearand couldoffer no differ- entfuture to theirchildren. As thisdismal economic situation for ruralblacks persisted decade afterdecade, an environmentcon- duciveto out-migrationwas created.The situationin urbanareas was littlebetter, with most blacks laboring at povertywages in unskilledoccupations. The chroniceconomic problems faced by southern blacks typi- callywere translated into migration only when there was a promise ofbetter conditions elsewhere. Often this promise was as close as a nearbyplantation. For others,the promise lay far to thesouth- west.However, the greatest potential developed in theindustrial Northas theWorld War I economyand therestriction of Euro- pean immigrationcreated opportunities and wages thatsimply wereunavailable to blacksin theSouth (Donald 1921;Gottlieb 1987; Kennedy 1930; Kiser 1967 [1932]; Scroggs 1917; U.S. De- partmentof Labor 1919; Woodson 1969 [I918]; Woofter1920). For the firsttime since Emancipation,black labor was in great demandoutside the agriculturalSouth, and thoseopportunities wereattractive enough to overwhelmthe substantial obstacles to migration(Mandle 1978). Therewere also lesschronic circumstances, with economic im- plications,that contributed to blackmigration. We referto these as "precipitating"causes. One importantprecipitating cause of black migrationwas therelentless march of theboll weevilon a northeasterlycourse through the South.After entering Texas in the I89os, theweevil spread throughout the South, reaching Alabamain I9Io andSouth Carolina in 1918.In itswake it lefta devastatedcotton economy, with displaced croppers and tenants. Manywere forced to migratein pursuitof a livelihood.A second precipitatingcause of blackmigration was thedevastating floods in Alabama and Mississippi,which destroyed many crops and displacedmany black farmers (Woodson 1969 [I918]: 170). Like the persistentand chroniceconomic hardships faced by southernblacks, these disasters undoubtedly increased the economic incentivesto migrate. The mostthorough empirical examination of economicexpla- nationsfor the black migration between 19oo and 1930has been conductedby Fligstein (I98I). He identifiesthree distinct dimen- sions to the economicexplanation of southernmigration: the socialrelations of production and exchange, the technical relations

This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Fri, 01 Jan 2016 08:03:56 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 354 SOCIAL SCIENCE HISTORY of production,and capitalistdevelopment in theSouth. Fligstein infersthat the social relationsof productionand capitalistdevel- opmenthad a significantinfluence on county-levelnet migration rates between 19oo and 1930. Especially importantwere tenure arrangementsin agriculture,the intensity of cottonproduction, and theinfluence of urbanareas (ibid.: 124). Accordingto Flig- stein,these were the primary economic forces that determined the movementof blacks into and out of southerncounties. Fligstein's findingsalso indicatethat black out-migration was linkedto the spreadof the boll weevilthrough the South.

Social Forces Social causes of black migrationwere as widelyacknowledged bycontemporary observers as theeconomic forces, but they were nearlyalways considered to havebeen of secondaryimportance. Woofter (1920: 121) enumeratedmany of the primarysocial factors:"injustice in thecourts, lynching, denial of suffrage,dis- criminationin publicconveyances, and inequalities in educational advantage." Earlyin thecentury, southern society was doublystratified by class and race. Elaboratearrangements were made to guarantee thatblacks occupied and recognized their inferior caste position. The passageof variousJim Crow laws provided for separate and unequalfacilities for blacks and whites (Flynn 1983; Newby 1965; Novak1978; Woodward 1966). Restrictivevoting statutes, which became moreand morecommon after the turn of the century, effectivelycurtailed the black vote(Kousser 1974). Statelegis- laturesallocated vastly unequal financial support for black and whiteschools (Kousser I980); moreover,county officials some- timessiphoned off the meager resources earmarked for blacks to supportwhite schools (Kennedy 1930; Myrdal 1972; Woodson 1930). Likechronic economic hopelessness, social abuses created an atmosphereconducive to out-migration. One of themost telling indicators of theinferior social posi- tionof blacksin southernsociety was thelevel of lethalviolence to whichthey were exposed. Lynching was an all-too-common methodof punishmentfor blacks who committedcriminal acts or who simplyviolated the rules of acceptablebehavior for their caste. Lynchingsmay well have contributed to thewillingness of

This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Fri, 01 Jan 2016 08:03:56 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Lethal Violenceand theGreat Migration 355 southernblacks to leave theirhomes, either for the North or for morepeaceful locations in theSouth. As Scott(1920: 22) wrote in his studyof black migration during World War I, "Bothwhites andnegroes in mentioning the reasons for the movement generally givelynchings as one of themost important causes and statethat thefear of themob has greatlyaccelerated the exodus." Letters of black migrantspublished by theJournal of Negro History in 1919also containreferences to lynchings as a reasonfor migration (ScottI919). In thefollowing section, we discussmore thoroughly the role of violentpersecution in the migrationof blacks, the centralconcern of this essay.

MODELING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RACIAL VIOLENCE AND MIGRATION To model adequatelythe linkagebetween racial violenceand black migration,we believethat each mustbe treatedas both dependentand independentvariable. That is, whileracial violence is viewedas a potentialincentive (push factor) for black migration,black migration is seen as a forceoperating to reduce thelevel of violenceagainst blacks. This basic conceptualization is illustratedin Figure2. The positivearrow from violence to migrationreflects the relationship hypothesized above and con- sideredby Johnson(1923) and Fligstein(1981). The negative arrowrunning in the oppositedirection has been hintedat in the literaturebut never systematically articulated or empirically

Black Out-Migration Exogenous Factors SocialRelations of Production White CapitalistDevelopment DemographicContext ReligiousComposition PoliticalContext Lethal Violence AgainstBlacks Lynchings and Executions

Figure2 Conceptualmodel

This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Fri, 01 Jan 2016 08:03:56 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 356 SOCIAL SCIENCE HISTORY estimated.This dimensionis criticalto therelationship between violentpersecution and blackmigration, for a failureto consider it leads to underestimationof the relationship's other component (thepositive arrow).

ViolentPersecution as a Cause ofBlack Migration Duringthe late nineteenth and earlytwentieth centuries southern blackswere exposed to trulyincredible levels of lethalviolence, bothat thehands of whitemobs and withinthe white criminal justicesystem (Ayers 1984; Shapiro 1988; Williamson 1984). For example,between 1882 and 1930, I,655 blackswere victims of lynchmobs within the Cotton South alone.4 But lynching was not theonly form of lethal social control whites exercised over blacks. Duringthe same period, 1,299 blackswere legally executed in the CottonSouth. Of all thoseexposed to lethalsocial control in these states,roughly 90% wereblack. Since theproportion of blacks in thesestates' populations never approached 90%, blacksclearly wereexposed to disproportionatelyhigh levels of lethalcontrol. By manyaccounts, violence terrorized southern blacks, espe- ciallywhere lynchings were common. A reportby theU.S. De- partmentof Labor (1919: 107) concluded that "another of the moreeffective causes of the exodus, a causethat appeals to every Negro whetherhigh or low, industriousor idle, respectedor condemned,is the Negroes'insecurity from mob violenceand lynchings."Several specific cases of heavyblack out-migration have been linkedto specificlynching incidents. For example, one sectionof Georgiaexperienced heavy out-migration following a series of horriblelynchings in 1915 and 1916. According to Woofter(cited in U.S. Departmentof Labor 1919: 79), "The plantersin the immediatevicinity of theselynchings attributed the movementfrom their places to the factthat the lynching partieshad terrorizedtheir Negroes." Another notorious lynching,in SouthCarolina, was followedby increasedout-migration of blacks fromthe area aroundAbbeville (Ballard 1984; Scott 1920); Raper (1933) mentionssimilar cases. Also, black migrants themselvesmentioned the fear of violence as a reasonfor leaving theirhomes. For example, onemigrant (cited in Henri 1975: 130) wroteeloquently to theChicago Defender, "After twenty years of seeing my people lynchedfor any offensefrom spitting on a

This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Fri, 01 Jan 2016 08:03:56 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions LethalViolence and theGreat Migration 357 sidewalkto stealinga mule,I madeup mymind that I wouldturn the prowof my ship towardthe part of thecountry where the peopleat leastmade a pretenseat being civilized." Even the "civilized"institutions of southernsociety victim- ized blacksand represented a lethal threat. The legalweb of Jim Crow and de jure second-classstatus of blacks,along with their culturalimperatives of racialhatred and inferiority,guaranteed thatthe criminal justice system would be biasedagainst blacks. Withlittle access to legal defense,blacks often were subject to summarytrials, which all too oftenresulted in a deathsentence. Raper (1933: 19) saw littleto distinguishmany legal executions of blacksfrom death through mob violence: "It is notincorrect to call a deathsentence under such circumstances a 'legal lynching.'" This conclusionwas also reachedby PresidentTruman's Committeeon CivilRights (Shapiro 1988: 368). It is importantto recognizethat black flight from racial vio- lencecould have fostered internal movement within the South, as wellas out-migrationfrom the South. For instance, we knowthat black lynchingswere primarily a ruralphenomenon. Although lynchingswere not unknown in southerncities, the risk of mob violencewas considerablygreater for blacks living in the country- side (Raper 1933; White 1969 [I929]). Thus, by encouraging rural-to-urbanmovement, the climate of terrorcreated by lynchingsmay have contributed to thesubstantial urbanization of the southernblack population that occurred between I88o and 1930. Alternatively,some ruralblacks may have leftareas of serious mobviolence for other, more benign, rural southern locales. Whileit seemsplausible that the violent atmosphere surround- ing southernblacks contributed to theirwillingness to migrate, previousefforts to assessthe impact of thisatmosphere on migra- tionhave revealed little support for such a relationship.According to Johnson(1923: 272), "Persecutionplays itspart-a consider- able one. But when the whole of the migrationof southern Negroesis considered,this part seems to be limited."This some- whatcontradictory conclusion is based on twokey observations: (I) thatcounties with many lynchings were as likelyto experience increasesin blackpopulation as theywere to experiencepopula- tionlosses; and (2) thatcounty-level patterns in whitemigration closelyparalleled those for black migration. Johnson's conclusion thatpersecution was secondaryto economicforces as a cause of

