Springfield, Ill., was the home of Abraham Lincoln, the "Great Emancipator," the bicentennial of whose birth will be celebrated on Feb. 12 next year. Largely forgotten, however, is that 100 years ago this Aug. 14, as the city anticipated the Lincoln centennial, Springfield became the scene of a deadly and destructive race riot that shocked the nation - and launched the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People). Clarence Lang is a professor of history and African-American studies and teaches the history of civil rights. He was interviewed by News Bureau social sciences editor Craig Chamberlain.
What was the state of racial relations in the U.S. at the time of the 1908 riot?
Black political gains made during Reconstruction, following the Civil War, had been eroded and replaced by racial segregation, or "Jim Crow." This was primarily in the South, where most African Americans lived, but anti-black sentiments were widespread throughout the U.S. in every area of public life. With the end of slavery, black people theoretically were able to compete with whites, economically and otherwise, in a way that hadn't been possible before. And because of conditions in the South, they were migrating to northern communities, though not on the same scale as they would later. So white northerners, as well as southerners, were asking, "What do we do with the Negro?" The question was often settled in the streets with buckshot, nooses and torches.
Was there anything that made Springfield especially ripe for this kind of incident?
Springfield was a commercial hub that attracted plenty of migrants, including a sizable black population for that time. Many of the residents, both black and white, were southerners figuring out a racial etiquette in a state that was not as racially restrictive as, say, Alabama or Mississippi. There was competition for jobs, and a perceived threat of black power at the polls. There were also European immigrants trying to define themselves against African Americans. And then, too, Springfield in those days had a reputation for lawlessness, whether rightly or wrongly. In many urban communities, African Americans often became the target of white anxieties about crime and vice. Springfield was no exception.
What happened and what were the consequences for Springfield?
Police arrested two black men in separate incidents involving attacks on white residents, including an alleged rape of a white woman. A large group of whites gathered at the jail and demanded that the sheriff hand the suspects over, but discovered that the prisoners had been moved to another city. Basically, the crowd, eventually numbering in the thousands, then turned on the black community. They burned entire blocks of homes, destroyed businesses, and hanged and mutilated two black men before the state militia put down the rioting. In the aftermath, there was an exodus of black residents, since many hadn't just lost their houses but also their jobs. Probably the saddest part is that the woman who had alleged rape later retracted her story.
How common were these kinds of occurrences at this time and later? And what was the usual end result for blacks in these communities?
The lynching of blacks, and mob violence against their communities, was a common occurrence during this period. In many other communities, the allegation of rape or some other outrage committed by a black person led to exactly the same kind of violence that occurred in Springfield, but with this difference: The black residents were literally expelled, and told that they were not welcome to come back, especially after dark. This is how we get the emergence of all-white "sundown towns," chronicled a few years ago in an important book by James Loewen. He spends a lot of time discussing Illinois, actually, which is an eye-opener for a lot of people.
In the aftermath of the riot, a conference was held on the date of the Lincoln centennial - and in Springfield no less - and from that the NAACP was born. Why do you think this particular incident had the effect of bringing this about?
Springfield drew so much national attention because it was the most jolting riot to occur in the North by that time, and it happened in the state capital of the "Land of Lincoln" - on the eve of his centennial, no less. That was too great an irony to ignore.
Why do you think this history is largely ignored or forgotten?
For many people, the South has functioned as the place where we concentrate all of our guilt and misgivings about race relations in this nation. The North's own history of racial inequality and violence gets lost in that kind of narrative. Also, for a lot of people in the post-Civil Rights era, the term "race riot" immediately conjures the image of black youth looting stores and shooting at police, rather than of white mobs rampaging through black neighborhoods in the Midwest.
What are the living legacies of the Springfield riot today?
In addition to helping launch the nation's premier civil rights organization, I think Springfield and its residents have made a healthy effort to confront this history. Also, consider that Illinois has produced two of the three African Americans to serve in the U.S. Senate since the end of Reconstruction, Carol Moseley Braun and Barack Obama, and the latter launched his presidential bid in Springfield. So in one sense, we can view Springfield as a symbol of both black tragedy and triumph in this state.