Gender-Affirming Care from the 1950s in Britain through the lens of Roberta Cowell

Roberta Elizabeth Marshall Cowell (1918-2011) was the frist known British trans woman to undergo gender-affirming surgery in 1951. Sammie Casper-Mensing looks at Roberta Cowell and what has happened since the 1950s.

Roberta Cowell in France, 1954. Source: Digital Transgender Archive, available here.

Being trans in Britain is not easy. A university student in 2018 shared that they were “laughed at, ridiculed, and became the butt of jokes that normally gender me as a woman. This has been constant since day one.”[1] Today trans people in Britain deal with social stigma and difficulty navigating and receiving gender-affirming care. But, as highlighted by the life and experiences of Roberta Cowell, the first known British trans woman to have gender-affirming surgery, being trans in the United Kingdom has never been easy. Writing in 1954, Cowell noted that “Many people were extremely kind and pleasant to me, but an equal number would go out of their way to treat me as though I were an unpleasant, perverted freak. They had no hesitation in making their attitude abundantly clear, perhaps because they considered that I had no feelings at all, perhaps because they wanted to hurt me as much as possible.”[2] Roberta Cowell transitioned more than 70 years ago, and despite her fame and improvements in the broader National Health System, trans people in Britain still experience harassment from the public and barriers to accessing gender-affirming care.

In 2018, Chaka Bachmann and Becca Gooch published the results of their survey of over 5,000 lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender individuals in Britain. The study produced by Stonewall, a UK-based charity that advocates for LGBTQ+ rights, aimed to assess the quality of life for LGBTQ+ British people. The Stonewall research study, which I will be referencing throughout this analysis, surveyed over 5,000 lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender individuals about their lives in Britain.[3]

In comparing Roberta Cowell’s life as a trans woman to the transgender individuals surveyed in the 2018 Stonewall trans report, it becomes clear that the barriers to gender-affirming care in Roberta Cowell’s life are still prevalent amongst transgender people today. These barriers transcend time and result in emotional distress for many in the trans community due to financial hurdles, social expectations, and mental health concerns.

Financial burden

One obstacle Cowell faced was the financial burden of gender-affirming care. Roberta Cowell underwent a variety of physical changes during the process of her transition, including hormone treatment, sex reassignment surgery, and plastic surgery to modify her facial features.[4] It took several years to complete these changes, and Roberta expressed her concern about the financial toll of the process, describing that “I would have to have money enough to pay for surgery and treatment, and also to start over again in a different environment when I finally made the changeover from trousers to skirts. I would also have to allow for an indefinite period during which I would be unable to work.”[5] This illustrates the financial complexity of receiving gender-affirming care as the medical treatment is only one of many factors that contribute to the cost of this process.

These financial concerns continue today, even as the majority of countries in Europe have universal healthcare. The Stonewall report found that nearly half of the trans respondents indicated that they don’t have the financial means to afford medical intervention, either because of the cost of treatment or travel expenses associated with reaching the medical facilities.[6]

Availability

The respondents of the Stonewall study also noted the difficulties that arose when attempting to find availability for gender-affirming care. Almost half of the respondents reported wanting to undergo some sort of medical intervention but were unable to because long wait times prevented them from accessing treatment.[7] One of the respondents in the Stonewall study explained “I am currently on the waiting list to start hormones and so far, my first appointment has been pushed back by nine months, added onto the nine months I have already waited. They have given me false hope and told me that my appointment would be in the next month, then continued to say the same thing month after month.”[8]

Although Roberta Cowell did not explicitly regard wait times as being an obstacle to her gender-affirming care, she did remark that she did not have an appointment for her gender-affirming surgery until nine months after she was legally registered as a woman on her birth certificate.[9] Whether this waiting period was a choice or not is hard to say, as Roberta does not reveal the purpose of this timing. The decision may have been hers or could have been the result of other obstacles, such as cost or an inability to immediately move to a new environment post-surgery.

In her memoir, Cowell admitted that she was hesitant to make the transition. She understood the social challenges this could bring to her life. There was the possibility of being labeled an outcast, or not being able to successfully present as a woman. This apprehension is apparent in her writing, as Cowell admits that “I had no desire to become a freak…There was the possibility that when it was all over I might not be socially acceptable as a woman. There was the possibility that I might become an invalid.”[10] Roberta never mentioned discrimination in her autobiography, but her fear of being labeled as a “freak”[11] illustrates the implicit doubt that loomed in her mind surrounding being accepted by society. Many of the participants in the Stonewall study faced similar concerns, although these concerns oftentimes revolved around a fear of discrimination or familial rejection. In the 2018 study, two in five trans people in Britain reported that they altered the way they dressed because they feared discrimination or harassment.[12] One of these respondents described the hostility he has faced as a trans man, sharing that “I get shouted at every single time I leave my house and threatened at least once a week. I try to closet myself from my family because I’m so close to getting kicked out. I can’t access hormone replacement therapy without going private. I’m disabled. It’s a lot to deal with and I’m crumbling under the stress but I consider myself a warrior. But really, something needs to change.”[13]Additionally, two in five trans who wanted to utilize medical interventions reported that they have not done so for fear of disrupting their family life.[14]

Necessary

Though “coming out” as trans and seeking gender-affirming care has been and can be challenging, a common experience among trans folks–from Cowell to the participants of the Stonewall study–is how necessary the transition is. Cowell described her pre-transition life as an “inky-black depression”[15] and went as far as to write that if she did not seem to be getting better, “then I considered I should be justified in taking my own life.”[16] Lack of support from family and the inability to access gender-affirming care puts trans people in a difficult position regarding their mental health and well-being. According to HPCLive, transgender youth who were able to receive gender-affirming care were 73% less likely to experience suicidality in comparison to youths who did not receive gender-affirming interventions.[17] A Stonewall study respondent emphasized this point, affirming that “We need more services available for trans people, so it gets easier to get hormones and surgery. Not sure I'd even be alive right now if I hadn't transitioned.”[18]Additionally, 1 in 5 transgender and non-binary youth attempted suicide between 2021 and 2022.[19] Another participant in the Stonewall study shared his struggles with suicidal ideation, revealing that“Coming out as transgender was the hardest thing I've ever done, and having to explain it over and over again to medical professionals that were supposed to be helping me, almost made me end my life. There needs to be better support for us.”[20] Accessing gender-affirming care is not a want, but a need for transgender individuals, yet these services are still a luxury reserved for those who have the time and money to jump through the hoops of the medical care system. 

Despite the overwhelming evidence showing that gender-affirming care saves lives, anti-trans legislation and rhetoric have become commonplace in the United Kingdom. During an annual conference of the Conservative Party, U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak expressed various anti-transgender ideologies. Sunak stated, “We shouldn't get bullied into believing that people can be any sex they want to be — they can't” and went on to say “A man is a man and a woman is a woman. That's just common sense.”[21] Many of these anti-trans ideas are also being translated into policies. One such policy prohibits minors and non-binary people from changing their gender in official government documents.[22] Additionally, the U.K. government has begun drafting guidelines that would require transgender students to use gendered facilities that align with their sex assigned at birth, as well as encouraging teachers to out transgender students to their parents.[23] The National Health Service also issued an advisory in September of 2023, saying that schools should not allow students to socially transition without parental consent.[24] It’s ironic that the National Health Service would advise schools to police a student's gender expression when research and survey studies clearly show that forcing trans people to present as their sex assigned at birth can lead to severe depression and suicidal ideation. This increase in public rhetoric against transgender people is certainly disheartening for many transgender folks in the U.K. One respondent from the Stonewall study acknowledged that “Even just five years ago it was not safe for me to come out as trans, the pace of change has been amazing. Unfortunately, there now appears to be a backlash against that progress in the last year with hate from the media against trans increasing disturbingly in the last six months. This increasing transphobia is accelerating and is causing acute anxiety in my daily life.”[25] As anti-trans speech and agendas push their way back into mainstream media, transgender people in the U.K. face uncertainty about their rights being upheld and confront the additional challenge of deciding if, and when it is safe to be open about their identity.

Conclusion

After comparing the individuals in the Stonewall study to Roberta Cowell, it becomes clear that many of the obstacles faced by Roberta Cowell in the 1950s are still prevalent today for trans people in Britain. Barriers to gender-affirming care, including financial constraints, accessibility of care, long wait times, and fear of discrimination continue to make necessary life changes unavailable to trans people. These barriers lead to extreme mental health concerns for many transgender individuals, putting countless lives at stake. In analyzing the historical and current-day issues regarding gender-affirming care, it is clear that national legislation must be implemented to preserve and provide access to transgender healthcare. We cannot continue to be at a standstill for transgender rights, and we certainly cannot afford to go backward. Let's make this world into a place where all trans people can live as their true selves, one step at a time.

Bibliography

Bachmann, Chaka L, and Becca Gooch. “LGBT in Britain - Trans Report.” Stonewall, April 24, 2020. https://www.stonewall.org.uk/lgbt-britain-trans-report.

Cowell, Alan. “Overlooked No More: Roberta Cowell, Trans Trailblazer, Pilot and Auto Racer.” The New York Times, June 5, 2020. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/05/obituaries/roberta-cowell-overlooked.html.

Factora, James. “The U.K. Is One of the Worst Places in Europe to Be Trans, New Report Finds.” Them, November 2, 2023. https://www.them.us/story/uk-worst-places-in-europe-trans-new-report-finds#intcid=_them-bottom-recirc_5697e6aa-ecd3-4488-a8d2-36086042aa7c_text2vec1.

Factora, James. “U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak Platforms Anti-Trans Talking Points in a Speech to Tories.” Them, October 5, 2023. https://www.them.us/story/uk-prime-minister-anti-trans-comments.

Fisher, John Hayes. Sex Changes that Made History. Academic Video Online. no. 1009, British

Broadcasting Corporation, 2015. https://bridge.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/01BRC_INST/es0tl/cdi_alexanderstreet_marcxml_AcademicVideoOnlinePremiumUnitedStatesASP3366432_marc

Grossi, Giuliana. “Suicide Risk Reduces 73% in Transgender, Nonbinary Youths with Gender-Affirming Care.” HCP Live, August 23, 2022. https://www.hcplive.com/view/suicide-risk-reduces-73-transgender-nonbinary-youths-gender-affirming-care.

Paley, Amit. “2022 National Survey on LGBTQ Youth Mental Health.” The Trevor Project, 2022. https://www.thetrevorproject.org/survey-2022/.

Roberta, Cowell E. Roberta Cowell’s Story: An Autobiography. British Book Centre, Inc., New York, 1954

Staveley-Wadham, Rose. “‘The Most Talked of Woman in England’ – Roberta Cowell in Our Newspapers.” The British Newspaper Archive Blog | Amazing finds and news from over 300 years of historical newspapers, June 13, 2022. https://blog.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/2022/06/13/roberta-cowell-in-our-newspapers.

[1] Taylor, qtd. in Chaka Bachmann, Becca Gooch, “LGBT in Britain - Trans Report,” Stonewall (2020), 12.

[2] Roberta Cowell, “Roberta Cowell’s Story: An Autobiography,” British Book Centre, Inc. (1954), 52.

[3] Bachmann, Gooch, “LGBT In Britain,” 5.

[4] Cowell, “Roberta Cowell’s Story.”

[5] Cowell, “Roberta Cowell’s Story,” 45.

[6] Bachmann, Gooch, “LGBT In Britain,” 16.

[7] Bachmann, Gooch, “LGBT In Britain,” 16.

[8] Jo, qtd. in Bachmann, Gooch, “LGBT In Britain,” 17.

[9] Cowell, “Roberta Cowell’s Story,” 54.

[10] Cowell, “Roberta Cowell’s Story,” 45.

[11] Cowell, “Roberta Cowell’s Story,” 44.

[12] Bachmann, Gooch, “LGBT In Britain,” 7.

[13] Stevie, qtd. In Bachmann, Gooch, “LGBT In Britain,” 14.

[14] Bachmann, Gooch, “LGBT In Britain,” 14.

[15] Cowell, “Roberta Cowell’s Story,” 59.

[16] Cowell, “Roberta Cowell’s Story,” 41.

[17] Giuliana Grossi, “Suicide Risk Reduces 73% in Transgender, Nonbinary Youths with Gender-Affirming Care,” HCP Live (2022).

[18] Sebatstain, qtd. in Bachmann, Gooch, “LGBT In Britain,” 16.

[19] Amit Paley, “2022 National Survey on LGBTQ Youth Mental Health,” The Trevor Project (2022).

[20] Henry, qtd. in Bachmann, Gooch, “LGBT In Britain,” 13.

[21] James Factora, “U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak Platforms Anti-Trans Talking Points in a Speech to Tories,” Them (2023).

[22] James Factora, “The U.K. Is One of the Worst Places in Europe to Be Trans, New Report Finds.” Them (2023).

[23] Factora, “One of the Worst Places”

[24] Factora, “One of the Worst Places”

[25] Willow, qtd. in Bachmann, Gooch, “LGBT In Britain,” 22.

Benedict Arnold and the Battle of Valcour Island

The Battle of Valcour Island, fought on October 11th 1776 is one of the most fascinating naval engagements fought in North America. A victory for the British, the small but determined American force under General Benedict Arnold fought tenaciously and subsequently managed to delay a British invasion south for nearly a year. This granted valuable time for the Americans to better consolidate their positions for the inevitable offensive which would culminate at the Battles of Saratoga in 1777, a decisive victory for the Americans and the turning point in the War for Independence.

