Evolving Jim Crow: an Analysis of the Consolidation Movement on the Virginia Peninsula, 1940-1958

Home , Daily Press (Virginia), Hilton Village

EVOLVING JIM CROW: AN ANALYSIS OF THE CONSOLIDATION MOVEMENT ON THE VIRGINIA PENINSULA, 1940-1958

R. Joshua Sipe

A thesis submitted to the faculty at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Master of Arts in the of the Department of History in the College of Arts and Sciences

Chapel Hill 2019

Approved by:

Jim Leloudis

Fitz Brundage

Erik Gellman

ABSTRACT

R. Joshua Sipe: Evolving Jim Crow: An Analysis of the Consolidation Movement on the Virginia Peninsula, 1940-1958 (Under the direction of Jim Leloudis)

In the decades after the Second World War, amidst a growing number of attacks on Jim

Crow by African Americans, Southern leaders employed a variety of strategies to preserve white supremacy. In Newport News, Virginia, local white leaders and citizens used consolidation with

Warwick County to reinforce white supremacy against a growing politically active black community on the Virginia Peninsula. The case of Newport News from World War II through consolidation in 1958 and the decades after depicts not only the frailty of Jim Crow, but also white citizens’ fear of a collapsing system and their attempts to re-inscribe white supremacy. It also portrays the long lasting effects and damage of white supremacy even after the end of Jim Crow.

iii To my parents Rick and Michele and my wife Jenn. Without your constant support and encouragement this would not be possible.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………………...1

THE RISE OF WHITE ANXIETIES OVER A GROWING BLACK POPULATION IN NEWPORT NEWS………………………………………………………………………………..3

CONSOLIDATION: AN ANTIDOTE FOR WHITE ANXIETIES…………………………….19

JIM CROW EVOLVES ON THE PENINSULA………………………………………………..25

CODA: A NEW CITY, LITTLE CHANGE—NEWPORT NEWS AFTER CONSOLIDATION……………………………………………………………………………...37

BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………………………………………..42

INTRODUCTION

On July 1, 1958, a little over a year after citizens of Newport News and Warwick voted to consolidate into a single city on the Virginia Peninsula, a young James Hershman, Jr. and his friends gathered on Warwick Boulevard near the former border between the City of Newport

News and Warwick. The day marked the beginning of a newly unified city with a large ceremony to celebrate the momentous occasion planned for that afternoon. While Hershman and his friends sat talking an roar began to fill the air. As the rumbling grew louder and moved towards the group, James turned to identify the source of the sound. As he turned, James witnessed a caravan of Newport News’ police officers clad in jackboots and sunglasses astride motorcycles led by Police Chief William F. Peach heading up Warwick Boulevard from downtown Newport News towards their newly acquired territory. Though a young boy,

Hershman recalled the spectacle had an appearance of malice.1 The officers jackbooted ride into their new jurisdiction that James witnessed on July 1st linked the old city of Newport News’ legacy of white supremacy with the newly unified city. The Newport News’ police embodied more overt forms of white supremacy on the Virginia Peninsula during the 1950s and 1960s, such as racial profiling and police brutality, while the creation of the newly unified city of

Newport News and Warwick demonstrated a more covert form of white supremacy.

Across the South during World War II, Jim Crow came under attack by politically active

African Americans. With the emergence of wartime defense industries, blacks moved to cities in

1 James Hershman, Jr., oral comments at Virginia Forum, March 15, 2019.

search of employment. As local black communities developed, African Americans influenced by the war’s rhetoric of democracy began to challenge systems of Jim Crow by paying poll taxes, voting, and demanding equal access to facilities.2 This increase in political activism continued throughout the post-war years as the civil rights movement began to emerge.3

White citizens and leaders across the South responded to African Americans’ attack on

Jim Crow in a variety of ways. In Mobile, Alabama, white workers at the Alabama Dry Dock and Shipyard assaulted approximately 50 black workers in an attempt to make Shipyard leadership reinforce traditional Jim Crow hiring practices.4 Many of the South’s white leaders turned towards the strategy of massive resistance in response to Brown v. Boards’ challenge to

Jim Crow.5 While other white leaders and citizens turned towards different methods as Jim Crow

“demanded a multifaceted defense.”6 In Washington D.C., Theodore Bilbo as the District

Committee chairman used the guise of “law and order” to reduce black political activity in the city and displace African Americans in the city.7 While James Francis Byrnes of South Carolina employed reformist rhetoric and a drive to equalize segregated school spending in order to attempt to stave off desegregation.8

2 Patricia Sullivan, Days of Hope: Race and Democracy in the New Deal Era, (Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1996), 136.

3 For information on the Long Civil Rights Movement see: Jacquelyn Dowd Hall, “The Long Civil Rights Movement,” The Journal of American History 91, no. 4 (March 2005): 1233-1263.

4 Harvard Sitkoff, “African American Militancy in the World War II South,” in Remaking Dixie: The Impact of World War II on the American South, ed. Neil R. McMillen (Jackson: University of Mississippi Press, 1997), 83.

5 For more on massive resistance see: John Kyle Day, The Southern Manifesto: Massive Resistance and the Fight to Preserve Segregation, (Jackson: University of Mississippi Press, 2014); George Lewis, Massive Resistance: The White Response to the Civil Rights Movement, (London: Oxford University Press, 2006).

6 Jason Morgan Ward, Defending White Democracy: The Making of a Segregationist Movement and the Remaking of Racial Politics, 1936-1965, (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2011), 68.

7 Ibid., 71.

8 Ibid., 122-123.

In Newport News, Virginia, local white leaders and citizens turned towards the tactic of reconfiguring local government on the Virginia Peninsula by way of consolidation to attempt to save Jim Crow. Exploring the evolution of tactics used by white citizens to maintain racial control in Newport News illustrates the determination and creativity of white southerners to protect Jim Crow. With an expanded and politically active black population after the war,

Newport News’ leaders also faced white flight into neighboring counties and cities threatening the white control of the city. Therefore, consolidation of surrounding counties and cities became the main solution adopted to impede potential black political influence. White city leaders and citizens believed consolidation could bolster the white population of the city to offset the increase in the African American population.

Beginning in 1947 with the launching of a study on consolidation, Newport News’ white citizens fought black advancement for rights until consolidation with Warwick became a reality a decade later, thereby, solidifying white control of the Peninsula and limiting black political influence. The process of consolidation was tumultuous and influenced by economic, social, infrastructural, and political concerns, but none of these were far removed from race, especially by 1956. The case of Newport News from World War II through consolidation in 1958 and the decades after depicts not only the frailty of Jim Crow, but also white citizens’ fear of a collapsing system and their attempts to re-inscribe white supremacy. It also portrays the long lasting effects and damage of white supremacy even after the end of Jim Crow.

The Rise of White Anxieties Over a Growing Black Population in Newport News

In 1880, railroad and industrial investor Collis P. Huntington viewed the sleepy rural area on the Virginia Peninsula known as Newport News as the perfect place to build an industrial center. With a population just over 2,000, Newport News sat northwest across the mouth of the

James River from the developing city of Norfolk, Virginia.9 Huntington recognized the areas close proximity to Norfolk and its deep-water access provided the opportunity to establish a shipbuilding hub supplied by a railway connection. Therefore, Huntington established a Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad and created the Newport News Drydock and Shipbuilding Company. During the first decade of the twentieth century, the shipyard, railroad, and other developing industries nourished the city of Newport News’ growth to a population of 20,000 citizens.10 The thirty-year period of growth allowed for the infrastructure of the city and the population to rise in tandem.

The First World War challenged the city of Newport News greatly and ignited its first crisis over blackness. American involvement in World War I led to a demand for “man power in

Newport News to be used for shipbuilding.”11 Homer L. Ferguson, the Lieutenant of the

Newport News Drydock and Shipbuilding Company, began hiring African Americans to help the shipyard meet the rising labor needs. With the new infusion of black and white labor the number of shipyard employees rose from 5,000 to 12,500 by the end of the war.12 The large increase in

Newport News’ population created a severe housing shortage.13 To address the problem shipyard leaders, local officials, and private citizens rapidly constructed housing units. The far east end of the Peninsula became the location for cheap and hastily built African American housing.14

9 U.S. Census Bureau, “Population in Each State and Territory, by Counties,” 1880.

10 U.S. Census Bureau, “Population-Virginia, Washington, West Virginia,” 1910.

11 “Build Ships and Win the War,” Daily Press, July 12, 1917.

12 “The Greatest Ship; The Greatest Shipyard,” Daily Press, March 17, 1915; Joint Employee-Management War Production Drive Committee, The Shipyard in Peace and War, (Newport News Virginia: Newport News Dry Dock and Shipping Company, 1944), 16.

13 “Build Ships;” “One Thousand New Homes are Needed,” Daily Press, August 7, 1917; “The Housing Problem,” Daily Press, August 28, 1917.

14 Joint Employee, Shipyard in Peace, 16.

Despite the efforts to build cheap units to house black workers, Newport News could not meet the high housing demands, as over the war the African American population grew from 7,259 to

14,077.15 The continued lack of housing forced many African American workers to live in shanty towns of tents on open lots in the east end of the city. City leaders viewed the existence of the shanty towns and ill-constructed homes as a temporary wartime measure. However, at the end of the war the need for these ramshackle houses and tent cities remained high due to continued employment of African Americans in skilled and unskilled positions at the shipyard. For the following decade and a half, African Americans continued to migrate to the city and seek shelter in the crowded and poorly constructed communities on the eastern tip of the peninsula.16

By the mid-1930s, white citizens of Newport News viewed the black neighborhood a dangerous slum that bread disease. Whites believed the slums created public hazards including

“breeding distinct social problems,” and most importantly, “the transmission of disease from slum residents to the white community.”17 One white resident declared that African Americans

“come from their disease-breeding surroundings [of lower Jefferson Avenue] daily to rub elbows with the rest of the citizenry...decentraliz[ing] the slums and carrying them into homes the city over.”18 The fear of black workers, especially black domestics, spreading disease from “slum areas” into the white community was a common trope used by white southerners to police

15 1910 Census ; U.S. Census Bureau, “Composition and Characteristics of the Population-Virginia,” 1920.

