Orangeburg, 1968-2008
Sunday, February 03, 2008This article is adapted from a presentation by South Carolina State University history professor Dr. William Hine at The Citadel Conference on Civil Rights in 2003. The entire article will appear in an anthology of essays on civil rights in South Carolina to be published later this year by the University of South Carolina Press. The 1999 appeal, "Orangeburg, Let Us Heal Ourselves," will appear in that book. Except for three years in graduate school, Hine has taught history at South Carolina State University since 1967. He is currently working on a history of South Carolina State.
Forty-five years ago on January 23, 1963, Harvey Gantt enrolled as the first black student at Clemson College, an episode characterized by The Saturday Evening Post as "integration with dignity." Forty years ago on Feb. 8, 1968, three students were killed and 28 young men were injured in the Orangeburg Massacre, an event no one associated with dignity -- not to mention non-violence or peaceful change.
Though -- and unlike Kent State -- the Orangeburg Massacre has been all but ignored by American historians, it has endured in South Carolina's past as one of the genuine tragedies of the 20th century. For four decades, the Massacre has been an open and festering wound that has deeply divided the black and white communities in Orangeburg. There have been two primary reasons why this racial animosity has persisted for so long.
First, South Carolina State University has held a memorial service every Feb. 8 since 1969. That ceremony has usually attracted newspaper and television coverage, which has laid bare diametrically opposed views of what happened in 1968. Most people in the black community regarded it as fitting and proper that there be an annual tribute to those whose lives were sacrificed in a fusillade of gunfire from untrained and racist highway patrolmen. To the contrary, more than a few people in the white community considered the young men not martyrs but angry and dangerous black militants, incited by outside agitators, who were bent on mayhem and violence. Only the heroic efforts of the highway patrolmen saved Orangeburg from destruction and devastation.
Second, many white people in Orangeburg regarded the book written by Jack Bass and Jack Nelson and published in 1970 as no more than a series of misrepresentations and inaccuracies that utterly failed to explain what really happened in Orangeburg. The book has remained in print and thus has continued to be a disagreeable reminder of a past that many do not believe happened.
On the 30th anniversary of the Massacre in 1998, an especially unpleasant series of exchanges were published in The Times and Democrat that finally prompted many black and white people to join together in 1999 to begin the slow process of reconciliation.
"History cannot be rewritten," they declared, "but it can and should be used to move forward and rebuild racial relations." They acknowledged the importance of the yearly commemoration of the tragedy. "The annual memorial service must continue to be the foundation for better relations among the races, not the root of increased tension in the Orangeburg community." More than 250 people signed the statement, published on a full page of The Times and Democrat on Sunday, Feb. 8, 1999. It was a singular achievement for a city not renowned for its racial harmony.
The process of reconciliation took another step forward in 2001. With funding provided in part by the South Carolina Humanities Council, South Carolina State University collaborated with the University of South Carolina and the College of Charleston to conduct an oral history of some of the survivors and people directly involved in the Massacre. There were, however, unintended consequences of what simply began as an effort to enlarge the historical record of what had happened in 1968.
The participants in the oral history project were also invited to take part in a public program on the 33rd anniversary of the event, and it became a profoundly moving moment of remembrance and reconciliation as hundreds of people assembled on the campus of South Carolina State. The committee responsible for initiating the oral history asked then-South Carolina State University President Leroy Davis (who was a student at the time of the Massacre) to invite Democratic Gov. Jim Hodges. Davis did and Hodges accepted.
Hodges proceeded to apologize: "We deeply regret what happened on the night of Feb. 8, 1968. The Orangeburg Massacre was a great tragedy to our state. Even today, the state of South Carolina bows its head, bends its knee and begins the search for reconciliation." Perhaps the most astonishing development occurred days earlier when Capt. David Deering, commander of District 7 of the South Carolina Highway Patrol, asked President Davis if a delegation of highway patrolmen could attend the ceremony. Six patrolmen -- three white men and three black men -- did attend and were recognized during the program. As much as anything else, the voluntary participation of a younger generation of highway patrolmen eliminated the ugly and mean-spirited rhetoric that erupted around previous observances.
In 2003 Republican Gov. Mark Sanford also issued an apology on behalf of the state on the anniversary of the Massacre. This served as another step toward healing.
