The Dishonorable Discharge of "Jim Crow"
From the United States Military
By Rodney E. Hill

Despite War Departmental Directives, intercession by First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt, civil rights efforts and the unprecedented, record-setting successes of all-black combat units like the Tuskegee Airmen (the 332nd Fighter Squadron from Tuskegee flew 1,578 missions, won 150 Distinguished Flying Crosses, 744 air medals and never lost a bomber during an escort), black servicemen faced extreme racism, discrimination and segregation during World War II. Civil Rights leaders like A. Philip Randolph and Charles Hamilton Houston pressed for an immediate end to segregation in the United States Armed Forces. President Franklin D. Roosevelt refused to meet with African-American leaders to discuss the status of blacks in the war. The War Department and the power structure in Washington, D.C. fostered an attitude that black men did not possess the brains, quickness or moral stamina to fight in war, overlooking the documented fact that black men fought well in every conflict the United States ever waged.

That attitude was promoted and taught to military officers. In his book Blacks in the Army Forces During World War II, Alan Osur writes about an area commander’s conference held in October 1943, for the United States Army Air Service Command. At that conference, white commanders were issued written instructions on how to deal with the black soldier. Part II of the United States Army’s publication Organization and Training of Tactical Service Units for Overseas Air Forces read:

Since the Negro is by nature a showman who loves praise and who is generally immature in every respect except his physical being, the use of simple psychology will aid greatly in solving this problem.  May I suggest briefly:

1. Give the Negro a chance to “show” what he can do and commend his work well done.
2. Have staff officers observe the Negroes [sic] work since by nature he loves to show-off to his superiors.
3. Keep him from becoming scared or frightened as under this condition he reacts as a child and can do, or will do nothing.
4. Give him some sort of material reward for which he can strive - even a medal of some sort if necessary.
5. Use care in the selection of officers who will understand his simple nature and treat him accordingly.
6. Make use of the “good Negro” in the group in helping to eliminate the “bad Negro” - he will revel in your trust and confidence in him.

 These types of racist attitudes ultimately became the catalysts for many protests and disturbances by black servicemen and women. Some of those protests were successful, leading to a gradual erosion of Jim Crow segregation in the United States military, while others were unsuccessful, resulting in court-martials and prison. 

Successful Protests

One successful event that spurred the United States Navy to begin desegregation in 1945 was the work stoppage mutiny by the “Port Chicago 50.” On October 24, 1944, a group of 50 black sailors, known as the “Port Chicago 50,” were convicted of mutiny and given prison sentences that ranged from eight to 15 years in prison (reported by the Washington Post, July 17, 1994, as the largest mutiny trial in naval history). The sailors were stationed at Port Chicago, a segregated naval base 35-miles north of San Francisco. It was a base where black sailors had to wait for whites to finish eating before entering the mess hall. The black sailors, without any training or instructions, were assigned the duty of loading two-ton bombs, shells and live ammunition onto munitions ships bound for the war in the Pacific. In the evening hours of July 17, 1944, the black sailors were loading explosives onto the U.S.S. Quinalt Victory and rigging the U.S.S. Bryan. There was an explosion that destroyed both ships and killed 320 men. Of the 320 men killed, 202 were African-American (another 390 people were injured). Three weeks later, the surviving black sailors were transferred to nearby Mare Island Navy Yard in Vallejo, and ordered back to duty. The men refused, demanded safety standards and engaged in a work stoppage. Two hundred fifty-eight black sailors from Port Chicago were imprisoned on a barge for three days. Eventually, 208 agreed to return to duty; notwithstanding their return to work, the men received summary court-martials and were sentenced to three months of hard labor. The remaining 50 were transferred to Treasure Island, where they were tried and convicted before a Navy trial board for mutiny.

Several black community groups and liberal white groups denounced the convictions, and First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt appealed, futilely, to then-Secretary of the Navy James V. Forrestal. The “Port Chicago 50” were held at the Terminal Island Disciplinary Barracks in San Pedro, California, where they remained for 16 months. They were then ordered to sea on various ships. A year later, the convicted sailors were quietly released from captivity and discharged “under honorable conditions” (a step above dishonorable, but negating veterans’ benefits).

The United States Army experienced similar situations that led them on a path of desegregation. In June 1943, the United States Army Eighth Air Force, stationed in Bamber Bridge, England, experienced a racial incident that forced commanders of the Eighth Air Force to re-evaluate the role of the black soldier in the Eighth Air Force. Two white military policemen accosted a number of black soldiers for not wearing proper uniforms in a Bamber Bridge pub. The confrontation led to rock and bottle throwing, which, in turn, led to gunfire that subsequently wounded two black soldiers. When word of the incident spread, black soldiers reacted by blatantly disobeying their superior officers. Black non-commissioned officers armed themselves and rode into Bamber Bridge, discharging their weapons at military personnel and vehicles.