16 Housing Authority of the City of Newport News, Better Homes, (Newport News, VA, 1946), 6.

17 “Slum Clearance is a Public Problem,” The Daily Press, January 15, 1935, 1.

18 Ibid.

blackness in urban areas.19 By tagging African American areas as disease and poverty ridden, whites could continue to consign black Americans “to the mudsills of Southern society.”20

While white citizens equated slums and blackness with disease, African Americans suffered from inadequate living and sanitary conditions forced upon them by Jim Crow society.

During the decade and a half following the war, epidemics of influenza and whopping cough affected the east end of Newport News. Overcrowding and unsanitary living conditions contributed to both of these waves of sickness.21 The burden of blame for overcrowding and unsanitary living conditions resided with white citizens and city leaders. According to a 1938 survey of the seven and a half block area of the far east end of the city conducted by two leading

African Americans in Newport News, over seventy percent of houses were not connected to the city’s sanitation system.22 Of the thirty percent of houses connected to the system, many lacked indoor plumbing. Conscious decisions by white property owners to not install plumbing and a lack of a suitable city infrastructure led to these inadequacies. The same report found an average of eight tenants living in a single dwelling. A large portion of the tenants living in these overcrowded houses were shipyard employees, who could find no other housing within walking distance of the shipyard.23 While the conditions threatened residents’ physical wellbeing, the landlords of many of the properties undercut any economic wellbeing the African American

19 Terra Hunter, To Joy My Freedom: Southern Black Women’s Lives and Labor after the Civil War, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1997), 190.

20 Ibid., 188.

21 Housing Authority, Better Homes, 8.

22 “Survey by Hampton Institute Focuses Attention on Slums in Newport News,” Daily Press, May 1, 1938; “City Appoints Race Men to Mark Survey of Slums,” Journal and Guide, October 22, 1938; “Slum Committee May Make Report on Survey Monday,” Daily Press, November 5, 1938.

23 Minutes of the Newport News City Council, November 7, 1938; “Housing Authority Approved to Study Slum Eradication; Mayor to Appoint Members,” Daily Press, December 13, 1938.

residents might be able to gain. The shortage of housing in the area for African Americans allowed predominantly white landlords to set high rent prices, while pushing many African

Americans further into poverty.24

While white citizens wrestled with anxieties over blackness attached to disease and poverty in the 1930s, the city’s ever increasing and politically active black population during

World War II in Newport News amplified white fears. By 1940, the growing American involvement in the European conflict led to the start of another wave of migration to Newport

News by white and black laborers.25 As in World War I, the federal government relied on the

Newport News Shipyard to build and repair ships to assist in the American defense effort. Also, the military used the Chesapeake-Ohio Railroad and the Hampton Port of Embarkation to transport munitions and war supplies to Europe.26 The demand placed on these industries by the

United States government required an expanded workforce. As in many other defense industry hubs, white and black Americans from across the region began moving to the city to secure employment in defense industries. African American workers particularly sought out jobs at the

Newport News Shipyard, as it was one of the few places that employed African Americans in skilled positions. Despite wage discrepancies between white and black workers, African

Americans viewed the shipyard as a place of employment where their labor was valued.27

Fearing another housing crisis like the one the city faced during WWI, the Newport News

City Council along with the Newport News Housing Authority (NNHA) began to build defense

24 Ibid.

25 Annie Lash Jester, Martha W. Hiden, Kemper L. Kellogg, and William T. Stauffer, Newport News during the Second World War, (Richmond, VA: The Baughman Company, 1948), 3.

26 Ibid, 16.

27 “Greatest Shipbuilder Praises Race Skilled Labor,” Journal and Guide, April 14, 1923.

housing communities for war workers. City officials were particularly concerned to avoid the

“slum problem” that followed the First World War.28 On July 2, 1940 Congress passed the

National Defense Act, which authorized the use of “money appropriated for the War Department for national-defense purposes” by cities and government agencies to “expedite the building up of the national defense.”29 With funds from the federal government, the NNHA launched its first housing initiative to meet the “acute housing shortage” brought on by the “large increase of work contracts” at local defense industries.30 The NNHA initially planned to construct two defense housing communities: a 300-unit community for whites; and a 200-unit community for African

Americans. However, Newport News Shipyard Lieutenant Homer Ferguson advocated for the city to construct 400 units for white workers and only 100 for African Americans to best match the needs of his employees.31 Additionally, he advised the housing authority the shipyard expected in the next year “a probable increase [in] employment of at least a 50%.” Therefore, the shipyard alone would need “at least 4,000 housing units.” In requesting the NNHA begin to consider the massive need for housing, Ferguson “stressed the importance of constructing substantial units rather than barracks or tents” as the latter only served people of “a type not desired in the community.”32 Ferguson’s requests were in hopes of keeping undesirable black laborers out of the city.

28 Housing Authority, Better Homes, 14-15.

29 U. S. Congress, House, National Defense Act of 1940, HR 9850, 76th Cong., Introduced to House July 2, 1940. July 2, 1940. https://www.loc.gov/law/help/statutes-at-large/76th-congress/session-3/c76s3ch508.pdf.

30 Minutes of the Housing Authority of the City of Newport News, June 27, 1940; “New $1,500,00 Housing Unit for Newport News,” Norfolk Journal and Guide, July 20, 1940.

31 Minutes of the Housing Authority of the City of Newport News, July 10, 1940.

32 Minutes of the Housing Authority of the City of Newport News, July 30, 1940.

Ultimately, influenced by the continued growth of defense jobs, the NNHA and the federal government constructed thirteen defense housing projects, five for African Americans and eight for whites, in and around the city of Newport News throughout the war.33 These defense communities ranged in size from as few as 80 units in College Court (White) to as many as 3,195 in Copeland Park (White). The three largest projects, Ferguson Park 1,200 units

(White), Newsome Park 1,591 units (African American), and Copeland Park, were all constructed in 1943 during the height of the war and were designed to be used solely for the duration of the war.34 Additionally, the houses in these three communities were “demountable,” meaning they could be easily transported to other important defense-industry cities with housing needs.35 However, the continued in-migration of defense workers, especially black workers, quickly filled these projects. The need for black housing was so great, city officials were forced to redraw the border between the all-white Copeland Park and the all-black Newsome Park to provide more units for African American defense workers.36

In 1943, as the African American community continued to grow, two events sparked the black citizenry of the city to become more politically active: the refusal of the City of Newport

News to hire black police officers and the unjustified firing of six black educators by the

Newport News City School Board. The lack of police presence in black communities along with some officers displaying “racial bias” led African American residents to petition for the

33 Lower Peninsula Planning Commission of Virginia, “Map of Housing Projects on the Lower Peninsula of Virginia,” June 20, 1946.

34 Ibid.; Minutes of the Housing Authority of the City of Newport News, August 25, 1943; “Largest Single Housing Project on Peninsula,” Journal and Guide, February 6, 1943; “Newsome Park Homes Defense Workers,” Journal and Guide, March 6, 1943.

35 “Allot 1,350 Demountable Units for Workers in Newport News,” Journal and Guide, February 21, 1942; Newport News City Council Minutes, September, 19, 1944.

36 Newport News City Council Minutes, March 14, 1944.

employment of black policemen. Black leaders of Newport News believed the employment of black officers to be crucial to maintaining local “racial morale and [black] faith in American

Democracy.”37 In early 1943, the City Council granted a presence at a council meeting to a committee of African American citizens led by Professor L. F. Palmer, a leading black educator and civic leader. The group requested the City Council employ African American police officers to patrol the black communities. In support of his call for the hiring of black officers, Palmer pointed to the success of black police in Galveston, Texas and Charlotte, North Carolina. Palmer argued employment of officers in these cities led to better racial harmony and a stronger moral among the black populations. Additionally, he declared the employment of black officers in these cities in no way disrupted the racial hierarchy in place. Following Palmer’s request, the

City Council absolved itself of responsibility for addressing the matter by citing its lack of authority over city employment. Members told the black audience the City Manager handled all hiring decisions; therefore, any action by the City Council on the matter would be an overreach.38

In the late spring of 1943, the City of Newport News School Board’s decision to fire six black educators without cause fueled the already galvanized black population to turn to the power of the ballot in city elections. In May of 1943, the Newport News School Board fired three black teachers and three black principals in a closed meeting. Among those fired was L. F.

Palmer, who had recently vocalized the black community’s concerns to the Council.39 The firing

37 “We Want Police Officers,” Journal and Guide, April 10, 1943.

38 Newport News City Council Minutes, February 1, 1943.

39 “3 Principals and 3 Teachers Dropped,” Journal and Guide, May 22, 1943; “Teachers Granted Right to ‘Limited Hearing: Teachers to Proceed in Case Sustains Board in refusal to Say Why Teachers Dismissed,” Journal and Guide, September 18, 1943.

of the teachers infuriated black citizens who believed the decision to be unjust. Citizens quickly made their voices heard at the next city council meeting, where they demanded the City Council force the School Board to rehire the educators. Black leaders then warned that black residents’ anger could lead to massive riots and violence if the School Board did not immediately reinstate the teachers. As with the issue of black police officers, the City Council claimed that it lacked the power to influence the School Board’s decisions. Additionally, members of the City Council defended the School Board’s actions by claiming that it had “full authority over employees from the Superintendent down.”40 African American Attorney R. Wendell Walker argued the City

Council had a “moral right” to respond to “dereliction of duty” by the School Board, no matter the legality of authority.41 Despite the anger of the black community the City Council and School

Board upheld the decision to release the six black educators.

With African American residents’ concerns falling on deaf ears blacks began to reconsider their longtime support of white candidates. Local black leaders and organizations turned to the possibilities of creating a black voting bloc to support a black candidate for City

Council in the 1944 elections. Throughout 1943, Newport News’ growing African American community began to create an infrastructure to get voters registered and more involved in the political process. The NAACP, in conjunction with the newly formed East End Voters League, held numerous meetings, rallies, and voter drives. African American citizens were “calling for a campaign to increase the Negro voting strength” in the city in order to vote out of office the city officials who continually ignored their complaints.42

40 Newport News City Council Minutes, May 24, 1943.

41 Ibid.

42 “Poll Tax Drive Pressed; Teachers Cite Warning,” Journal and Guide, November 27, 1943.