Now on the eve of the 40th anniversary, there is a further effort to promote "truth and reconciliation" among people in Orangeburg and South Carolina. This year's observance will be broadcast statewide on South Carolina ETV.
No one who lives in Orangeburg in 2008 would contend that the community has freed itself of racial rancor and division. It has not. But neither is it the same community that it was in 1968 or even in 1998. With the willingness and commitment of local citizens to take a public stand for racial healing in 1999, with the governor's apology in 2001, with the presence of the six highway patrolmen at the same ceremony and with 40 years having passed since the Massacre, Orangeburg has exorcized some of its racial demons. But the process is far from finished. Will that dedication to strengthening bonds and ties among all of the community's residents continue or will it falter?
sweatr wrote on Feb 10, 2008 11:58 AM:
Two days before the shooting, several students were beaten by police during a confrontation with officers in the bowling alley's parking lot. Police said they were trying to control a crowd of 300 to 400 that gathered when several of the protesters were arrested for trespassing…. After the clash with police, students carrying rocks and bricks broke windows at a half-dozen businesses and damaged cars at a dealership…. That led then-Gov. Robert McNair to send 250 National Guard troops to Orangeburg to join more than 50 troopers and 25 other agents in an effort to keep the peace. During the next two days, community leaders met with the students to try and diffuse the situation while authorities closed the main highway in front of campus because cars were being hit by rocks and bottles thrown by other students. On the night of Feb. 8, 1968, students built a bonfire. Authorities decided to send a fire truck to extinguish the blaze, but its arrival agitated students. Troopers, guns drawn, protected the firefighters. The students retreated, then returned, and some rocks were thrown. (Collins, 2003) “Students set grassfires and tried to burn down a vacant house” (National Park Service, N.D.). Earlier a few .22-caliber pistol shots from the adjacent Claflin College campus were fired over the heads of a patrol squad across the highway and railroad tracks from the campus. Traffic had been diverted because of objects tossed. As students retreated to the interior of the campus, one tossed into the air a banister rail from an unoccupied house. It hit one patrolman in the face, leaving teeth marks on the wood and knocking the officer to the ground, his face bloodied. Before an ambulance arrived, a patrol car took him to the Orangeburg Regional Hospital for treatment. Some thought he had been shot. Tension intensified. (Bass, 2007)
These officers faced a mob of people; they were outnumbered even with the Guard presence. Shots were being fired toward the officers. One of the officers goes down, blood coming from his head but is quickly taken to the hospital. His comrades do not know if he was shot. The students continue to incite the violence by pelting the officers with objects. They hear shots, warning shots by one of their fellow troopers, or shots from students, who’s to say. I am sure you’ll say from the trooper, but it has already been admitted that students had fired toward the officers. They opened fire on the crowd because they feared for their safety. The FBI investigated the 1968 tragedy, with the probe leading to charges against nine troopers. When a federal grand jury refused to indict the troopers, prosecutors decided to try them anyway on a charge of imposing summary punishment without due process of law. A jury of 10 whites and two blacks acquitted all of the defendants a little over a year later, finding they acted in self-defense (Times and Democrat, 2007). These people were tried, although it couldn’t possibly have been a fair trial, right? Public property damaged, the health and safety of the community threatened, officers shot at and attacked with objects, what do you suppose should havw happened. Military in charge, that possibly might have made more sense but opens up a whole new world of legality. The fact remains that this wasn’t a massacre, the students and their leadership made no efforts to stop the violence; in fact, just the opposite, they intensified the situation at every turn. You have your opinion and I have mine, and I doubt mine will change from what I have seen.
Collins, J. (2003, March 16). After 35 years, S.C. black leaders still seeking answers in campus protest that left three dead. Times and Democrat. Retrieved February 10, 2008, from http://thetandd.com/articles/2003/03/16/news/news6.txt
Bass, J. (2007, March 31). SATURDAY'S COMMENTARY: How 1968 Orangeburg shootings began. Times and Democrat. Retrieved February 10, 2008, from http://thetandd.com/articles/2007/03/31/opinion
/doc460dd8f9c9360688932867.txt
Times and Democrat (2007, December 16). Feds make right decision on ‘68 probe. Times and Democrat. Retrieved February 10, 2008, from http://thetandd.com/articles/2007/12/16/opinion/doc4762fcc7bb04d867542496.txt
National Park Service (N.D.). South Carolina State College historic district. Retrieved February 10, 2008, from National Park Service: http://www.nps.gov/history/nr/travel/civilrights/sc2.htm
"
fhsmct wrote on Feb 9, 2008 6:46 PM:
What grass fire? Then and now, there's nothing but concrete at that location unless you're speaking of the spot where the current admin bldg in located.
