Category: Research

---

There must be a lot of different kind of people in the world. And I don’t think fighting anybody helps to understand them.

The Story of Phillis Wheatley, Shirley Graham Du Bois, p. 142.

But history often fails to record the many forgotten heroes and heroines of minority races because many historians, and the times in which they live, bear an unreasoning hostility to those minorities.

Sonia H. Davis, Book Review of Phillis Wheatley First American Negro Poet.

Having been an immigrant in Liverpool and then in America before becoming a U. S. citizen, it is not surprising that Sonia did not hold the same prejudices as her second husband H.P. Lovecraft. She understood what it felt like to live in a foreign country, trying to learn their language and their traditions while preserving her own. Even before their marriage, Sonia “wanted, if possible, to eradicate or partly remove some of his intensely fixed ideas”, and she would also say “that these underprivileged of all races and nations is what made America the great and strong Country that it is”. (The Private Life, unedited manuscript.) Yet since we only have his letters to reference, there is one particular passage that may reflect a tinge of prejudice from Sonia.

It seems that the direct communication of this park with the ever thickening Harlem black belt has brought its inevitable result, & that a once lovely soundside park is from now on to be given over to Georgia camp-meetings & outings of the African Methodist Episcopal Church. […] Wilted by the sight, we did no more than take a side path to the shore & back & reënter the subway for the long homeward ride…

H.P. Lovecraft to Lillian D. Clark, July 6, 1925, Letters to Family and Friends 1.310.

“Wilted by the sight, we”? Are we then to believe that Sonia was wilted by the sight that African Americans were gathered at the park, or wilted at the idea that they did not have the park to themselves for some quietude? There is a vast difference. For Lovecraft, it was the former, rather than the latter. But what about Sonia? We will never know, not if we are to depend on Lovecraft’s letters to give us an answer. Whatever it may have been, Sonia was more open about her desire for unity with all ethnic groups after her third marriage to Nathaniel A. Davis. He was an advocate for unity, regardless of creed and skin color, and Sonia, the ever-reflecting temperament of the men she married, also became an advocator for the very same things.

The question remains, however, was she always this advocator of the minority while married to Lovecraft. Sonia wrote The Private Life of Howard Phillips Lovecraft manuscript in the late 1940s, with an abridged version seeing publication on August 22, 1948, in The Providence Sunday Journal. Sonia of the 1940s was very different from the Sonia of the 1920s—she was very outspoken about the evils of white supremacy. Rightfully so. Although, I wonder how much of her memoir, specifically the passages regarding her responses to Lovecraft’s xenophobic flaws, was later rephrased and overly emphasized to fit her ideals at the time of writing it. If she wrote the memoir right after their marriage in 1929, would it still focus on HPL’s racism and her need to correct that part of him? How much of the memoir was swayed by her current thoughts, rather than of the time the moments occurred?

This isn’t in any way to portray her memoir in a negative light, but rather, to shine a possibility that The Private Life of Howard Phillips Lovecraft was perhaps shaded by the greater need to express equality to the minority. When it came to her ethnicity, however, she admitted:

As to H.P. not knowing that I was a Jewess until I told him; that was very natural, since I saw nor felt it any need to broadcast to the universe.

Sonia to Winfield Townley Scott, September 24, 1948, John Hay Library, Providence, R.I.

After marrying Nathaniel, she would think it necessary to broadcast it, writing essays of Jewish historical figures—expounding to the point that some of her papers were skewed and historically inaccurate. Her heart was certainly in the right place.

Tangent aside, reading Amos Fortune, Free Man and The Story of Phillis Wheatley further equipped Sonia to advocate for what was (and is) right. It isn’t quite clear when Sonia read these two remarkable books. Sadly, both book reviews are not dated. Amos Fortune, Free Man was published on January 1, 1950, while The Story of Phillis Wheatley was published on June 1, 1949. If we are to assume she read them as soon as they were released, our country was still very much segregated between whites and blacks—ultimately between whites and all ethnicities who were not white. California, however, was just slightly ahead of the curb in repealing Jim Crow laws with one minority group at a time. (For a timeline of the Jim Crow laws in California, you may read it here: Study the Past. These laws specifically targeted the growing Asian population.)