African Americans in Newport News used their higher defense-job wages and community groups to counter the state poll tax. With increased wages, some black defense workers could now pay their poll tax and register to vote. Additionally, the NAACP, tenant councils, and the Newport News Voter League held “poll tax drives” in hopes of raising money to assist those who could still not afford to pay the poll tax.43 These grassroots efforts helped slowly increase the number of black voters on the Peninsula. Dr. Luther P. Jackson argued that paying the poll tax “enable[ed] Negroes to right wrongs and arrest racial discrimination through action at the ballot box.”44 By January, the Journal and Guide reported a record number of

African Americans in Newport News had paid their poll taxes and registered to vote in the upcoming primary in April. The Newport News Voters League and the NAACP continued to work to enroll as many voters as possible in the upcoming election.45

The rising focus on voter registration and political activism by African Americans in

Newport News was a part of the NAACP’s nationwide “Double V” campaign. The “Double V” campaign focused on using wartime rhetoric of democracy to win victory on two fronts: in

Europe against the fascist axis powers and at home against racism.46 Across the nation membership rolls of local chapters of the NAACP grew as more African Americans, especially in the South, demanded that America finally fulfill its promise of democracy. While Peninsula residents did not respond to the growing political activity of black citizens with violence as in other southern cities, such as Mobile, Alabama, racial harmony was not fully present either. An

43 Ibid.

44 Luther P. Jackson, “May Abolish Poll Tax by Paying It,” Journal and Guide, December 4, 1943.

45 “Predicts Hottest Primary in Past 25 Years,” Journal and Guide, January 29, 1944.

46 Sullivan, Days of Hope, 136.

article in the Daily Press warned that residents who believed racial prejudice and tension did not exist were “foolish in the extreme.”47 For on the Peninsula “there [were] persons who take delight in stirring up prejudice and hate.”48

By the start of 1944, momentum from voter registration drives provided the opportunity for African Americans in several southern states to run in white primaries.49 In Newport News, attorney R. Wendell Walker announced his candidacy for City Council in early February becoming the first African American to run for City Council since the turn of the century.50 In the primary race, Walker faced off against eight white candidates. The black community of

Newport News quickly rallied behind Walker as he garnered endorsements from the NAACP, the Voters League, and other community groups. Knowing he faced an uphill battle, at an

NAACP rally, Walker “stressed the importance of Negroes safeguarding their rights as American citizens by paying the poll tax, registering and voting in all elections.” Walker pledged that if elected he would work to ensure the city council embraced its “moral responsibility” to uphold democracy by pushing local officials to address the concerns of the black community. 51

As the democratic primary election neared, white citizens and leaders looked to prevent black voters from employing a “single-shot ballot.” The “single-shot ballot” or “single-shot voting” was a strategy that could be employed by groups to counteract numerical disadvantages in voting population by voting for a single candidate, rather than the three candidates allowed.

47 Ibid., 160-162; “Peninsula Record Good,” Daily Press, December 17, 1942.

48 “Peninsula Record.”

49 Sullivan, Days of Hope, 134.

50 “Walker Files for Newport News Council,” Journal and Guide, February 12, 1943.

51 “Join NAACP; Plead for Race Councilman,” Journal and Guide, March 4, 1944.

By only voting for a single candidate, voters could add to a selected candidates vote total without helping opposing candidates. Also, whites feared African Americans “bloc voting,” where

African Americans collectively decided who they should vote for in the election thus creating a voting block of support for a ballot of candidates. African Americans across the South employed these strategies in hopes of voting black candidates or liberal whites into office. Combining

“one-shot-balloting” in and “bloc voting” created a potentially potent black political tool for

African Americans to dismantle white rule.52 Therefore, white leaders in Newport News, fearing

Walker could succeed if black voters embraced a “one-shot ballot,” discussed whether “single- shot ballots” could be counted as invalid. The debates located a discrepancy between local and state election laws on the validity of “single-shot ballots,” with the state considering them valid ballots. However, city leaders decided to uphold local election laws from the cities charter to validate only ballots with votes for three candidates, as it was “the safest course” of action and ensured “single-shot balloting” would not lead to a Walker victory.53

In the election on April 4th, Walker’s performance validated black hopes and white fears about the potential strength of black voters. It also highlighted the obstacles a black candidate faced in Newport News. Walker finished sixth out of the nine candidates running in the primary.

The result left black citizens ecstatic at the “remarkable showing” their candidate put forward.

The Journal and Guide reported Walker “beat down” his white opponents in the two black precincts. Walker received 1,039 votes in the election, with 892 of them coming from African

Americans. The Daily Press reported that the rest of his votes came from white precincts where

52Ward, White Democracy, 157.

53 “Staples View Fails to Clear Vote Problem,” Daily Press, April 1, 1944.

he received between “9 and 21” votes respectively. 54 Though small in number, the white votes

Walker received pointed to the existence of white southern liberals in the community. Walker’s performance demonstrated to black citizens that they could potentially garner enough votes to desegregate the City Council and that Newport News possessed a small number of whites with whom they could ally. These white southern liberals were a part of the “Silent South” that worked as an internal threat to the “Solid South’s” social structure.55

White city leaders saw the rise in black voters as a threat to their power and sought to appease the black community. Less than two weeks after Walker’s surprising election finish, the

City Council announced they intended to concede to the black community’s demand for the employment of black police officers. The City Council explained their decision as a response to a constant manpower shortage in the police force. But African Americans linked it to their new- found political clout. The Journal and Guide reported, “the announcement caused widespread speculation because of the sudden decision to employ Negroes on the force immediately after the recent councilmanic primary in which one incumbent was defeated for reelection.”56 Black citizens celebrated the decision as a victory.

The City Council’s decision to appease the black community most likely was influenced by a faith in an adaptive style of racial management and the Council’s belief the racial composition of the city would return to its pre-war levels. White leaders in Virginia, and especially the Tidewater area, used paternalistic relationships with black leaders to shape race relations and maintain white control over much the first part of the twentieth century. Over the

54 “Wornom Noses Out Jones; Taylor and Anderson Win Re-Nomination,” Daily Press, April 5, 1944.

55 Luther P. Jackson, “Rights and Duties in a Democracy: Southern Whites Rallying to Negro,” Journal and Guide, August 18, 1945.

56 “Newport News Plans Negro Police,” Journal and Guide, April 15, 1944.

1930s and early 1940s, Virginians adapted to allow token African American roles throughout society within a paternalistic framework.57 Within this tradition of race relations, Newport

News’ councilmen could elect to appease the black community by allowing a small number of highly qualified candidates to become officers with jurisdiction only over black areas of the city.

As such concessions posed no threat to white control.

Additionally, City Council members believed the rise in defense jobs and defense housing would only last for the duration of the war. City leaders predicted the shipyard and railroad would scale back employment as defense spending would decrease dramatically, leading to layoffs of the migrant defense workers, especially black workers.58 Additionally, a report released by the authorities at the Hampton Roads Port of Embarkation suggested that “Negro personnel show a greater tendency to migrate” and predicted “about two-thirds intended to return” to their pre-war lives.59 City leaders thus expected without other employment options the large black population that had migrated to the city would move away searching for new economic opportunities.

Similarly, Newport News’ leaders expected many of the defense communities to be torn down following the conclusion of the war. The expectation of a labor exodus in addition to fear of the semi-permanent defense community devolving into pre-war like slums led leaders to anticipate that many of the communities including, Newsome Park would be torn down.60 The

57 J. Douglas Smith, Managing White Supremacy: Race, Politics, and Citizenship in Jim Crow Virginia, (Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 2002), 9-11.

58 Newport News City Council Minutes, August 23, 1943.

59 “8 of 10 Service Men Would Go Back to Homes,” Daily Press, February 10, 1945.

60 Newport News City Council Minutes, January 31, 1944; “Oppose Demountables as Permanent Housing,” Journal and Guides, May 31, 1945.

firm belief in the migratory nature of the black defense working population and the ability to decrease available housing in conjunction with traditional views on managing race relation created an environment in which white city leaders reasoned they could temporarily appease the black community until the loss of population would limit the growing black political power.

Black citizens of Newport News also assumed there would be an exodus of workers and citizens from Newport News at the conclusion of the war, though they believed it would be of whites not blacks. Like many war workers across the United States, African Americans who moved to Newport News during the war had previously worked as sharecroppers in rural southern communities.61 The improvements in living conditions brought by the housing projects and the large increase in wages of the defense industry led many to believe that even if layoffs occurred the opportunities that still existed in Newport News were greater than one could find elsewhere. Additionally, throughout the war black citizens developed a vibrant black run economy to sustain the communities. The creation of black businesses in and surrounding the defense communities created bonds to the city that anchored citizens to the area. Together the creation of a vibrant black community and the belief in the economic opportunity led black citizens to believe they would persist in the city and could continue to improve their political power to garner better resources for the growing community.62 However, black citizens believed

61 “Hampton Roads Negro Population Shows Great Gains in 4 Years,” Daily Press, March 9, 1945. “Caring and Sharing:” a Memoir of Newsome Park, 1990; Annie Pollard, interviewed by R. Joshua Sipe, September 21, 2015, audio recording, Hampton Roads Oral History Project, Christopher Newport University, Newport News, VA; 5; Albert McIver, Jr., interviewed by R. Joshua Sipe and Alex Szymanski, October 18, 2014, audio recording, Hampton Roads Oral History Project, Christopher Newport University, Newport News, VA; Helen Foster, interviewed by Katie Fisher, November 13, 2014, audio recording, Hampton Roads Oral History Project, Christopher Newport University, Newport News, VA.

62 “Caring and Sharing;” Elwood Hill, interviewed by R. Joshua Sipe, August 31, 2015, audio recording, Hampton Roads Oral History Project, Christopher Newport University, Newport News, VA; “Caring and Sharing;” Newsome Park Memoir, August 30, 2008; Audrey Perry Williams, interviewed by R. Joshua Sipe, August 29, 2015, audio recording, Hampton Roads Oral History Project, Christopher Newport University, Newport News, VA.

white war workers would migrate to other cities that could offer better wages or employment.63

The two divergent views on the future population of the city and the potential of black political development would set the stage for continuous black challenge for the city council and white leaders attempts to mitigate black political power.

After the war, Newport News’ leaders faced the reality of African American defense workers remaining in the city and needing housing as the city became a permanent defense industry center. Despite the end of the war, the shipyard and railroad would continue to be central to post-war military plans, especially with the rising tensions between the US and Soviet

Union. The continued boom of the shipyard and the railroad meant continued employment of

African Americans creating the potential for a second housing crisis in the community if the city removed “temporary” black housing, such as Newsome Park. Therefore, city leaders reluctantly accepted the need to keep the black defense communities functioning in the city.

Simultaneously, white working and middle-class citizens of Newport News moved from the central urban core surrounding the shipyard to the suburbs in Warwick County and Elizabeth

City County. Attracted by better housing, quality schools, and lower tax rates, the white population that had helped offset the rise in Newport News’ African American population were slowly syphoned off over the next decade.64 The migration mirrored the suburban movement across America, as whites relocated to new housing developments or further populated the streetcar suburbs of the First World War, such as Hilton Village just inside the Warwick County line.65 The counties of Warwick and Elizabeth City experienced a large white population growth

63 “Oppose Demountables as Permanent Housing,” Journal and Guide, March 31, 1945.

64 “Benefits from Complaints,” Daily Press, January 30, 1945; Burt Garnett, “Slum Clearance Slow,” Daily Press, March 29, 1948; Cynthia Skove, “East End: A Tale of Lives and Livelihoods,” Daily Press, September 23, 1979.

65 John Quarstein, Newport News: A Centenial History, (Newport News, VA: City of Newport News, 1996), 158- 159; David G. Temple, Merger Politics: Local Government in Tidewater Virginia, (Charlottesville, VA: University

between 1940 and 1950. Warwick County’s white population grew from 6,703 to 27,434 and

Elizabeth City County’s grew from 25,275 to 43,748 , while Newport News’ increased from only

21,772 to 24,059.66 The diminishing racial buffer caused by white flight intensified anxieties of potential black political success, especially with the growing influence of the NAACP in the city.67

Consolidation: An Antidote for White Anxieties

The city leaders of Newport News turned towards consolidating local governments on the Peninsula as a means to address postwar economic, social, and political concerns, including black political influence in the city. In the fall of 1946, the City Council of Newport News ordered their newly formed Lower Peninsula Planning Commission (LPPC) to begin investigating the possibility of consolidation on the Peninsula, including Hampton, Phoebus,

Elizabeth City, and Warwick.68 City leaders sought consolidation of the Peninsula as each area could benefit “politically and economically...under a single united administration.”69 The potential economic benefit centered on continued industrialization in the post-war years within the communities. As a consolidated city could provide incentivizing tax rates and improved city structures leading to companies building industries within the city. While hope of further industrialization was an important factor in the creation of the LPPC, politicians focused much of

Press of Virginia, 1972), 47. For more on postwar suburbanization in the United States see: Kenneth Jackson, Crabgrass Frontier: The Suburbanization of the United States, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985).

66 U.S. Census Bureau, “Characteristics of the Population-Virginia,” 1940; U. S. Census Bureau, “Characteristics of the Population-Virginia,” 1950.

67 Temple, Merger Politics, 47-48.

68The Lower Peninsula Planning Commission, “Report of Study Committee of the Lower Peninsula Planning Commission of Virginia on Consolidation of Local Governments,” May 19, 1949, ii.

69 “A Timely Study,” Daily Press, September 23, 1946.

the discussions on how consolidation could develop “political harmony” and address mutual

“urban issues,” such as duplicated services, efficient city governments, and appropriate tax bases.70 Therefore, between 1947 and 1949, the LPPC, made up of politicians, business representatives, and prestigious citizens of the five areas under consideration for consolidation, researched and contemplated various ways the Peninsula could be merged to address city leaders’ concerns.

In April of 1949, the LPPC released its report on the potential for consolidation. The report presented solutions the committee deemed “practical, feasible, and wholly desirable.” The suggestions provided by the LPPC were intended to create a more efficient and effective government to shape a “homogeneous community.” In examining consolidation the LPPC believed “democratic governments” on a local level should function with “a balanced population by age, educational and cultural attainment, economic substance and racial background to minimize the possibility of appeals to or political control of a special group, the growth of disproportionate burdens and the development of disadvantageous, deteriorating conditions.”71

Though using terms such as homogenous community, which appeared benign, the LPPC’s report was about race and ways to limit the threat posed by black citizens in Newport News.

With this in mind, the LPPC evaluated four potential consolidation plans: The

Metropolitan Commission Plan; The Metropolitan County Plan; The Urban-Rural Plan; and the

City Plan. The Metropolitan Commission Plan proposed that each respective government would remain politically intact, but an elected area commission would be formed to make political and

70 Lower Peninsula, “Consolidation of Local Governments;” “The Consolidation Study,” Daily Press, October 27, 1946; Temple, Merger Politics, 1-2.

71 “Consolidation of Local Governments,” 7.

economic recommendations. The Metropolitan County Plan consolidated all five areas into a single county, which would function under Virginia county laws and would be tax friendly to residents. The Urban-Rural Plan consolidated the rural areas of Elizabeth City County and

Warwick County into a single government, and the Cities of Newport News, Hampton, and

Pheobus, into a single city government. This plan would allow each area to maintain governmental and tax structures similar to those already in place. The City Plan, also known as the “Greater City,” consolidated the five areas into a single city. Ultimately, the LPPC believed the City Plan offered the greatest benefit to each area.72

The “Greater City” offered tremendous potential economic growth to the area because of its size and the resources at the city’s disposal to attract investment from industries, but most importantly created a political and racial balance for Peninsula communities. The Greater City plan would create the third largest city in the state of Virginia, behind Richmond and Norfolk, with a total of approximately 127 square miles of territory containing 148,000 citizens.73 This large city could rival Norfolk and other port cities across the United States as an economic hub of trade and military industry. However, in outlining the advantages the Greater City offered all areas, the LPPC first cited the consolidation could “accommodate problems that develop— political, social, civic, and cultural—that, unsatisfied, effect a deteriorating influence” on the area.74 Once again, the LPPC used coded language of good and efficient government to highlight the impact consolidation would have on limiting black political influence on the Peninsula. In the eyes of the LPPC, the “Greater City” offered the greatest flexibility and potential for sustainable

72 Ibid, 8-15.

73 Ibid. 16.

74 Ibid.

economic growth, while also adequately addressing urban concerns of city leaders, especially in regards to the growing black population in Newport News.

By combining the five areas the white population would regain a strong hold on population rule, securing white political power, even with a growing number of “progressive” minded whites in the area. In 1947, African Americans made up approximately thirty-five percent of the population of Newport News. In the new “Greater City,” African Americans would only comprise twenty-six percent of the population.75 This decrease in percentage of black population would give whites a stronger grip on power. Additionally, the LPPC noted the consolidation “provid[ed] ample room for future expansion and growth and [would] remove any likelihood of the need for further changes in boundaries in the local government structure.”76 By encompassing all potential areas of future suburban growth, the consolidated “Greater City” would help white leaders solve Newport News’ “white flight” and suburbanization problem.

Initial reactions to consolidation from residents across the Peninsula were generally favorable, though many wanted to know more details regarding its benefits and costs. Some residents, such as Rutherford B. Thompson of Elizabeth City County, were skeptical of Newport

News and Warwick having too much influence over a merged city.77 Despite these concerns, the general mood of most white citizens in Newport News and Warwick was supportive. Citizens, such as L. M. Rutherford of Hilton Village, stated, “I am for consolidation because it will be better for the Peninsula and lower taxes. Also, it will add prestige to the city and make it more wholesome.”78 For many citizens on the Peninsula, consolidation promised the greatest

75 U.S. Census, 1950.

76 “Consolidation of Local Governments,” 17.

77 Matt Fulgham, “Sentiment Widespread for Consolidation but Many Seek More Data,” Daily Press, Jun 12, 1949.

78 “Rhode, Other Citizens Back Consolidation,” Daily Press, March 18, 1950.

opportunity for improved resources and an efficient local government.79 In addition to support from citizens, consolidation was backed by Lewis A. McMurran, Jr. and the local branches of the

Byrd Organization, the statewide political machine headed by Harry S. Byrd, Jr.80

African Americans on the Peninsula were torn on whether to support consolidation or fight against it. A strong contingent of African Americans, including religious leaders, believed consolidation could be beneficial for the black community. Joining together the various communities could potentially better connect black institutions across county and city lines.

African American citizens also felt consolidation presented the chance for the education systems on the Peninsula to improve, as more resources would be available to use for black education.

Additionally, African Americans thought a unified Peninsula could offer better municipal services, such as policing and public transportation. Finally, those in support of consolidation imagined that creating a singular political body on the Peninsula would provide African

Americans the best chance to impact politics.81 Ernest Williams of Newport News’ favored consolidation because “there [was] strength in unity, making possible the accomplishment of many things.”82 But others in the black community viewed consolidation as a ploy to limit black power. Newport News resident Willie Braxton argued that if consolidation passed, “the balance

79 “Unity’s Opportunity,” Daily Press, January 7, 1950; Charles L. Hurst, “Charter OK’d by House as March 21 Vote Date Gets Court Signature,” Daily Press, March 5, 1950.

80 Temple, Merger Politics, 30-37. Temple details the involvement of local branches of the Byrd Organization in the consolidation process on the Peninsula, but suggests the state level of the organization was not actively involved. For more on the Byrd Machine in Virginia see: James Ely, The Crisis of Conservative Virginia: The Byrd Organization and the Politics of Massive Resistance, (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1976).

81 “Colored Jaycees Back Consolidation,” Journal and Guide, February 18, 1950. “Ministers’ Alliance Favors Peninsula Consolidation,” Journal and Guide, March 4, 1950.

82 D. M. Crockett, “The Inquiring Reporter,” Journal and Guide, April 1, 1950.

of power held by Colored in Newport News would be lost forever. Records have proven what the fate of the minorities is.”83

In March of 1950, voters from the five areas went to the polls to vote on a referendum on whether or not the areas should consolidate. The votes resulted in Elizabeth City County,

Hampton, and Phoebus blocking the first attempt at consolidation on the Peninsula. In Hampton and Phoebus, consolidation failed by margins of 3 to 1 and 6 to 1, respectively, while Elizabeth

City voted the measure down by a 2-1 margin. The three areas appeared to be concerned with

Newport News’ government, and the desire of the three areas to consolidate into a single county of their own.84 While those three regions firmly rejected consolidation, Newport News expectedly voted in support of consolidation by a large number. City voters cast 3,692 votes

“for” and 640 votes “against” consolidation. The turnout in Newport News was one of the largest the city had ever seen. Meanwhile, Warwick supported consolidation by a 2 to 1 margin.85 Black voters in all areas reflected the divided black opinion on consolidation, with more African

Americans favoring consolidation than rejecting it. However, in the solidly pro-consolidation city of Newport News the strongest opposition came from within all black precincts, which totaled nearly 200 votes against consolidation.86 These black precints likely rejected consolidation as it most threatened their growing political power. Though consolidation in 1950 was defeated, events over the next five years in the city and nation at large would lead to the

83 Ibid.

84 “Hampton, ECC and Phoebus Vote Against Unification Plan in Near-Record Ballot,” Daily Press, March 22, 1950.

85 Ibid.

86 Ibid.

most explosive fight for consolidation on the Peninsula, in which considerations of race became the most contentious issue.

Jim Crow Evolves on the Peninsula

A month after consolidation was defeated, African Americans citizens led by W. Hale

Thompson, a fiery local black lawyer, began a two-year battle to desegregate the Newport News

Public Library. In April of 1950, Thompson and other African American leaders in Newport

News attended a city council meeting and requested access to the main branch of the library.87

After hearing the black citizens’ request, Mayor Taylor furiously declared, “the library should stay as it is” because the city had “opened up a fine library for [blacks] in the East End and it

[had] plenty of books.”88 The library Taylor referred to was an annex on the second floor of the

Doris Miller Recreation Center that housed approximately 50 books. The city council agreed with Taylor citing Plessy v. Ferguson’s standard of separate but equal as justification for refusing to desegregate the library. Additionally, city leaders, as in previous incidents, claimed they did not have legal authority over the library, since the library operations were run by the

Newport News Public Library Inc., a private entity.89

Following the refusal of the city council and mayor to act, Thompson filed suit in Federal

District Court against the City of Newport News and Newport News Public Library Inc. for equal access to the Main Library. In response to the suit, the Newport News Library board of directors filed a request that if the suit proceeded to trial, it would be decided by a jury instead of

87 “Mayor Cowles Cold Toward Equal Library Use Request,” ˆJournal and Guide, April 29, 1950.

88 Ibid.

89 “Control of Library and Equal Facilities Raised as New Point,” Daily Press, May 30, 1950.

a federal judge.90 The suit was continuously moved down the docket throughout 1951 and much of 1952. With the trial approaching in the late summer of 1952, the library board of directors stunned locals by voluntarily desegregating the public library in July. While the board of directors released no official statements, observers believed the library willfully integrated to prevent a forced integration by the courts.91 Court ordered integration of a public facility such as the library could have created a precedent to undo segregation elsewhere on the Peninsula, upsetting the racial hierarchy of the city.

In 1952, Newport News not only experienced desegregation of its library system, but also had another black candidate for city council. In January, W. Hale Thompson announced his candidacy for one of the three open seats on the city council. Thompson, like his predecessors, believed the city’s government continuously failed to address the needs of black citizens.

Inspired by recent successful candidacies in Richmond, Virginia and parts of North Carolina, the black community felt they could lead the way towards integration of local governments on the

Peninsula. Thompson and his supporters believed that as in other urban areas where black candidates successfully competed in elections, Newport News had a growing progressive white class who possessed an “awakening sense of social responsibility.”92 Thompson was not the only black candidate in the state hoping to ride such a moral awakening. Black candidates also took aim at city council seats in Portsmouth, Petersburg, Charlottesville, and Lynchburg.93

90 “Newport News Library Issue May Go to Court,” Journal and Guide, July 29, 1950; “Newport News Library Suit Discussed,” Journal and Guide, August 5, 1950; “Library Board Demands Jury, If Case Goes to Trial Stage,” Daily Press, September 15, 1950.

91 “Main Library Opens Doors to All Adults,” Daily Press, July 9, 1952.

92 “Two May Aspire for Council in Newport News,” Journal and Guide, January 12, 1952; “Candidates for Office Find Favorable Trend,” Journal and Guide, January 12, 1952.

93 “Candidates for Office.”

In the Newport News race, Thompson faced eight white candidates in the primary election. As in previous primaries, local black institutions rallied behind Thompson and led voter registration drives. When the votes were counted, Thompson finished fourth, the best a black candidate had finished in any election on the Peninsula. Thompson accrued 1,438 votes, with

953 coming from African American wards of the city. Thompson’s strong performance in black districts was augmented by the significant pockets of support in certain white districts. The progressive white vote in Newport News had grown significantly since Walkers strong run in

1944. The good performance of Thompson in the primary along with the desegregation of the library began to build momentum among threated whites for another large scale push for

Peninsula consolidation.

The emergence of lawsuits across the United States, including in Newport News to desegregate public schools further ignited local white support to pursue consolidation. With the ruling of the Supreme Court in Brown vs. Board to desegregate schools, local citizens largely trusted their local leaders to address the questions brought about by the Brown case.94 However, local clergy members in Newport News immediately came out in support of the lawsuit, citing segregation and racism as expressions of moral depravity that needed to be resolved.95 Despite the presence of “pro-integration” sentiments by local religious leaders, the majority of Newport

News’ white citizenry firmly rejected the notion of integration.96 William Stephenson, a resident of Newport News, stated to the Virginia legislature that “pro-integration” speeches by local

94 “Better Not Guess: Just Wait Confidently,” Daily Press, April 15, 1954; “Hurtful Impatience on School Integration,” Daily Press, May 26, 1954.

95 “NN Resident In Blast on School Issue,” Daily Press, November 16, 1954; “Much Opposition to Racial Integration in the Church,” Daily Press, August 28, 1955.

96 Phillip Hamilton, “Race, Politics, and Education in Tidewater Virginia: Christopher Newport College and the Shoe Lane Controversy of 1960-1963,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 119 No. 3, (2011), 251.

religious leaders “made [him] sick to [his] stomach” and that he and at least 3,800 other residents of the city were ready to support closing schools to prevent integration. 97 In 1955 the Newport

News’ chapter of the NAACP, led by W. Hale Thompson and William Walker, another African

American attorney, sued the School Board of Newport News to integrate local schools.

Thompson and Walker’s lawsuit to integrate began a long battle in which Newport News’ white leaders supported statewide attempts to prevent integration.98

Amidst the growing anxieties about federal interference in state and local issues brought on by the Brown decision and the local integration suit, white Peninsula leaders revived discussions of consolidation. Leaders in Newport News, Warwick, and Hampton, which consolidated with Elizabeth City County in 1952, commenced the development of a Tri-City

Consolidation Plan. The initial arguments for the plan echoed those from 1950, with leaders citing the need to create larger land areas to attract more industry to the area. Furthermore,

“working as one instead of three [cities] would [result in] a better school system, equal facilities and teacher salaries, [and] more adequate police and fire protection.”99 Many officials viewed consolidation was “essential to the progress of the Peninsula.”100

Throughout 1955 and 1956 leading up to the Peninsula wide vote on the Tri-City consolidation referendum in November of 1956, community members and leaders specifically discussed consolidation in terms racial control of the Peninsula. City leaders from Hampton and

Newport News held public forums to allow the public to discuss support for and concern about

97 “NN Resident.”

98“Hamilton, “Race, Politics, and Education,” 151; “NN Board Turns Down Bid for Integration of City Schools This Fall,” Daily Press, July 13, 1955.

99 “Consolidation Views Argued Before Group,” Daily Press, October 26, 1955.

100 “Vision and Courage Demand Consolidation,” Daily Press, November 3, 1956.

consolidation. Pro-consolidationists from Newport News contended inaction would lead to what they characterized as “Negro domination” on the Peninsula.101 Newport News resident William

Ferguson declared, “Newport News is fast coming under the control of a colored government of undesirable persons controlled by Negroes.”102 J. B. Woodward, a shipyard leader and prominent citizen, argued that white citizens needed to “take a look at the trend indicated by recent elections and by the school population in Newport News now reported to be 60 to 40

(white in the minority) and in about four years estimated to become 70 to 30.”103 Woodward and other consolidationists feared the continued growth of Newport News’ black population and the continued challenge for seats on the city council by black citizens. Consolidationists “predicted that unless consolidation [was] accomplished, the Newport News government may in a few years be in the hands of ‘persons ill fitted and out of harmony with those in Hampton and

Warwick’.”104 In addition to gaining political control, consolidationists argued African

Americans would overtake businesses and the economy. One citizen argued, “Negroes…in a short time hope to gain control of millions in tax values and control of the Newport News

Waterworks…by controlling Newport News, the Negroes would get control of the economic and business hub of the Peninsula.”105 Therefore, if white citizens of Warwick and Hampton did not agree to consolidation their economic future was in peril.

101 “Consolidation Debate Hears Industry Quiz,” Daily Press, October 17, 1956.

102 Ernest C. Downing, Jr., “Statistics Apart,” Daily Press, October 9, 1956.

103 Ibid.

104 “Increase of Colored Population Causes Fear,” Journal and Guide, March 17, 1956.

105 “Faget, Newman Clash in Warwick Consolidation Debate; Seven Meetings Hear Merger Pros, Cons,” Daily Press, October 26, 1956.

Most white citizens in Hampton agreed with this belief in a threat of black political power. One supporter of consolidation believed that if citizens in Hampton refused to help secure white rule in Newport News, the city of Hampton would be the next to fall under the terror of

“Negro rule.”106 Meanwhile, members of the Hampton Citizens Committee for Consolidation decried those who did not believe in the race threat posed by Newport News’ black community.

They argued that white leaders with anti-consolidationist sentiments were “co-workers” of W.

Hale Thompson and Joe Richman, a Newport News politician representing the black Second

Ward, which was known for vote rigging, bribery and other political underhanded tactics.107

Linking white anti-consolidationists with Richman and Thompson suggested such men strove to corrupt the political system of the Peninsula by opening the door to African Americans in political offices.

While supporters of consolidation waived the banner of black political power, anti- consolidationists, especially in Hampton, discussed the supposed “Negro problem” as either mythical or of no concern. In a consolidation debate hosted by the Buckroe Beach Civic

Association, Hampton city councilman Von Schiling announced he believed the “Negro problem would have never been brought into the open,” if it were not for “race baiting” by consolidationists. Additionally, he felt that even if black citizens gained control of the city of

Newport News, catastrophe would not follow, as black citizens had a strong interest in the continued economic success of the city.108 Other citizens in attendance at the meeting claimed,

“it [was] not Hampton’s responsibility to save Newport News from a threat of Negro

106 Ibid.

107 “Three Councilmen’s Anti-Merger Statement Hit by Hampton Group,” Daily Press, October 29, 1956.

108 “Consolidation Debate Reaches Hot Words as Pros, Cons Clash Before Buckroe Beach Civic Association,” Daily Press, October 10, 1956.

domination, when Newport News leaders failed to have the proper foresight and act through annexation powers to prevent the threat. [Furthermore,] the councilmanic election in Newport

News last year showed that the threat was largely imaginary.” Citizens who ran an ad in the

Daily Press echoed the idea that Newport News leaders were issuing false claims about the possibility of “Negro domination” (See Figure 2). The ad pointed to the still “2 to 1” majority white citizens had on the black population of Newport News.109 Despite the belief that the fear of black political control was false, the one speaker at an anti-consolidation rally avowed his belief that white supremacy was an absolute necessity in local government for years to come. Another anti-consolidationist bolstered this claim arguing that if the Peninsula merged “the Negroes of

Newport News, Warwick and Hampton could band together to elect one or two men to the council and the could hold the balance of power, something they haven’t been able to do in

Newport News at the present.”110 Meanwhile three councilmen from Hampton opposed to the merger declared, “Consolidation is not a solution to the race question that is foremost in the minds of many.”111 Instead, other actions could be pursued to address the concerns of the “race question” plaguing the South. The centrality of race and the desire to maintain white control of local government by proponents on each side of the consolidation debate demonstrates how white southerners could possess similar goals of reaffirming Jim Crow, yet determine different strategies as most effective.

Unlike in 1950, African Americans on the Peninsula fully rejected consolidation as it was a direct attempt to limit their potential power. Hale Thompson denounced the Peninsula

109 “Race Issue without Fact,” Daily Press, October 29, 1956.

110 “Faget.”

111 “3 Councilmen Cite Views on Consolidation,” Daily Press, October 28, 1956.

governments’ attempt to consolidate. In front of a gathering of black residents of Newport News, he argued, “the present situation in Newport News offers a good opportunity for Negroes and right-thinking people to produce a model city government in which all can work together.”112

Additionally, Thompson addressed the manufacturing of racial fear by white leaders using the

“threat of Negro domination.” He described “the motive of continued white supremacy behind consolidation an ‘unwholesome unchristian’ motive,” and characterized “proconsolidationists as trying to ‘drive a wedge between the Negroes and the Whites.”113As an outside observer, Oliver

Hill an African American attorney in Richmond argued that African Americans needed to continue to fight for representation, meaning the defeat of consolidation and election of an integrated city government that would work towards the benefit of all citizens of the

Peninsula.114 Thompson and Hill’s comments on consolidation underscored the desire of African

Americans on Peninsula for an equal voice in city decisions.

The November 1956 referendum once again defeated consolidation; however, in the aftermath consolidationists accused African American voters of hijacking the desire of the white majority. The city of Newport News and Warwick County largely supported consolidation with results of “5,385 ‘for’ to 2,058 ‘against’ and 5,336 ‘for’ to 3,532 ‘against” respectively.

However, the City of Hampton blocked the Tri-City Consolidation plan by 856 votes, with a tally of “ 6,192 ‘for’ and 7,048 ‘against.”115 The Daily Press reported “about 53 per cent of the voters were opposed to consolidation, or a ratio of about 1.08 to 1.”116 While a large portion of

112 “Thompson Asks Defeat of Consolidation,” Journal and Guide, October 30, 1956.

113 “Hale Thompson Urges Negro Voters Oppose Tri-Cities Merger Plan,” Daily Press, October 16, 1956.

114 “Negro’s Role in Economic Life is Cited,” Daily Press, August 2, 1956.

115 “Proposal Loses by 856 Votes in Hampton Area,” Daily Press, November 7, 1956.

116 Ibid.

Newport News supported consolidation, the four primarily black precincts in the city were a heavy voting force against measure. African Americans in Warwick and Hampton voted similarly as their Newport News counterparts dampening the consolidation vote.117

Pro-consolidationsists, energized by fear of “Negro dominance,” quickly decried the results of the consolidation vote as the direct result of “the color issue” infecting the Peninsula.118

On November 9th, the day after consolidation failed, a letter from one unnamed consolidationist under the pseudonym “Second Looker” ran in the Daily Press. In his letter, “Second Looker” expressed his understanding of why consolidation failed despite “a majority of white citizens’” support. The author claimed that while white anti-consolidationists and African American residents decried the discussion of race in debates leading up to the vote, the voting results confirmed white fears of “Negro domination” of the white majority.119 The “Second Looker” continued, “The Negro voting strength in Newport News was brought into the open during the campaign and the outcome of the voting on Tuesday indicates that the Negro voters play an important part not only in Newport News, but Hampton and Warwick as well.”120 Finally,

“Second Looker” concluded with a grave warning, “To know the colored vote has strength out of all proportion to its size and, further, that such vote cannot be counted on except to vote for its own interests...In a short time they [African Americans] will control Newport News with dire effects on Hampton and Warwick…It CAN happen here and is going to unless the majority of

117 Ibid.; “Peninsula Colored Voters for Ike, Against Merger,” Journal and Guide, November 10, 1956.

118 Second Looker, “The Color Issue,” Daily Press, November 9, 1956; “Did a Minority Bloc Defeat Consolidation,” Daily Press, November 9, 1956.

119 Looker, “Color Issue.”

120 Ibid.

citizens take steps to ensure that the majority view will continue to prevail.”121 On the same page, an editorial titled “Did a Minority Bloc Defeat Consolidation?” explored the claim that

African American voters overpowered the white vote. The editorial cited voting records published in the Journal and Guide, as proof “that the Negro minority voting group flexed its muscles successfully to kill [the] merger.” 122

In the aftermath of the consolidation vote of 1956, white citizens of Newport News, not just white leaders, saw the increase in black political power as a true threat their power and their

“interests.”123 Newport News’ white citizens’ reaction to the election results and blaming of

“minority bloc voting” mirrored concerns of other white southerners across the South during the

1950s, who saw bloc voting as the ultimate threat to continuation of white political rule.124

Interpreting the vote as a confirming the reality of black political power, white citizens and city leaders turned towards one final consolidation solution: merging Newport News and Warwick.

Within two weeks of the failed Tri-City consolidation vote, Warwick and Newport News’ white citizens and governments began discussions of one final attempt to consolidate a portion of the Peninsula as they held a consolidated government best served the citizens’ interests.125 While city governments had largely driven previous consolidation efforts, the 1957 campaign grew into a mass “people’s movement” of those awakened by the “color issue” fully revealed months

121 Ibid.

122 “Minority Block.”

123 Ibid.

124 Ward, “White Democracy,” 157.

125 “Warwick In It for Merger Calls Session,” Daily Press, November 20, 1956; “Meeting of Warwick Citizens Favoring Consolidation,” Daily Press, November 25, 1956; “Group to Seek Newport News and Warwick Merger,” Daily Press, October 28, 1956; Temple, Merger Politics, 45.

earlier.126 The city councils, under the pressure from citizens, worked to develop an agreed upon date for voting and work out the any issues of the new charter to be implemented.127 Unlike the year before, talks surrounding consolidation of Newport News and Warwick took a less hostile tone on race, though debates over tax structure, debt consolidation, and city council representation still occurred.

In July, residents of both areas went to the polls and passed consolidation. The measure passed handedly in Newport News, though narrowly in Warwick by 700 votes.128 In the only article in the Journal and Guide about the consolidation effort in 1957, the paper reported

African Americans in both Warwick and Newport News “threw their weight behind consolidation.”129 Despite individuals such as community leader Phillip Walker, lifelong native of Newport News and local African American lawyer, believing “there was a great deal of racism involved in the consolidation. [Whites] were afraid the blacks would take over all the city offices.”130 Why African Americans in Newport News and Warwick decided in 1957 to support consolidation when they so firmly rejected it in 1956 and community leaders understood its racial motives is unclear. One potential reason for African Americans shift in support could reside in blacks’ sacrificing democracy for expediency. Though losing the potential for political representation on the city council, African Americans could have viewed consolidation as providing greater resources for the community, such as a more efficient public transportation

126 “Group to Seek.”

127 “One Possible Snag for Consolidation Falls,” Daily Press, February 7, 1957.

128 “Voters Approve Merger, 8,337 to 4,126,” Daily Press, July 17, 1957.

129 “Peninsula Voters Approve Merger; Create Big City,” Journal and Guide, July 20, 1957.

130 Skove, “East End.”

system. Additionally, with the desegregation of schools on the Peninsula seeming likely, African

Americans in Newport News and Warwick might have believed consolidation would open all school resources to their disposal. Additionally, African Americans may have hoped, as they had in 1950, that a united black community on the Peninsula could leverage the city government to create a more equal society.

With the merger becoming official on July 1, 1958, Newport News’ white leaders and citizens received the result they had sought since consolidation was first discussed: a larger white population. Consolidating with Warwick, Newport News increased the white electorate, offsetting much of the population previously lost to suburbanization. According to the 1960 U.S.

Census, Newport News’ total population rose to a total of 113,662, 74,562 whites and 39,100

African Americans.131 White citizens now made up sixty-five percent of the city’s population compared to fifty-seven percent prior to consolidation.132 Phillip Walker argued that consolidation did two things, “It took away any substantial part of the political power of the black people in Newport News and it brought about a lack of interest in the East End section,” the area that was Newport News prior to the merger.133 The reestablishment of a solid white majority stalled any potential African American political efforts over the next decade.

Consolidation of Newport News and Warwick acted as a new strategy for reinforcing white supremacy as Jim Crow began to crack and the Civil Rights Movement gained momentum.

Unlike massive resistance or violence, consolidation maintained a veneer of benign practicality.

Consolidation acted as another plank in white southerners’ “multifaceted defense” of

131 U.S. Census Bureau, “Characteristics of the Population,” 1960.

132 U.S. Census, 1950.

133 Skove, “East End.”

segregation.134 Additionally, consolidation fit within the bounds of a new progressive segregation, which “repackaged white resistance in a reformist veneer.”135 The ability to recraft white supremacy into seemingly innocuous forms, such as consolidation, which offered benefits to the citizens, proved a vital tool for white leaders, especially as traditional overt forms of segregation began to crumble.

Coda: A New City, Little Change—Newport News After Consolidation

In 1961, Newport News’ leaders moved on from consolidation to other methods of entrenching white supremacy, including the acquisition of land for Christopher Newport College, now Christopher Newport University. Phillip Hamilton in his essay, “Race, Politics, and

Education in Tidewater Virginia: Christopher Newport College and the Shoe Lane Controversy of 1960-63,” illustrates how Newport News’ City Council chose the site for Christopher Newport

College in order to “hold onto a system of racial segregation whose time was coming to an end.”136 The site selection process was narrowed from five to two possible locations in central

Newport News, both predominantly white areas of the new city. Hamilton argues that city leaders selected the site at Shoe Lane, the location of a long standing black community, in order to create a buffer zone for the adjacent all-white James River Country Club.137 African American leaders such as W. Hale Thompson and William Walker, another prominent African American, decried the attempt to purchase the Shoe Lane area as “purely a matter of race.”138 Ultimately,

134 Ward, White Democracy, 68.

135 Ibid., 122.

136Hamilton, “Race, Politics, and Education,” 247.

137 Ibid, 254.

138 Ibid., 267.

after attempting to purchase plots of land from black home owners for below-market value, the city proceeded with condemnation hearings, forcefully seizing the African American community.139 The erasure of the black community at Shoe Lane reinforced the make-up of middle and upper Newport News as a white only space. Akin to consolidation, the placement of

Christopher Newport College on Shoe Lane further whitened an area of the city as yet again whites in the region sought to address the race question as traditional techniques were no longer viable.

Newport News’ new political boundaries and population dynamics after consolidation effectively maintained white control of the city council until 1970. Seeking to finally integrate the all-white city council, local citizen Jessie Rattley ran in the 1970 city council election.140

Unlike her predecessors Walker and Thompson, who were heavily involved in lobbying for integration and deconstruction of Jim Crow, Rattley did not overtly threaten whites control, as she was the owner of the Peninsula Business College, which preached a policy of black self-help.

Additionally, in her campaign she discussed the plight of black citizens, but distanced herself as a “sectional or special group candidate.” Instead, she argued for “unity for Newport News” stating she “want[ed] the city to be too busy growing to take time to hate.”141 Despite her less threatening background, a number of white citizens formed the “Stop Rattley Campaign” to keep her out of office.142 Using door-to-door campaigning, pamphleting, and phone banks, the “Stop

Rattley Campaign” spread a narrative that depicted Rattley as a communist and black radical

139 Ibid., 269-270.

140 “Seven Top Finishers in Democratic Primary Election,” Daily Press, April 8, 1970.

141 “Howell Backs Mrs. Rattley,” Daily Press, April 6, 1970; “Candidate Appeals for Unity in Newport News,” Journal and Guide, February 28, 1970.

142 “ ‘Stop Rattley Campaign’ Called Racist Inspired,” Journal and Guide, June 6, 1970.

hoping to remove whites from power.143 In a public statement, Rattley’s campaign manager dismissed the smear campaign as “racist inspire propaganda.144 The “Stop Rattley Campaign” echoed attacks launched at individuals seeking to alter the political and social foundation of the city and South.

In the June election, in spite of the racial smear campaign launched against her, Rattley secured a seat on the city council receiving close to 9,715 votes, mainly from black precincts of the city.145 Despite her clear victory in the election, critics claimed Rattley’s success was due to

“single-shot and bloc voting.” One white woman argued that “the black community and so-called liberals in the white community joined together” and utilized “bloc voting” to elect Rattley.146

The woman declared that the use of bloc voting was “a threat to democracy” and needed to be addressed.147 Another citizen of Newport News asserted, “the single-shot voting in East End resulted in Mrs. Rattley’s election…Had this minority area not single-shot for its candidate then she simply would not have been elected.”148 Echoing white fears during the consolidation debate, the citizen further claimed, “the single-shot vote from the East End was a realistic and desperate attempt by 36 per cent of Newport News’ population to achieve representation on City Council in spite of the other sixty-four per cent.”149 The charges of “undemocratic” results due to black political success highlights the ingrained notions of black political domination held by white

143 Ibid.; “Demos Challenged by GOP, Independents in Council Race,” Daily Press, June 7, 1970.

144 “Stop Rattley.”

145 “Peach Leader in Record City Council Vote,” Daily Press, June 10, 1970.

146 Roberta Nicholls, “Women are Talking About,” Daily Press, November 1, 1970.

147 Ibid.

148 “Perry Depue, Propose Hornsby as Mayor of NN,” Daily Press, June 22, 1970.

149 Ibid.

citizens of the Peninsula. For many white citizens, the election saw their greatest fear materialize: an integrated City Council. Meanwhile, black citizens celebrated Rattley’s “banner victory.”150

While Rattley’s election and future political success undid consolidation’s political goals, the racial effects of consolidation went beyond limiting black political control.151 In a 1979 reflection on consolidation’s impact on the East End community, the Daily Press highlighted how the process furthered “the flight of the whites of the [East End of Newport News] to the suburbs.”152 Additionally, business investments followed white citizens from the urban core to the middle and upper ends of Newport News, leaving black citizens unemployed and without access to essential services, including grocery stores. African American citizens described consolidation as “disastrous” for the black community of the city as they became an even more forgotten people.153

The scars left by consolidation that East End residents identified in 1979 are still visible to this day. The re-entrenchment of white supremacy by way of consolidation did more than protect the racially homogeneous nature of the city council for a decade; it furthered a structure that continued to handcuff black potential on the Virginia Peninsula even after the death of Jim

Crow. In 2006, the Daily Press reported that in the predominantly black East End the average family income was $19,087, $23,000 dollars lower than the citywide average. Additionally,

150 “Banner Day for Black Candidates in the State,” Journal and Guide, June 20, 1970.

151 Douglas Ashley, “Champagne, Oratory Flow,” Daily Press, 1986.

152 Skove, “East End.”

153 Ibid.

thirty-seven percent of families in the community lived below the poverty line.154 While other internal and external factors affected the struggling East End community, the legacy of white citizens’ efforts to maintain a racial hierarchy on the Peninsula through consolidation still impacts the city’s black residents to this day.

154 McKinley Price, “Improving our Community Will Require Altering the Economic Mix,” Daily Press, October 28, 2006.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

“A Timely Study.” Daily Press, September 23, 1946.

“Allot 1,350 Demountable Units for Workers in Newport News.” Journal and Guide, February 21, 1942.

Ashley, Douglas. “Champagne, Oratory Flow.” Daily Press, 1986.

“Banner Day for Black Candidates in the State.” Journal and Guide, June 20, 1970.

“Benefits from Complaints.” Daily Press, January 30, 1945.

“Better Not Guess: Just Wait Confidently.” Daily Press, April 15, 1954.

“Build Ships and Win the War.” Daily Press, July 12, 1917.

“Candidate Appeals for Unity in Newport News.” Journal and Guide, February 28, 1970.

“Candidates for Office Find Favorable Trend.” Journal and Guide, January 12, 1952.

“Caring and Sharing: Newsome Park Memoir.” 1990.

______. August 30, 2008.

“City Appoints Race Men to Mark Survey of Slums.” Journal and Guide, October 22, 1938.

“Colored Jaycees Back Consolidation.” Journal and Guide, February 18, 1950.

“Consolidation Debate Hears Industry Quiz.” Daily Press, October 17, 1956.

“Consolidation Debate Reaches Hot Words as Pros, Cons Clash Before Buckroe Beach Civic Association.” Daily Press, October 10, 1956.

“Consolidation Views Argued Before Group.” Daily Press, October 26, 1955.

“Control of Library and Equal Facilities Raised as New Point.” Daily Press, May 30, 1950.

Crockett, D. M. “The Inquiring Reporter.” Journal and Guide, April 1, 1950.

Day, John Kyle. The Southern Manifesto: Massive Resistance and the Fight to Preserve Segregation. Jackson: University of Mississippi Press, 2014.

“Demos Challenged by GOP, Independents in Council Race.” Daily Press, June 7, 1970.

“Did a Minority Bloc Defeat Consolidation.” Daily Press, November 9, 1956.

Downing, Jr., Ernest C. “Statistics Apart.” Daily Press, October 9, 1956.

Ely, James. The Crisis of Conservative Virginia: The Byrd Organization and the Politics of Massive Resistance. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1976.

“Faget, Newman Clash in Warwick Consolidation Debate; Seven Meetings Hear Merger Pros, Cons.” Daily Press, October 26, 1956.

Foster, Helen. Interviewed by Katie Fisher. November 13, 2014, audio recording,.Hampton Roads Oral History Project, Christopher Newport University, Newport News, VA.

Fulgham, Matt. “Sentiment Widespread for Consolidation but Many Seek More Data.” Daily Press, Jun 12, 1949.

Garnett, Burt. “Slum Clearance Slow.” Daily Press, March 29, 1948.

“Greatest Shipbuilder Praises Race Skilled Labor.” Journal and Guide, April 14, 1923.

“Group to Seek Newport News and Warwick Merger.” Daily Press, October 28, 1956.

“Hale Thompson Urges Negro Voters Oppose Tri-Cities Merger Plan.” Daily Press, October 16, 1956.

Hall, Jacquelyn Dowd. “The Long Civil Rights Movement and the Political Use of the Past.” The Journal of American History, 91, no. 4 (March 2005): 1233-1263.

Hamilton, Phillip. “Race, Politics, and Education in Tidewater Virginia: Christopher Newport College and the Shoe Lane Controversy of 1960-1963.” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 119 no. 3, (2011): 244-275.

“Hampton Roads Negro Population Shows Great Gains in 4 Years.” Daily Press, March 9, 1945.

Hill, Elwood. Interviewed by R. Joshua Sipe. August 31, 2015, audio recording. Hampton Roads Oral History Project, Christopher Newport University, Newport News, VA.

“Housing Authority Approved to Study Slum Eradication; Mayor to Appoint Members.” Daily Press, December 13, 1938.

Housing Authority of the City of Newport News. Better Homes. Newport News, VA. 1946.

“Howell Backs Mrs. Rattley.” Daily Press, April 6, 1970.

Hunter, Terra. To Joy My Freedom: Southern Black Women’s Lives and Labor after the Civil War. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1997.

“Hurtful Impatience on School Integration.” Daily Press, May 26, 1954.

“Increase of Colored Population Causes Fear.” Journal and Guide, March 17, 1956.

Jackson, Kenneth. Crabgrass Frontier: The Suburbanization of the United States. New York: Oxford University Press, 1985.

Jackson, Luther P. “May Abolish Poll Tax by Paying It.” Journal and Guide, December 4, 1943.

______. “Rights and Duties in a Democracy: Southern Whites Rallying to Negro.” Journal and Guide, August 18, 1945.

Jester, Annie Lash, Martha W. Hiden, Kemper L. Kellogg, and William T. Stauffer. Newport News during the Second World War. Richmond, VA: The Baughman Company, 1948.

“Join NAACP; Plead for Race Councilman.” Journal and Guide, March 4, 1944.

Joint Employee-Management War Production Drive Committee. The Shipyard in Peace and War. Newport News Virginia: Newport News Dry Dock and Shipping Company, 1944.

“Largest Single Housing Project on Peninsula.” Journal and Guide, February 6, 1943.

“Library Board Demands Jury, If Case Goes to Trial Stage.” Daily Press, September 15, 1950.

Lewis, George. Massive Resistance: The White Response to the Civil Rights Movement. London: Oxford University Press, 2006.

“Main Library Opens Doors to All Adults.” Daily Press, July 9, 1952.

“Mayor Cowles Cold Toward Equal Library Use Request.” ˆJournal and Guide, April 29, 1950.

McIver, Jr., Albert. Interviewed by R. Joshua Sipe and Alex Szymanski. October 18, 2014, audio recording. Hampton Roads Oral History Project, Christopher Newport University, Newport News, VA.

“Meeting of Warwick Citizens Favoring Consolidation.” Daily Press, November 25, 1956;

“Ministers’ Alliance Favors Peninsula Consolidation.” Journal and Guide, March 4, 1950.

“Much Opposition to Racial Integration in the Church.” Daily Press, August 28, 1955.

“Negro’s Role in Economic Life is Cited.” Daily Press, August 2, 1956.

“New $1,500,00 Housing Unit for Newport News.” Norfolk Journal and Guide, July 20, 1940.

Newport News City Council. Minutes of the Newport News City Council. Newport News, Virginia. 1938-1946.

“Newport News Library Issue May Go to Court.” Journal and Guide, July 29, 1950.

“Newport News Library Suit Discussed.” Journal and Guide, August 5, 1950.

“Newport News Plans Negro Police.” Journal and Guide, April 15, 1944.

“Newsome Park Homes Defense Workers,” Journal and Guide, March 6, 1943.

Nicholls, Roberta. “Women are Talking About.” Daily Press, November 1, 1970

“NN Resident In Blast on School Issue.” Daily Press, November 16, 1954.

“One Possible Snag for Consolidation Falls.” Daily Press, February 7, 1957.

“One Thousand New Homes are Needed.” Daily Press, August 7, 1917.

“Oppose Demountables as Permanent Housing.” Journal and Guide, March 31, 1945.

“Peach Leader in Record City Council Vote.” Daily Press, June 10, 1970.

“Peninsula Colored Voters for Ike, Against Merger.” Journal and Guide, November 10, 1956.

“Peninsula Voters Approve Merger; Create Big City.” Journal and Guide, July 20, 1957.

“Perry Depue, Propose Hornsby as Mayor of NN.” Daily Press, June 22, 1970.

“Poll Tax Drive Pressed; Teachers Cite Warning.” Journal and Guide, November 27, 1943.

Pollard, Annie. Interviewed by R. Joshua Sipe. September 21, 2015, audio recording. Hampton Roads Oral History Project, Christopher Newport University, Newport News, VA.

“Predicts Hottest Primary in Past 25 Years.” Journal and Guide, January 29, 1944.

“Proposal Loses by 856 Votes in Hampton Area.” Daily Press, November 7, 1956.

Quarstein, John. Newport News: A Centenial History. Newport News, VA: City of Newport News, 1996.

“Race Issue without Fact.” Daily Press, October 29, 1956.

“Rhode, Other Citizens Back Consolidation.” Daily Press, March 18, 1950.

Second Looker. “The Color Issue.” Daily Press, November 9, 1956

“Seven Top Finishers in Democratic Primary Election.” Daily Press, April 8, 1970.

Sitkoff, Harvard. “African American Militancy in the World War II South.” In Remaking Dixie: The Impact of World War II on the American South, edited by Neil R. McMillen, 70-92 Jackson: University of Mississippi Press, 1997.

Skove, Cynthia. “East End: A Tale of Lives and Livelihoods.” Daily Press, September 23, 1979.

“Slum Clearance is a Public Problem.” The Daily Press, January 15, 1935.

“Slum Committee May Make Report on Survey Monday.” Daily Press, November 5, 1938.

Smith, J. Douglas. Managing White Supremacy: Race, Politics, and Citizenship in Jim Crow Virginia. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 2002.

“Staples View Fails to Clear Vote Problem.” Daily Press, April 1, 1944.

“‘Stop Rattley Campaign’ Called Racist Inspired.” Journal and Guide, June 6, 1970.

Sullivan, Patricia. Days of Hope: Race and Democracy in the New Deal Era. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1996.

“Survey by Hampton Institute Focuses Attention on Slums in Newport News.” Daily Press, May 1, 1938.

“Teachers Granted Right to ‘Limited Hearing: Teachers to Proceed in Case Sustains Board in refusal to Say Why Teachers Dismissed.” Journal and Guide, September 18, 1943.

Temple, David G. Merger Politics: Local Government in Tidewater Virginia. Charlottesville, VA: University Press of Virginia, 1972.

“The Consolidation Study.” Daily Press, October 27, 1946

“The Greatest Ship; The Greatest Shipyard.” Daily Press, March 17, 1915.

“The Housing Problem.” Daily Press, August 28, 1917.

The Lower Peninsula Planning Commission of Virginia. “Map of Housing Projects on the Lower Peninsula of Virginia.” June 20, 1946.

______. “Report of Study Committee of the Lower Peninsula Planning Commission of Virginia on Consolidation of Local Governments.” May 19, 1949.

“Thompson Asks Defeat of Consolidation.” Journal and Guide, October 30, 1956.

“Three Councilmen’s Anti-Merger Statement Hit by Hampton Group.” Daily Press, October 29, 1956.

“Two May Aspire for Council in Newport News.” Journal and Guide, January 12, 1952.

United States Census Bureau. “Population in Each State and Territory, by Counties,” 1880

______. “Population-Virginia, Washington, West Virginia,” 1910

______. “Composition and Characteristics of the Population-Virginia,” 1920

______. “Characteristics of the Population-Virginia.” 1940.

______. “Characteristics of the Population-Virginia.” 1950.

______. “Characteristics of the Population.” 1960.

U. S. Congress. House. National Defense Act of 1940. HR 9850, 76th Cong., Introduced to House July 2, 1940. July 2, 1940. https://www.loc.gov/law/help/statutes-at-large/76th- congress/session-3/c76s3ch508.pdf.

“Vision and Courage Demand Consolidation.” Daily Press, November 3, 1956.

“Voters Approve Merger, 8,337 to 4,126.” Daily Press, July 17, 1957.

“Walker Files for Newport News Council.” Journal and Guide, February 12, 1943.

Ward, Jason Morgan. Defending White Democracy: The Making of a Segregationist Movement and the Remaking of Racial Politics, 1936-1965. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2011.

“Warwick In It for Merger Calls Session.” Daily Press, November 20, 1956.

“We Want Police Officers.” Journal and Guide, April 10, 1943.

Williams, Audrey Perry. Interviewed by R. Joshua Sipe. August 29, 2015, audio recording. Hampton Roads Oral History Project, Christopher Newport University, Newport News, VA.

“Wornom Noses Out Jones; Taylor and Anderson Win Re-Nomination.” Daily Press, April 5, 1944.

“3 Councilmen Cite Views on Consolidation.” Daily Press, October 28, 1956.

“3 Principals and 3 Teachers Dropped.” Journal and Guide, May 22, 1943.

“8 of 10 Service Men Would Go Back to Homes.” Daily Press, February 10, 1945.