The only public road that was initially closed was the section of Hwy 601 that runs in front of the campus. Later, when the students were sent home for several days, the streets on campus were closed, with all the campus entrances manned by the military.
Go to court? Please cite the case that was filed and pending on this? The national law had already been passed and, there was a less than a few hours between when Stroman was denied access and the 1st wave of students responded was not nearly enough time to file a federal action!
And, as for the trial you speak of: do you REALLY thing it was a fair, impartial trial? It was the same kind of trial that Edgar Ray Killen initially receive in the Schwerner, Chaney, and Goodman case, that Byron De La Beckwith initially received in the Megars Evers case and which Cleve Sellers received in this instance.
Yet again, a clear case of documentably untrained troopers over reacting. The fact remains the military, who were trained for that contingency, should have been the primary responders and the troopers should have been off site, held in reserve (and that's not even a hindsite observation) . . .
"
sweatr wrote on Feb 8, 2008 2:29 PM:
ANNUAL wrote on Feb 8, 2008 1:26 PM:
fhsmct wrote on Feb 8, 2008 12:05 PM:
a. I will NEVER forget that ?NY Times? picture of Smith, having been dragged down the slop and off campus by the troopers, still very much alive and clearly pleading for help only to later arrive at the hospital in a condition from which he would not recover.
b. As for the condition of the Orangeburg schools, if you're not a part of the solution, you're part of the problem.
No matter how long people wear blinders, the failure of our students will eventually have an effect on the entire community so running away from the issue doesn't, never has and never will solve anything. In some ways, it adds to the problem.
The, "well, not mine" lament just doesn't hold H2O . . . "
fhsmct wrote on Feb 8, 2008 12:00 PM:
Are we looking at different pictures?
That picture you're referring to is clearly on campus, in front of O D - Bulldog Stadium and most probably a planned, coordinated student event.
Since when do they have to get a ""Parade Permit," "Lawful Assembly Permit," or a Burn Permit Number from the Forestry Department"?
I find it intriguing that someone would think or imply that the Forestry COMMISSION (not "Dept") would have jurisdiction over the campus of SCSU and will not even address the other possibly implied(s) from that one!
AND, the only thing they need is permission from the administration for a formal gathering although informal gatherings on college campuses have long been a time honored tradition so WHY would or should SCSU be any different? The City and County LEOs have enough on their plates without being asked to intervene in an otherwise peaceful, commerative gathering.
AND, are the students at Clemson, USC, et al required to get that plethora of permits you speak of when they hold their various gatherings before their annual pigskin contest?
Has anyone ever been charged, much less investugated, for defacing public property when, as one example, those painted paw prints show up on highways and streets around the state?
Just asking . . . "
fhsmct wrote on Feb 8, 2008 11:40 AM:
A Riot is usually defined as:
a noisy, violent public disorder caused by a group or crowd of persons, as by a crowd protesting against another group, a government policy, etc., in the streets.
2. Law. a disturbance of the public peace by three or more persons acting together in a disrupting and tumultuous manner in carrying out their private purposes.
3. violent or wild disorder or confusion.
On the day in question, the "noisy, violent public disorder" more describes the troopers than the students, the students may have been, to an extent, somewhat "disruptive" but not truly "tumultuous".
"
beast wrote on Feb 8, 2008 9:49 AM:
There was no parading around the streets, the students were taken to the location outside the bowling alley by van/bus. It is rumored that the mayor was the one who suggested the students take a van/bus due to their safety.
Nevertheless, where that be true or not, yes, everyone who needed to know, knew. The events planned for this week have been a matter of public information for some time now.
Sounds like you may be holding a grudge. I can tell you that as an observer of this event, it was done with the respect of the community in mind.
Please refrain from making assumptions in the future and attempts to prove these assumptions to be fact. "
BHT wrote on Feb 8, 2008 9:34 AM:
sweatr wrote on Feb 7, 2008 9:18 PM:
msjones wrote on Feb 7, 2008 8:33 PM:
yesscsu wrote on Feb 7, 2008 1:15 PM:
"The barriers were obvious and infuriating, especially for students who wanted to bowl at Orangeburg’s only bowling alley, the All Star Bowling Lanes.
As whites-only signs fell throughout the South, the owner refused admission to African-Americans, saying it would ruin business." source: The State Newspaper.
Re-read my post for better understanding.
"
beast wrote on Feb 7, 2008 12:18 PM:
SCMOM2008 wrote on Feb 7, 2008 11:00 AM:
beast wrote on Feb 7, 2008 10:23 AM:
We have got to do a better job of moving past the race issue in this community so that this community can finally grow to its full potential. We need to see eachother as men and women instead of white, black, hispanic, etc.
If you ask me, I think plenty of our race related issues in this area could be blamed on our local schools. I think better education and an understanding of local history could help to diminish stereotypes and misunderstanding that often hold this community and other communities like ours behind.
BTW - take a look at how our local schools are doing, it is pathetic - http://www.thetandd.com/reports/schoolreportcard.html
As far as The Orangeburg Massacre is concerned, like it or not, it is a big part of local history and a part of that story seems to be the big topic of discussion on this message board. Everyone seems to have a different idea of what happend and a different recollection of the facts.
We need to see this event as one that needs firm answers and needs to be remembered so that we can prevent this type of thing from ever happenning again. So legislators can make better decisions, protestors understand what can happen when picketing goes wrong and our children - white, black, hispanic, etc. - can coexhist more comfortably and build a more unified community and stronger future. "
fhsmct wrote on Feb 7, 2008 7:43 AM:
1.
RE: "RIOTS AND LOOTING AND BURNING"
What was looted, what burning (aside from from bon fire on the street in front of the campus where the admin bldg currently is), and what riots (plural)?
2.
RE: "THERE ARE HOLES IN THE HOUSES ACROSS THE TRACKS TO PROVE IT."
There were exactly three (3) houses across the street from where the action took place: the Trinity Methodist Church parsionage, the current Wesley House (or whatever the United Methodist call it) which was were Rev Bradley & his family resided at the time and the "shootgun" house, occupied at the time by the Thomas family, that was next to the old tax preparation business bldg.
The only one of those bldgs that would have been in the line of fire from students allegedly shooting towards where the Troopers were is the United Methodist ediface.
To hit the other two bldgs, as well as the "ice house" (which was further to the right of the parsionage) would take someone shooting far, far to the right and left of where the state troopers and national guardsmen were positioned.
Also, why were the troopers issued buckshot versus riot control rounds for their shotguns?
If shots were fired by the students, why did only the troopers return fire and not the National Guard troopers? For that matter, were the Guardsmen even issued ammo?
There's no rumor: the Guardsmen did, in fact, have and use half-tracks and other personnel carriers in the days after the shootings. I distinctly recall seeing them patroling up and down 601 (at the time, my family resided directly across the street from the Nance residence on 601) as well as manning the front entrance to the campus during the days afterward when the school was closed and the students sent home.
Then, again, why marr a good story with facts when rumors and innuedo will do? [ : - O ]. . "
sweatr wrote on Feb 6, 2008 5:37 PM:
yesscsu wrote on Feb 5, 2008 6:51 PM:
ANNUAL wrote on Feb 5, 2008 4:52 PM:
scsu76 wrote on Feb 5, 2008 8:48 AM:
minimouse wrote on Feb 4, 2008 4:42 PM:
BHT wrote on Feb 4, 2008 1:23 PM:
fhsmct wrote on Feb 4, 2008 12:20 AM:
My home town (Orangeburg) would be much better off had the process begun many, many moons ago . . . "
fhsmct wrote on Feb 4, 2008 12:17 AM:
Such statements have all the false credibility of the allegations that Dr Cleve Sellers, born and raised/grew up in Denmark, SC was an "outside agitator from the north".
Let's see: those students should have accepted overt segregation, the indignities that came with it and been happy with their place in life at that time in our history?
I think not . . . "
oburg wrote on Feb 3, 2008 3:17 PM:
palmettohawk wrote on Feb 3, 2008 10:59 AM:
swillabill wrote on Feb 3, 2008 10:09 AM:
bmore#1 wrote on Feb 3, 2008 9:00 AM: