The Negro in Chicago: A Study of Race Relations and a Race Riot. Chicago Commission on Race Relations
save, for you haven't any place to spend it.
7. Yes. Better homes. Spend money anywhere you want to, go anywhere you have money enough to go; don't go out very much but like to know I can where and when I want to.
8. Have chance to make more money, but it is all spent to keep family up.
9. At home did not earn much money and did not have any left to go what few places colored people were allowed to go. Here, Negroes can have whatever they want.
10. Don't have to worry about how you are going to live. More money earned affords anything wanted.
11. Have more comforts in the home that could not have at home; more conveniences here. Wages sons earn make it possible to have all that is wanted.
12. Yes. Better houses and more enjoyment.
13. Yes. I live in larger house and have more conveniences. Can take more pleasure; have more leisure time.
14. Yes. Better houses and more amusement. More time of my own, better furniture and food.
15. Yes. Better houses and furniture. More pleasures because of shorter hours of work, giving me more time.
16. What little was earned at home was used for food and clothing. Here, earn more, have more to spend; now and then put some in the bank, and can spend some for pleasure without strain or inconvenience.
17. Yes. More places to go, parks and playgrounds for children, and no difference made between white and colored. Houses more convenient here.
18. Have more money to spend but when you have to live in houses where landlord won't fix up you can't have much comfort. Go no place for pleasure, but enjoy the chance of earning more money.
19. No comment.
20. Have money to get whatever is desired. Live in a better house and can go places denied at home. All the family are perfectly satisfied and are happier than they have ever been.
21. Live in better house than ever lived in. Never had the comforts furnished here. Some houses there had no water closets; only had cistern and wells out in the yard.
Question: Are you advising friends to come to Chicago?
Answers:
1. Yes. People down there don't really believe the things we write back, I didn't believe myself until I got here.
2. No. I am not going to encourage them to come, for they might not make it, then I would be blamed.
3. Yes. If I think they will work.
4. Some of them, those who I think would appreciate the advantages here.
5. No. Not right now, come here and get to work, strikes come along, they're out of work. Come if they want to, though.
6. Yes. I have two sisters still in Lexington. I am trying to get them to come up here. They can't understand why I stay here, but they'll see if they come.
7. Yes. People here don't realize how some parts of the South treat colored folks; poor white trash were awful mean where we came from; wish all the colored folks would come up here where you ain't afraid to breathe.
8. Yes. Want friend and husband to come; also sister and family who want her to come back that they may see how she looks before they break up and come. Youngest son begs mother never to think of going back South. Oldest son not so well satisfied when first came, but since he is working, likes it a little better.
Only a few migrants were found who came on free transportation, and many of these had friends in Chicago before they came. Few expressed a desire to return.
VII. EFFORTS TO CHECK MIGRATION
The withdrawal of great numbers of Negroes, both because of the migration and because of military service, left large gaps in the industries of the South dependent upon Negro labor. Thousands of acres of rice and sugar cane went to waste. The turpentine industry of the Carolinas and the milling interests of Tennessee were hard pressed for labor. Cotton-growing was much affected, especially in the delta region of Mississippi. The situation became critical, presenting a real economic problem. Organized efforts were made, and at times extreme measures were taken, to start a return movement. A report was circulated that on one day in the winter of 1919 in Chicago, 17,000 Negroes were counted in a bread line. The "horrors of northern winters" were played up as they had been during the migration.
The press throughout the country was used to spread broadcast the South's needs, its kind treatment of Negroes, its opportunities, and its growing change of heart on the question of race relations. Newspaper articles from sections of the North and South carried about the same story. The Chicago Tribune said in a conspicuous headline: "Louisiana Wants Negroes to Return." Other such headlines were: Washington Post—"South Needs Negroes. Try to Get Labor for Their Cotton Fields. Tell of Kind Treatment"; New York Evening Sun—"To Aid Negro Return"; Philadelphia Press—"South Is Urging Negroes to Return. Many Districts Willing to Pay Fare of Those Who Come Back"; Memphis Commercial Appeal—"South Is Best for Negro, Say Mississippians. Colored People Found Prosperous and Happy."
Though such reports were widely circulated throughout the North, the actual efforts of agencies from the South seeking the return of Negro labor centered around Chicago. This was due largely to the fact that from the southern states most acutely in need the drift during the migration had been to Chicago, and because the increase of Chicago's Negro population had been so great.
Immediately following the riots in Chicago and Washington, rumors gained wide currency that hundreds of migrants were leaving for sections of the South. So strong was the belief in the truth of this report that a Chicago newspaper telegraphed the governors of southern states inquiring the number of Negroes they needed. Agents of the South, including representatives of the Tennessee Association of Commerce, the Department of Immigration of Louisiana, the Mississippi Welfare League, and the Southern Alluvial Land Association, visited northern cities with a view to providing means for the return of Negroes. Although free transportation was offered, together with promises of increased wages and better living conditions, the various commissions were disappointed.
Their interviews with Negroes living in Chicago revealed a determination not to return to conditions they had left two years before. To offset this objection, two Chicago Negroes and one white man were taken to Mississippi by a representative of the Mississippi Welfare League to make an investigation. They visited several delta towns, traveling for the most part in automobiles and interviewing farmers and laborers. They reported in substance as follows:
Railroad accommodations for Negroes were adequate and uniform, irrespective of locality; treatment accorded Negro passengers by railroad officials was courteous throughout. Public-school terms were nine months in the city and eight months in the country for white and colored alike, and the strongest possible human ties between planter and worker exist. … In no instance were Negroes not given the freest use of sidewalks, streets, and thoroughfares and we were unable to find any trace of friction of any kind between the races.
An effort was then made by the Chicago Urban League to ascertain the precise state of affairs. Its southern representative questioned hundreds of Negroes living in the South, regarding improved relationships. Answers to this query were all about the same. Some of them are quoted:
There has been no change. Lincoln League organized in this city has been denounced by the white newspapers as a movement that will cause trouble, and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, and the Urban Leagues of various cities have been called "strife breeders and meddlers in southern affairs"; Jim Crow accommodations are just the same as ever. If there is any change for the better, I can't see it.
It is ridiculous for any Negro to say he finds conditions better here. Don't you remember that Negroes answering an invitation to meet the Welfare Committee