Impact of Christian socialist beliefs, internationalism, and states' rights ideology on Frank Porter Graham
Jones explains how international Christian socialist ideology revolutionized Frank Porter Graham's social views. Although Graham supported Franklin Roosevelt's far-reaching New Deal measures, he maintained his beliefs of local control. Jones argues that his adherence to states' rights reflected his moderate social beliefs.
Citing this Excerpt
Oral History Interview with Charles M. Jones, November 8, 1976. Interview B-0041. Southern Oral History Program Collection (#4007) in the Southern Oral History Program Collection, Southern Historical Collection, Wilson Library, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Full Text of the Excerpt
- CHARLES M. JONES:
-
He was a great friend of Weatherford. He and Weatherford and two or three
of those old folks; you've probably run across them. Of
course, Weatherford's dead now. He has a son, the President
of Berea.
- JOSEPH HERZENBERG:
-
Yes. And then I think the last, probably formative experience for him
comes rather late, in the twenties when he went to London for a year and
met these Christian socialists.
- CHARLES M. JONES:
-
Did he come through the London School of Economics?
- JOSEPH HERZENBERG:
-
Met [R. H.] Tawney and …
- CHARLES M. JONES:
-
That got him unionized, I guess.
- JOSEPH HERZENBERG:
-
I think so, yes. His copy of R. H. Tawney's book, almost
every word in it is underlined. And all kinds of
words scribbled in the margins. And Chancellor House told me that when
Frank Graham came back from London, he wanted everybody to read the
book.
- CHARLES M. JONES:
-
He thought a lot of Toynbee, too.
- JOSEPH HERZENBERG:
-
Yes.
- CHARLES M. JONES:
-
I think possibly you might pursue this. How close did he come toward some
mild form of socialism when it came to economics?
- JOSEPH HERZENBERG:
-
I think he went further than the New Deal. In fact, in the mid-thirties,
after the Supreme Court began to overturn New Deal legislation, he gave
a speech many times which proposed a kind of New Deal amendment to the
Constitution which would, in effect, bypass the Supreme Court. Nobody
seems to have picked it up very much.
- CHARLES M. JONES:
-
You'd have to square that now with his states'
rights on race …
- JOSEPH HERZENBERG:
-
Yes. Well, I don't really believe that states'
rights thing, but he did use it sometimes.
- CHARLES M. JONES:
-
He surely did.
- JOSEPH HERZENBERG:
-
For example, he fought in the late thirties for federal aid to education
on all levels; that's not…. He had some
states' rights sort of reservation that the decisions would
be made on a state and local level. He did sign the FEPC report; he
signed a dissenting opinion that the states should pass these FEPC
laws.
- CHARLES M. JONES:
-
I guess we'll never know whether that was…. I
don't think he ever did anything purely for strategy. I think
he probably thought you'd get it passed quicker if you passed
it in the states. One would lead the other on, then the next, and you
know…. You sense that same gradualism
idea, that if you get started in one state, it will move. And you fail
on a national level because a local senator, a North Carolina senator,
won't vote for it. You can educate the state, but you
couldn't educate the senator.