Brian Hughes explains.

A depiction of the Battle of Valcour Island.

In Autumn of 1776 the outlook did not look favorable for the fledgling United States. The Battle of Long Island was a catastrophe for the Continental Army. George Washington had managed to salvage a fraction of his force, just barely escaping encirclement and annihilation as he retreated across New Jersey. Washington also faced the loss of most of the militia forces as the end of the year approached and their terms of enlistments expired.

The Americans faced setbacks in the north as well. The expeditionary force which had invaded Canada the previous year had been dislodged by a renewed British counterattack. The Northern Army was forced to discard valuable equipment and suffered significant casualties as a result. The British and their mixed force of various German, Indigenous and Canadian allies were now well poised to launch an invasion south down the strategic Champlain-Hudson Corridor, severing New England from the middle Colonies and linking up with the substantial British force pursuing Washington. If successful this operation would likely end the rebellion. 

Fort Ticonderoga

Fortunately for the Americans they still possessed Fort Ticonderoga, strategically situated between Lake(s) Champlain and George which they had captured the previous year. Major General Philip Schuyler Commander of the Northern Army recognized the tenuousness of the situation and with great resourcefulness integrated his defenses to the best of his ability. In addition to Fort Ticonderoga the Americans maintained a modest flotilla of ships to aid in their defenses. The decision was made to further augment American naval capabilities on the Lake as a means to challenge the maritime supremacy of the British to their north. The Americans however did not possess a noteworthy supply of trained seaman and commanders. The few experienced sailors within the American cause tended to prefer privateering on the high seas as the potential for prize money was a far more appealing incentive for the experienced mariner. One notable American commander would however prove to be a major asset, Brigadier General Benedict Arnold.

Benedict Arnold

Prior to the war Benedict Arnold had been a successful sailor and merchant who frequently voyaged to the Bahamas, Canada and probably Europe. Not only was Arnold a competent and knowledgeable seaman he was also acquainted with ship construction, expertise which the Americans desperately required especially in the backcountry of Upstate New York. Beginning nearly from scratch, the Americans methodically began to construct a series of ships at Skenesborough, modern day Whitehall, New York. Philip Schuyler worked around the clock to provide the Americans with whatever material they required exacerbating an already difficult logistical situation. Meanwhile, the British to the north were likewise enlarging their naval capacities as summer gave way to fall and the window of opportunity for campaigning shortened. The American Armada gradually piecemealed their force up the lake as they awaited the completion of the final vessels. The issues of supplies and armaments still plagued the Americans as they were short of nearly everything from nails for the ships to food and powder and even warm clothing.

Numbering sixteen ships and termed the “Mosquito Fleet” because of the eclectic make up of vessels. In addition to standard square rigged gunboats Arnold ordered the construction of gondolas outfitted with a triangular or lateen sail. This design afforded greater maneuverability and agility particularly in some of the narrower coves and shorelines indenting Lake Champlain. The largest vessel in the American Armada was the Royal Savage which resembled a standard Ship of the Line albeit in smaller fashion. Guns were placed fore and aft as well as the sides as the inexperienced American gun crews had to drill without powder and ammunition saving what little they had for the upcoming engagement.

Arnold displayed impressive strategic and tactical instincts in predicting the British strategy. Knowing full well that the Americans could not parity British naval power and the superior training he would have to be creative. Arnold kept the British guessing by shielding his fleet within Valcour Bay, just off the New York shoreline near present day Plattsburgh. Due to the shape of Valcour Island a vessel sailing south could not detect the presence of ships to the west. By positioning his fleet here Arnold planned to force the British to give battle on unfavorable terms sailing upwind into a narrow cove in which he could negate their advantage in firepower. But this would be a gamble, as the British could opt to disregard the little fleet to their rear and continue pressing south thus forcing a hopeless pursuit. Also, Valcour Island could be easily cut off to the north and south, trapping Arnold’s fleet and granting no chance of escape. 

Guy Carleton

As the British fleet embarked it proved to be formidable. On board was Guy Carleton in nominal charge of the invasion. The British did however spend extra time ensuring the strength of their fleet as it was now mid-October and already snow was visible on the High Peaks of the Adirondack Mountains on Lake Champlain’s western shore. The American’s had been waiting in anticipation for weeks at this point being at full mercy of the harsh northern elements without sufficient clothing and unable to go to shore due to frequent attacks from Indians loyal to the British.

Arnold arrayed his flotilla in a line of battle in Valcour Bay. As the British fleet began to sail south Arnold dispatched the Royal Savage and the highly nimble Congress to goad them into battle. In this they were successful but at cost to the Royal Savage which ran aground forcing its crew to flee. The British struggled to sail upwind and bring their superior firepower to bear on the Americans. Both sides began to exchange gunfire which wrought havoc on the ships and crew. The Battle lasted all day as casualties on both sides remained relatively light as the advent of darkness ended the engagement. The British found themselves in an ideal position to resume battle the following day as they weighed anchor with the knowledge that they had effectively nullified the American’s ammunition and powder from the battle. 

Bold decision

Arnold conferred with his officers and made a bold decision. The British fleet left just enough space for the remainder of the American boats to slip past single file and flee south. Muffling his oars Arnold led the column ever so closely past the warships standing sentinel as one by one the American flotilla fled south taking advantage of a favorable wind. As dawn broke the British were shocked. They could not fathom that the “trapped” American force would be capable of mounting an escape, they instantly gave chase. After a day-long pursuit the wind became less favorable for the Americans. On October 13th the British caught up with Arnolds fleet. Arnold scuttled his ships in the bottom of Buttonmold Bay on the Vermont side of the Lake stripping his ships of anything valuable as he led his troops overland and back to Fort Ticonderoga.

The British were surprised by the aggressive resistance by the Americans. Arriving at Crown Point on October 20th it appeared the winter was prematurely setting in. The lateness of the season coupled with the prospect of facing an even greater number of adversaries in a siege-based scenario forced the British turnaround and sail back to Canada and await the thaw of Spring. 

Arnold had achieved his objective. Despite losing the engagement of Valcour Island he managed to successfully delay a British invasion that likely would have put an end to the rebel cause. The Battle of Valcour Island resembled a nautical Bunker Hill. In spite of British victory, the dogged and resourceful Americans displayed courage in face of overwhelming odds inflicting horrendous casualties and reforming in good order to fight another day.

Did you find that piece interesting? If so, join us for free by clicking here.

Disaster in New York City: Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire

The Triangle Shortwaist Factory Fire took place in New York City in March 1911. It is one of the deadliest industrial disasters in U.S. history, resulting in 146 deaths. Richard Bluttal explains.

The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire on March, 25, 1911.

“My name is Sadie Frowne. I work in Allen Street (Manhattan) in what they call a sweatshop. I am new at the work and the foreman scolds me a great deal. I get up at half past five every morning and make myself a cup of coffee on the oil stove. I eat a bit of bread and perhaps some fruit and then go to work. Often, I get there soon after six o'clock so as to be in good time, though the factory does not open till seven.

At seven o'clock we all sit down to our machines and the boss brings to each one the pile of work that he or she is to finish during the day--what they call in English their "stint." This pile is put down beside the machine and as soon as a garment is done it is laid on the other side of the machine. Sometimes the work is not all finished by six o'clock, and then the one who is behind must work overtime.’’

The Life of a Shirtwaist Maker in New York City early 20th Century

The shirtwaist makers, as young as age 15, worked seven days a week, from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. with a half-hour lunch break. During the busy season, the work was nearly non-stop. They were paid about $6 per week. In some cases, they were required to use their own needles, thread, irons and occasionally their own sewing machines. The factories also were unsanitary, or as a young striker explained, “unsanitary—that’s the word that is generally used, but there ought to be a worse one used.” At the Triangle factory, women had to leave the building to use the bathroom, so management began locking the steel exit doors to prevent the “interruption of work” and only the foreman had the key.

The “shirtwaist”—a woman’s blouse—was one of the country’s first fashion statements that crossed class lines. The booming ready-made clothing industry made the stylish shirtwaist affordable even for working women. Worn with an ankle-length skirt, the shirtwaist was appropriate for any occasion—from work to play—and was more comfortable and practical than fashion that preceded it, like corsets and hoops.

The Fire

It was a warm spring Saturday in New York City, March 25, 1911. On the top three floors of the ten-story Asch Building just off of Washington Square, employees of the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory in New York City began putting away their work as the 4:45 p.m. quitting time approached. Most of the several hundred Triangle Shirtwaist employees were teenage girls. Most were recent immigrants. Many spoke only a little English. Just then somebody on the eighth floor shouted, "Fire!" Flames leapt from discarded rags between the first and second rows of cutting tables on the hundred-foot-by-hundred-foot floor. Triangle employee William Bernstein grabbed pails of water and vainly attempted to put the fire out. As a line of hanging patterns began to burn, cries of "fire" erupted from all over the floor. In the thickening smoke, as several men continued to fling water at the fire, the fire spread everywhere--to the tables, the wooden floor trim, the partitions, the ceiling. A shipping clerk dragged a hose in the stairwell into the rapidly heating room, but nothing came--no pressure. Terrified and screaming, girls streamed down the narrow fire escape and Washington Place stairway or jammed into the single passenger elevator.

In the hell of the ninth-floor, 145 employees, mostly young women, would die. Those that acted quickly made it through the Greene Street stairs, climbed down a rickety fire escape before it collapsed, or squeezed into the small Washington Place elevators before they stopped running. The last person on the last elevator to leave the ninth floor was Katie Weiner, who grabbed a cable that ran through the elevator and swung in, landing on the heads of other girls. A few other girls survived by jumping into the elevator shaft, and landing on the roof of the elevator compartment as it made its final descent. The weight of the girls caused the car to sink to the bottom of the shaft, leaving it immobile. For those left on the ninth floor, forced to choose between an advancing inferno and jumping to the sidewalks below, many would jump. Others, according to survivor Ethel Monick, became "frozen with fear" and "never moved."

It took only eighteen minutes to bring the fire under control, and in ten minutes more it was practically "all over." Water soaked a pile of thirty or more bodies on the Greene Street sidewalk. Doctors pawed through heaps of humanity looking for signs of life. Police tried desperately to keep crowds of hysterical relatives from overrunning the disaster scene. Officers filled coffins and loaded them into patrol wagons and ambulances. The bodies were taken to a temporary morgue set up on a covered pier at the foot of East Twenty-sixth Street. Firemen searched the burned-out floors of the Asch building, hoping to find survivors. What they mostly found were, according to Chief Edward Croker, "bodies burned to bare bones, skeletons bending over sewing machines." Four hours after the fire, workers discovered a lone survivor trapped in rising water at the bottom of the elevator shaft.

Suzanne Pred Bass, Executive Board Member at the Remember the Triangle Fire Coalition, located in New York City, to discussed how the legacy of the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire of 1911, which took the lives of 123 women and girls and 23 men, has inspired future movements to protect workers’ rights – particularly for vulnerable populations such as immigrants and women. 

‘’ Immigrants struggling to make a life for themselves, without the language and educational skills necessary to protect and guide them, become extremely vulnerable in the workplace. As they struggle to 

help their families survive, they end up working wherever they can. Many don’t have the necessary papers to legally work and therefore are prey to greedy bosses who will exploit them and see them as nothing but tools to make money. Without unions to protect them they are forced to accept low wages, unsafe workplaces, sexual harassment, and unfair conditions over which they have no say. “

This is what was happening in 1911 when the fire occurred and is still happening here and around the world. The International Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union (ILGWU) had been fighting for the creation of unions since 1900. The union’s first major strike – comprised of 20,000 female workers – occurred in 1909, followed by an even larger one in 1910. Led by Clara Lemlich, women sweatshop workers went on strike to protest their unsafe, unfair workplace environments. The strike succeeded in getting many sweatshops to become union shops. Unfortunately, the Triangle Factory owners – Max Blank and Isaac Harris – refused to be unionized. They made promises to workers that were never fulfilled. The Triangle Factory fire galvanized New Yorkers and people across the country as well as in other countries, particularly those from Russia and Italy; countries that claimed the most victims. 

Building Structure of the Brown ( Asch ) Building

The Brown (then called the Asch) Building, constructed in 1901 of steel and iron, was advertised as “fireproof” and, hence, attracted several garment factories. The Triangle firm occupied the 8th, 9th and 10th floors, at the top of the building. The building offered few working bathrooms, faulty ventilation, and outmoded heating and cooling systems. The stairwells were poorly lit and hazardous. More egregious, it had no overhead sprinklers and only a single fire escape, which was neither durable nor big enough to accommodate all of the people working in the building in the event of a fire.

Added to these risks, the Triangle Company stored flammable products and chemicals on its production floors. Working cheek by jowl, the seamstresses sat at tightly arranged rows of sewing machines and cutting tables. All over the floor were clippings of flammable fabric. Under one of the work bins, where 120 layers of fabric were once stored, a spark turned into a flame and spread to the tissue paper shirt patterns, or templates, hanging from the ceiling.

The fire soon spread from worktable to worktable, gaining speed, heat, and venom with each passing second. Many died of smoke inhalation. Others, who could not find a means of escape, burned to death. And there also were the indelibly horrific images of the young women who jumped out of windows to their deaths, because the stairwell doors were locked shut and the elevators were out of order.

The New York City Department arrived but their ladders reached only as high as the 6th floor of the building, two entire floors below the fire. The mounting dead—covered in tarps— were arranged in rows along the sidewalk by the city coroners for the newspaper photographers.

Below were the laws of the Department of Buildings at time of the fire and the specific structure of Ashe building of these laws.

 New York State Labor Laws (Article 6, Section 80):

“All doors leading in or to any such factory shall be constructed as to open outwardly, where practicable, and shall not be locked, bolted, or fastened during working hours.”

Triangle Shirtwaist Company Compliance:

Whether Section 80 was violated was the key issue in the trial of Harris and Blanck. The case turned on whether the ninth-floor staircase door on the Washington Place side was locked at the time of trial.

The prosecution contended the door was locked and introduced a witness who testified that at the time of the fire she tried the door “in and out, all ways” and was unable to open the door. The prosecution also showed that many of the victims of the fire died in front of the door. The prosecution argued that Harris and Blanck kept the door locked, especially near quitting time, to force exiting workers to pass through the only other exit, where they could be inspected if they were suspected of trying to pilfer waistcoats.

The defense contended that the door was open, but that the fleeing workers were unable to exit through the door because of fire in the stairwell. The defense introduced a witness who said that on the day of the fire a key was tied to the lock with the string and that she used the key to open the door. (The prosecution claimed the witness lied.)

It was also shown that the ninth-floor staircase door did not “open outwardly,” but inspectors failed to note a violation because only the width of a stair separated the door from the stairs, making it not “practicable” for the door to open outwardly.

Staircases
New York Law:
Buildings with more than 2,500 square feet per floor–but less than 5,000 square feet per floor–require two staircases. Each additional 5,000 square feet per floor requires an additional staircase.
Triangle Shirtwaist Company Compliance:
The Triangle Shirtwaist Company floors had 10,000 square feet of space. Any additional floor space would have required a third staircase. As it was, two staircases–the number the Triangle factory had–sufficed.

Fire Escapes
New York Law:
New York law left the matter of fire escapes to the discretion of building inspectors. The building inspector for the Asch building insisted that the fire escape proposed for the building “must lead down to something more substantial than a skylight.” (The architect’s plans showed a rear fire escape leading to a skylight.)
Triangle Shirtwaist Company Compliance:
The Asch building architect promised “the fire escape will lead to the yard and an additional balcony will be put in.” In the final construction, however, the fire escape still ended at a second-floor skylight. During the fire, the fire escape collapsed under the weight of the fleeing workers.

Non-Wood Surfaces
New York Law:
Buildings over 150 feet high must have metal trim, metal window frames, and stone or concrete floors. Buildings under 150 feet high have no such requirements.
Triangle Shirtwaist Company Compliance:
The ten-story Asch building was 135 feet high. If it had one more floor, it would have required non-wood surfaces.

Consequences and Conclusion

More than 350,000 people marched in the funeral procession for the Triangle victims. Activists kept their memory alive by lobbying their local and state leaders to do something in the name of building and worker safety and health. Three months later, John Alden Dix, then the governor of New York, signed a law empowering the Factory Investigating Committee, which resulted in eight more laws covering fire safety, factory inspection, and sanitation and employment rules for women and children. The following year, 1912, activists and legislators in New York State enacted another 25 laws that transformed its labor protections among the most progressive in the nation. Many of these reforms—all proposed to protect the health and safety of the American worker—were swept into federal law during the New Deal. Years later, in 1970, the Occupational Safety and Health Act was passed and created, “whose primary mission is to ensure that employees carry out their tasks under safe working conditions.” It remains a critically important agency in the lives of working Americans.

The Triangle Fire of March 25, 1911, destroyed hundreds of lives — both those who died and their families. Sadly, it required the ashes of 146 people to redesign and reimagine the workplace of the early 20th century. Once a dirty and unsafe place, filled with dangerous machines and, before child labor laws, small children, American factories and offices are now far safer than they once were only a century ago. Nonetheless, as new technology and manufacturing processes develop, we must remain vigilant in ferreting out and preventing the health risks they impose to workers and consumers. Now, as then, we must always remember the horrific flames of the Triangle.

The company's owners, Max Blanck and Isaac Harris – both Jewish immigrants – who survived the fire by fleeing to the building's roof when it began, were indicted on charges of first- and second-degree manslaughter in mid-April; the pair's trial began on December 4, 1911.Max Steuer, counsel for the defendants, managed to destroy the credibility of one of the survivors, Kate Alterman, by asking her to repeat her testimony a number of times, which she did without altering key phrases. Steuer argued to the jury that Alterman and possibly other witnesses had memorized their statements and might even have been told what to say by the prosecutors. The prosecution charged that the owners knew the exit doors were locked at the time in question. The investigation found that the locks were intended to be locked during working hours based on the findings from the fire, but the defense stressed that the prosecution failed to prove that the owners knew that the jury acquitted the two men of first- and second-degree manslaughter, but they were found liable of wrongful death during a subsequent civil suit in 1913 in which plaintiffs were awarded compensation in the amount of $75 per deceased victim. The insurance company paid Blanck and Harris about $60,000 more than the reported losses, or about $400 per casualty.

Did you find that piece interesting? If so, join us for free by clicking here.

1963: A Third, Very Different Funeral

It has been 60 years since an assassin’s bullet cut down President John F. Kennedy in Dallas, Texas. The horrific event for America was immediately probed from all angles for any signs of a conspiracy right after the event outside the Texas School Book Depository in Dallas. 

Michael Thomas Leibrandt explains.

Jack Ruby shooting Lee Harvey Oswald. Photograph by Robert H. Jackson. The photograph won the 1964 Pulitzer Prize for Photography.

Three days following John F. Kennedy’s assassination, on November 25, the country mourned his death. We have all seen the incredible images of JFK’s funeral. The Horseless Rider in the procession, Jackie Kennedy walking with RFK and Ted behind the casket. John John saluting his father one last time.

Just over 1,300 miles away also on November 25, the Dallas Police Department was on display in their Dress Uniforms to honor Officer J.D. Tippit’s at his funeral. Tippit was gunned down in a Dallas residential area not long after the assassination of President Kennedy.

Across town in Fort Worth, a very different type of funeral was taking place. Twenty-four-year-old Lee Harvey Oswald, the killer of J.D. Tippit and suspected killer of JFK was being laid to rest in Rose Hill Cemetery. The logistics of this funeral turned out to be the most difficult.

When Oswald’s body was collected in the middle of the night from Parkland Hospital, Miller Funeral Home was surrounded by authorities. Next was the obstacle of getting a clergyman to provide a sermon for Oswald. With a possible concern of sniper fire during the outdoor service, several clergy members backed out.

The 4:00 P.M. funeral had no mourners except for Oswald’s immediate family, who attended as well as authorities and the press. When the time came to carry Oswald from the hearse to the gravesite, local reporters were the only pallbearers who were available to carry the casket.

Then suspicions arose that Oswald was not actually in the casket, that it was instead a spy who was hired to assassinate Kennedy. The casket was opened briefly so that the family could see the body.

Exhumation

With suspicions continuing about a spy in Oswald’s casket for years after the funeral, the body was exhumed in 1981 despite Robert Oswald’s objections. When the casket was damaged during the exhumation, and a Texas Funeral Home attempted to sell the original for more than $87,000, Robert Oswald did sue and was able to stop the transaction as well as winning a court ruling.

Shannon Funerals Chapels was originally founded in 1906. The 84-acre cemetery was founded in 1928 and the two united in 1986.

If you visit Oswald’s grave today at Shannon Rose Hill, you’ll no doubt notice the headstone in the next plot that simply reads NICK BEEF.

Since 1996, the headstone has occupied the plot next to Oswald’s. The plot is owned by writer Patric Abedin, who traveled to Fort Worth to see the Kennedys during the 1963 visit. He was propped up on the shoulders of a marine serviceman to see the Kennedys, and this made an impression on Abedin as did his visits to Oswald’s grave as a child.

In 1975, he bought the plot for a $17.50 deposit, and then made monthly payments of $10. In 1996, the headstone appeared with Abedin’s alias.

In November 1967, two teenagers stole Lee Harvey Oswald’s headstone from the cemetery. When it was recovered by authorities, it was returned to Oswald’s mother and stored in a crawlspace under her home, where it remained and changed ownership after Mrs. Oswald’s home was sold after her 1981 death and was finally sold to the Historic Auto Attractions Museum.

Perhaps ending all of the sad, strange events around the final arrangements for Lee Harvey Oswald.

Find that piece interesting? If so, join us for free by clicking here.

Michael Thomas Leibrandt lives and works in Abington, PA.

The Connections between the U.S. Civil War and the Wild West

The Civil War and the American conquest of the West were two of the most important events of the nineteenth century. However, these events are often treated as separate occurrences, even though the end of the war played a crucial role in stimulating westward expansion. It is important to acknowledge that the expansion of slavery played a prominent role in the power struggles for control over the territories, which would eventually become the Old West. Indeed, what we now perceive as the Old West saw itself as the New South during that period.

Lloyd W Klein explains.

Buffalo Bill, around 1880.

Following the defeat of the Confederacy, numerous men who had fought for a cause found themselves suddenly without employment, money, or prospects. Many returned home to find their families and farms devastated, facing circumstances beyond their worst nightmares. In response, those who had the means chose to migrate westward in search of a fresh start. However, their anger, experiences, and familiarity with guns and violence accompanied them on their journey.

The popular perception of the Old West, largely influenced by Hollywood depictions, revolves around lawlessness, gunfights, and violence. In these portrayals, lawmen are depicted as heroes, distinguished by their badges and white hats, while the "bad guys" are characterized by black hats, unshaven appearances, and a tendency to draw their weapons first. However, the reality was far more nuanced. Violence was rampant, and law and order were virtually nonexistent. Interestingly, those who carried badges typically hailed from the northern states, while outlaws were often from the Border States and the old South. And those who wore the badges were of a specific background.

The Border States

It is crucial to recognize that the western frontier in the 1850s and 1860s encompassed Missouri and Kansas, known as the Border States. Kansas, in particular, had a history steeped in violence, which was deeply ingrained in the lives of its inhabitants. While we may not commonly associate the Old West with the consequences of the Civil War, those who lived during that time held no such distinction. When we envision the Old West today, we often think of states like Arizona, New Mexico, and Colorado. However, during the 1860s, the frontier was primarily located in Kansas. Whether we refer to it as a result of the Civil War or as Old West-related, those who actively participated in that era did not make such distinctions. It was the frontier in many different ways: between North and South, for sure, but also the West vs. East, whites vs. Native Americans, and Republicans vs. Democrats. It was a place of violence and lawlessness precisely because it was the border of all of these cultural shifts.

Bushwhacking and Western Gangs

Bushwhacking is a form of guerrilla warfare common during conflicts in which there were large areas of contested land and few governmental resources to control these tracts. This tactic was particularly prevalent in rural areas during the Civil War where there were sharp divisions between those favoring the Union and Confederacy in the conflict. The individuals responsible for these attacks, known as bushwhackers, utilized ambushes as a means of attrition. Attrition warfare, a military strategy aimed at wearing down the enemy through continuous losses in personnel, material, and morale, was the underlying objective of these guerrilla tactics.

Bushwhackers were typically affiliated with irregular military forces on both sides of the conflict. While they occasionally launched well-coordinated raids against military targets, their most devastating attacks involved ambushing individuals and conducting house raids in rural communities. These actions were especially inflammatory as they often pitted neighbors against each other, serving as a means to settle personal scores. Due to their lack of proper insignia, the Union considered these attackers as terrorists. Notable figures such as William Quantrill, Bill Anderson, and John Singleton Mosby exemplified the bushwhacker profile. Partisan Rangers, essentially land-based privateers, also fell under the category of bushwhackers.

The association of bushwhacking became particularly strong with the pro-Confederate guerrillas in Missouri, where this form of warfare reached its peak intensity. Guerrilla activities also extended to regions like Kentucky, Appalachian Tennessee, northern Georgia, Arkansas, and western Virginia. In Kansas, pro-Union guerrilla fighters were referred to as "Jayhawkers" and frequently engaged in cross-border raids into Missouri.

Jesse & Frank James

The James Brothers, along with their partners the Youngers, can be traced back to their involvement in the Civil War. Understanding the James–Younger Gang solely as outlaws in the Wild West would be incomplete, as their formation can be traced back to the bushwhackers of the Civil War era who engaged in partisan warfare in Missouri during the Civil War.

After the war ended, their motives shifted from fighting for the Confederacy to pursuing personal profit through acts of plunder and murder. Jesse James, a prominent member of the gang, began his insurgent activities in 1864. Throughout the war, he primarily fought against fellow Missourians, including Missouri regiments of U.S. Volunteer troops, state militia, and unarmed Unionist civilians. Although there is only one confirmed instance of him engaging in combat with Federal troops from another state, which occurred after Appomattox, he faced numerous hardships during the war. His mother and sister were arrested, his stepfather was tortured, and his family was temporarily banished from Missouri by Unionist Missourians.

The James–Younger Gang eventually disbanded in 1876 after the Younger brothers were captured during a failed bank robbery in Northfield, Minnesota. It is often mentioned that Union Army veterans played a significant role in the gunfight that led to their capture. Considering the contributions of the Iron Brigade and the First Minnesota in the war, it appears that the gang had chosen the wrong town to engage in criminal activities.

Three years later, Jesse James formed a new gang and resumed his criminal career. However, his reign came to an end in 1882 when he was shot from behind by Robert Ford, resulting in his death. Interestingly, Ford, who was a member of the James-Younger Gang, had been offered a reward and full pardon by the Governor of Missouri, Thomas Crittenden, if he successfully killed James. Crittenden had been elected with the promise of bringing an end to the notorious gang.

Buffalo Bill

In 1853, a man named Isaac Cody sold his land in Scott County, Iowa, and he, his wife, and their son moved to Fort Leavenworth, Kansas Territory.  The allure of the frontier and the potential opportunities it held were the driving factors behind this move. However, little did he know that he was about to find himself in a tumultuous and violent situation. As an ardent opponent of slavery, Isaac was invited to deliver a speech at Rively's Store, a local trading post known for hosting gatherings of pro-slavery individuals. Unfortunately, his impassioned antislavery rhetoric provoked such anger among the crowd that they resorted to threatening his life. In a shocking turn of events, a man leaped forward and viciously stabbed Isaac twice with a Bowie knife. Although Rively, the store's proprietor, promptly rushed him to receive medical attention, Isaac never fully recovered from the injuries inflicted upon him. 

Following their arrival in Kansas, the Cody family faced relentless persecution from pro-slavery supporters. Isaac's safety was jeopardized to such an extent that he was compelled to spend considerable time away from his home. Matters took a grave turn when his adversaries discovered his planned visit to his family and devised a sinister plot to assassinate him en route. It was at this critical juncture that his 11-year-old son, already an accomplished equestrian, rode an astonishing thirty miles to warn his father of the impending danger. In a surprising twist, Isaac decided to divert his course and journeyed to Cleveland, Ohio, where he organized a group of thirty families to bring them back to Kansas to bolster the antislavery population. Tragically, during his return trip, Isaac fell ill with a respiratory infection, exacerbated by the lingering effects of his stabbing and complications arising from kidney disease. These afflictions ultimately led to his untimely demise in April 1857.

His son, William Cody, was forced to make a living as a young teen. He first worked as a messenger, capitalizing on his exceptional horse-riding abilities. Subsequently, he embarked on a career as a scout, riding alongside the US Cavalry in Utah, where he demonstrated his marksmanship by preventing a Native American from harming his comrade. At the age of 14, he ventured into gold prospecting in California but soon abandoned this quest to become a rider for the Pony Express. In 1861, he attempted to enlist in the Union army, but was rejected (he was just 15). In 1863, at age 17, he enlisted as a teamster with the rank of private in Company H, 7th Kansas Cavalry, and served until discharged in 1865.

With the end of the war, he went to Junction City KS to enlist as a scout with an old friend named Bill Hickok. They would work for various troops and their generals, including George Armstrong Custer. The reunion of Bill Cody with Wild Bill Hickock after the war was a critical part of the Old West story. They first met when Hickok was age 18, and a Jayhawker, and Cody was age 12. They crossed paths again in 1862 when Hickock joined General James Henry Lane's Kansas Brigade, and while serving with the brigade, saw his friend Buffalo Bill Cody, who was serving as a scout.

Buffalo Bill's Wild West Shows have been the subject of much contemporary criticism, with controversy revolving around whether they exploited Native Americans or if Bill was their benefactor.

Billy the Kid

Billy the Kid’s real name was Henry McCarty, whose alias was William H Bonney – that was not his real name. He had killed 21 men by the time of his own death at age 21. His connection to the Civil War is indirect but is a fascinating reflection on the times.

McCarty was orphaned at the age of 15. His first arrest was for stealing food at the age of 16 in 1875. Ten days later, he robbed a Chinese laundry and was arrested again but escaped shortly afterward. He fled from New Mexico Territory into neighboring Arizona Territory, making himself both an outlaw and a federal fugitive. In 1877, he began to call himself "William H. Bonney".

After killing a blacksmith during an altercation in August 1877, Bonney became a wanted man in Arizona and returned to New Mexico, where he joined a group of cattle rustlers. He became well known in the region when he joined the Regulators and took part in the Lincoln County War of 1878. He and two other Regulators were later charged with killing three men, including Lincoln County Sheriff William J. Brady and one of his deputies.

Bonney's notoriety grew in December 1880 when the Las Vegas Gazette, and The Sun, in New York City, carried stories about his crimes. Sheriff Pat Garrett captured Bonney later that month. In April 1881, Bonney was tried for and convicted of Brady's murder and was sentenced to hang in May of that year. He escaped from jail on April 28, killing two sheriff's deputies in the process, and evaded capture for more than two months. Garrett eventually caught up with him and shot and killed Bonney, by then aged 21, in Fort Sumner on July 14, 1881. Garrett shot him in the chest in a dark room. Garrett and Bonney had been friends; he had a temper and had killed several men, with and without a badge. Rumors developed that Garrett never actually killed Bonney but it was a set up for him to escape. The movie in the 1970s accompanied by Bob Dylan’s lyrics made it seem as if Garrett was more of an assassin than a lawman. Certainly, a reward offered by the Governor of New Mexico was part of the incentive. And indeed, Garrett’s life story shows him seamlessly drifting among these roles.

Governor Lew Wallace, renowned for his involvement in the battles of Shiloh and Monocacy, as well as his authorship of the novel "Ben Hur," arrived in Santa Fe on September 29, 1878. His service as governor of the New Mexico Territory occurred during a time of lawless violence and political corruption. Wallace was involved in efforts to resolve New Mexico's Lincoln County War, a contentious and violent disagreement among the county's residents, and tried to end a series of Apache raids on territorial settlers.

On March 1, 1879, after previous attempts to restore order in Lincoln County had proven unsuccessful, Wallace issued orders for the arrest of those responsible for the local killings. Among the outlaws was none other than Billy the Kid. On March 17, 1879, Wallace clandestinely met with Bonney, who had witnessed the murder of a Lincoln County lawyer named Huston Chapman. Wallace sought Bonney's testimony in the trial of Chapman's alleged murderers. In return, Bonney requested protection from his enemies and amnesty for his past transgressions. During their meeting, the two struck a deal, with Bonney agreeing to become an informant in exchange for a full pardon of his previous crimes.

Wallace supposedly assured the Kid that he would be "scot-free with a pardon in your pocket for all your misdeeds." On March 20 Bonney agreed to provide grand jury testimony against those involved in Chapman's murder. Wallace arranged for a "fake" arrest and Bonney's detention in a local jail to assure his safety. Bonney testified in court on April 14, as agreed. However, the local district attorney revoked Wallace's bargain and refused to set the outlaw free. Bonney escaped and went back to killing people. Garrett set a $500 reward for his capture. That was when Garrett went after his friend. The authenticity of this bargain, however, remains questionable. It is unclear whether Wallace truly made such an offer or if it was merely a fabrication.

Garrett's early life was marked by financial hardship and tragedy. At age 3, Garrett’s father purchased the John Greer plantation in Claiborne Parish, Louisiana. The Civil War, however, destroyed the Garrett family's finances. Their mother died at the age of 37 on March 25, 1867, when Garrett was 16. Then the following year, on February 5, 1868, his father died at age 45. The children were left with a plantation that was more than $30,000 in debt. Relatives took in the children. The 18-year-old Garrett headed west from Louisiana on January 25, 1869. He became a Buffalo hunter and killed his first man in 1876. His first lawman job was as sheriff of Lincoln County during its war between 2 families after the previous sheriff was killed in a 5-day shootout. Billy the Kid was involved, so Garrett began to track him. Garrett went on to great acclaim as a Western lawman, recognized alongside Bat Masterson and Ben Daniels by Theodore Roosevelt. He would eventually be killed on the trail under still-mysterious circumstances.

An intriguing aspect to consider is the contrasting backgrounds of McCarty and Garrett. While McCarty was born in New York City, Garrett hailed from Alabama. in this regard, although an interesting switch of geographic roles, Garrett wasn’t such a good guy; Garrett's reputation as a lawman was not without blemish. On the other hand, Bonney, despite his outlaw status, had spent most of his life in the South. This pattern reveals a recurring theme where the law was often associated with the Republican and Northern states, while outlaws tended to emerge from the Border States or regions with Southern influences.

Arizona

In March 1861, Arizona territory issued an ordinance of secession. In retrospect, this is noteworthy because it wasn’t even a state at the time; it was part of a territory with New Mexico. Its stated reasons for this measure included: the need for protection from Native American raids and attacks, continued mail service, and the ties of “southern identity” although the document makes no explicit mention of slavery.  A specific passage in the secession statement says, “RESOLVED, That geographically and naturally we are bound to the South, and to her we look for protection; and as the Southern States have formed a Confederacy, it is our earnest desire to be attached to that Confederacy as a Territory.”

Black Americans in the Old West

Old Hollywood Westerns are fantastic updated examples of a Greek morality play: Evil may seem to be winning, but in the end, justice will prevail. There is of course a problem with the casting of these movies: 25% of the estimated 35,000 men who went out west and became cowboys (in the modern sense) were black.  These were former slaves who had been emancipated, went west due to limited prospects in the South, and were now looking to make a living.

And once this fact is pointed out, the reasons are not hard to discern. Former slaves had skills in cattle handling; suddenly free with no prospect of being hired for a fair wage at home, they headed West at the end of the Civil War.  While not treated exactly as equals, black men had equality to white men in terms of pay and responsibilities, A typical trail party consisted of a dozen men, of whom 7 or 8 were white men, 2 or so were Mexicans, and 3 were blacks.  These men were most often employed as wranglers or cooks, but not very often as trail bosses. The freed slaves might not be hired right away. Many came with kitchen or ranching skills but often trained under Mexican vaqueros or native Americans, and then hired by white ranchers and paid an equal wage.).

Many of the authentic characters of the Old West were former slaves who found a better life on the frontier. Here are 5 examples:

Deadwood Dick: Real name: Nat Love from Tennessee. Breaking horses and driving cattle were his specialties. He lived for a time in Deadwood and Dodge City. Later became a rodeo rider and performer.

Bob Lemmons: After being freed, he moved to West Texas and became known for his skills in capturing wild mustangs. He was so good at this that he became wealthy, bought his own ranch, and developed large herds of cattle and horses.

John Ware: Rancher freed from slavery in South Carolina, considered one of the most reliable cowboys on cattle drives from Alberta to Texas.

Bass Reeves: A freed slave from Arkansas who spoke numerous Native American languages, one of the great western lawmen, the first Black deputy U.S. marshal west of the Mississippi. Throughout Arkansas and the Oklahoma Territory, he apprehended over 3,000 criminals. Tales of his exploits are legendary, including that he once went on a posse with just a cook and an assistant and rounded up 21 wanted outlaws, who he led back on a rope. When we think of Western heroes, he really should be among the first we recognize, and the fact that we don’t is purely a manifestation of what old Hollywood thought would sell.

Bill Pickett: Legendary Rodeo performer, who invented steer wrestling, enshrined in the Rodeo Hall of Fame.

Wyatt Earp

If you think the Civil War has its myths and legends bent out of proportion to reality, well, the Old West has it beat, and the legend surrounding Wyatt Earp may be its greatest fraud. He is truly the embodiment of “the real America”, just not the ersatz one Hollywood created; the truth about the misogyny and violence of the Old West are romanticized, leading to false legends which have impacted modern views.

The story surrounding the Earps and the McLaurys and the Clantons and the facts of the Gunfight at the OK Corral and the Vendetta Ride go beyond this article. The truth is an even better story than the romanticized, sugar-coated version, and the blending of good guy versus bad guy never really ceases to amaze.

Wyatt Earp and Bat Masterson were assistant marshals in Dodge City, KS in the 1870s and 1880s. This town did not exist during the Bleeding Kansas days (it was founded in 1871), but the state’s reputation for violence predated the Old West. Earp moved to Dodge City from another Kansas boomtown, Wichita. His first wife was a prostitute who had opened a brothel there. Earp had been a pimp in Peoria. He was arrested several times while in Wichita for engaging in business with the brothel, and it was considered a conflict for a constable to be engaging in that behavior.

The Earps were northerners, from Illinois. Masterson was Canadian, from Quebec. Wyatt and Bat were Dodge City lawmen, in Kansas in the 1870s. Bleeding Kansas was still fresh in everyone’s mind. The territory west of them was Native American: Arapaho, Cheyenne, Comanche, Kansan, Kiowa, Osage, Pawnee, and Wichita.

Among the Dodge City lawmen of 1883 were Bat Masterson, Earp, and Charlie Basset, the town marshal. You would not want to mess with this group; these men were Tough. And they weren’t especially concerned with the details of the law. They applied the law with their fists and their six-shooters. What we see illustrated is that the guys wearing the star are northerners, sanctioned by Republican politicians in the post-war years by Grant or Hayes or Garfield, all Union generals serving as President; while the outlaws are originally from border states or southerners, and Democrats, who left behind a destroyed land and culture, represent the majority of the settlers. In the movies, the cliché was that the good guys wore white hats and the bad guys black ones. In reality, the lawmen were urban, wore ties, were clean-shaven, and represented society and a brand of frontier justice in the vacuum of the real thing.

Doc Holliday was from Georgia but graduated from Penn Dental School and his first dental practice was in St Louis. He moved west because his dental practice, at first successful, couldn’t survive his active tuberculosis, which was his eventual cause of death. He gambled because it was the only way an intelligent man with a persistent cough could earn a living, and his manual dexterity manifested in his gun handling.

The Clantons were from Missouri, the McLaurys from Iowa, but had become Texas and later Arizona cattle ranchers. The tension between North and South was not lost on anyone even a dozen years after Appomattox. While Hollywood has suggested that “cowboy” refers to the (white) settlers of the West it was a pejorative term suggesting cattle rustling, stagecoach robbery, and other crimes. The Clanton’s were indeed cowboys in this sense. Cowboys were poor, rural, isolated, worked with cattle and horses, worked hard, and did anything necessary to survive.

Tombstone is located in southern Arizona and was acquired as part of the Gadsden Purchase. That land was purchased from Mexico specifically to build a southern transcontinental railroad. Tombstone had its origins in the lead-up to the Civil War, and you just cannot understand the Gunfight or the Vendetta Ride without recognizing this. Tombstone was another boomtown due to silver mining. These kinds of places were infamous for loose law enforcement, perfect for the Earps. Earp’s second wife was also a prostitute. In Tombstone, his girlfriend was Josephine Marcus, a prostitute and gambler, from Brooklyn NY whose actual name was Sadie, called Sarah. She had been Sheriff Behan’s girlfriend before Earp came to town, and he was a friend with the Cowboys.

This is the foundation of the true story: Tombstone, AZ was perfectly happy with a bunch of cowboys – cattle thieves – in charge of town with their own elected sheriff in charge. Then these northerners came down uninvited, ran for office, tried to “reform” the town, stole the sheriff’s girlfriend, and carried badges from a Republican governor. They are not exactly noble: they are rough-and-tumble lawmen from Kansas and an infamous gambler, with reputations as gunfighters.

Those killed at the OK Corral famously are buried on Boot Hill. Where Wyatt Earp is buried is highly illustrative of the real America: Wyatt Earp is buried in a Jewish cemetery in Los Angeles. Despite her gambling addiction, Earp and Josephine, who was Jewish, remained together for many years after the shootout. Earp lived in LA as a movie consultant for Hollywood as one of many real-life roles including working for a time for Theodore Roosevelt. This is the real America, the melting pot, and the part that is left out because it is not the Western narrative Hollywood thrives on.

The Native American Perspective

The Civil War profoundly impacted the Native American tribes and led to what followed for the next 30 years. One-third of all Cherokees and Seminoles in Indian Territory died from violence, starvation, and war-related illness. Elite tribal members’ enslavement of African Americans motivated Southern allegiance. It turns out that the Native Americans fought for all the same reasons, influenced by the same economics and politics, as the white man.

It is estimated that over 20,000 Native Americans actively participated in the Civil War, fighting on both sides of the conflict. Approximately 3,500 Native Americans served in the Union Army. While exact numbers don’t exist for the CSA, it is believed to be much higher. It is crucial to recognize that some of the territories that were at the center of the slavery debate in 1850 eventually became the Indian territories in the 1870s. This historical context sheds light on the complex dynamics at play during this period.

Native Americans held complex aspirations during the war, perhaps naively hoping that aligning themselves with the white man would grant them a voice and consideration for their views. A close examination of the geographical distribution reveals that certain Indian territories, such as Oklahoma, Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona, lay below the Missouri Compromise line, indicating the presence of Native American slave owners. Ultimately, what the tribes truly desired was tribal sovereignty, but their concerns were overshadowed by the larger, more devastating destruction of indigenous ways of life. Oklahoma was the primary site of Indian Territory in 1861, housing at least nine tribes, with the Cherokees being the largest among them. The tribes faced internal divisions and conflicting opinions on the best course of action, both within and between their respective communities. Once again, it is important to emphasize that some of the territories of 1850 where slavery was a political issue would become the Indian territories of the 1870s.

The indigenous peoples of America held complex desires during the war and may have been somewhat naive in their belief that aligning with the white settlers would grant them a platform to voice their concerns. Their primary aspiration, however, was to attain tribal sovereignty. But the war wasn’t about their issues and was just an interlude to the bigger, more chilling destruction of aboriginal ways of life.

Tribes located in Oklahoma, Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona were situated below the Missouri Compromise line, while Wyoming and the Dakotas were located above. This indicates that certain Native American tribes did own slaves while others did not. Oklahoma today was the main location of Indian Territory in 1861, and at least 9 tribes were located there, although the Cherokees were the largest of them. Within these tribes, there were divisions in terms of loyalty and differing opinions on the best course of action to take. These divisions were not only present between tribes but also within individual tribes themselves.

Stand Watie served as Brigadier General in the Confederate States of America (CSA) during a tumultuous period in the history of the Cherokee Nation. Before his leadership, John Ross, who had guided the nation through the tragic Trail of Tears, advocated for neutrality and unity as the secessionist movement gained momentum in and around Indian Territory. Ross, supported by a significant majority, aimed to maintain the nation's sovereignty while also advocating for the abolition of slavery. However, Watie represented a wealthy minority within the Cherokee Nation who owned slaves. He was the most prominent figure of the Treaty Party, a group that defied the majority's wishes and illegally signed a treaty that resulted in the forced removal of Cherokees from their ancestral lands.

In a move that bypassed Ross, Watie formed a Cherokee cavalry by recruiting members from within the nation. Consequently, the Cherokee Nation found itself embroiled in its own civil war. When the CSA eventually surrendered, Watie lost his rank, and Ross resumed his position as chief. Watie actively participated in significant battles such as Wilsons Creek, Pea Ridge, and Cabin Creek. Notably, he became the last Confederate general to surrender. However, the Cherokee Nation suffered immense devastation both internally and externally. The absence of support from the Union army made it clear that their loyalty would not be rewarded. This summary only scratches the surface of a complex narrative filled with ruthless decision-making, self-centered actions, and violence.  

Ely Parker, a Seneca (Iroquois) and a colonel on Grant's staff played a significant role in the Civil War. Unlike Stand Watie, Parker strongly opposed slavery. Before the war, he had served as a civil engineer and diplomat for the Seneca, even contributing to the construction of the Erie Canal. As the war drew to a close, Parker was entrusted with the task of drafting the final terms of surrender for the Confederacy. At the time of surrender, General Lee "stared at me for a moment," said Parker. "He extended his hand and said, 'I am glad to see one real American here.' I shook his hand and said, 'We are all Americans.' After the war, he served in many government capacities including as Commissioner of Indian Affairs.

Enjoy that piece? If so, join us for free by clicking here.

References

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Arizona_Territory_Ordinance_of_Secession

https://listverse.com/2016/04/04/10-african-american-cowboys-who-shaped-the-old-west/

https://historycollection.com/the-little-known-history-of-american-indians-during-the-civil-war/

https://historycollection.com/the-little-known-history-of-american-indians-during-the-civil-war/

https://www.history.com/news/civil-war-native-american-indian-territory-cherokee-home-guard

https://americanindian.si.edu/static/why-we-serve/topics/civil-war/

Was a World War 2 Japanese Offensive in 1944 a Master Stroke?

The 1944 Japanese offensive of “Operation Ichigo” is one of the more under reported offensives of World War Two. However, this offensive would have an important effect on the outcome of the Pacific theater. This operation took place in China and accomplished some important Japanese military objectives. It would have a direct consequence on the U.S. bombings over Japan, and was a major Japanese military victory.

Daniel Boustead returns to the site and explains.

Japanese forces invading Henan, China in 1944.

In April 1944, the Japanese launched their first major offensive in China since they captured Hankow in 1938 ([1]). The operation was code named Ichigo meaning “Number One”. The plan involved Japanese forces in north China who were ordered southward to take the main north-south rail lines and the capture the U.S. Army Air Force’s east China Air bases. At the same time, other forces holding an enclave in the far south around (Canton and Hong Kong) were instructed to drive to the west and clear a line to the French Indochina border. This separate action was designed to open a direct line of communication between the Japanese in China and those Japanese forces in Southeast Asia.

The principal objectives for Operation Ichigo were as follows: seize the north-south rail line, a series of key towns, and the air bases. These were built by General Claire Chenault in 1938 and 1939. Chenault built these air bases for the Chinese Air Force and would be subsequently expanded to accommodate his Fourteenth Army Air Force.

This Japanese force consisted of 15 Imperial Japanese Army Divisions, plus five independent Imperial Japanese Army brigades. This force was commanded by General Shunroku Hata.

Early success

The Japanese achieved one of their first goals early in the operation. As the Japanese advanced the Chinese Army of 300,000 men simply capitulated to them ([2]). Japanese units consisting of only 500 men routed thousands of Chinese. In the resulting panic, Chinese officers commandeered most of the available trucks to escape with their families and possessions. It took only three weeks from April to May, 1944, for the Japanese to capture their first important objectives of the Yellow and the Yangtze Rivers. It was soon after the Japanese captured the Yangtze River in May 1944, that they pushed forward to General Chennault’s air bases. The Chinese city of Changsa barred the Japanese from Chenault’s air bases.

Changsha was defended by Chinese General Hsueh Yueh, who would soon make a fatal mistake that sealed the fate of the city. Right before the attack, General Yueh moved his headquarters 100 miles to the south to prepare the defense of Hengyang, China, where General Chenault’s northernmost air bases were located ([3]). This resulted in no one being able to coordinate the defense of Changsha. When the Chinese army artillery commander of Changsha asked General Yueh for infantry to protect his artillery, General Yueh refused. The outcome of these fatal decisions was apparent. The Japanese quickly destroyed the unprotected artillery and then swept away the unprotected infantry as Changsha fell to Japanese control in May 1944.

Advances

The Japanese Army then turned their attention to capturing Hengyang, China ([4]). It surrounded Hengyang by June 1944 and captured it by August, 1944(5).  On August 26, 1944 6,000 Japanese counterattacked at Lungling, China and the Chinese Y-Force was forced to retreat (22). In September 1944, the Imperial Japanese Army captured the Fourteenth Air Force base at Lingling, 80 miles southwest of Hengyang, China (6). By October 1944, Imperial Japanese Army forces were threatening Kweilin, China, home of the largest of General Chennault’s air bases. On November 10, 1944 the Imperial Japanese Army captured Kweilin, China (7).  In the aftermath of the fall of Kweilin in November 1944, Imperial Japanese forces began advancing towards Kunming, China (13). The Kunming advance further threatened General Chennault’s Fourteenth Air Force bases. The Japanese forces then moved to take over Chennault’s base at Liuchow, some 100 miles to the southwest of Kweilin. It was soon after this they pushed southward to take four bases around Nanning. They then drove southwest for a link up with other Japanese forces in French Indochina.

The Imperial Japanese Army had succeeded in their twin objectives: capturing the east China airfields and securing the main railway line to the south. As part of this Ichigo advance the IJA’s Eleventh Army (under the command of Lieutenant Isamu Yokoyama), began operating under his own his initiative, and quickly captured the American Chinese air base. This air base was located on the northwest trail towards the Chinese city of Kweiyang. The Chinese who were defending this air base quickly capitulated to the Japanese. This was due to their lack of supplies and weapons.

By early December 1944, the only thing that stood in the way of the Japanese Eleventh Army and the Ichigo offensive were Chennault’s air force. The Japanese forces also were facing the Chinese Army forces in their drive towards Kunming and Chunking China. Chennault’s air force was operating east of the Ichigo advance. The Japanese 11thArmy stopped its advance towards Kunming in December 1944. They had outrun their supply lines and retreated back slightly to garrison for the winter.

Operation Ichigo was such a success that American General Wedemeyer estimated that it would result in the Japanese Army releasing 25 divisions to fight elsewhere. General Wedemeyer also estimated that if the Japanese captured all of China, they could hold out for years, long after the Americans invaded the Japanese Home Islands.

Allied air strikes

On February 15, 1944 at an Allied meeting in New Delhi, General Wolf presented General Order No.16 (14). In General Order No.16, it stated that General Chennault and his Fourteenth Army Air Forces would be responsible for fighter defense of B-29 bases in China. The Japanese knew it was only a matter of time before the B-29 Bombers would be using the Fourteenth Army Air Force bases. The first B-29 Bombers took off from Chengtu, China, to bomb the Coke Ovens at the Imperial Iron and Steel Works at Yawata, Japan (8). The first B-29 Yawata raid lasted from the nights of June 15 to June 16, 1944. The photoreconnaissance results of the raid were disappointing. Only a single bomb wrecked a small building about three quarters of a mile away from the Coke Ovens. On July 7 to July 8, 1944, B-29 Bombers took off from a base near Chengtu, China to strike the Japanese Naval base at Sasebo, Japan (9). The raid was a failure because the bombs had missed the port facility by as much as 12 miles. This was due to mechanical problems with the radar bombing system. On August 10, 1944, 24 B-29 Bombers flew from Chengtu, China to Nagasaki and dropped 63 tons of incendiaries and fragmentation bombs on the city’s shipyards (10). On August 20, 1944, B-29 Bombers launched from Chengtu China caused little damage to the coke ovens at the Imperial Iron and Steel Works at Yawata Japan (11). On October 25, 1944, 78 B-29 Bombers took off from Chengtu, China and bombed Omura, Japan (12). According to strike photos and later reconnaissance on November 6, 1944, the Omura raid did a considerable amount of damage on the target, especially in the aluminum fabrication industry of the city. B-29 raids based out of China and India would end in early 1945 (21).

The early B-29 raids from the Mariana Islands on Japan produced varied results. On November 24, 1944, a group of B-29 bombers took off from Saipan island (15). The group of 111 B-29 Bomber’s target was the Nakajima Musashino aircraft-engine plant in northwest, Tokyo (16). This raid resulted in only 24 B-29 Bombers who managed to make a hit on the Nakajima Musashino aircraft engine plant. This bombing raid was severely weakened by the 130 MPH Jet Stream wind that blew the bombs off course. On November 27, 1944, a group of B-29 bombers took off from Isley Field Saipan and tried to hit the same target again (17). The results of this second raid were not very good due to poor aiming over the target, and that was only slightly mitigated by radar (18). On December 3, 1944, 86 B-29 Bombers took off from the Marianas Islands to hit the same target (19). The results of this raid were that only 26 bombs hit the target area and the damage to the factory was negligible. On December 13, 1944, a group of B-29 Bombers (based out of the Mariana Islands) struck at the Mitsubishi Aircraft Engine Works at Nagoya, Japan (20). The results of this raid (according to strike photographs) were one-fifth of the plant’s huge roof was blown in. Furthermore, the plant’s engine production was cut from 1,600 engines per month to 1,2000 engines per month and some vital parts of the factory were completely destroyed (20).

Conclusion

The Japanese capture of the American air bases severely reduced the damage to Japanese cities. The early B-29 raids from China and the Mariana Islands produced sparse results. They would have devastated Japan if they had been better coordinated, lasted longer, and had better weather intelligence. Even if the Japanese did not capture the air bases that directly house the B-29 Bombers, the Japanese military offensive along with America’s decision to concentrate on bombing missions from the Mariana Islands, made the Americans realize that bombing from China was no longer a viable option.

“Operation Ichigo” is an often-overlooked military operation. However, it had a strategic and tactical impact on the course of the war.  The operation captured key air bases, railways, and allowed for a link up with forces in Indochina. In addition, it drove the Allies to use nuclear weapons and Operation August Storm to negate the effects of this operation. “Operation Ichigo” was a very successful Japanese offensive.

In Loving memory of my Grandfather Richard Strayer Shue, a World War II veteran, a published Historian, and my inspiration. Born March 9, 1923 and died July 23, 2023.

[1] Moser, Don. China-Burma-India. Alexandria, Virginia. Time-Life Books Inc. 1978. 179.

[2] Moser, Don. China-Burma-India. Alexandria, Virginia. Time-Life Books Inc. 1978. 180.

[3] Moser, Don. China-Burma-India. Alexandria, Virginia. Time-Life Books Inc. 1978. 180 to 181.

[4] Moser, Don. China-Burma-India. Alexandria, Virginia. Time-Life Books Inc. 1978. 181.

5 Moser, Don. China-Burma-India. Alexandria, Virginia. Time-Life Books Inc. 1978. 172.

22 Moser, Don. China-Burma-India. Alexandria, Virginia. Time-Life Books Inc. 1978. 183.

6 Moser, Don. China-Burma-India. Alexandria, Virginia. Time-Life Books Inc. 1978. 188.

7 Moser, Don. China-Burma-India. Alexandria, Virginia. Time-Life Books Inc. 1978. 190.

13 Wheeler, Keith. Bombers Over Japan. Alexandria, Virginia. Time-Life Books Inc. 1982.71.

14 US Air Force, Office of Air Force History. The Army Air Forces In World War II: The Pacific: Matternhorn to Nagasaki June 1944 to August 1945., Volume No.5. Edited  Wesley Frank Craven and James Lea Cate. 1983. 46.

8 Wheeler, Keith. Bombers Over Japan. Alexandria, Virginia. Time-Life Books Inc. 1982. 57 to 59.

9 Dorr, Robert F. Osprey Combat Aircraft .33 : B-29 Superfortress Units of World War 2. Edited by Tony Holmes. Oxford,  Osprey Publishing Limited, United Kingdom, 2002, (2003 reprint). 20.

10 Wheeler, Keith. Bombers Over Japan. Alexandria, Virginia. Time-Life Books Inc. 1982. 61 to 63.

11 Wheeler, Keith. Bombers Over Japan. Alexandria, Virginia. Time-Life Books Inc. 1982. 63 to 64.

12 US Air Force, Office of Air Force History. The Army Air Forces In World War II: The Pacific: Matternhorn to Nagasaki June 1944 to August 1945., Volume No.5. Edited  Wesley Frank Craven and James Lea Cate. 1983. 140.

21 Dorr, Robert F. Osprey Combat Aircraft .33 : B-29 Superfortress Units of World War 2. Edited by Tony Holmes. Oxford,  Osprey Publishing Limited, United Kingdom, 2002, (2003 reprint). 31.

15 Wheeler, Keith. Bombers Over Japan. Alexandria, Virginia. Time-Life Books Inc. 1982. 101.

16 Frank, Richard B. Downfall: The End of the Japanese Empire. New York: New York. Random House. 1999. 53.

17 Wheeler, Keith. Bombers Over Japan. Alexandria, Virginia. Time-Life Books Inc. 1982. 103.

18  Frank, Richard B. Downfall: The End of the Japanese Empire. New York: New York. Random House. 1999. 54.

19 Wheeler, Keith. Bombers Over Japan. Alexandria, Virginia. Time-Life Books Inc. 1982. 105.

20 Wheeler, Keith. Bombers Over Japan. Alexandria, Virginia. Time-Life Books Inc. 1982. 105 to 106.

One of the Greatest Tragedies in the History of American Expansion – The Donner Party

The Hastings Cutoff - why would this area in the western part of our country, near Salt Lake City, be so important in the history of westward expansion? All the wagon train had to do was make a simple decision, make the turn, thereby cutting off three hundred miles or about two weeks on their journey to California.

Richard Bluttal explains the tragedy of the Donner Party, a group who took the Hastings Cutoff route.

James and Margaret Reed.

During their first week in the Cutoff, the Donner party made good progress. Hastings, who had promised to lead migrants along the trail, left Fort Bridger with a different company of wagons, and it fell to James F. Reed to act as the company’s guide. As they broke a new trail through the nearly impassable terrain of the Wasatch Mountains, they lost the two weeks’ time.

In May 1846, the last wagon train of the season left Independence, Missouri for the Mexican territory of Alta California. Led by two men from Springfield, Illinois—farmer George Donner and furniture manufacturer James F. Reed—the Donner Party followed the well-established California Trail as far as the Little Sandy River in Wyoming. It is there that they made the fateful decision to take a new, more direct route over the Wasatch Mountains and across the Great Salt Lake Desert. The determination was made despite the warnings from accomplished mountain man James Clyman.

On August 30, after gathering as much water and grass as they could carry, they entered the Great Salt Lake Desert. A note left by Hastings had assured the party that they would be able to cross the desert in just two days, but the journey took five. The party lost dozens of cattle in the desert, and several wagons had to be abandoned. The pioneers lost valuable days conducting a fruitless search for the missing oxen before beginning a circuitous navigation of the Ruby Mountains in modern north-eastern Nevada. By the time the Donner party reached the Humboldt River, where Hastings Cutoff re-joined the main California Trail, it was late September. All the other migrants of 1846 had completed their journey to California, and the Donner party was racing the weather to clear the passes in the Sierra Nevada.

Tension

Tensions were running high among the exhausted migrants, and on October 5 an altercation between Reed and a teamster employed by another family ended with Reed fatally stabbing the man. Some members of the party suggested that Reed be hanged, but he was instead banished from the company. Reed would continue west on horseback while the rest of his family remained with the Donner party.

The migrants began the ascent of the Sierra foothills low on food, and Paiute warriors killed several of the remaining oxen. By this point, the members of the company had cached, or buried, virtually all their personal possessions—except for food, clothing, and the barest essentials necessary for survival—in an effort to minimize the load on their exhausted animals. On October 31 the weary migrants approached what is now Donner Pass across the Sierra Nevada and found their progress blocked by deepening snow.

177 years ago, the Donner Party was unable to cross the Pass in a storm. They returned to the Lake and built cabins. They slaughtered their cattle for food and used the hides as roofs on the cabins. The Breens inhabited the cabin that had been built two years earlier by the Stephens Party. This is the site of the Pioneer Monument at Donner Memorial State Park. The Murphys built a cabin a few hundred yards to the south, against a large rock. This rock is today marked by a plaque in the park. The Graves and Reeds built a cabin about a half-mile down the Creek.

From November 20, 1846 to March 1, 1847, Irish immigrant Patrick Breen, a Donner party member, kept a diary of his ordeal in the mountains. Clinging to survival with his wife Margaret and their seven children, Breen described the harsh winter weather, the leather hides they resorted to eating, and the deaths of their traveling companions.

Diary Entries

“Came to this place on the 31st of last month that it snowed we went on to the pass the snow so deep we were unable to find the road, when within 3 miles of the summit then turned back to this shanty on the Lake, Stanton came one day after we arrived here we again took our teams & waggons & made another unsuccessful attempt to cross in company with Stanton we returned to the shanty it continuing to snow all the time we were here we now have killed most part of our cattle having to stay here until next spring & live on poor beef without bread or salt” - November 20, 1846

“still snowing now about 3 feet deep…killed my last oxen today will skin them tomorrow gave another yoke to Fosters hard to get wood” - November 29, 1846 “... snow about 5 ½ feet or 6 deep difficult to get wood no gong from the house completely housed up looks as likely for snow as when it commenced, our cattle all killed but three or four them, the horses & Stantons mules gone & cattle suppose lost in the Snow no hopes of finding them alive” - December 1, 1846 “... Milt. & Noah went to Donnos 8 days since not returned yet, thinks they got lost in the snow…”

December 17, 1846 “... May we with Gods help spend the comeing year better than the past which we purpose to do if Almighty God will deliver us from our present dreadful situation…” - December 31, 1846

Ordeal

Breen’s account of the winter of 1846–47 would provide the only contemporary written record of the Donner party’s ordeal. On December 15 Baylis Williams, an employee of the Reed family, died of malnutrition at the lake camp; his was the first recorded death. On December 16 a party of 10 men and 5 women set out to cross the mountains on improvised snowshoes. During a month’s harrowing, often overwhelming hardships from cold, storms, deep snow, and inadequate food, they struggled on. Eight of the men died, and the bodies of some of these were eaten by the others. Two men and all the women got through to the Sacramento Valley. The settlers of California organized a relief party which left Fort Sutter (Sacramento) on January 31, 1847. Heroically struggling through the deep snow, seven men reached the lake camp on February 18. They then took twenty-three of the starving emigrants, including seventeen children, back to the settlements; several deaths occurred on the way. Other relief parties followed, but, because of illness and injuries, it was impossible to remove everyone.

After dogs and cowhides had been devoured, many deaths occurred, and the survivors were forced to resort to cannibalism of the dead bodies. The last survivor, Lewis Keseber who had supported himself during the last weeks by cannibalism, did not leave camp until April 21. Five of the emigrants died before reaching the mountain camps, thirty-four at the camps or on the mountains while attempting to cross, and one just after reaching the settlements. Two men who had joined the party at the lake also died. The total number of deaths was thus forty-two, with forty-seven survivors, although many others would soon follow.

The ordeal of the Donner party highlighted the incredible risks that were inherent in the great overland trek, but it did little to slow the pace of migration. Indeed, even the survivors of the party encouraged others to undertake the journey. In a letter to her cousin in Illinois, Virginia Reed recounted that “I have not wrote you half of the truble, but I hav Wrote you anuf to let you now what truble is,” before concluding, “Dont let this letter dishaten anybody. Never take no cutofs and hury along as fast as you can.” The discovery of gold in California in 1848 would turn the flow of migrants into a virtual flood, and the legacy of the Donner party would become less a cautionary tale and more a grim historical footnote in the story of the great westward movement.

After examining remains from the Alder Creek campsite, researchers in 2010 announced that they had been unable to find any human bones or other physical evidence of cannibalism. The researchers themselves clarified, however, that the absence of archaeological evidence did not rule out the possibility that cannibalism had occurred, especially given the extensive contemporary accounts by members of the rescue parties.

Key problems

There has been a lot written about the Donner party’s own problems, below were a number of them.

1. The Donner Party started its trip dangerously late in the pioneer season. The core of what became the Donner Party did not leave their jumping-off point at Independence, Missouri until May 12. They were the y fell behind schedule after taking an untested shortcut.

2. After reaching Wyoming, most California-bound pioneers followed a route that swooped north through Idaho before turning south and moving across Nevada. In 1846, however, a dishonest guidebook author named Lansford Hastings was promoting a straighter and supposedly quicker path that cut through the Wasatch Mountains and across the Salt Lake Desert. There was just one problem: no one had ever traveled this “Hastings Cutoff” with wagons, not even Hastings himself. Despite the obvious risks—and against the warnings of James Clyman, an experienced mountain man—the 20 Donner Party wagons elected to break off from the usual route and gamble on Hastings’ back road. The decision proved disastrous. The emigrants were forced to blaze much of the trail themselves by cutting down trees, and they nearly died of thirst during a five-day crossing of the salt desert. Rather than saving them time, Hasting’s “shortcut” ended up adding nearly a month to the Donner Party’s journey.

3. The emigrants lost a race against the weather by just a few days. Despite the Hastings Cutoff debacle, most of the Donner Party still managed to reach the slopes of the Sierra Nevada by early November 1846. Only a scant hundred miles remained in their trek, but before the pioneers had a chance to drive their wagons through the mountains, an early blizzard blanketed the Sierras in several feet of snow. Mountain passes that were navigable just a day earlier soon transformed into icy roadblocks, forcing the Donner Party to retreat to nearby Truckee Lake and wait out the winter in ramshackle tents and cabins. Much of the group’s supplies and livestock had already been lost on the trail, and it was not long before the first settlers began to perish from starvation.

4. During the “Forlorn Hope” expedition, the hiking party included a pair of Indians named Salvador and Luis, both of whom had joined up with the Donner emigrants shortly before they became snowbound. The natives refused to engage in cannibalism, and Salvador and Luis later ran off out of fear that they might be murdered once the others ran out of meat. Indeed, when the duo was found days later, exhausted and lying in the snow, a hiking party member named William Foster shot both of them in the head. The Indians were then butchered and eaten by the hikers. It was the only time during the entire winter that people were murdered for use as food.

Conclusion

Of the eighty-one pioneers who began the Donner Party’s horrific winter in the Sierra Nevada, only forty-five managed to walk out alive. The ordeal proved particularly costly for the group’s fifteen solo travelers, all but two of whom died, but it also took a tragic toll on the families. George and Jacob Donner, both of their wives and four of their children all perished. Pioneer William Eddy, meanwhile, lost his wife and his two kids. Nearly a dozen families had made up Donner wagon train, but only two—the Reeds and the Breens—managed to arrive in California without suffering a single death.

Did you find that article of interest? If so, get more by joining us for free - click here.

Was Hungary Neutral or a Nazi Ally in World War Two?

Hungary became involved in World War Two largely due to circumstances that were present at the end of World War One. Hungary underwent a variety of governments, leaders, and economic structures that created a difficult political situation – ripe for the embrace of a totalitarian regime. An embrace that they accepted with gritted teeth, but one they accepted none-the-less. Weak leadership, incongruent leadership, and radical ideology all guided Hungary into the arms of the Nazis, an embrace they spent the remainder of the war attempting to loosen.

Avery Scott explains.

Hungarian Arrow Cross forces and a German tank in Budapest, October 1944. Source: Bundesarchiv, Bild 101I-680-8283A-12A / Faupel / CC-BY-SA 3.0, available here.

From 1919 to 1921, the White Terror (led by a counter-revolutionist group) occurred in Hungary. The terror was an attempted purge of those the country found undesirable – largely Jews. Archduke Joseph August stepped forward as regent to maintain power within the Hapsburg line. However, allied powers did not recognize August, and therefore he held no authority – requiring abdication. Eventually, the turmoil was cooled slightly in the establishment of the Kingdom of Hungary and with Parliament’s selection of Miklós Horthy de Nagybánya to serve as the regent of the Kingdom in March of 1920. Horthy’s power was slightly more limited than a king, but only slightly in that he had free will to appoint ministers and influence legislation. One major goal of Horthy’s rule was to reverse Hungarian losses sustained as a result of the Treaty of Trianon. The Treaty ended World War One but diminished Hungarian landholdings. The loss of land resulted in Hungary struggling economically, just as much of the world was struggling at the time. In 1927, Prime Minister István Bethlen signed a Treaty of Friendship with Benito Mussolini, thus bringing the two nations closely together both politically and economically. A few years later, Prime Minister Gyula Gömbös signed a similar treaty with Adolf Hitler of Nazi Germany, acquiescing to many demands of Hitler to spur an economic relationship between the two nations. One major selling point to the Kingdom of Hungary was the promise that Hitler would return land lost in the Treaty of Trianon. This land would be valuable to Hungary in its aim to climb out of the current depression that was wreaking havoc on the nation.

Tilt to the Axis

Gömbös soon died and was replaced by Prime Minister Kálmán Darányi who was forced to step down to be replaced by Béla Imrédy. Both Darányi and Imrédy began their tenure as Prime Minister by trying to court both their fascist neighbors, and the allied powers. This two-faced style worked for neither minister, and ultimately, they were forced to choose a side, typically doubling down on the side of their neighbors. Both passed anti-Semitic laws, and installed members of their cabinet that were pro-German in policy (despite Imrédy’s own Jewish heritage). After Imrédy stepped down, he was replaced by former Prime Minister Pál Teleki. Teleki was more moderate in his stance on involvement with the Nazi regime, and despite being complicit in anti-semitism, was more accommodating in his approach to Jews than other prime minsters had been. Teleki hoped to keep Hungary out of any wars but felt pressure from both the allied and axis powers to pick a side. Teleki hoped that a small war involving Germany could restore more land to Hungary, but he did not want a drawn-out struggle. Despite his moderate stance, Hungary signed the Tripartite Pact which would likely embroil them in the upcoming struggle, as it allied them with the axis powers. However, Teleki also signed a Treaty of Friendship with Yugoslavia in which the two countries would not be aggressive toward each other. As a result of the Tripartite Pact, Hitler felt that Hungary should assist him in is war efforts. Specifically, Hitler’s Nazi regime was adamant that Hungary should allow German troops to march through Hungary to attack Yugoslavia. Teleki wanted Hungary to remain neutral in this, but British pressure was going to force him to pick a side. Unfortunately, before Teleki was able to do so, private arrangements were made for Germany to march through Hungary. As a result, on April 3, 1941, Teleki committed suicide as he could not stand the thought of Hungary being complicit in the war.

War

After the death of Teleki, László Bárdossy became prime minister, and supported a pro-German policy. This was amplified after a bombing raid by Yugoslavia and then another raid allegedly by the Soviet Union. The raid by the Soviet Union was the catalyst that led Hungary to declare war on the Soviet Union. The allied powers warned Hungary that if they did not end their involvement in the war, they would also declare war on Hungary. Bárdossy did not comply (even though he could not even if he had wanted to). Because of this, Hungary was soon fully engulfed in World War Two. In an attempt to distance the country from Germany, Horthy asked for László Bárdossy to resign. Horthy hoped that by doing so, there would be less reliance on Germany thus allowing them to avert any additional consequences. Dr. Miklós Kállay took control as Prime Minister. Kállay was far more moderate than his predecessors and was less willing to work with Germans or follow their commands. Under Kállay, Jews were not treated well; however they were not persecuted to the extent they had been previously. Most importantly, they were not being turned over to the Germans. Kállay, despite still maintaining a relationship with Germany, was attempting to negotiate with the United States and Britain. The Germans found out about this relationship and were infuriated. Germany followed through on their promise to occupy Hungary if support for Germany ended. Thus, when German forces invaded Hungary, Kállay was removed from his post and replaced with Döme Sztójay. Kállay fled but was eventually captured and remained in the custody of the Germans for the remainder of the war. Sztójay only served for a few months as prime minster and was effectively a German puppet during that time. Horthy was very unhappy with many of his decisions, including the deportation of Jews, and was eventually successful in ousting him for Géza Lakatos. Lakatos, similarly, only served for a few months but attempted to end Hungarian involvement in the war with a peace treaty with the allies. However, this was unsuccessful. After Horthy’s son was kidnapped, Horthy surrendered to the Germans, and Lakatos was imprisoned. Ferenc Szálasi was made the leader of the Government of National Unity, essentially a Nazi puppet government. Under his control, Jews were deported, funds sent to Germany, a draft occurred, and Hungary increased overall military presence with the Germans. During this time, Béla Miklós de Dálnok attempted a provisional government with which to fight back against a Szálasi government. This was eventually successful, and he became prime minister from March to November 1945.

Conclusion

Hungary is a tale of a country that was falling into the perfect storm of struggle leading them to accept the dictates of an oppressive government. Hungary courted the Nazis too closely early on and became reliant upon them for trade and commerce. Because of this connection, they were unable to move away from Germany when they no longer agreed with its policies. John Adams once stated that, in the American Revolution, France assisted America in putting their hand “above our chin to prevent us from drowning, but not to lift our heads out of water.” There are many times in history this statement has been true, but possibly none more perfectly than in the relationship of Hungary and Germany. Germany needed a struggling Hungary, as it gave them power over their government.

Additionally, Hungary attempted to be on the allied side, axis side, and neutral all within the same conflict, sometimes within a matter of days of each other. This position was untenable and the direct result of poor leadership. The prime minister was replaced so frequently that it is difficult to understand who was really in power all too often. This greatly reduced continuity of government and did not allow for any one policy to take root. Hungary was led based upon the current leader’s agenda. Horthy did a poor job of vetting ministers and did not exert control over them to effect positive policies for Hungary. This weak leadership allowed for Hitler to come into Hungary and dictate what they would do, and how they would govern. Thus, Hungary became an ally, an unenthusiastic one, but an ally still to Nazi Germany and the Nazi regime that terrorized the world.

Did you find that article of interest? If so, get more by joining us for free - click here.

Female Hysteria Throughout History

Mental health is fast becoming an issue at the forefront of the public consciousness, but it has not been without struggle; history is littered with a multitude of inhumane ways those suffering from mental health issues have been treated - all you have to do is look through the history of ‘lunatic asylums’ to discover that their methods were usually cold, brutal and often detrimental to the patient.

These asylums commonly had a high volume of women within their walls; many of whom were abandoned at the gates by their husbands or other family members, as they were unable to deal with their ‘issues’ - which could have been anything ranging from mood swings and nervousness, loss of appetite, or even simple dizzy spells. The diagnosis: a bad case of female hysteria. The treatment? Well, a pelvic massage, of course!

Rachael Elizabeth explains.

Marie Wittman in a cataleptic pose taken, circa 1880.

The Queen of Hysterics

One such place where these afflicted women would be sent was the Salpetriere Hospital in Paris, France. The Salpetrieire Hospital was originally a gunpowder factory until its recondition in 1656, when it was converted into a ‘hospice’ for women suffering from hysteria, epilepsy, and dementia, along with poor women and female criminals. Although it is cited as a ‘hospital’ or ‘hospice’, the Salpetrieire Hospital quickly became a notorious insane asylum, and the go-to place to dispose of women suffering from so-called ‘hysteria’. The hospital had a capacity of 10,000 “patients” and 300 prisoners - but among the women, a patient named Marie “Blanche” Wittman became the unlikely star of Dr Jean-Martin Charcot’s hysteria show.

Dr Jean-Martin Charcot was a French neurologist, and famously became known as ‘the father of neurology’. Dr Charcot would use Miss Wittman, along with other female patients, for his hypnosis shows, demonstrating his ability to induce and stop moments of hysteria. Whilst on stage, Charcot could arouse an attack of hysteria from his female host via hypnosis, and it was Wittman who became the main attraction - due to the fact she would reenact any scenario Charcot asked with an extreme display of emotion, making her audience coo with disbelief. In one such event, Charcot made Wittman believe that an image of a donkey was in fact a nude image of herself, and through her shock and embarrassment, Wittman smashed the picture.

In order to “switch off” Wittman (or the other women), Charcot would use ovary compression, as this was believed to bring them out of their hypnotic state - at first, Charcot would manually press down on the women's bodies - that is, until he invented the first ovary compression device, aptly named “the ovary compressor”.

The first demonstration of the device was on February 7, 1888, with Wittman as the hypnotized demonstrator. The straps, made from leather, would fasten around her back and the padded screws were placed over the abdomen, before being slowly tightened which would squeeze the woman's abdomen, towards the “hysteric centre”, and would magically appease their hysteric state.

The History of Hysteria

The word ‘hysteria’ is derived from the ancient Greek word ‘Hystera’ (which, loosely translated, means ‘uterus’), and it was believed that if a woman didn’t keep her uterus in check (usually by engaging in sexual encounters with her husband or by producing offspring), her uterus would angrily ‘wander around her body’ - like a naughty child throwing a tantrum - and thus cause a myriad of symptoms and diseases; but because hysteria was only thought to be caused by the womb, this “condition” was only ever attributed to women.

In the Victorian era, hysteria diagnosis was rampant, and the physicians of the time concluded that rubbing the woman’s pelvis until she reached “hysterical paroxysm” was a way to cure (or at least provide some temporary relief to) the hysteria-ridden woman and help bring the womb back to its rightful place.

The action of massaging the woman’s pelvis consisted of the physician physically performing the task himself - and although this could be construed as predatory, the act itself was supposedly never considered or intended to be sexual. Unfortunately, however, as with many archaic medical interventions, there were downsides to the procedure - it was a difficult technique to master, and could in some cases take hours to gain a successful result. The laborious task of curing a woman’s hysteria quite rapidly became a hindrance, both due to the volume of women affected, and the volume of women who needed ‘repeat prescriptions’, if you will.

In 1734, the invention of the first clock-work vibrator named the ‘Tremoussoir’ provided welcome relief to the cramping hands of the physicians, as now they had an apparatus to take the strain out of manual pelvic massages. A little later, around the early 1800s, Joseph Mortimer Granville patented the first ‘electromechanical’ vibrator; its original purpose was for the relief of muscular aches and pains for men, and he specifically stated that it should NOT be used to treat hysterical women - although many physicians began implementing the devices regardless.