In 1913, writing about Los Angeles and Pasadena, W.E.B. Du Bois claimed, “Nowhere in the United States is the Negro so well and beautifully housed, nor the average efficiency and intelligence in the colored population so high.” (Chapter 5 – The California Reparations Report)

When The Story of Phillis Wheatley was published in 1949, California had already repealed in 1947 the 1866 segregation law which required separate schools for children of Chinese, Japanese, Mongolian parentage. (Study the Past) Additionally in 1947, the segregation of Mexican American children from public “white” schools was repealed. This change for Mexican Americans was brought on by the Mendez v. Westminster case in Orange County, which would later pave the way for the Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka—the landmark 1954 Supreme Court Case that ruled racial segregation of African Americans in public schools was unconstitutional. (OCDE Newsroom)

The case of Mendez v. Westminster began simply enough, with Gonzalo and Felicitas Mendez wishing to enroll their three children at 17th Street School, a public school in Westminster, in 1943. They were met with rejection, for this school with its beautiful playground, was only for white folk. The Mendez family, along with four other Mexican American families, sought legal action. In February 1946, the judge ruled to terminate discriminatory practices against students of Mexican descent. The ruling was upheld on April 14, 1947. (OCDE Newsroom) Sylvia Mendez, the daughter of Gonzalo and Felicitas Mendez, remembered the whole ordeal:

I remembered going (to court) every day and sitting in the front row, and not knowing what they were fighting for. I thought they were just fighting for me to get into the White school.

Sylvia Mendez, OCDE Newsroom.

Her mother inevitably set the record straight:

She says, ‘No, Sylvia. That’s not why we were fighting. We were fighting because under God we’re all equal. And you belong at that school, just like everybody else belongs at that school. And that’s what we were fighting for.

Felicitas Mendez, OCDE Newsroom.

While the Mendez v. Westminster did not initially receive recognition at the time of its occurrence and favorable conclusion, the case of Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka certainly ran with the conviction further and spread it nationwide. Just like the Mendez family, Oliver Brown filed a class-action suit against the Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas, in 1951, when his daughter Linda Brown was denied entrance to an all-white school, which, too, was a public school. This extraordinary case challenged the “separate but equal” doctrine, sincerely proving its falsity. On May 17, 1954, the Supreme Court, the very court which had enacted the “separate but equal” doctrine in 1890, came to its decision, banning segregation in public schools. (History)

In 1955, Rosa Parks refused to relinquish her seat on a bus in Montgomery, Alabama, which sparked an array of boycotts, some of which were led by Martin Luther King Jr. In 1957, President Eisenhower deployed federal troops to protect nine students so they may enter Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed, followed by the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the Fair Housing Act of 1968. (History) It was in these turbulent times, yet liberating times, that Sonia read about two extraordinary historical figures, whose lives left immeasurable legacies in spite of the prejudices they faced because of their skin color.  

Amos Fortune, Free Man

---

Transcription:

Amos Fortune

This is a distinguished + authentic biography of an African prince, At-mun, captured in 1725, transported to America and sold as a slave to a Quaker Weaver. Treated as a member of the family, named Amos, he was educated and trained. When offered freedom he refused it, but was sold, at his master’s death, to a tanner, who also appreciated him. He was given his freedom in 1769 after 40 years as a slave. Out of his small earnings he bought freedom for 3 women + a child. He established his own tannery in Jaffrey and bought land there. He was a benevolent and deeply religious man, always helping those in need. And he was a highly respected member in his community.

On his death he left money to the church and to the school. This is a very inspiring book, not only as a beautiful story with a tragic beginning + a happy ending but because of its great, moral, mental + spiritual values.

Amos Fortune, Freeman is the story of a man who, born free in Africa, was sold in America as a slave. In time he purchased his own freedom + was able to give freedom to several other people. This dramatic story of a slave who achieved recognition as a free man and a worth-while citizen is based on the life of an actual person. Amos Fortune Freeman lived from 1710 to 1801 and is buried beside his wife in a little cemetery on a hill-top in Jaffrey, New Hampshire.

The story of A. Fortune is a moving tale of a man who made the Democratic ideal come true.

(use this before ending with spiritual values.)

---

The photo on the right is the dust jacket, while the photo on the left is the design beneath the dust jacket.

Sonia’s book review is clearly a rough draft. This is the only copy of her thoughts on Amos Fortune. It is unclear whether she ever revisited the review and rewrote another version to completion. Given by her faithful summarization of the book, I would venture to guess she wrote much of what is presented after having immediately read it. Amos Fortune, Free Man was written by Elizabeth Yates and won the Newbery Medal in 1951 and the William Allen White Children’s Book Award in 1953.

At-mun, later Amos, was captured in 1725, and was brought to Boston to be sold. At the time of his capture, At-mun was fifteen years old and a prince of his tribe. When the ship arrived in Boston, At-mun was auctioned, like the many before him. Mr. Caleb Copeland, a Quaker, bought At-mun outright, knowing he would provide a Christian home for At-mun, now Amos. Mr. Copeland, along with his wife and children, helped teach and train Amos. As Sonia stated in her review, Amos was given an opportunity by Mr. Copeland to buy his freedom. However, as elaborated in the narrative, Amos rejected the opportunity because he had seen the slaves, who had bought their freedom, struggle on their own without any skills for an actual free and better life. Therefore, Amos learned Mr. Copeland’s trade, so when the time was right, he would be able to support himself.

With this conviction set in mind, Amos worked hard to earn for his freedom, and for others as well. He went on to save throughout the years enough money to buy the freedom of his first wife, Lydia Somerset, and later his second wife, Violate. After moving to Jaffrey, New Hampshire, Amos and Violate adopted a daughter, Celyndia. Their lives in Jaffrey prospered with their tanning business, in spite of the occasional prejudices toward their family. 

While it is the story of a slave, who overcame all odds, it’s ultimately the story about the power of faith. As revealed in the book review, Amos was a deeply religious man, always helping others in need. In one particular passage, during his years with his wife and daughter in Jaffrey, further shines a light on his desire to help those in need. When hardship upon hardship met the Burdoo family, another African American family in Jaffrey, Amos swiftly considered donating his hard and long-earned funds to aid the family:

But after the evening with Lois Burdoo Amos had begun to think differently.

He told Violet how he felt as they sat outside the cabin after their noon day meal and Celyndia played nearby.

“It makes a hurt in my heart to see Lois so badly, sadly off since Moses died, and all those little children with hardly a roof over their heads or so much as a crust to eat,” he said, his eyes on the mountain but his hands resting on Violet’s hands that were folded in her lap.

“What are you fixing in your mind to do for that no-account family?” Violet asked warily, her idea of the Burdoos being far from his. “Buy a little house in the village for them,” he said slowly. “Lois can do a piece of work now and then and the children too. We’ll get them some new clothes and help them to a start in life.

Amos Fortune, Free Man, Elizabeth Yates, p. 131.

While Violate’s remark may seem cold and standoffish, she had seen the forest from the trees with this family. The Burdoo family had, by this point in the narrative, been receiving assistance from the town without proof of progressing in their circumstances. Yet, Violate’s observation of her husband in the ensuing pages truly captures the spirit of Amos and his generosity:

How many times, Amos Fortune, have you been standing on the way to laying hold of your own good life and how many times have you set it all aside? Three times. There was Lily, then there was Lydia, and then you put your all on me. I’m not wanting Lois Burdoo to live in hardship but I’m thinking you’ve got a right to live in dignity.

Amos Fortune, Free Man, Elizabeth Yates, p. 135.

While Amos Fortune, Free Man was originally considered a biography, it now leans more toward historical fiction. Being a middle grade book, much was left unsaid and/or details changed. One prime example being Amos’ wife, Violate, whose name was change to Violet in the narrative. Ultimately, this is a book for children who have yet to grasp the dark history of our country, and while the author didn’t shy away from describing the attitudes of racism, it certainly held back as not to overburden the reader with such hate. Even in the face of such injustices, Amos was a man who thoroughly trusted in God—a God who did not, has not, and will not discriminate. Many times in his life, as expressed throughout the pages of this book, he prayed for his place in this country. He was ever modest in his wishes, profoundly trustful in God’s ways; Amos Fortune represented Christianity at its humanly best.

Oh Lord,” Amos said, “You’ve always got an answer and You’re always ready to give it to the man who trusts You. Keep me open-hearted this night so when it comes I’ll know it’s You speaking and I’ll heed what You have to say.

Amos Fortune, Free Man, Elizabeth Yates, p. 140.