Many of the participants were court-martialed and convicted; however, commanders of the Eighth Air Force responded surprisingly differently. A group of 75 predominantly white officers were replaced with young, vigorous officers. The Eighth Air Force was reorganized into the Combat Support Wing, an effort to foster among the black soldiers a definite feeling that they contributed to the war effort. Colonel George Grubb, commander of the wing, openly encouraged his soldiers to retaliate against discrimination using assertive actions.

A year later, the United States Army Air Force experienced another protest by black soldiers that led to an erosion of Jim Crow in the Air Force. In November 1944, at the Herbert Smart Airport in Macon, Georgia, the entire 457th Aviation Squadron mutinied against their white squadron commander when that particular commander relieved the squadron’s black sergeant of duty. The squadron protested the action by refusing to work and proceed with that day’s training. Both the squadron commander and the base commander were unable to gain control of the situation. An Army Air Force investigation was initiated with regards to the soldier’s mutinous actions. The investigative report found that there were significant racial factors behind the mutiny. The report pointed to junior, inexperienced and inefficient officers assigned to black units, “resulting generally in low morale and a lack of discipline through poor leadership.” As a result of the investigation, the Army Air Force, instead of taking disciplinary action against the mutinous soldiers of the 457th, elected to transfer the white squadron officers and commander.

Unfortunately for the black soldier, protesting didn’t always lead to favorable ends.

Unsuccessful Protests 

In her book, A Study of the Negro in Military Service, Jean Byers documents one such protest that fell on deaf ears. In 1943, black soldiers stationed at the United States Army Camp Stewart, in Georgia, began a protest and voiced their complaints to the base commander about racist conditions on and around the base.

The black soldiers at the camp formally complained:

• that discrimination and segregation reigned on the buses between Camp Stewart and Savannah, Georgia;
• that the white junior officers did not have adequate experience and were not interested in the men they supervised;
• that toilets were marked for white and colored on the military post despite the order circulated in October 1942, which abolished the designation of buildings according to racial lines.

In response to the demands, the Office of the Inspector General conducted two investigations of Camp Stewart. The Inspector General’s report to the Chief of Staff ignored the demands of the black soldiers, but instead recommended, inter alia, that the military police be used to ascertain the names of the leaders inciting unrest so that they may be known and appropriate disposition be made of them. Black soldiers became increasingly angered by the continued mistreatment at the camp and took up arms and ammunition on the post as a means of further expressing their resentment that conditions at the camp were never remedied.

Another unsuccessful protest involved black women who served in the armed forces. In a 1991 Washington Post article, Rita Gomez wrote about a protest staged by black women who served in the U.S. Army. In May 1942, President Roosevelt announced the formation of the Women’s Army Auxiliary Corps (WAAC), whose purpose was to take care of noncombat duties in order to free-up male soldiers for combat. Black women were only allowed to serve in the Army; the Navy, Marines and Coast Guard announced that they had no place for black women. Notwithstanding the racist attitudes, thousands of black women signed up. Many were promised opportunities to learn new skills that might lead to good postwar jobs. However, the promises proved to be nothing but empty lies, and most of the women were assigned to the motor corps or served as cooks, bakers and mess attendants – which usually meant long hours of kitchen police (KP) duties.

The black WAACs faced the same degradation, segregation and discrimination that the black male soldier encountered. The discrimination against the black WAACs eventually came to a head. In November 1944, a company of 60 black medical technicians in the now-renamed Women’s Army Corps (WAC) arrived at Lovell General hospital at Fort Devens, Massachusetts. Although military hospitals were overcrowded and understaffed, black women were assigned the most menial tasks, such as washing windows and scrubbing floors, despite the advanced training they received as medical technicians.

On March 7, 1945, the 60 black WACs staged a sit-down strike and requested a meeting with the hospital commander, Colonel Walter M. Crandell, to protest their menial work assignments. Colonel Crandell met with the protesting WACs and told them, “blacks girls are fit only to do the dirtiest type of work, because that’s what Negro women are used to doing.” He went on and told them that he would not have black WACs serving as medical technicians. Unhappy with the Colonels response, the women walked out on him.

On March 10, the 60 were formally ordered to return to work or be held in violation of failing to obey a direct order. Four of the WACs refused to return to duty and were arrested. Six of the WACs were court-martialed; four were convicted and found guilty of disobeying a superior officer. The four convicted WACs were each sentenced to one year at hard labor, ordered to forfeit all pay and allowances and given dishonorable discharges.

Black organizations protested the Army’s handling of the situation. Under pressure from the White House and Congress, the War Department reversed the convictions and dismissed all charges. African-Americans pushed harder and insisted that Colonel Crandell be investigated and punished. The War Department refused and closed the matter.

Despite the great achievements by all-black units in the war, the United States Military as a whole, held on to its Jim Crow segregationist policies until after the end of World War II.

With the escalating number of black men entering the military, the Korean War (1950 to 1953) was the last American conflict involving segregated units of the U.S. Armed Forces.

Jim Crow finally received a well-overdue dishonorable discharge.

Previous	Next
Publications : Bar Bulletin: February, 2003