This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Fri, 01 Jan 2016 08:03:56 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 358 SOCIAL SCIENCE HISTORY black migrationsubsequently has been widelycited as evidence thatlynchings were not an importantcause of migration (Fligstein I98I; Kennedy1930). For example, in theircomprehensive re- viewof blackmigration Johnson and Campbell (I98I: 66) write, "One of the more importantand controversialaspects of his [C. S. Johnson's(1923)] surveywas thefinding that there was no correlationbetween racial persecution and migration." It is difficultto knowhow muchconfidence to place in John- son's "empirical"observations. Even he acknowledgedthat his analysisrepresented a "workingtest" based on "roughcorrela- tion" (Johnson1923: 274). There are additionalreasons to con- siderhis evidenceless thandefinitive. First, it is notclear upon whichcounties his investigationwas based. Second,his simple bivariateobservations cannot do justiceto thecomplex processes connectingblack migration to thesocial and economicenviron- ment(as representedinFigure 2). Finally,the similarities between whiteand blackmigration patterns do notrule out the possibility thateach respondedto somewhatdifferent causal mechanisms. Fligstein(I98I) has conducteda moresophisticated examinationof the impact of racial persecution on blackmigration. Along withseveral other variables (see ourearlier discussion), Fligstein includeslynching as a predictorof black migration between 19oo and 1930. Foreach ofthe three decades Fligstein's findings show a negative,though statistically insignificant, relationship between lynchingand net migration.5In lightof theseresults, Fligstein concludesthat lynching was not an importantdeterminant of county-levelblack migration patterns. Since Fligsteinwas notprimarily interested in an examination of therole of racialviolence, it is notsurprising that his analysis cannotbe considereddefinitive. First, the NAACP'S inventoryof lynchings(Fligstein's source) has been demonstrated tohave serious weaknesses(Tolnay et al. I989). Second,Fligstein's lynching variablemeasures only whether a countyexperienced a lynching duringthe decade for which migration was measured.This mea- surementstrategy overlooks the possibility that a climateof racial violenceaccumulated over a longerhistorical period; moreover, it assumesthat a singlelynching had the same impact as three,four, or morelynchings. Third, Fligstein's analysis does notconsider thepossibility of a reciprocalnegative impact of out-migration on subsequentlynchings (as hypothesizedin Figure2).6 Whilethis

This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Fri, 01 Jan 2016 08:03:56 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions LethalViolence and theGreat Migration 359 possiblerelationship is discussed further below, it should be noted herethat its existencemay have attenuatedthe strengthof the associationbetween lynching and migration inferred by Fligstein. Not onlyis therea lack of previousempirical support for a significantlink between racial violence and migration,but other scholarshave pointed out an apparentlogical inadequacy in argu- mentswhich suggest such a link. For instance,Higgs (1976) pointsout thatsouthern blacks historically had been exposedto discriminationand abuse.Thus, he arguesthat this constant con- ditionof racialharassment is an unlikelyexplanation of thesharp increasein blackmigration after 1900oo. Moreover, Scroggs (1917: 1041) notesthat lynchings were on thedecline after I9Io, pre- ciselythe same time that black migration rose dramatically. Both of theseobservations are accurate:racial harassment had existed in the Southfor decades, and lynchingdid declinein intensity after1910. However,neither observation necessarily contradicts thebasic frameworkdeveloped in thisessay. To appreciatethis point, it is importantto distinguishbetween longitudinaltrends and cross-sectional variation in racialviolence and migration.Racial violencehad characterizedthe Southfor decadesbefore the Great Migration; thus it is unlikelythat racial violencecan explainthe timing of theGreat Migration. Rather, the timingof theblack exodusis probablybetter explained by theawakening of northernemployers to thepotential for exploit- ing cheap black labor,and by the sharpplunge in the number of Europeanimmigrants during and after World War I. However, as illustratedin FigureI, once theGreat Migration was under- way,the exodus from southern counties was notuniform across the South.Certain areas in theSouth experienced considerably moreout-migration than others. It is thiscross-sectional varia- tionin migrationthat we are suggestingmay have been caused partiallyby correspondingcross-sectional variation in violence againstblacks. Furthermore,once attentionis shiftedto a cross-sectionalcon- cern,Scroggs's (1917) observationthat lynchings declined after 19io seemsless problematic,especially since lynchings and legal executionsboth proceeded at a veryvigorous pace afterthe turn of the twentiethcentury. Table 2 showsthe numbers of lynchingsand executionsin Georgiaand SouthCarolina, by decade, fromI890 to 1930. Clearly,the level of lethalviolence against