Although the invention of the vibrator did help to alleviate the workload of the physicians, they were still manually using the devices to treat the women. As electricity became a growing staple in people's homes, women were now able to buy their vibrators to use in the comfort of their own home; in the 1920s, the vibrating devices began making an appearance in adult films, therefore catapulting them deep into the world of eroticism, and they were subsequently rendered obsolete by the medical community.

A Happy(ish) Ending

To our modern minds, doctors facilitating the use of a vibrator sounds ludicrous, and perhaps even ominous, but we have to remember that in the 1800s, when this was a popular topic, not one iota of the device's purpose, nor the treatment itself was intended to be sexual - in fact, physicians sometimes even used the device to help deter women who made ‘sexual forward advances’, as that behavior was also seen as an affliction.

Although it is tempting to poke fun at the historic medical blunders that seem so outlandish by today’s standards, it’s important to remember that historical sexism towards women’s ailments was a deeply troubling and disturbing time, and even though ‘hysteria’ is no longer a diagnosis, it took until the 1950s for Female Hysteria to be declassified as a mental health issue.

Even today, although thankfully vastly improved, the remnants of the dismissive attitude towards women’s health problems are still ingrained in us - a study on heartandstroke.ca details, “Women who mention stress, along with physical symptoms of cardiac disease, are more likely to be diagnosed with anxiety than men reporting the same issues”. According to the British Heart Foundation, another study has also shown that women have a fifty percenthigher chance of heart disease being misdiagnosed as anxiety-related disorders when compared with men.

Although it is easy to look back at the science of the time and laugh at its absurdness, we should also consider that they were probably trying to do the best they could with the information they had available at the time. Nowadays, we can rest assured that medical science has evolved in a variety of ways which has had an overwhelmingly positive effect on many people's lives.

Did you find that piece fascinating? If so, join us for free by clicking here.

References

https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/from-awareness-to-action/202303/the-history-of-hysteria-in-womens-lives

https://www.glamour.com/story/the-history-of-doctors-diagnosing-women-with-hysteria

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/female-hysteria_n_4298060

https://www.rti.org/insights/myth-female-hysteria-and-health-disparities-among-women

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/the-controversy-of-female-hysteria#Hysteria-in-the-19th-century

https://www.bhf.org.uk/informationsupport/heart-matters-magazine/medical/women/misdiagnosis-of-heart-attacks-in-women

https://theamericanscholar.org/beyond-nerves/

https://academic.oup.com/brain/article/130/12/3342/285315

https://www.bestfranceforever.com/the-hysteria-show/

https://gizmodo.com/meet-the-queen-of-hysterics-who-was-freuds-early-muse-1604567867

Quackery by Lydia Kang

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3480686/

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232746123_Women_And_Hysteria_In_The_History_Of_Mental_Health

https://victorian-era.org/female-hysteria-during-victorian-era.html

https://victorian-era.org/female-hysteria-during-victorian-era.html?expand_article=1

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-vibrator/

How American Seeds Blossomed into the Mexican Revolution

Despite being neighbors and having deep ties with Mexico, most Americans don’t realize that the United States played a key role in sowing the seeds of the Mexican Revolution. In fact, long before the Mexican Revolution even kicked off, three parties emerged, and later their respective interests converged, setting the stage for a violent, bloody uprising. Mexican president Porfirio Diaz, Gilded Age, American industrialists and tycoons, and Mexican revolutionary Ricardo Flores Magón collided, leaving in their wake an indelible influence still felt in both countries today.

Adam Miezio explains.

Porfirio Diaz.

The Diaz Master Plan

Mexico had just cast off France’s colonial shackles in 1867. By this time, Mexico had been beaten, bludgeoned and bloodied by centuries worth of European colonial domination. Diaz wanted to pull Mexico up out of its mostly agrarian based economy and turn Mexico into a legitimate, wealthy country on the world stage. Diaz’ plan to modernize Mexico included welcoming foreign investment and production for international markets.

At first, Diaz’ plan paid off. The coups and foreign invasions ended, health and literacy increased and renewed vigor pulsed through Mexico. The progress came at the cost of violent suppression of dissent, imprisoning or executing public challengers, rigging elections and dismissing democratic principles. However, as well-meaning as his intentions may have been, Mexico became a quick and easy target for exploitation from north of the border.

Tired of being the new kid on the block, targeted by bullies, Diaz saw opportunities to open Mexico to capital investment. He was in luck, and all he had to do was look to the U.S for a bit of fresh, oxygen rich, air to breathe new life into Mexico.  At the time, the U.S. was experiencing the Gilded Age (1877-1900), an era exemplified by American, economic titans. Although the Spaniards and French took much of the wealth, Mexico was still rich in natural resources: precious metals, oil, and much more. The Gilded Age industrialists saw the vast, untouched wealth Mexico had to offer and couldn’t resist. Diaz welcomed them with open arms to come down to Mexico, do business and plunder the nation’s resources.

Mexico Opens for Business

Diaz opened Mexico for business and:

“…literally sold Mexico to foreign interests. Millions of acres were sold to U.S. agriculture, railroad, and mining companies. Ninety-eight per cent of Mexico’s rural and Indigenous population was left landless, whereas U.S. businessmen and the élite Mexicans who collaborated with them grew rich. The Guggenheim, Rockefeller, and Doheny families in the United States, and the Terrazas and Madero families in Mexico, among many others, reaped the profits of Díaz’s rule. As a result, titans such as Andrew Carnegie claimed that Díaz was “one of the greatest rulers in the world, perhaps the greatest of all, taking into consideration the transformation he has made in Mexico.”

Thus, Mexico and the U.S. consummated a political marriage of financial opportunity and economic convenience. Little did Diaz know that he was helping to start a future, socioeconomic fire. With his coffers filling up, he lost perspective and sight of the ruin that his policies inflicted on Mexico. Nevertheless, Diaz continued the liquidation of Mexico, in turn creating societal fire risk, by selling:

“…land use and mining rights to wealthy landowners and entrepreneurs and to US and European companies. In the process, he confiscated communally held land from peasant communities (ejidos. ) His corruption, favoritism, and dictatorial rule led to resentment by many upper- and middle-class Mexicans. They were educated, white or light-skinned landowners and professionals who resented the lack of democracy and opportunity, but considered themselves superior to the Indian and mestizo masses.”

The collective greed of Diaz and the Gilded Age titans saw no bounds. The 1883 Land Reform Act saw many of Mexico’s natural and material resources sold off to J.P. Morgan, Russell Sage, and the Hearsts. In the late 1890s, sprawling American business investments included sugar, sawmills, cattle ranches and henequen plantations. Oil, copper, lead, zinc, rubber, and agricultural investments swelled American fortunes.  Transportation became a double dip. The mined resources were transported by railroad north to the U.S. using the Mexican railway system, which not coincidentally, was also owned by the same Gilded Age tycoons.

In 1911, American investments represented almost 62% of Mexican railroads, 24% of mining, and 1.4% of oil. Foremost among the American industrialists was the oil and railroad magnate and multi-millionaire, Henry Clay Pierce. In 1914, Pierce owned $115,049,000 worth of bonds of the National Railway of Mexico, or about half of its total value. Now the wood and the oxygen for the Mexican Revolution was set in place, with countless Mexican workers and indigenous natives suffering under debt peonage. All that was left, was the match to start the fire.

Portfirio beer. Copyright and re-produced with the permission of Adam Miezio.

The Revolution Finds Its Fire

The decades of the Diaz regime plunged Mexico into a socioeconomic disaster. For the time being, the man who cared least about Mexico’s growing unrest and inequality, was Diaz himself. He was busy lining his pockets and his cronies’, thanks to the American tycoons surging business enterprises in Mexico. This didn’t sit well with Mexico however, and it would be one man’s pen, that would ignite the bonfire of the Mexican Revolution- Ricardo Flores Magón.

In 1901, in San Luis Potosi, Magón began sparking the match by decrying the Diaz regime as a “den of thieves.” Many Mexicans agreed with the sentiment of the already two decade old regime stealing their lands, rights and wages, but it was never heard or discussed publicly. Ricardo Flores Magón and his brothers became radical dissidents. Along with radical and liberal intellectuals, Magón gained political influence. He was backed by journalists, American dissidents, and thousands of poor workers, farmers, miners, and cotton pickers called magonistas. Magón never strayed far from their side, as the magonistas could always have their leader’s writings in hand.

A year prior, Magón founded the newspaper Regeneración, the leading, revolutionary voice of Mexico. The newspaper circulated far and wide across Mexico, and soon landed Magón in jail. Afterwards, he fled in exile to Canada and the U.S. While in the U.S., he lived in various cities (El Paso, St. Louis, San Antonio and Los Angeles), where he hid, organized, wrote and published Regeneración. By 1905, the newspaper enjoyed a circulation of 20,000 and had gained one quite notable reader- Emiliano Zapata.

While the socialist Regeneración was published from the U.S., Magón gained notable support and help from American socialists and anarchists like Mother Jones and Emma Goldman. Foreign countries weren’t enough to protect and hide Magón. Although he never gained the high profile status of revolutionaries Emiliano Zapata and Pancho Villa, Magón had achieved most wanted status.

Inevitable American Pressure

The percolating unrest south of the border drew the attention of the White House. At a time when it wasn’t common practice for U.S. presidents to meet respective heads of state on their own territory, President William Howard Taft and Mexican President Porfirio Díaz met in El Paso and Ciudad Juárez. Up until that point, it was the first meeting between American and Mexican heads-of-state. Around that time, Taft wrote a letter, saying “there would be a revolution growing out of the selection of his successor. As Americans have about $2,000,000 of capital invested in the country, it is inevitable that in case of a revolution or internecine strife we should interfere, and I sincerely hope that the old man’s official life will extend beyond mine, for that trouble would present a problem of the utmost difficulty.”

Magón and his masses of magonistas were still determined to oust Diaz. They had endured more than enough plunder of their beloved country by American imperialists like Guggenheim and Rockefeller to fail. Unfortunately for Magón, the Diaz regime was now collaborating with American officials to hunt him down. U.S. agents of the Bureau of Investigation (precursor to the F.B.I.) were tracking Magón and his whereabouts. Magón also had feds from the U.S. Departments of War, Treasury, Justice and State on his tail, not to mention hordes of police, sheriffs and spies. Magón lays claim to being one of the F.B.I.’s first cases and most wanted men.

Eventually, Magón was apprehended in Los Angeles, on August 23, 1907.

Magón was released from prison in 1910, the same year that the Mexican Revolution began. Magón continued publishing Regeneración in Los Angeles, as the magonistas, led by Zapata and Villa, waged war south of the border. Besides inadvertently helping to launch the F.B.I., Magón left another influential legacy behind - Mexican immigration.

The Mexican Revolution Jump Starts Immigration

As the Mexican Revolution kicked off, Mexicans fleeing the violence, poured into the U.S. Insurgents, refugees and campesinos alike came by boat or by foot. Those who came by boat, disembarked in San Francisco, and took trains to Los Angeles and Chicago. Those who came by foot, flooded into the southwest, especially Texas. Laredo and El Paso became two of the most popular destinations.

In fact:

The Mexican population in El Paso grew exponentially between 1910 and 1916, from approximately 9,000 to nearly 33,000, as Mexican refugees, impacted by the Revolution, fled north. The refugees included not only the poor but also, by one city newspaper’s estimation, “tens of thousands of Mexicans of the best classes,” leading El Paso to displace “San Antonio, New Orleans, St. Louis, New York, and Los Angeles [as the] formerly dominant capitals in the mind of the average welltodo [sic] Mexican.”

The revolution blazed across Mexico. Peasants, workers, mestizos, intellectuals, business owners and white-skinned Mexicans were forced into competing groups. The undemocratic institutions, unequal land distribution and deep rooted inequality sown by Diaz’ economic policies affected each socioeconomic class in a unique way. The unfortunate reality didn’t help to create solidarity during the revolution. Some success did come fast though.

Diaz Out, and Magón Dead along with his Legacy

By May 1911, Diaz was defeated and on his way to exile in France. Even with the 30-year dictatorship vanquished, the Mexican Revolution still raged on for 6 more years. At the time, Magón lived in El Monte, part of the San Gabriel Valley in Los Angeles County. By this time, he had become fully radicalized and made no effort to hide his anarchist politics. His radical anarchism didn’t sit well among some magonistas, who were more moderate and socialist. Magon began losing support and notoriety, but he had one last gasp in the annals of history.

While WWI broke out, coinciding with the Mexican Revolution, Magon published an anti-war manifesto in 1918. The last stroke of his pen sealed his fate. In 1919, U.S. president Woodrow Wilson launched the Palmer raids. The raids unleashed a wholesale crackdown on dissidents and leftists, foremost among them socialists, communists and anarchists. Magón got swept up along with notable contemporary Eugene V. Debs. Magón was charged with sedition under the Espionage Act of 1917. He was convicted and sentenced to 20 years in prison, and died at age 48 in Fort Leavenworth penitentiary in Kansas.

Sadly, Magon spent most of the Mexican Revolution in prison, cut off from the movement he started. His increasing militancy and anarchism didn’t provide the cohesion and solidarity that Mexicans sought. Although he earned the credit of the Mexican Revolution’s “intellectual author,” his legacy now lies in the shadows of timeless legends Emiliano Zapata and Pancho Villa.

If you found that piece of interest, join us for free by clicking here.