00:00:13.740 - 00:00:40.980

So again, we're gonna give people just a couple of minutes to arrive. So if you're just signing on I want to welcome you to our Friday Doc Talks

00:00:40.980 - 00:00:53.180

for the Task Force on Slavery Segregation and Racial Injustice. I'm Caleb McDaniel, one of the co-chairs of the task force and my typical co-host for the Friday Doc Talks

00:00:53.180 - 00:01:07.780

and co-chair for the task force, Dr. Alex Byrd is unable to join our conversation today. But what that means is that we have a very special guest who's joining us for this Doc Talk Dr. Nicole Waligora-Davis

00:01:09.820 - 00:01:18.750

from the department of English and also a member of the steering committee of the task force is joining us to talk about a document or two today.

00:01:18.750 - 00:01:31.330

So welcome Dr. Waligora-Davis, thanks so much for taking the time to do this. Thank you Caleb, for inviting me. I really appreciate the chance to join this conversation

00:01:31.330 - 00:01:44.880

about some of the really amazing and robust examples of Rice's history that's available in our archives. So this is a great opportunity to talk a little bit more about what the slavery taskforce,

00:01:44.880 - 00:01:53.260

Slavery Segregation Racial Injustice Task Force has been unfolding. Thank you so much. And we appreciate all of the work

00:01:53.260 - 00:02:02.560

that you've been doing as a member of the steering committee which I have to say every time I look at the list of people that we have on the task force I sort of have to pinch myself

00:02:02.560 - 00:02:16.330

because it really is a dream team of faculty, staff, students, alumni. And it's I think one of the most rewarding parts of doing the work is getting to work and collaborate

00:02:16.330 - 00:02:25.670

with colleagues like yourself. So thank you for all the work you've been putting in. And I know this is only one of many hats that you wear at Rice these days,

00:02:25.670 - 00:02:34.040

including as a member of the, what's, the right word, the board the steering committee. Yes.

00:02:34.040 - 00:02:42.500

Steering committee of the Center for African and African American Studies which is getting off the ground here at Rice. And I wondered if you would be willing to share

00:02:42.500 - 00:02:54.330

just a little bit with our audience about some of the work that the center is doing. And I know recently there was a conference to launch a consortium of centers in the Houston area

00:02:54.330 - 00:03:03.410

around these topics. Yes, no, thank you. The center, as you know, is relatively new. We're only in our, this would be semester four.

00:03:03.410 - 00:03:15.540

It's hard to believe it's four semesters in but we are, you know, we may be 50 years later than many institutions in the forming of this center. But one thing is clear that the ambitions and plans

00:03:15.540 - 00:03:25.330

for the center are as bold and as visionary as our institution. And so what that has meant that in this short period of time we've not only rolled out

00:03:25.330 - 00:03:33.740

at undergraduate minor in African and African-American studies of graduate certificate program, but under the architecture of our director, Tony Pinn

00:03:33.740 - 00:03:48.350

has helped to afford a new vision for the center through the building of a consortium with other institutions in our metropolitan area. So this means a partnership between TSU, Prairie View

00:03:48.350 - 00:03:59.030

University of Houston and Texas around black studies. And what we're hoping to do is, leverage the strengths of each of our institutions and pool and share our resources.

00:03:59.030 - 00:04:10.390

This is a way for students at all of these institutions to be able to participate in activities across the campuses which was already possible, but people will be more aware of various events

00:04:10.390 - 00:04:21.130

that are happening. People will be aware of various classroom opportunities, research opportunities, internship opportunities, study abroad opportunities, and speaker opportunities

00:04:21.130 - 00:04:33.010

that are happening at all of the campuses. And so this is a really important and historic event for us to join together, to help make black studies particularly black studies in Houston

00:04:33.010 - 00:04:43.970

a kind of flagship for the nation, going forward. That's great, and I know the inaugural event of that consortium was when is it, a couple of weeks ago I think.

00:04:43.970 - 00:04:51.070

Was about two weeks ago. Yep just about two weeks ago we kicked off. Very exciting. And thank you for taking the time

00:04:51.070 - 00:05:03.730

with all of your responsibilities on campus to join us for this conversation. And as you know, for the Friday Doc Talks, we usually talk about some historical documents

00:05:03.730 - 00:05:15.180

that raise questions for us as researchers on the task force. And that maybe help us begin to answer some of the questions that fall under our charge as a task force.

00:05:15.180 - 00:05:26.920

And so I'm really curious to see what document you brought to discuss today. If, you wouldn't mind sharing it with us and what you're making.

00:05:27.800 - 00:05:43.410

I would love to, I'm gonna try to share my screen hopefully with some success, forgive me my zoom skills vary day-to-day, but I wanted to talk a little bit about a document

00:05:43.410 - 00:05:55.330

that I discovered in rereading the thresher. And I thought it was really for me a great opportunity to look at how our students on this campus have engaged and understood,

00:05:56.520 - 00:06:06.730

the curricular change is going on on the campus, how they have related to one another how they have engaged with larger political, social and cultural events happening in the world around them.

00:06:06.730 - 00:06:17.490

And so the thresher becomes a kind of nice bird's eye view to get a sense of the culture and climate of our institution historically. And so today, I mean, it was really really difficult Caleb

00:06:17.490 - 00:06:28.960

to actually just select one article. And I've really tried to just pin it to one. I will hopefully not point to too many other articles that are related to what I wanna talk about today

00:06:28.960 - 00:06:40.880

but I wanted to call attention to a specific one that was published in 1928 around an event, a dinner that was held in November, 1928. So I'm gonna spend a little bit of time,

00:06:40.880 - 00:06:52.600

a couple of minutes kind of contextualizing this a bit so that our listeners and participants today can have a better sense of why I actually think this article matters.

00:06:52.600 - 00:07:07.090

And what was truly a treasure trove of options to talk about today. And so the article I've wanted to talk about is, this one that was published in the thresher in November, 1928

00:07:07.090 - 00:07:21.950

and it's responding to an event that happened a banquet that was held by the Rice's Pre-Law Association. And so they're having this dinner on a cold I'm assuming Houston cold November evening

00:07:22.120 - 00:07:32.470

and they start the dinner with a letter. So imagine a gathering of people around the long dinner table sitting there waiting for the evening banquet to unfold.

00:07:32.470 - 00:07:42.020

And it begins with one of the organizers of the event reading a letter. A letter that is presumably authored by the board of trustees.

00:07:42.020 - 00:07:53.790

And so this is what you would have heard if you were in the room that night. Men of Rice the faculty and board of trustees appeal to you in the name of equality,

00:07:53.790 - 00:08:06.620

to you members of the Pre-Law Association do we present a proposal of serious import. Racial equality, legal since the emancipation proclamation, having now become social,

00:08:06.620 - 00:08:21.570

especially since the recent bolts of this solid south are the time propitious for such an experiment. Rice is now forced to consider accepting negro applications and will, unless the proposal receives drastic condemnation

00:08:21.570 - 00:08:35.110

from the Pre-Law Association and other active campus organizations. So you've got a group of male students sitting at the table, November 16, 1928 opening dinner with this letter read

00:08:35.450 - 00:08:49.580

by Carl Illig the organizer for this event. And you can imagine the response at this hand. And before I get too heavy into how people responded I wanna give you a little sense of the historical moment

00:08:49.580 - 00:09:03.370

that these people participating in this dinner we're in right. I want you to remember that 1912 is when our institute opens under the presidentship or stewardship of Edward Lovett

00:09:03.370 - 00:09:14.860

1914. So within just two years of opening up the university we're already in the midst of World War II, right. So 1914 to 1918, we're in the great war

00:09:14.860 - 00:09:25.050

in the middle of this great war you have the great migration going. We're talking about millions of African Americans relocating right from the south and moving northward,

00:09:25.050 - 00:09:36.640

westward all points out of the south. And taking advantage of new economic opportunities particularly those that were opened up by the war by the absence of a white male labor force

00:09:36.640 - 00:09:47.440

that is now abroad fighting in this international campaign for democracy. And then we also need to talk about what happens when the war ends.

00:09:47.440 - 00:09:59.500

Now, you can't remember this post-war moment without putting a kind of flag on the ground to signal 1919 and the Red Summer, right. The Red Summer is the moment when we saw 26 race rides

00:09:59.500 - 00:10:09.860

within a six month period in almost every major US city in the United States there were 76 blacks that were murdered from by lynching during this time period,

00:10:09.860 - 00:10:20.680

more than in a single year in any prior decade, right. So you've got the war is over and you've got 76 blacks lynched more than ever in any decade.

00:10:21.660 - 00:10:33.750

And then you have the failures to pass federal anti-lynching legislation 1922. And we also remember this historic moment for some of the most restrictive immigration laws today

00:10:33.750 - 00:10:45.910

in the history of the United States. Laws it didn't get overturned until 1964. And I'm talking here of the Quota Act of 1921. And of course the Johnson Reed Act of 1922

00:10:45.910 - 00:10:56.880

which ostensibly closed down our borders. And so you wanna get a sense if this is a moment where the nation is contracting becoming more and more insulated, right.

00:10:56.880 - 00:11:05.780

At the same time that it's involved in campaigns of imperialism, right. At the same time that Jim Crow is becoming more and more solidified,

00:11:05.780 - 00:11:19.490

at the same moment that African-American soldiers have returned having participated in World War I having fought for democracy abroad only to return home to a country from whom those privileges

00:11:19.490 - 00:11:32.300

and protections have been withheld. So this is the temperament of this evening of November 16, 1928. And just, I wanted to show you a little bit,

00:11:32.300 - 00:11:43.300

you know, for our audience participants to get a sense of just how bloody the aftermath of the war really was in the United States. We're also talking about a moment that marked

00:11:44.240 - 00:11:56.370

an increased black radicalism and militancy and forms of resistance among African-Americans. And I liked this moment really captioned here by James Weldon Johnson

00:11:56.370 - 00:12:07.830

who had gone to an event for the Brooklyn Civic Forum. And in his address to the forum, this interfaith organization he says the following. The negro came back from the great war

00:12:07.830 - 00:12:19.710

and that's World War I disillusioned. Thousands died for what to them is a lie, and the whole race galvanized into thought is going after what it is entitled to

00:12:19.710 - 00:12:34.860

and what is it going to get unlimited American democracy. So the same time that the country is closing down, right and Jim Crow, of course is deeply entrenched in our country. You have, African-Americans

00:12:34.860 - 00:12:47.400

becoming increasingly galvanized around the idea of we've got to find a way to really secure the privileges and protections that had already been legally legislated toward us.

00:12:47.400 - 00:12:58.890

They were in fact marked as citizens and should have had all the privileges of citizenship. And then we have this dinner. So why does the dinner matter?

00:12:58.890 - 00:13:08.130

Like I could pick a thousand different examples out of the archive. But why this one? And why talk about this even today, literally today?

00:13:08.130 - 00:13:21.590

And so I wanna sort of tease this out and I hope, you know, a conversation we'll sort of suss this out further 'cause these are just some ideas of things that grabbed me as I thought about this particular event.

00:13:25.630 - 00:13:36.510

Black myths. And so by black myth I mean not only, the myths surrounding black people which this letter does, or this article does a

00:13:36.510 - 00:13:48.130

kind of tremendous job in giving us real insight into the particular disposition toward blacks not only on our campus but I would argue in terms of a larger national climate

00:13:48.130 - 00:14:04.130

but also the kind of stain and stigma that myths can have and the implications that they have for other people. And so I wanna sort of latch on to the response. So when people sat at this table

00:14:04.130 - 00:14:17.350

and they heard Carl Illig read this proposal allegedly from the board of trustees that integration at Rice was going to happen in 1928 unless these student groups say otherwise.

00:14:17.350 - 00:14:28.470

Here was what the reporter said was how this proposal was met. It was met by the following kinds of remarks. "Down with the black apes," shouts the southern majority.

00:14:28.470 - 00:14:42.030

"Negros at Rice, hell no." "I'll be damned if I go to school with the negro," shouts, Billy Davidson frothing at the mouth with rage in his extemporaneous speech of fiery eloquence.

00:14:43.020 - 00:14:55.670

"Even if they are clean" adds diminutive Spencer Scott serious for the first time in his earthly existence. Right so this is a kind of snapshot

00:14:55.670 - 00:15:06.100

into the mood and climate of the campus. Right where the author is telling, the reporter is documenting for us, that this was a kind of overwhelming disposition

00:15:06.100 - 00:15:17.040

was absolutely against the possibility of considering integration in a moment that I told you nationally is marked by increasing molds of unrest and frustration

00:15:17.410 - 00:15:33.520

by black Americans in the wake of having shed their blood and their lives on the battlefield for democracy abroad. But I also want to signal another moment that I think is curious in the article.

00:15:33.520 - 00:15:50.040

So not only do we get a kind of insight into how many of the people who participated at this dinner felt but we also get an outlier view, a minority opinion that the report takes the time to document for us.

00:15:50.040 - 00:15:59.010

But as I to share this with you, I'm gonna pause for a moment because I also want to talk for a second about what the article itself tells us

00:15:59.010 - 00:16:08.920

about the author who wrote it. How we actually learn a little bit about his character disposition and about the larger disposition of the campus

00:16:08.920 - 00:16:20.530

and the nation toward the possibility of racial equality and social equality for black Americans. So this is what the reporter writes, one northerner had the audacity

00:16:20.530 - 00:16:32.050

to face the frenzy of a dozen orators. I think of it, a normal thing to do in this freelance of the quality he declared. And this gave rise to more harassing

00:16:32.050 - 00:16:42.230

and unprepared explosions of thought. The table became a seething mass of dishes, perspiring faces and wild tempers. Now I've marked in bring for you this next section

00:16:42.230 - 00:16:53.310

which I think is really crucial because in an article that is focused on the tenor of this evening as the students gathered and heard this alleged proposal

00:16:53.310 - 00:17:02.530

the reporter takes the time to document the response of the blacks in the room. And I find this really curious because if you count the number of lines

00:17:02.530 - 00:17:13.540

in the overall article proportionately or rather substantive kind of capturing or rather substantive amount of the article has been dedicated or given way

00:17:13.540 - 00:17:25.430

to try to chronicle the responses of blacks who were there. And so here's what it tells us. The negro waiters became excited. They began to gather around supposedly taking off the dishes

00:17:25.430 - 00:17:36.740

but vitally interested in the hectic oratorical struggle. There are enormous white teeth gleaned under thick lips and low brows as they slowly removed the dishes

00:17:36.740 - 00:17:49.900

so as to hear the outcome of that antagonistic verbal battle which had someone turned out the lights might've found expression and physical violence. Now is remarkable

00:17:50.770 - 00:18:03.410

because what the reporter is telling us is that in the room as this petition this alleged petition is being read, our black waitstaff right black support staff.

00:18:03.410 - 00:18:14.510

And I want us from woman to inhabit their position and how they would have received this proposal. I already gave you a sense of this stork, a moment, right. A moment of profound agitation and frustration

00:18:14.510 - 00:18:29.580

Marcus Garvey's UNIA has already been formed, Brotherhood of Blacks Sleeping Car Porters has thousands within its ranks right there. And so increasing efforts for blacks to unionize

00:18:29.580 - 00:18:40.940

and mobilize, to try to ensure their rights not only in the workplace, but in every sector of American social and political life. And here you have these waiters,

00:18:40.940 - 00:18:53.400

hearing the potential that Rice might integrate. How might they have received this, right? How might they have wanted to hear and eagerly listened to this possibility?

00:18:53.400 - 00:19:08.650

But yet the author betrays his own feeling toward the proposition in the use of phrenology thick lips and low brows, right. Gleaming white teeth, right.

00:19:08.650 - 00:19:20.270

This kind of atavistic man. That is how the black bodies getting characterized here that is showing that the author is very much sympathetic to the disposition of his colleagues

00:19:20.270 - 00:19:32.220

who early in the article, refer to them them being African-Americans as black apes, right. To the other students in the room who felt that it would be improper

00:19:32.220 - 00:19:40.800

and not acceptable to him to go to school with other black students. Because this is has becomes a question about their intelligence.

00:19:40.800 - 00:19:51.360

Also to the references to the questions of blacks and hygiene rights. So there's this underlying tenor that's not even so underlying, it's rather explicit here

00:19:51.360 - 00:20:03.820

that the author too very much sympathizes with the feelings and sentiments of those in the room who are absolutely against an incense by the possibility of Rice integrating in 1928.

00:20:05.860 - 00:20:22.670

But I also want us to think about what the article tells us about how blacks are seen and are understood in relationship to the fact that this conversation could happen in front of a black waitstaff

00:20:22.670 - 00:20:38.710

without any sense of shame or embarrassment. It could be held in such a way that even the waitstaff to the people present in the room become invisible, right. Their feelings are invisible

00:20:38.710 - 00:20:52.690

how they might've received this as a real possibility and potential as a moment of happiness and welcome anticipation completely dismissed. Utterly discounted, right.

00:20:52.690 - 00:21:06.240

So this is a really extraordinary event to my mind that really sets the stage for us to have a deeper understanding of white fragility and anxiety around blackness

00:21:06.570 - 00:21:19.890

in the United States in the 1920s. With Rice serving kind of as a microcosm for a deeper sentiment that was very rampant across our national landscape.

00:21:19.890 - 00:21:26.940

And I'm gonna end this although I was telling Professor McDaniel that I wouldn't even mention this although I was so tempted to.

00:21:26.940 - 00:21:41.800

That almost 30 years later another Rice student offers a different response to the question of racial integration. Speaking about the efforts on the part of the institution

00:21:42.330 - 00:21:56.620

through the charter soon to finally integrate, right. So now we're well more than 30 years, we're 40 years later sorry for the math era, 40 years later you have a student reporting in the thresher

00:21:56.620 - 00:22:11.540

in response to the integration of students on campus. Finally saying, in fact, they felt that integration of black students on campus remained a hoax. So 40 years later, the same use of the language of hoax

00:22:11.540 - 00:22:21.800

around integration. But in the cast of this student by the measure of the student in the 1960s, they were articulating a frustration

00:22:21.800 - 00:22:33.000

that the institution had yet failed to do enough to fully integrate its new students that it had been accepted to the campus. So it's a different kind of argument.

00:22:33.000 - 00:22:40.880

Now that the position of students on many students on campus was aligned with that single outlier articulated in this article.

00:22:40.880 - 00:22:56.900

This one northerner who had the audacity to face the frenzy of a dozen orators. By the late 1960s, there's a deeper effort, more of a particular kind of sway on campus

00:22:56.900 - 00:23:09.240

toward the importance of having black students and having a diverse applied faculty and student body on our campus. And so I thought it was really, really notable

00:23:09.240 - 00:23:23.490

that the language of the hoax used around integration appears within 40 years of each other. But I'm open to other ideas and thoughts and conversations that people might have about this particular dinner.

00:23:23.490 - 00:23:34.320

'Cause I found it really a stunning moment as these students play a prank on one another but the prank actually produces a kind of moment of Bedlam at this dinner.

00:23:35.190 - 00:23:48.740

That of course I'm sure had been anticipated and was part of the humor of the joke, but it's a humor that is taken at the expense of the blacks in the room and frankly so.

00:23:51.390 - 00:24:01.310

Thank you so much. That was a powerful presentation and such a fascinating source I agree. And you know, it's also interesting to think about,

00:24:01.310 - 00:24:13.460

you know, what were the organizers of this dinner the student organizers of this dinner thinking or not thinking, you know, as they planned this hoax and instigated this debate.

00:24:16.620 - 00:24:27.700

I think what you're calling our attention to is what the impacts of that would have been to people in the room. I think it's also, setting it in the context of the time,

00:24:27.700 - 00:24:39.010

really important to highlight as you did, that there were some dissenting voices in this discussion. I noticed in the article that when the organization held a vote

00:24:39.010 - 00:24:50.630

at the end of this debate, it was 14 to five. So the, the southerners prevailed against the idea of integration. But, you know, I'm always attentive to that

00:24:50.630 - 00:25:03.910

because it does raise the question of, what was possible or thinkable, in a particular moment. And when you point to the rising black radicalism that was happening across the nation at the time,

00:25:03.910 - 00:25:12.730

and I noticed the article also mentioned the breaking of the solid south, which I'm assuming it was. Yes, I'm glad you said that. Yes, absolutely.

00:25:12.730 - 00:25:23.840

It's a big thing. A referenced to the presidential election and, you know some states in the south going for the Republican candidate, Herbert Hoover.

00:25:23.840 - 00:25:39.850

And so there are these possibilities in the here and maybe the program committee that planned this discussion didn't really think of them very seriously. But at the same time, there were people in the room

00:25:39.850 - 00:25:55.650

who were vocalizing this, this opposing view that this was a moment to embrace the ideals of democracy. And if the United States was a liberal democracy than that, then that should mean an end to segregation

00:25:55.650 - 00:26:09.210

at a place like Rice. So sometimes I think, you know, a kind of simplistic reading of historic evidence like this is to, you'll hear people say, well, that was then this is now,

00:26:09.210 - 00:26:23.330

people, students then were, you know, a product of their time. And, but, you can find dissenting voices even then. And so it's not as though it was impossible

00:26:23.330 - 00:26:32.900

for Rice students to think differently. And I think that's spot on, right. That the minority opinion is here and that the reporter did take the time to highlight it.

00:26:32.900 - 00:26:45.970

And I love this word of the audacity of this northerner. And the audacity here for me is sort of doubled because it's not only the audacity of being willing to stand up as the minority viewpoint

00:26:45.970 - 00:27:01.720

in front of a room of foaming at the mouth angry people but also the audacity of the idea, right. In a moment when it was not the dominant idea. So that audaciousness is operating at multiple registers.

00:27:01.720 - 00:27:11.950

And I think that's really important to signal as I also think is the occasion of the event. I don't think that we're supposed to miss the fact that this prank was played by students

00:27:11.950 - 00:27:23.980

who are interested in pursuing careers in the law. And we understand that Jim Crow is very much not just about social customs and etiquettes but very much sediment included in the law.

00:27:23.980 - 00:27:38.300

And it would take the 1964 Civil Rights Act to make, to change the Jim Crow system legislatively. And so I think it's important that these students at the level of their career interests

00:27:38.300 - 00:27:51.880

are being appealed to think about these questions of equality. Which quickly devolve into, to a kind of emotional response as opposed to really staying at the level of reason,

00:27:51.880 - 00:28:05.450

rationality and law, right. Because as the article says this already is the law. Yeah, no, that was something I noticed as well, just from, as a historian of the civil war era

00:28:05.450 - 00:28:15.700

and reconstruction. One of the arguments that in particular historian Kate Masur at Northwestern University has made is that you know, during reconstruction,

00:28:15.700 - 00:28:28.140

even as these new constitutional amendments were being adopted that guaranteed equal protection under the law at the very same time you saw even Republicans

00:28:28.140 - 00:28:38.050

who supported ostensibly legal equality, raising the specter of social equality. That's right. And the phrase of social equality

00:28:38.050 - 00:28:51.930

and the idea of that kind of equality of mingling and integration was sort of raised as a red flag. And you saw that in this article, even in 1928 you know, that emancipation created legal equality

00:28:51.930 - 00:29:04.210

but are we really gonna go so far as to embrace social equality? And that's the suggestion that leads to all of this tumult. So fascinating source.

00:29:04.210 - 00:29:16.570

As I read this article, I couldn't help but remember a book that comes out in 1912 James Weldon Johnson, "Autobiography of an Ex-Colored Man." Where he recounts this moment on a train

00:29:16.570 - 00:29:26.450

where our protagonist is traveling on the train car and he's listening to a debate between southerners and a northerner over this question of racial equality

00:29:26.450 - 00:29:40.370

that quickly devolves into a discussion of social equality which then devolves into the microphysics of the home into this question of interracial marriage. And so that even those who were in support of,

00:29:40.370 - 00:29:51.050

in the debate, even those who weren't supportive the idea of racial equality, as soon as the language of social equality, soon as the possibility of intermarriages is raised

00:29:51.050 - 00:29:58.350

everything get shut down. And their politics change. And so it is really crucial that this article is leveraging that.

00:29:58.350 - 00:30:10.260

That it becomes this emotional thing It becomes deeply personalized and what the law says no longer seems to matter. Yeah, now I think that's, and we see that

00:30:10.260 - 00:30:27.830

even when we get to the 1960s in the discussion about, integrating Rice, the same kinds of themes come up about, you know social mixing among students at the school. So thank you for calling our attention to this.

00:30:27.830 - 00:30:39.110

You know, it's a difficult document to read but I think such an important one to grapple with it. And even though, and the attendees can believe us or not, we didn't plan this.

00:30:39.110 - 00:30:51.510

I didn't know which document you were gonna talk about but the one that I wanted to discuss today I think pairs really well with this document because the pre-law banquet read a letter

00:30:51.510 - 00:31:03.250

that was purportedly from the board of trustees, right. And then at the end, they realized that now it was a hoax. The board of trustees was not proposing the integration of Rice in 1928.

00:31:03.250 - 00:31:15.180

And what I wanted to look at was, some minutes kept by the actual board of trustees. Oh fantastic. Not long after this pre-law banquet in 1941.

00:31:15.640 - 00:31:25.410

And so let me pull up those minutes so that our audience can see them. And while I'm doing that, let me remind you in the audience that if you have a question about the first document

00:31:25.410 - 00:31:34.930

or anything we've been saying, or this next document you can either use the Q&A function below or drop your question in the chat. And we'll be sure to leave some time at the end

00:31:34.930 - 00:31:48.130

to address questions that you might have. So this is from the Woodson Research Center. And as you can see at the top of this large ledger book which is a TypeScript page.

00:31:48.130 - 00:32:02.570

We are looking at the minutes of the William Marsh, the William M. Rice Institute for the advancement of literature, science and art. So this is from the era when Rice University

00:32:02.620 - 00:32:13.450

did not yet exist. It was the William Marsh Rice Institute for the advancement of literature, science and art. And the context for this particular set of minutes in 1941

00:32:14.410 - 00:32:29.710

was the expiration of the original charter that incorporated the William Marsh Rice Institute. So the very first charter of the Institute was signed in 1891 by William Marsh Rice himself

00:32:29.730 - 00:32:44.130

and the trustees that he identified in that charter. One of whom was James A. Baker who remained a member of the board here in 1941 when this discussion takes place

00:32:44.130 - 00:32:59.090

even though he would actually pass away later that year in August of 1941. So this is sort of the closing moments of James A. Baker's association with the board of the trustees,

00:32:59.090 - 00:33:12.250

which over a long period of time did a lot to contribute to the expansion of the institution and the evolution of the institute into the university that it would become.

00:33:12.250 - 00:33:27.090

So, as I said, the original charter in 1891 was for a 50 year term. So the rules that were governing the charter in 1891 would only last until 1941.

00:33:27.090 - 00:33:38.490

And so that left the board in 1941 with some decisions to make about renewing that charter how long to renew it for. And of course it was a natural moment to think about

00:33:38.490 - 00:33:51.850

whether there was anything in the original charter that the board would want to revisit or address. And, you know, as a sidebar here I think it was interesting in the article

00:33:51.850 - 00:34:03.180

that you presented Professor Waligora-Davis that there was a northerner in the room of this pre-law banquet, because the original charter said that the institute was created

00:34:03.180 - 00:34:15.380

for the white inhabitants of Houston. But of course, by very early on in the history of the Rice Institute, at least one part of that charter requirement

00:34:15.380 - 00:34:23.320

had already been observed only in the breach, because there were students who were not just from the Houston area who enrolled at the institute

00:34:23.320 - 00:34:38.420

including we can imagine this northerner. And of course, we also have evidence as well that some students who would have been considered or maybe would have even identified themselves as nonwhite

00:34:38.420 - 00:34:49.810

in the early 20th century Asian-American students or Hispanic students. Also, we have records of their enrollment in the Rice Institute in these years.

00:34:49.810 - 00:34:57.790

And I noticed that there was a student with the last name of Garza and the Pre-law banquet article that you talked about as well. So there were parts of the charter

00:34:57.790 - 00:35:08.870

that had already been sort of, what's the word fudged a little bit, I guess, by the board of trustees. But there were other parts of the charter

00:35:08.870 - 00:35:21.890

that the institute had stuck to religiously. And one of them was the fact that the institute was supposed to be free. So the original charter in 1891

00:35:21.890 - 00:35:34.450

said that the library and the laboratories and the resources of the institute would create for the advancement of literature, science and art. We're supposed to be free,

00:35:34.450 - 00:35:48.750

to the inhabitants of Houston. But here in 1941 as the board is considering the renewal of the charter the trustees receive a communication from Captain Baker

00:35:48.750 - 00:36:02.010

James A. Baker, April 15th, 1941. And you can see here in the margin of the minutes that the communication was in regard to tuition at the Rice Institute.

00:36:02.010 - 00:36:17.480

So as we read on, we find that Baker had put on the table before the board of trustees whether it would be a good occasion to revisit, the question of tuition at Rice.

00:36:17.480 - 00:36:27.940

Particularly because, you know, this is if we set the context again, nationally 1941 the nation still just beginning to emerge from the great depression,

00:36:27.940 - 00:36:38.090

wouldn't really fully emerge from the great depression until after World War II. And so this was also, you know, even though the institute was a very well endowed,

00:36:38.090 - 00:36:49.280

a concern for any private corporation, including the Rice Institute how to make ends meet and Baker refers back to his earliest history as William Marsh Rice's lawyer

00:36:49.280 - 00:36:59.770

who had been engaged in all of the litigation after Rice's murder to ensure that, that the institute would get the money that Rice had promised.

00:36:59.770 - 00:37:10.400

And so Baker says, "recalling as I do, "the probate of William Marsh Rice's will "the expenses incident there too "the very substantial reductions in the rate of return

00:37:10.400 - 00:37:21.570

"from the institute's investments during recent years "I have from time to time considered "whether or not the Institute might not secure some relief "through the courts."

00:37:22.660 - 00:37:35.920

And so following this thought he arranges for a lawyer that he knows Mr. Dillon Anderson to consider carefully whether they can find from the law books, anything that would justify the trustees

00:37:35.920 - 00:37:45.660

in making an effort to get some relief in court. And so they've gone into he says, he reports in these minutes, they've gone into the question very thoroughly,

00:37:45.660 - 00:38:00.810

and they've concluded that they think in fact, there is some legal grounds for the board of trustees. And on the next page, as we go on here, we're gonna see the letter letterhead from Bake Botts,

00:38:00.810 - 00:38:11.050

Andrews and Wharton. Baker Botts of course a very prominent law firm in Houston history very closely connected to the Rice Institute in these years.

00:38:11.050 - 00:38:24.220

And the employer of Mr. Dillon Anderson, who writes to Captain Baker about his question. And Anderson says, he wants to confirm a recent conversation

00:38:24.220 - 00:38:36.610

with regard to the possibility that the Rice Institute might on application to the state district court obtain authority to charge tuition. This, as you realize, would involve a departure in degree

00:38:36.610 - 00:38:45.520

from the provisions of the original trust instrument, providing for the establishment and maintenance of the institute. And then he quotes from the specific paragraph

00:38:45.520 - 00:39:00.260

in that 1891 charter that talks about the library, reading room, scientific department et cetera, instruction are to be free and subject to such restrictions

00:39:00.260 - 00:39:09.660

only as in the judgment of the board of trustees will conduce to the good order and honor of the set institute. And then Anderson gives us his opinion as a lawyer,

00:39:09.660 - 00:39:21.370

he's been asked to investigate this question and he says, based on a consideration of the authorities that the court may legally permit such a departure from one of the specific provisions of a will or trust

00:39:22.210 - 00:39:31.700

where it is necessary to accomplish the general purposes of the trust. So he's kind of laying out what the legal argument would have to be

00:39:31.700 - 00:39:39.430

if we went to court and we asked to do this what argument would we have to make? We'd have to make the argument that, the original purpose of the trust

00:39:39.430 - 00:39:51.520

was to create an institute that would do these things. And if the board has decided it can't do those things without charging tuition then they'll have a solid legal argument to make

00:39:51.520 - 00:40:03.420

that they can do that. And in fact, Anderson says, you know despite Baker's concern, he thinks that they'll have a pretty wide latitude with the court

00:40:03.420 - 00:40:15.310

that the existing law about trusts, such as this one meant that you didn't even have to show that that the trust would fail entirely, if this provision weren't changed.

00:40:15.310 - 00:40:26.930

But you just had to show that, that there's ample evidence that changing this provision would help carry out the original purposes of the trust. And so he says it would be necessary for us

00:40:26.930 - 00:40:39.070

to demonstrate to the court that the general purpose of Mr. Rice was to found an endowed institution to perform a function in the community that cannot now adequately be performed

00:40:39.070 - 00:40:51.320

without providing for some additional revenue from the only available source, to wit a tuition charge. So that's the reply of Dillon Anderson. And you can see in the minutes here that the,

00:40:51.320 - 00:41:00.970

the secretary for the board has literally pasted this letter into, this is our, you know, now we copy and paste and it's kind of, you know, the metaphor has been lost

00:41:00.970 - 00:41:14.050

but they literally pasted a copy of this letter into the minute books. And the trustees we learned authorized Captain Baker to proceed with investigating this further.

00:41:14.920 - 00:41:28.070

But with the understanding that before the suit is actually filed to do this, he would notify the trustees in advance of its filing. Now, it's interesting that as we go on

00:41:28.070 - 00:41:45.380

through the minute books to find out what happened we actually find out that this went nowhere. Okay in the end, the board decided not to file a lawsuit to change that part of the charter.

00:41:45.380 - 00:42:01.590

And instead it simply passed a resolution later that month to extend the institute's charter for another 50 years. So it was expiring in 1941 and it's gonna be extended another 50 years to 1991.

00:42:01.590 - 00:42:12.050

And we could read the resolutions but basically the important point is that they did not ultimately decide to do what, according to Captain Baker

00:42:12.050 - 00:42:20.150

and the lawyer that he had engaged in looking at this question, they could have done they could have at that moment gone to the court. And of course, as we know

00:42:20.150 - 00:42:36.550

that's ultimately two decades later, what Rice did do. They did go to a court and filed a suit to change not only that part of the charter about tuition to remove the word free from the charter

00:42:36.550 - 00:42:49.760

but also to admit black students for the first time and remove the prohibition on white students. So what do you make of that? I mean, Professor Waligora-Davis in 1941,

00:42:49.760 - 00:43:00.500

the board was was contemplating changes to its original charter. I'm stunned actually, you know, it's not something I expected

00:43:00.500 - 00:43:10.510

that you would be sharing with us at all this afternoon although it makes good sense given the economic pressures of that historic moment. And I'm equally stunned

00:43:10.510 - 00:43:20.800

by the decision to proceed per usual. Because I can imagine that, to have arrived at the point where, it was even a topic of conversation

00:43:20.800 - 00:43:32.300

knowing that this had been one of the governing principles of Rice and the idea of making our institution affordable and accessible remains a governing principle

00:43:32.300 - 00:43:42.360

of this institution. It's remarkable that it went nowhere, that they were able to find I'm assuming other alternative points of,

00:43:42.360 - 00:43:51.430

or other alternative assets to leverage or secured to better bolster the financial projections of the institution. But I love how you bring this up

00:43:51.430 - 00:44:01.200

because there are these points of inflections, right in the histories of institutions where, things can change. And there are these opportunities,

00:44:01.200 - 00:44:12.510

again like that conversation in 1928 why not contemplate a different future? Why not make the case in a court of law that to not have a diverse student body

00:44:12.510 - 00:44:27.810

to not have a diverse campus goes against the mission of creating a really significant, impactful and state of the art school of literature and sciences, right.

00:44:27.810 - 00:44:36.920

Yeah, I mean, it's kind of interesting as much more for what they don't consider and which parts of the charter, they don't look into seeing about changing.

00:44:36.920 - 00:44:48.200

And we might say that on the one hand, you know and this is in 1941, this is, you know 13 years before Brown V board of education, before World War II,

00:44:48.200 - 00:45:00.270

before the integration of the armed forces. So it's a moment when we might say that, you know it would have been extremely surprising on some level have the board of trustees

00:45:00.270 - 00:45:09.750

decided to take steps on this. And in fact, that's what powered this hoax that you talked about in 1928. The idea, the very idea that the board of trustees

00:45:09.750 - 00:45:17.360

would suggest this in 1928 was met with this shock and outrage. And so placing it in that context maybe makes it not surprising

00:45:17.360 - 00:45:32.670

but at the same time, the presence of those dissenting views at the pre-law banquet mean that, it's not as though the idea of integration was not in the air in the 1920s or even in the 1940s.

00:45:33.140 - 00:45:45.340

And I wanted to share, since you shared and I'm gonna break my own rule of showing a second document since you shared something from the Rice Thresher just a couple of years after,

00:45:45.340 - 00:46:03.410

this minutes that we've been looking at in April, 1943, there was an article on the front page of the Rice Thresher about an African-American speaker on campus. He was a preacher at the Methodist BeBee Tabernacle

00:46:03.410 - 00:46:16.690

in Houston and he addressed the Methodist Student Union on campus on the subject of race tension in Houston. And he in this article talks about the problems

00:46:16.690 - 00:46:31.520

that African-Americans faced in a segregated Houston. He talked about some of the myths as you were describing them about black culture. He says that the use of the n-word in Houston

00:46:31.520 - 00:46:40.870

was one of the greatest grievances that his community faced it's suggested something dirty and filthy to uses his phrase.

00:46:40.870 - 00:46:49.780

He resented the way that, the race of an African-American criminal was played up in the newspapers. He said, quote, "whenever a colored person commits a crime

00:46:49.780 - 00:47:00.810

"the fact is emphasized by such headlines as "John Jones negro tried for murder." "This associates innocent law-abiding negroes "with the criminal,

00:47:00.810 - 00:47:10.720

"where the race of a white offender is never mentioned." So this is in 1943. And speaking of this kind of rising radicalism that you were discussing earlier

00:47:10.720 - 00:47:27.800

where there is an African-American speaker on campus. And he also speaks plainly on the question of segregation. He says, quote, "most segregation is discrimination." Most segregation is discrimination.

00:47:27.800 - 00:47:38.580

So this is, you know, two years after the 1941 charter but it does kind of suggest that it's not that it was outside the realm of anyone's imagination

00:47:38.580 - 00:47:53.030

to describe integration as a fair and just decision and to describe the segregation of Rice Institute as discrimination. But it was the choice of the board of trustees

00:47:53.030 - 00:48:03.900

and the way that they thought about these things not to see that as something that was critical to the advancement of the institute. So I find that interesting, and, you know

00:48:03.900 - 00:48:17.110

looking ahead to the charter trial I think these minutes give us a preview of the somewhat limited grounds on which the lawyers for the Rice University in the 60s

00:48:17.110 - 00:48:29.400

made their argument. You know, just as the lawyer advised in 1941 to change a trust, what they had to show is that it was not possible to carry out the purpose of the trust

00:48:29.400 - 00:48:37.090

without making these changes. And so a lot of the argument in the 60s occurred on the same grounds. They just sort of said narrowly that,

00:48:37.090 - 00:48:48.010

the purpose of William Marsh Rice was to create this great institution of higher learning to create a first rate university. And whereas it might not have been the case in 1941

00:48:48.010 - 00:48:54.920

according to the board of trustees that integration was essential to that. By the time you get to the 60s, the board is saying you know,

00:48:54.920 - 00:49:03.550

we can't get grants from the federal government. We can't recruit faculty to campus unless we do this. So now the situation has changed and we can't carry out the purposes

00:49:03.550 - 00:49:16.940

of our charter and our trust without making this change. But, what it kind of obscures is, what the choices that were being made in those first 50 years were

00:49:16.940 - 00:49:29.310

to abide by some parts of the charter strictly, and to let other parts of the charter be a little bit more flexible. No, I mean, I think you're spot on in that, right.

00:49:29.310 - 00:49:41.820

I mean, these are deliberate and strategic choices. They're very calculated choices. And as you noted that example from 1928, there are other faces and voices in the audience, right.

00:49:41.820 - 00:49:52.240

There is Garza who is Garza right. And as you say, the population of the student body does have students of color on it may not have black students

00:49:52.240 - 00:50:05.350

but there are other students of color on it. And so how do we account for this? How do we account for the decision to bind the universities, to some components of the charter

00:50:05.350 - 00:50:16.610

and to show greater elasticity toward others or kind of blind eye toward others. And I think it, you know, it makes sense to kind of to me illustrates some of the differences

00:50:16.610 - 00:50:25.740

since we started with the pre-law banquet. Some of the differences between the ways that, lawyers approach questions from the way that historians approach questions.

00:50:25.740 - 00:50:37.750

You know, and the work that doing on the task force to understand the history of slavery segregation and racial injustice, is in some ways able to take a wider view

00:50:37.750 - 00:50:50.120

of some of these questions than the lawyers could because they had to make these determinations about the intention of the founder, about the nature of the trust from a legal perspective.

00:50:50.120 - 00:51:04.330

You know, what would make the winning argument in court that would enable the board to do what it needed to do at that moment in time. But that kind of narrows the question in certain ways

00:51:04.430 - 00:51:14.840

that historians might want to understand better. You know, what are the the choices that are being made? And what's the context in which those choices are being made?

00:51:14.840 - 00:51:26.660

And art is as narrowly focused on what are the historical arguments that will win? What are the arguments that will convince the court to let the board of trustees take these steps?

00:51:26.660 - 00:51:36.450

I mean, I think you're right. I mean, you know, to the extent that lawyers are bound within certain kinds of legal restrictions, you know making the case, as you have noted

00:51:36.450 - 00:51:51.320

that a diverse student and faculty body would enhance the educational experience has actually make possible, but kind of distinguished academic education

00:51:51.320 - 00:52:02.240

that was part of or actually intrinsic to the mission of Rice is a much higher hurdle to make in the 40s than it is by the 60s.

00:52:02.240 - 00:52:15.060

And certainly of course, even today. Right and so, but it could have been waged. It probably would have not met with much success. Right, right, yeah.

00:52:15.060 - 00:52:27.560

Yeah well, I don't wanna take up all of the time in case we have five more minutes. If there's any questions from the audience, again you can put in the chat or in the Q&A any questions.

00:52:28.500 - 00:52:39.300

And while we're waiting on that, I wanna say thank you again, Professor Waligora-Davis, for joining us today, this has been a treat. And I told Alex, you know

00:52:39.300 - 00:52:49.390

that he was gonna have to watch his back because if you came on, then his seat might be in jeopardy now, just kidding, but he'll be back.

00:52:49.390 - 00:53:02.260

I don't think that this can ever could be possible but I really appreciate the real, the privilege and this occasion to be able to talk about these documents to just share this conversation with you about them

00:53:02.260 - 00:53:13.820

because there's so much here for us to talk about in terms of thinking backwards about the history of this institution and thinking forward about the future

00:53:13.820 - 00:53:24.200

that we can walk into as a consequence of that history. Absolutely, I hope you'll come back and join us for another Doc Talk as well. And I hope that all of you in the audience

00:53:24.200 - 00:53:37.790

will be back next Friday at noon for our next Doc Talk. And remember that you can find podcast episodes that contain recordings of past Doc Talks on our website at taskforce.rice.edu.

00:53:37.790 - 00:53:39.340

Have a great weekend, everyone.