This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Fri, 01 Jan 2016 08:03:56 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 360 SOCIAL SCIENCE HISTORY

Table2 Lynchingsand executions in Georgia and South Carolina by decade, 1882-1930 Georgia SouthCarolina Decade Lynchings Executions Lynchings Executions 1882-1889 53 53 28 48 1890-1899 16 Iog9 52 57 1900-1909 97 112 33 32 1910-1919 125 78 20 52 1920-1930 41 45 13 28 blacks was substantialin thesetwo states,even after19oo. In fact,Georgia experienced its most intensive decade of lynching between I9Io and 1920. Thus, a lack of coincidencebetween the highpoint of lynchingsfor the South as a whole(I89os) and the exodusof blacksfrom the South (after I9Io) does notnecessarily contradictour hypothesis,which links spatial patterns of black migrationand corresponding patterns of racial violence. Consideringthe plausibility of an associationbetween racial violenceand theGreat Migration, and thefailure of priorefforts adequatelyto assessthe strength of suchan association,it seems clear thatadditional inquiry is warranted.While an exhaustive empiricalexamination of the causal processeshypothesized in Figure2 is beyondthe scope of thisessay, we can offerprelimi- naryevidence consistent with our hypothesizedeffect of racial violenceon blackmigration. Figure 3 describesthe relationship betweenthe numberof lynchingsthat occurred in thecounties of Georgiaand SouthCarolina between 1882 and 1920,and out- migrationof blacksfrom those same counties between 1920 and 1930.7It showsa verystriking relationship between migration and lynchingin Georgiaand South Carolina. For instance, counties in whichmore than five blacks were lynched experienced an average out-migrationrate of 29 per Ioo blackpopulation. At theother extreme,counties with at mostone blacklynching lost only 23 per Ioo black populationduring the 1920s. Moreover,the black out-migrationrate rose consistentlywith the intensityof black lynchingsbetween 1882 and 1920. The tentativenature of this evidence must be stressed.Figure 3 describesa simplebivariate association which does notconsider therole of other social and economic forces that may have affected

This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Fri, 01 Jan 2016 08:03:56 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions LethalViolence and theGreat Migration 361

I o 27 CO

ESv z 0

23 0-1 2-3 4-5 > Numberof black lynchings to1920 Figure3 Effectof lynchings to 1920 on mean black out-migration in Georgiaand South Carolina, 1920-30. Sources: Lynchings: see note 7; executions:data file obtained from Espy (n.d.). bothracial violence and black migration. Moreover, specification of the temporalrelationship between lynching and migrationis rathercrude and ignoresthe possibility of nearlysimultaneous effectsof lynchingsin the 1920s on migrationduring the same decade. Still,this evidence does providetantalizing support for ourconceptual framework.

BlackOut-Migration and ReducedLethal Violence By theturn of the twentieth century the southern economy had be- comeextremely dependent upon cheap black labor. As theblack exodusintensified, the economic impact of the loss of labor began to be felt.Henri (1975: 70) notedthat "as thetrains and boats pulledout week afterweek and monthafter month, the South began to hurtfrom a loss of the black laborforce, especially theDeep South."In response,southern planters and employers mounteda desperateattempt to stemthe labor hemorrhage. At first,their effort consisted of coercivemeasures. Migrants were intimidated,threatened, and otherwise abused; labor agents were taxed,beaten, and lynched. When coercionproved ineffective, some southerncommuni- tiesturned to enticement.If blackswere migrating because they wereunhappy or mistreated,then one solutionwas to makethem

This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Fri, 01 Jan 2016 08:03:56 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 362 SOCIAL SCIENCE HISTORY feelmore comfortable. In someareas, wages rose in responseto the black exodus (Scott 1920: 86; Scroggs 1917: 103). In other areas, local elitessaw an increasingneed to improvethe plight of local blacks.For instance, a reportby the U.S. Departmentof Labor (1919: 32) observed: They see in the growingneed forNegro labor so power- fulan appeal to theself-interest of the white employer and thewhite planter as to makeit possibleto getan influential whitegroup to exertitself actively to providebetter schools; to insurefull settlements between landlord and tenanton all plantationsby the end of the year; to bringabout abolition of theabuses in thecourts of justice of the peace. Importantly,it appears that in somecases local whiteelites were evenwilling to call fora reductionin thelevel of violent persecu- tionof thesubordinate caste. Scott (1920: 94) referredto sucha trend:"The tendencyto maltreatthe negroes without cause, the customof arrestingthem for petty offenses and theinstitution of lynchinghave all been somewhatchecked by thischange in the attitudeof the southern white man towards the negro." Historically,southern blacks have used theirlabor value to extractconcessions from the white majority-even if unintention- ally. AfterEmancipation, blacks "took advantage"of a labor- starvedsouthern economy to preventthe perpetuation of a slave- like labor" "gang agriculturalsystem (Ransom and SutchI977). It was throughcompromise that the tenancy and sharecropping systememerged in southernagriculture. We are suggestingthat blacksagain "exploited"their increased labor value duringthe era of heavymigration. That is, facedwith the loss of their cheap laborforce, and withno real alternative,southern planters and employersbegan to perceivethe benefits of a less hostileand exploitiveenvironment for blacks. Naturally, we wouldexpect to findthe emergence of this sentiment to havebeen more prominent in areassuffering greater losses of black population. Our argumentthat black migration had a reciprocaleffect on racial violencehas to thispoint focused primarily on the per- spectiveof thesouthern white elite. However, it wouldbe naive to believethat the South was monolithicin itsresponse to black migrationand the loss of black labor. In fact,there is goodreason to suspectthat reactions to theblack exodus were split along class

This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Fri, 01 Jan 2016 08:03:56 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions LethalViolence and the Great Migration 363 lines. Edna Bonacich's(I972, 1975) "splitlabor market" theory of antagonisticethnic relations is usefulfor developing this im- portantpoint. According to Bonacich,blacks were one of three class groupsrepresented in thesouthern economy; the other two werewhite planters and employers,and whitelaborers. Planters and employerswere dependent upon cheap black labor,while thehigher-priced white laborers were in competitionwith black labor.White laborers had everythingto gainfrom the exodus of blacksfrom the South, but planters and employershad muchto lose, as describedabove (Holmes 1969). Competitionbetween white and black southern labor had inten- sifiedconsiderably during the late nineteenth and earlytwentieth centuries.The growingrural population overburdened southern land (Myrdal 1972; Wilson 1978), and moreand morewhite farmerswere reduced to tenancy.As a result,despite their mem- bershipin thedominant caste, more rural whites began to share the blacks' disadvantagedeconomic position. And forthe first time,sizable numbers of southern white farmers found themselves in directeconomic competition with southern black farmers. To theextent that the migration of blacksfrom southern counties re- movedeconomic competitors, then, poorer whites improved their positionvis-a-vis white planters and employers.8 WilliamHolmes (1969) presentsclear evidence of thiseffect in thecase of Mississippi,where many borderline white farmers organizedto terrorizeblack farmers and tenants into leaving. Be- cause ofthe crop-lien system, it was not uncommon for merchants to becomelanded gentry through foreclosure, then to hireblack tenantsand sharecroppersto workthe cottonfields. This had twoimmediate effects: first, to reducethe number of smallland- holdingwhite farmers, and secondly, to replace white tenants with moreeasily controlled black tenants (ibid.). These actionswere detrimentalto the economicinterests of bothborderline land- holdingand landless whites and, as Holmeshas demonstrated, did not go unchallenged,with much violence directed at offending blacks. In sum, it is unlikelythat planters and employers,who suf- feredfrom the loss of blacklaborers, and poor marginal whites, whocompeted with them, responded similarly to black migration. Whilethe former may have attempted to moderategrievances held byblacks, the latter had little motivation to do so. The social and

This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Fri, 01 Jan 2016 08:03:56 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 364 SOCIAL SCIENCE HISTORY

0.30

0.28 o

0.26

S0.24

S0.22

C 0.20

0.18 >0 20, <15 >15, <35 >35 Black out-migration,19Io-20 (per Ioo) Figure4 Effectof black out-migration, 1910-20, on lynchings, 1920-30, in Georgiaand South Carolina economiccomposition of thewhite community becomes, then, a criticalfactor in understandingthe push forces behind the black exodusas wellas thecommunity's responses to it. Thispotential is representedin Figure2 bythe arrow running from "White Class Structure"to the downward arrow connecting black out-migration withlethal violence against blacks. Again,although an in-depthempirical exploration is premature, we can providesimple descriptive evidence supportive of thehy- pothesizedreciprocal influence of black migration on thelevel of lethalviolence. Once morerestricting our focus to thecounties of Georgiaand SouthCarolina, Figure 4 describesthe effect of black out-migrationbetween 19Io and 1920 on subsequentblack lynchingsbetween 1920 and 1930. By alteringthe time periods fromthose used in Figure3, we are attemptingto avoid pos- sible simultaneitybias in therelationship between migration and racialviolence.9 The evidencesuggests that heavy out-migration of blacksmay have had an ameliorativeeffect on racialviolence. Forexample, counties that experienced an out-migrationrate over blacks between and less than0.2 35 per Ioo 19Io 192o averaged lynchingsduring the next Io years.On theother hand, counties thatexperienced no blackout-migration (oreven net in-migration) maintainedrelatively high levels of racialviolence-nearly 0.3

This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Fri, 01 Jan 2016 08:03:56 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions LethalViolence and theGreat Migration 365 lynchingsbetween 1920 and 1930on average.The evidencepre- sentedin Figure4 bearsthe same caveatsmentioned in relation to Figure3. But it also providesintriguing information which suggeststhat our conceptualframework warrants more intensive empiricalattention.

CONCLUSION In thisessay we haveargued that prior treatments ofblack migra- tionhave prematurely neglected racial violence as a forcecontrib- utingto themigration of blacksfrom the South and to internal migrationwithin the South. While we do notclaim that the impact of violenceon migrationwas greaterthan the influence of economicforces, we do believeit was morepowerful than previously assumed.Moreover, we haveproposed a reciprocalrelationship betweenblack migrationand racialviolence against blacks during thefirst part of thetwentieth century. That is, notonly did southernblacks choose to leave areas in whichthey had been exposedto highlevels of lethalviolence, but the exodus of blacks motivatedsouthern whites to reducethe level of racial violence. The historicallegitimacy of this conceptual framework is dem- onstratedthrough an examinationof the social and economic contextwithin which the Great Migration occurred. Lynching was an importantmechanism of social control as whitessought to keep blacksin theirsubservient and impoverishedposition in southern society.And southernblacks obviously feared lynch mobs and theirvicious attemptsto imposepopular justice. Many blacks respondedto thisthreat by fleeingto less violentsurroundings. Once southernblacks began to leavethe region in largenumbers, however,some whites recognized the disruptive effect the exodus was havingon thesouthern economy. For decades southern employershad taken for granted the availability of cheap black labor; whentheir supply was threatened,they acted in their own interests to stanchthe flow of black labor to theNorth. Preliminaryempirical evidence presented in Figures3 and 4 is consistentwith our hypothesesand suggeststhat our conceptualframework has sufficientmerit to justify closer consideration. Simplebivariate analyses indicate that, among counties in Geor- gia and SouthCarolina, blacks were more likely to leaveareas of morefrequent lynching, and thatheavy out-migration was asso-

This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Fri, 01 Jan 2016 08:03:56 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 366 SOCIAL SCIENCE HISTORY ciated withlower levels of racial violencein followingyears. Naturally,these simple bivariate relationships cannot be takenas proofpositive that a traditionof racialviolence increased black mobilityor thatextensive out-migration led to a declinein the use of racialviolence against southern blacks. Before definitive conclusionscan be drawn,empirical investigations ofour conceptual frameworkmust be extendedto a broadergeographic area and to a moreextensive set of socialand economic variables. An adequatetest of the conceptual framework developed in this essay willrequire a majorresearch initiative; however, the possibility of "rewriting"the conventional wisdom regarding the dynamics of theGreat Migration will justify that initiative.

NOTES

I The netmigration estimates represented on thismap weregenerated using a forwardcensus survival rate method (Shryock and Siegel I980: 630-34). It is thesame method used by Neil Fligstein(I98I) forthe estimates of net migration.A moredetailed description of thisindirect technique for esti- matingnet migration is presentedin a latersection of thisessay. Figure I describesthe rate of net migration but reveals nothing about the destinations of migrants. 2 It is probablysafe to ignorecross-county variation in theattractiveness or availabilityof employmentopportunities in theNorth as an explanationfor thecounty-level variation displayed in FigureI. Of course,some southern countiesmay have had strongerties with northern urban areas throughthe priormigration of familymembers or friends(e.g., Ballard1984). 3 In additionto push and pull factors, theoretical treatments ofmigration often mention"obstacles" to, or "costs"of, relocation that can discourage poten- tialmigrants. One mechanismoperating during the Great Migration to reduce such impedimentswas an expandingnetwork of familyand friendswho had alreadyrelocated. Such networksprovided valuable information about potentialdestinations and eased thearrival and transitionof newmigrants. Forexample, Ballard (1984) describesan importantconnection between pre- vious migrantsto Philadelphiaand residentsof thearea aroundAbbeville, SouthCarolina. Although an importantdimension to theGreat Migration, thisissue is somewhatoutside the specific focus of this essay. 4 Traditionally,the cottonstates are consideredto be Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana,Mississippi, and South Carolina. 5 A negativeeffect of lynchingon netmigration may seem to contradictour hypothesis.However, it shouldbe recognizedthat a positivevalue of net migrationmeans that a countygained population through migration. A nega- tivevalue implies a loss ofpopulation via migration.Thus, a negativeeffect of lynchingon netmigration actually indicates that more lynchings were associatedwith out-migration (orwith lower levels of in-migration).

This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Fri, 01 Jan 2016 08:03:56 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Lethal Violenceand theGreat Migration 367

6 These pointsshould not be interpretedas criticismsof Fligstein'sanalysis, since it was nothis purposeto conducta full-fledgedinvestigation of the associationbetween racial persecution and migration. 7 The county-leveldata used in Figures3 and 4 forlynchings in Georgia and SouthCarolina come froma recentproject to createan inventoryof lynchingsfor the entire Deep Southbetween 1882 and 1930.Three separate enumerationsof lynchvictims served as theraw material for the lynching inventory:(I) theNAACP'S inventories beginning in 1889and endingin the 1940s(see, e.g., NAACP1919); (2) theChicago Tribune's annual list of lynch victims,published between 1882 and 1918; and (3) a listcompiled by the TuskegeeUniversity Archives for the period 1882 to 1964 (Williams1968). Unfortunately,there are serious problems with each of these inventories (see, e.g., Becket al. 1989;Tolnay et al. 1989).Therefore they were combined to producea completelisting of all knownlynchings included in public sources. Theneach of these incidents and the details about them were verified through contemporaryreports published in nearbynewspapers. The productof this effortwas a confirmedinventory of southernlynchings which includes the followinginformation about each event:state, county, exact date, race of victim,sex of victim,and reportedreason. While we do notclaim that this inventoryis exhaustive,we are certainof its superiorityover other public inventories. The county-levelnet migration rates presented in Figures3 and 4 were estimatedusing a forwardcensus survivalrate method(Fligstein I98I: AppendixC; Shryockand Siegel I980: 630-34). In brief,an observedpopu- lationfor some point in timeis comparedwith the expected population for thesame time.The expectedpopulation is estimatedby survivingforward thepopulation for some earlier point in time. The difference between the two representsnet migration. If we takethe period 1920-30 as an example,then

= - MI920-30 P1930 (S) (P1920), whereM1920-30 is the net migrationbetween 192o and 1930, P1930is the observedpopulation size in 1930,S is thesurvival probability between 1920 and 1930, and P1920is theobserved population size in 1920. And thenet migrationrate, NM1920-30, is derived as follows: - X NMI920-30 (M1920-30/ P1920) I00. The actualcomputational procedure is mademore complex by an effortto be as preciseas possibleby allowing for separate survival probabilities for dif- ferentage groups,for males and females,and forurban and ruralresidents. A moredetailed description of the measurement ofnet migration is available fromthe authors. 8 Bloom (1987) disagreeswith Bonacich's (1972) assumptionthat black and whitelaborers were in directcompetition. He adoptsa moretraditional Marxistinterpretation of the sources of racialantagonism by locatingthem primarilywithin the white elite. 9 Futureefforts to modelthe reciprocal relationship hypothesized in thisessay betweenmigration and racialviolence will require careful temporal specifi-

This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Fri, 01 Jan 2016 08:03:56 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 368 SOCIAL SCIENCE HISTORY

cation.For instance,did a historicaltradition of lynchingsin an area spur out-migration,or was recentviolence more salient? Furthermore, while a laggedeffect of racialviolence on migration(or vice versa)can be speci- fiedand estimated,it ignoresthe possibility of nearlysimultaneous effects betweenthe two social forces.

REFERENCES Ayers,E. L. (1984) Vengeanceand Justice:Crime and Punishmentin the Nineteenth-CenturyAmerican South. New York:Oxford University Press. Ballard,A. (1984) One More Day's Journey:The Storyof a Familyand a People. New York:McGraw-Hill. Beck,E. M, J. L. Massey,and S. E. Tolnay(1989) "The gallows,the mob, and thevote: Lethal sanctioning of blacksin NorthCarolina and Georgia,1882 to 1930." Law and Society Review 23: 317-31. Bloom,J. M. (1987) Class, Race,and the Civil Rights Movement. Bloomington: IndianaUniversity Press. Bonacich,E. (1972) "A theoryof ethnicantagonism: The splitlabor market." AmericanSociological Review 37: 547-59. (1975) "Abolition,the extensionof slavery,and theposition of free blacks: A studyof splitlabor markets in theUnited States, 1830-1863." AmericanJournal of Sociology 81: 60o-28. Daniel, P. (1985) Breakingthe Land: The Transformationof Cotton, Tobacco, and Rice Culturessince i88o. Urbana:University of IllinoisPress. Donald, H. (1921) "The Negromigration of I916-1918." Journalof Negro History6: 383-498. Espy,Watt (n.d.) Capitalpunishment research project. Unpublished raw data. Fligstein,N. (1981) GoingNorth: Migration of Blacks and Whitesfrom the South, 1900oo-1950.New York: Academic. Flynn,C. L., Jr.(1983) WhiteLand, Black Labor:Caste and Class in Late- Nineteenth-CenturyGeorgia. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press. Gottlieb,P. (1987) MakingTheir Own Way: SouthernBlacks' Migrationto Pittsburgh,I916-30. Urbana:University ofIllinois Press. Henri, F. (1975) Black Migration:Movement North, 1900-1920. Garden City, NY: Anchor. Higgs,R. (1976) "The boll weevil,the cotton economy, and blackmigration, 190Io-193." AgriculturalHistory 5o: 335-50. (1977) Competitionand Coercion:Blacks in theAmerican Economy, 1865-1914.Cambridge, U.K.: CambridgeUniversity Press. Holmes,W. F. (1969) "Whitecapping:Agrarian violence in Mississippi,1902- 1906." Journalof SouthernHistory 35: 165-85. Jaynes,G. D. (1986) Brancheswithout Roots: Genesis of theBlack Working Class in the AmericanSouth, 1862-1882. New York:Oxford University Press. Johnson,C. S. (1923) "How muchis themigration a flight from persecution?" OpportunityI: 272-74. Johnson,D. M., and R. R. Campbell(I98I) Black Migrationin America:A Social DemographicHistory. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Fri, 01 Jan 2016 08:03:56 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions LethalViolence and theGreat Migration 369

Kennedy,L. V. (1930) The NegroPeasant Turns Cityward: Effects of Recent Migrationto NorthernCenters. New York:Columbia University Press. Kiser,C. V. (1967 [1932]) Sea Islandto City:A Studyof St. HelenaIslanders in Harlemand Other Urban Centers. New York:AMS Press. Kousser,J. M. (i974) The Shapingof Southern Politics: Suffrage Restriction and theEstablishment of theOne-Party South. New Haven,CT: Yale University Press. (1980) "Separatebut not equal: The SupremeCourt's first decision on racialdiscrimination in schools." Journal of Southern History 46: 17-44. Lee, E. S. (1966) "A theoryof migration." Demography 3: 47-57. Lewis,E. E. (1931) The Mobilityof the Negro: A Studyin theAmerican Labor Supply.New York:Columbia University Press. Mandle, J. R. (1978) The Roots of Black Poverty:The SouthernPlantation Economyafter the Civil War. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Myrdal,G. (1972) An AmericanDilemma: The NegroProblem and Modern Democracy.New York:Pantheon Books. NationalAssociation for the Advancementof ColoredPeople (1969 [19191) ThirtyYears of Lynchingin the UnitedStates, 1889-1918. New York: NAACP. Newby,I. A. (1965) JimCrow's Defense:Anti-Negro Thought in America, 1900oo-1930.Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press. Novak,D. A. (1978) The Wheelof Servitude: Black Forced Labor after Slavery. Lexington:University of Kentucky Press. Ransom,R. L., and R. Sutch(1977) One Kind of Freedom:The Economic Consequencesof Emancipation.New York:Cambridge University Press. Raper,A. (1933) The Tragedyof Lynching.Chapel Hill: Universityof North CarolinaPress. Ravenstein,E. G. (1885) "The laws of migration."Journal of the Royal StatisticalSociety 48: 167-227. - (1889) "The lawsof migration." Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 52: 241-301. Scott,E. J. (1920) NegroMigration during the War. New York:Oxford Univer- sityPress. - , ed. (I919) "Lettersof Negromigrants." Journal of NegroHistory 4: 290-340. Scroggs,W. 0. (1917) "Interstatemigration of Negropopulation."Journal of Political Economy 25: 1034-43. Shapiro,H. (1988) WhiteViolence and Black Response:From Reconstruction to Montgomery.Amherst: University of MassachusettsPress. Shryock,H., and J. Siegel (I980) The Methodsand Materialsof Demography. Washington,DC: U.S. GovernmentPrinting Office. Tolnay,S. E., E. M. Beck, and J. L. Massey(1989) "Black lynchings:The powerthreat hypothesis revisited." Social Forces67: 605-23. U.S. Bureauof the Census (1975) HistoricalStatistics of the UnitedStates: ColonialTimes to 1970.Washington, DC: U.S. GovernmentPrinting Office. U.S. Departmentof Labor,Division of NegroEconomics (I919) NegroMigra- tionin I916-17. Washington,Dc: U.S. GovernmentPrinting Office. White,W. (1969 [1929]) Rope andFaggot. New York:Arno.

This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Fri, 01 Jan 2016 08:03:56 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 370 SOCIAL SCIENCE HISTORY

Williams,D. T. (1968) Amidthe Gathering Multitude: The Storyof Lynch- ing in America;A ClassifiedListing. Unpublished manuscript, Tuskegee University,Tuskegee, AL. Williamson,J. (I984) The Crucibleof Race: Black-WhiteRelations in the AmericanSouth since Emancipation. New York: Oxford University Press. Wilson,W. J. (1978) The DecliningSignificance of Race: Blacksand Changing AmericanInstitutions. Chicago: University of ChicagoPress. Woodson,C. (1930) The RuralNegro. Washington, DC: Associationfor the Studyof Negro Life and History. (1969 [I918]) A Centuryof NegroMigration. New York:Russell and Russell. Woodward,C. V. (1966) The StrangeCareer of Jim Crow. Rev. ed., New York: OxfordUniversity Press. Woofter,T. J. (1920) NegroMigration: Changes in RuralOrganization and Populationof the Cotton Belt. New York: W. D. Gray.

This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Fri, 01 Jan 2016 08:03:56 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions