Leslie Leatherwood

HIST3090

March 25, 2006

University of Georgia

 

ACTIONS OF THE ATLANTA POLICE DEPARTMENT DURING THE RACE RIOT OF 1906

 

At the turn of the twentieth century Atlanta, Georgia was considered a prime example of a progressive city regarding race relations.  It was cited as a city of the New South where blacks and whites worked and lived side by side with few racial problems.  All that changed in the early evening hours of September 22, 1906.  A race riot began in the streets of downtown Atlanta that would mark the city for many years.  For months prior to that fateful day the racial tensions in Atlanta were intense.  The gubernatorial candidates for governor that year were in a heavy debate about how to disenfranchise the blacks and keep them in their place.  There were also concerns by the whites of the advancements that blacks were making in society.  On that September day, there were several exaggerated reports published in the newspapers of assaults on white women by black men.  These alleged attacks caused a crowd of men, which quickly turned into a mob, to randomly and viciously attack innocent blacks on the streets of the city.  The riot was on and no person with dark skin was safe.  In looking back at the riot it is interesting to note the responses of the local police to the riot.

            The actions of the Atlanta Police Department came under great scrutiny as the events of the riot unfolded and in its aftermath.  As the riot went on into the evening and the crowd continued its rampage, many asked what was the police department doing to contain the mob and restore order to the city.  The mob was clearly disorderly, and it repeatedly revealed a boisterous disregard for human life, private property, and police authority.1  There were several responses to the riot by the police, and not all were good.  Some of the officers took action against the mob; but their actions were also lacking due to being overwhelmed by the crowd, they were ineffective due to training and resources and because of participatory actions by some of the officers. 

            The actions of police and military in American race riots have varied from city to city and from department to department.  It is interesting to notice that the Atlanta Police Department had responses to the riot similar to those of other department.  Much of the response and effectiveness of the police and military depend largely on the attitudes of the police themselves and their leaders.  There have been numerous reports where white policemen have refused to protect black victims and in some cases have actually joined in the attacks.  Every riot has produced allegations of misbehavior on the part of individual police officers and the department.2  Like Atlanta, there have been race riots in several major cities, such as Chicago, St. Louis, New York, and Detroit where the actions of the police were questioned.  Looking at the policies of the police departments of the communities involved none had plans for the suppression of civil racial violence.3  Even though Atlanta was seen as a progressive city it still observed the color lines of the time.  Atlanta, like the other cities, had its prejudices, discriminations and social tensions against the black population.  And like the other cities, some of the local police were part of the problem instead of the solution.  In almost every riot police official have used only two tactics consistently, with little success; those tactics are attempting to separate the warring factions by isolation of the black community and the establishment of curfews.4  The Atlanta police also used these tactics with the same results.

            To understand the response of the Atlanta police officers one must look at the department prior to the riot.  The Atlanta Police Department was comprised of all white males.  It was not until 1948 that the first blacks were hired as police officers.5  These white males, even though they were officers of the law, had the beliefs of the time and shared the same racial ideas of the rioters.  In the early years of the twentieth century the black citizens of Atlanta often faced harassment and brutality at the hands of the white police.6  The black citizens of Atlanta looked to the police for help and protection but that help was not there.  The one group that the black citizens hoped to receive assistance from turned out to be more supporting to the rioters. In a private letter, Atlanta resident John Slaton admitted that practically nothing was done to stop the mob by the police, by law enforcement officials, or by civic leaders.7 Some police officers did not execute their responsibilities.  The mayor received reports that the officers failed to do their duty and permitted the mob to attack blacks without interference.8    The white rioters did not fear retaliation from police or troops because of the kinship they felt with the white policemen.  Southern mobs paid little attention to the troops because they felt strong bonds of common emotion and sympathy with the troops and did not expect forceful military action.9  For whatever reasons, a few police officers stood by and did nothing while rioters attacked blacks and destroyed property.

            Even worse than doing nothing to stop the rioters, there were some reports of the police joining in on the beatings.  So, not only did some of the officers make little effort to stop the rioters but also some even participated with them.  A witness to the attacks recalled that when a beating occurred within their reach some police officers joined the attack with their own regulation nightsicks.10  The actions of these police officers shows the mentality of the time concerning race.  Race was a defining factor for many in the earlier years of the twentieth century.  The whites of the time feared social interaction between the races, which led to more restrictions against the blacks, and greater racial tensions.  Some of the white police officers, like the rioters, seized the opportunity to inflict harm on any black person they saw for no other reason than the color of his skin.  It quickly became clear to the blacks that the policemen were not interested in quelling the mob. The police made no effort in using his club or his gun to rescue victims from the mob.11  Others had similar reports to tell of police behavior that they had witnessed.  After the riot the police chief admitted that he had seen several policemen who appeared to side with the faction during the rioting.12  The Atlanta police had not been overly concerned with the rights of the black citizen prior to the riot and this night was no different.  The participatory actions of these few officers reflected badly on the whole department.

            During the rioting the police seemed more interested in arresting black citizens than they were the rioters.  The blacks that were running for their lives were stopped by police and arrested.  The police station, located near Five Points, disintegrated into mass confusion as blacks poured in desperately seeking asylum.  Some of the blacks at the station were arrested for carrying concealed weapons.13  Blacks, supported by eyewitnesses, later accused many policemen of having spent the night roaming the back streets of the city, stopping fleeing blacks and arresting them for carrying the weapons with which they had been defending themselves against the mob.14  Incidents of this type show how Atlanta’s police did little to protect black citizens, going so far as to take weapons from blacks while allowing whites to remain armed.  The troops won the highest praise from civic leaders and did indeed represent an improvement over the police but they gave the black populace few reasons for gratitude.  Many of the troops refused to interfere seriously with the violence and the troops as a whole played no significant part in ending the riot during the first evening.15  Throughout the riot the police seemed unwilling to take action against the whites, which are the ones who started the conflict.

In the early years of the twentieth century the Atlanta Police Department had little in the way of training or resources.  This hindered the police as they were dealing with the riot.  The police were ineffective in subduing the large crowd because most had never seen anything of that caliber and were not prepared.  The Atlanta Police Department at the time of the riot had just over two hundred officers, their numbers were just not enough to quell the mob of approximately ten thousand participants when serious outbreaks of violence occurred.16  The police department was just not equipped to handle an incident of this size and magnitude.  A race riot had never occurred in Atlanta before so the officers had no experience in dealing with this type of situation.  The requirements for police applicants at the time were few; he had to have been a resident of the city for a specified time, generally a year, and to have paid his taxes during that period.  Furthermore, he had to be between the ages of twenty-one and thirty, be able to read and write English, and to meet certain physical standards.17  There were no education requirements and the only training received was on the job training.  Even though there were advancements made, i.e. mounted police, a telephone system, and the Gatewell police alarm system, resources were still limited.  Throughout the night the police proved unequal in maintaining order in the city.

            Another factor that influenced the response of the police officers was the size of the mob.  The sheer numbers of rioters overwhelmed the police.  By nine o’clock that evening word had spread to the outlying areas and those white men came to join the riot.  A black man was struck over the head with a stick, he was knocked down and trampled by a hundred men, and the police were powerless to stop the onslaught.18  Atlanta was a city bursting at the seams and within a short time the crowd grew into the thousands in the downtown area.  The rioting kept the police busy throughout the night.  The police received numerous calls of rioting breaking out in the city and in the outlying areas.  Mass police efforts to maintain order was usually overwhelmed by white power.19  As the crowd grew the police were unsure what to do and quickly lost control of the streets.  It was physically impossible for the few police on hand at the beginning of the riot to contain the crowd.  The police frustrated with their inability to stem the ever-expanding waves of white men who were chasing blacks, just sat upon their horses as the race for life went on.20  The two hundred man force was unable to cope with the mob as it swept through the downtown area.  The crowd spread out into the residential area looking for any black person they could find and the police were extended beyond their capabilities.  The police were simply outnumbered.

            In an attempt to overcome their lack of manpower police officials made an effort to find additional help with the riot.  After the riot broke out the sheriff swore in a large number of extra men.  These extra deputies were to aid in quelling any possible disorder that may arise in the city.21  These citizens were willing to help the authorities in their effort to bring peace to their city.  The local police also saw help arriving in the form of the state militia.  At midnight, several hours into the riot, the Governor summoned local state troops to the city.  His decision to summon only the local militia was itself an extremely conservative response.  He never declared martial law in the city, and he did not request federal troops.22  Many companies arrived in the city in the early morning hours, which gave the city police additional assistance in dealing with the mob.  Even with the state military troops in the city they found that they were stretched thin due to the mob spreading throughout the city and outlying areas.  But this extra help, even though it arrived late, was a relief to the local officers.

            Another resource that was overlooked before the riot was firepower.  The officers were not equipped well enough with guns when the riot broke out, but that was corrected a day late.  If the police had been outfitted with more and better equipment they might have been able to do a better job of containing the mob.  As soon as the rioting in the city started the county authorities telegraphed for a complete arsenal of rifles and repeating shotguns.23  The arsenal of guns did not reach the city in time to help in the riot. By getting the guns officials made sure the officers were armed in case of any more outbreaks of racial violence.  This would also arm the officers so they could cope with any situation that might arise in the future.

            In the mist of chaos most officers did perform their duties.  The officers who did nothing or who participated in the attacks were the exception.  At the onset of the riot the police arrived in the downtown area within a few minutes.  However, since their numbers were so few they did what they could to disperse the crowd.  But because thousands of white men flocked to Atlanta in such a short time it was hard for the police to gain control.  Individual officers were more effective and able to save black victims more than the collective group.  After the riot the Grand Jury found that even though the department could have handled the riot better individual members of the force, with some exceptions, acted with courage and with a consciousness of the seriousness of the situation.24  Most officers did what they could to stop the assaults that they saw taking place. The first disorder occurred at Pryor and Decatur Streets where young white men assaulted a black bicycle messenger; he was rescued by an officer.25  The accounts of police officers that did the job they had been hired to do in the middle of such adversity are many.  At  the cries of help from the black people many officers did their best.  In some instances the police did act forcefully and successfully.  In one case a police company deflected a Decatur Street mob from their march on a skating rink where five hundred blacks had taken refuge. And in the second instance a white mob of four hundred stormed a hardware store, the outcome would have been a lot worse if not for the mounted policemen that arrived to disperse the mob with one aggressive charge.26  The police chief tried to prevent rioters from beating a black man with sticks.  He managed to beat the mob off while escorting a white rioter, which he had arrested, to the police station.27    To the credit of many officers they stood their ground against the angry mob.  No amount of persuasion on the part of neither the mayor of Atlanta nor the police would induce the mob to disperse and go home.28   Many of the police officers were determined to bring order back to the streets of Atlanta.  Their determination for peace saw them throughout the days of the riot.

            It is easy to stand back and judge the actions of others once the crisis is over.  It is much harder to know how we would have reacted in the same situation.  In the aftermath of the riot leaders called for a number of police reforms to be made.  Many citizens noted the failure of the police department, taken as a whole, to adopt stringent measures at the very inception of the recent riot to protect the innocent and the helpless.29  After the riot an inquest was requested to determine if any officer did not do his full duty.  The councilmen were concerned about rumors, which criticized the conduct of the police force.  The councilmen also stated that they did not want to condemn or censure anyone, but merely desired that there be a full investigation of the acts of the police force on the night of the riot.30  There were concerns of many that if the police was powerless to quell this riot they would be powerless in the future.  Blacks were concerned also because even though everyone admitted that the authorities were criminally negligent on the night of the riot black men had no voice with which to rebuke them for their negligence.31 

At this time black people usually did not vote because of the poll tax that they could not afford, the literacy requirements that they could not meet and the grandfather clause.  The reforms did little to help the blacks in Atlanta, it would be many years in the future before Atlanta’s black citizens were treated fairly.

            It was determined that a few officers did not perform as they should have during the riot.  Several officers were brought before the police board to answer for their conduct during the riot.  Blacks also called for an impartial enforcement of the laws of the land.  The authorities must protect all the people, black and white, equally.32  It was felt that even though the officers were under extreme pressure their performance during the riot could have been more successful.  The Grand Jury determined  that if the police had shown a more united front that all serious trouble could have been averted.33  The leaders of Atlanta were hoping that by looking into the actions of the police during the riot that any future incidents of this type could be avoided. 

            In the one hundred years since the race riot it has largely been forgotten by everyone.  But, the Race Riot of 1906 did have an impact on Atlanta for many years.  It was to be expected because the racial tensions of the time were soaring.  The Civil War, even though it had been fought over thirty years prior to the riot, had not been forgotten.  The whites were still looking for ways to put the blacks in their place.  The riot reflected badly on the city of Atlanta.  The fact that a riot had occurred in a city that was described as a model city for racial accord was damaging to the city’s image as a thriving New South city.  The citizens had to start over proving how Atlanta was a progressive city.  The Atlanta Police Department had many obstacles to overcome because of their actions during the riot.  Their responses, while being overwhelmed by the mob, ineffectiveness due to resources and their participatory actions, caused many to lose confidence in their police department.  It would take a long time for the city and the police department to prevail over the mark left by the riot but they did it.  

Notes

  1. David Fort Godshalk, The 1906 Atlanta Race Riot and the Reshaping of American Race Relations (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2005), 88.

 

  1. Allen D. Grimshaw, “Actions of Police and the Military in American Race Riots,” Phylon 24, no. 3 (1963), [database on-line], J-Stor, GALILEO; accessed February 12, 2006.

 

  1. Ibid.
  2. Ibid.
  3. Ronald H. Bayor, Race and the Shaping Of Twentieth-Century Atlanta (Chapel Hill:  The University of North Carolina Press, 1996), 89.

 

  1. Ibid.
  2. Godshalk, The 1906 Atlanta Race Riot, 96.
  3. Gregory Mixon, The Atlanta Riot Race, Class, and Violence In A New South City (Gainesville:  University Press of Florida, 2005), 88.

 

  1. Charles Crowe, “Racial Massacre in Atlanta September 22, 1906,” The Journal of Negro History 54, no. 2 (1969), [database on-line], J-Stor, GALILEO; accessed February 10, 2006.

 

  1. Mark Bauerlein, Negrophobia A Race Riot In Atlanta, 1906 (San Francisco: Encounter Books, 2001), 169.

 

  1. “The Atlanta Massacre,” The Independent, 4 October 1906, 800.

 

  1. William J. Mathias and Stuart Anderson, Horse To Helicopter First Century of the Atlanta Police Department (Atlanta: Community Life Publications, 1973), 55.

 

  1. Godshalk, The 1906 Atlanta Race Riot, 96.

 

  1. Mathias and Anderson, Horse To Helicopter, 54.

 

  1. Crowe, “Racial Massacre in Atlanta.”

 

  1. Mathias and Anderson, Horse To Helicopter, 53.

 

  1. Eugene J. Watts, “The Police in Atlanta, 1890-1905,” The Journal of Southern History 39, no. 2 (1973), [database on-line], J-Stor, GALILEO; accessed February 13, 2006.

 

  1. Mills Lane, Standing Upon The Mouth Of A Volcano New South Georgia (Savannah: Beehive Press Book, 1993), 225.

 

  1. Mixon, The Atlanta Riot, 88.

 

  1. Ibid., 89.

 

  1. “280 Deputies Aid Officers,” The Atlanta Constitution, 25 September 1906, p. 3.

 

  1. Godshalk, The 1906 Atlanta Race Riot, 97.

 

  1. “Police Receive New Shotguns,” The Atlanta Constitution, 28 September 1906, p. 7.

 

  1. “Atlanta Police Blamed,” The Atlanta Constitution, 31 October 1906, p. 3.

 

  1. Mixon, The Atlanta Riot, 87.

 

  1. Crowe, “Racial Massacre in Atlanta.”

 

  1. Mixon, The Atlanta Riot, 88.

 

  1. Lane, Standing Upon The Mouth, 225.

 

  1. “Lively Presentment By Fulton Grand Jury,” The Atlanta Constitution, 31 October 1906, p.5.

 

  1. “Riot Reviewed By Police Board,” The Atlanta Constitution, 29 September 1906, p. 3.

 

  1. J. Max Barber, “The Atlanta Tragedy,” The Voice, November 1906. 479.

 

  1. Walter C. Daniel and Patrick J. Huber, “The Voice of the Negro and the Atlanta Riot of 1906: A Problem in Freedom of the Press,” Journalism History 17, no. 2 (1990), [database on-line], EBSCOhost, GALILEO; accessed February 12, 2006.

 

  1. “Atlanta Police Blamed,” The Atlanta Constitution, 31 October 1906, p. 3