Some of the information presented in the overall story differ from actual events, but this can be easily remedied by learning more from reliable websites such as The Amos Fortune Forum. Prior to his death, and after separating a sum of his money for his wife and child, Amos donated the remaining funds to the church and to the town to support Schoolhouse Number 8, which to this day The Jaffrey Public Library administers the Amos Fortune Fund.

It is a shame that Sonia did not expand on her thoughts on Amos Fortune, Free Man. It is clear, however, that she was moved by the book. Followed by her unfinished review, Sonia copied chapters one and two. The first page is missing to this section, but with my copy of the book, I was able to compare her pages with the original text:

What she intended to do with these pages of the story is unknown. It’s quite possible she planned to use them as reference material to expound on her review. However, that’s simply speculation on my part.

The Story of Phillis Wheatley

---

Transcription:

BOOK REVIEW OF PHYLIS WHEATLY [sic]

FIRST AMERICAN NEGRO POET.         By Sonia H. Davis

It is my privilege to present to you a short review of the life and work of Phylis [sic] Wheatley, the first poet of the negro race in America.

The story of Phylis [sic] Wheatley is written by Shirley Graham, and was published by Messner, in 1950. While the story of Phylis Wheatlet [sic] is as thrilling as any historical novel, it also points the moral of a way of life among some early white New England families; a way of life not only for themselves, but also for the “stranger within their gates”. The great strength of the book lies in the treatment of their slaves, by some of the white folks in Boston, Massachusetts. Although on the one hand there is great cruelty practiced by many of the slave-venders as well as by some of the slave holders , [sic] there are also many God-fearing persons who find slavery wrong and courageously speak out against it,

If I’m still alive, please return you may copy what you wish.         S.H.D

manifesting by the treatment they accorded their own slaves how much they condemned the evil practice.

A clear picture of the every-day life of the Wheatley family and especially of the life of Phylis [sic] herself, emerges magnificently from the pages of the book. The biography tells of the remarkable life and attainments of a little Negro girl stolen from Africa when still a very small child, who was sold on the block to a kind and prosperous white family in Boston. She was educated by them the Wheatleys in the classical manner and she rewarded their efforts and their love by becoming well known for her poetry and her character both in the colonies and in England. She was actually lionized in England London and in Boston.

Phylis [sic] Wheatley was an Afro-American verse writer, born in Africa about 1758. In 1763 she was brought to Boston on a slave-ship. She was put up for sale in the market place and was purchased by Suzannah, [sic] the wife of Mr. Jhon [sic] Wheatley, while they were out on their errands of marketing.

When the gentle Mrs. Wheatley saw the frail, pathetic, naked little girl being exhibited for sale on the auction block, she persuaded her husband to let her buy the child. He tried to lead her away,telling [sic] her the auction block was not a place for a lady to attend. However, Mrs. Wheatley insisted upon going to the auction ; [sic] and although she almost fainted on seeing the poor, bedraggled little mite and the other stolen slaves, she insisted stubbornly upon buying the little girl and refused to go away. To her horror she saw the auctioneer pick up the naked little savage. Addressing her husband in a quavering voice she said “Jhon, [sic] it’s a little girl”! The child’s eyes were closed shut tight, and she shivered in the morning sunshine; and her whimpering was that of a terrified young animal. A man’s voice was heard to offer ten shillings. There were several other offers, but when the last was two and a half pounds, Mrs. Wheatley called out “I’ll give three pounds” whereupon the child was sold to her.

In astonishment Mr. Wheatley asked what she expected of a puny little black girl who was seemed to be about five or six years old and was as yet unable to do any effective work. She was so thin and weak she could hardly stand. To this question his wife replied that she could not bear to see the child abused; and that the others buyers appeared to be so cruel. The crowd standing nearby laughed at the child, and accused her of being dumb, so the auctioneer gave her a few resounding slaps on her bottom and she started to scream.

A string was tied around the child’s waist. Having bought and paid for her purchase, Mrs. Wheatley was about to go on her way, but the child did not move. “You gotta jerk the string” a tough, uncouth onlooker informed her as he stepped forward to show her how. Seizing the cord in his hand, he gave it a sudden, quick pull. “Oh no!” cried Mrs. Wheatley in a distressed voice as the child almost fell to the ground. The man handed her the cord, but Mrs. Wheatley’s distress was such that she did not thank him. Embarrassed by the child’s nakedness, she quickly stripped the scarf from her neck and wrapped it around the trembling body. As Mrs. Wheatley, accompanied by her husband, was leading the child through the streets, the gossiping towns-people [sic] saw them and snickered with amusement. When the Wheatleys walked to their waiting carriage, they did not find the one man-slave they owned. (he was really not a slave; Mr. Wheatley acquired him through a business transaction) So they they were obliged to walk all the way home. When Black Prince came home, he was asked where he had been and why he wasn’t waiting at the carriage. He said that whenever Mrs. Wheatley was doing her shopping on days when slave-ships came in, he would go to the dock, thinking there might be some one he knew. Needless to say he was quite forgiven. Black Prince did all sorts of work around the house and grounds, and also helped his master in the shop when it was busy. For this, Mr. Wheatley paid him a small wage.

The whimpering child, led by the string in Mrs. Wheatley’s hand, did not know what would happen to her; where she was going, or why, her baby mind was not able to conceive. All she knew was that she was cold and hungry and terribly unhappy. Many of the slaves during the voyage died on the ships, but the little girl’s sturdiness saved her for survival.

When they reached home the child broke away from Mrs. Wheatley’s grasp. With the string trailing after her, the child disappeared in the bushes. Upon hearing the commotion outside, their fifteen year old daughter,Mary, [sic] appeared on the porch and regarded her parents with wonderment and surprise. She heard her father say “Come, Mary, help your mother; she bought a slave at a street auction and now she let it get away.” Mrs. Wheatley pointed to the quivering bushes, indicating where the child is was.

With fruits and flowers she was finally enticed out of the bushes. While mother and daughter, with the help of another slave, Aunt Sukey, were engaged in trying to urge the child out of the bushes, Mary’s brother, Nathaniel,came [sic] along. Needless to say, upon seeing the little girl with the string tied under her arms, he was no less surprised than his sister. “They were auctioning her off on the block,” explained Mrs. Wheatley. “She was is so tiny and helpless” she added. The children understood, and helped their mother and Aunt Sukey to get her into the house.

The bewildered little waif then realized that they meant her no harm. At last she smiled and came out of the bushes. She was taken into the house and Aunt Sukey gave her a bath, and some clothing was found for her.

As the story unfolds it indicates the Wheatleys to have been predominantly good people. One day Mr. Wheatley was approached by a woman who had evidently escaped from one of the slave ships. She showed sign of terrible abuse. He gave her shelter in his shop and later took her home. Mr. Wheatley was a tailor, and although prosperous —for those times—he was probably not a very wealthy man. The Wheatleys cared for their slaves almost as if they were members of the family.

Aunt Sukey bathed and dressed the little savage, and gave her some food, for the want of which she had almost fainted. Mary Wheatley insisted that the little girl sleep in her room.

Being given flowers and greens as well as food,the [sic] child understood their kindness and responded appreciatively. Mary gave her the name of Phylis. [sic] To make her understand that that was her name, she pointed to her several times and called her by that name. She probably pointed to herself also and pronounced her own name, alternating the actions and the sounds until the child understood. Mary Wheatly [sic] had stretched her hand and picked a human bud that had been tossed among the rocks of New England. She transplanted it into her home and in her heart, and tended it with loving care. Mary’s patience in teaching the child to speak English must have been phenominal. [sic] She would touch a table or chair and call the article by its name several times. Her own name, by repetition, was probably taught her as animals are taught to understand their names.

Phylis [sic] seemed to be afraid of cats, but Mary’s kindly attitude soon dispelled all fear of unfamiliar things. Soon her brother Nathaniel took over the teaching of Phylis, [sic] and he found her to be an apt pupil. As she learned to read well, she soon exhibited a fondness for books, thus acquiring a superior education. She read Latin with facility and thoroughly understood it.

At an early age she began to express her thoughts in verse; and some of her poems, written at the age of fourteen, give evidence of her poetic ability. At nineteen she visited England, where she attracted much attention.

A volume of poems dedicated to the Countess of Huntington was published there, containing Phylis’ [sic] portrait and bearing the title “POEMS OF VARIOUS SUBJECTS RELIGIOUS AND MORAL”, by Phylis Wheatley,Negro [sic] servant to Mr. JhonWheatley, [sic] of Boston, in New England.”

After her return from England, she published several poems, among others, an address to General Washington. Her book was reprinted in Boston and passed through several editions. At first she received no credit for her poems but after she was examined by the best judges she was thought qualified to write them. This was signedby [sic] his Excellency, Thomas Hutchison, Governor. It was signed also by several other notables, namely, the Honorable Andrew Oliver, Lieut. Governor; Jhon [sic] Wheatley, her master; and several Clergymen.

The family of Mr. Wheatley having been broken up by death, after her return from England,during [sic] the distress and poverty after the revolution, she marries a Negro named Peters. In the 1790’s he practiced law in the Courts, altho’ in 1784 in 1784 he was thrown into debtors’ prison. (This was a custom of the times.) Her last days were spent in extreme want. From the opening scene on the slave-ship, to the close, trying to keep her baby warm, this is a tragic and thrilling story. It must be read to understand its significance and its beauty as well as its extreme tragedy.

I am confining this review to Phylis, [sic] that is why I am skipping much that the reader will find of other great interest in the book; such as the romance and marriage of Mary; the death of the tender, kindly Mrs. Wheatley, and the tragic end of the noble young Nathaniel who protected Phylis [sic] as he did his own sister against slanderous gossip that, among evil persons, crept up from time to time to harass him because of her close relationship to the family and particularly Nathaniel’s close propinquity as her teacher.

The Wheatleys, as the rapidly moving story indicates, loved Phylis [sic] very much. This is manifested in the patiencepracticed [sic] by each member of the family in teaching her and encouraging her to write; and although she often helped with the duties in the household she was at no time treated as a slave. In fact, what I can deduce from the story is that the Wheatley slaves had never been treated as such in any way at any time; and they were all cared for abundantly throughout their lives except Phylis [sic] who met with tragedy, especially during and immediately after, the revolution when every one suffered from a common, cause. In fact, Phylis [sic] was treated as a particular member of the family and had been much loved and respected not only by the family that adopted her, but by the entire city of cultured Boston, as well as by the other slaves who found no need for jealousy.

The story of the life of Phylis [sic] Wheatley is not only interesting but it is also important because she has contributed greatly to the cultural growth not only of her own people, but to the cultural growth of our Country. [sic] Her story is not unlike that of many other members of her race who found themselves suffering from disabilities in similar circumstances, circumventing their condition and rising to great heights. A fact that proves conclusivly [sic] that there is no such thing as an inferior race until the white man by his cruelty and injustice forces them into inferiority. Given the same opportunity as other normal persons in a free Country, [sic] the colored races, too, are capable of great deeds and great sacrifices, and can rise to commendable heights in their fields of artistic, cultural and scientific endeavors, and win success as well as any other; except that in their specific cases their heights are reached mostly through the hard, cruel way, made so difficult for them by their white brother. Nor do I mean that they attain to financial success only, although that, too, sometimes comes to them as a just reward along with a desrvedly [sic] earned recognition of their worth as human beings.

I speak chiefly of those successes which are they preceeded [sic] by their sincere efforts + which followed toward goodness and righteousness and decency in which they may well take a justifiable pride,along [sic] with the rest of similar humanity, for the world,in [sic] each case, is a better place for their having lived in it and achieved their successful objectives.

But hustory [sic] often fails to recordthe [sic] many forgotten heroes and heroines of minority races because many historians, and the times in which they live, bear an unreasoning hostility to those minorities. Failing to accord them that meed [sic] of credit which they deserve, those countries in which they have lived and served, and for which they have often died, repeatedly become poorer and in many cases, sometimes decline. Vide Spain, after the Inquisition; Germany, after Hitler; and Haym Salomon who, single handed, had financed our own American Revolution, yet whose glorious name and selfless deeds had never been entered in our history books, yet and whose great name and illustrious deeds are recorded in the archives in Washington, D.C.

Yet Many of these forgotten martyrs and heroes repay a thousand fold for the privilege that is theirs to serve mankind as a whole. Not the least of these had been the love that Phylis [sic] Wheatley had borne for humanity. And in this connection I should like to add that the glorious name of Phylis [sic] Wheatley—perhaps in a trifle more humble way—but just as great and just as effective, will go down in history and literature along with the names of the many other great writers, scientists and humanitarians, few of whom had attained recognition in their own day.

Although in a different field of endeavor, her name will stand forever beside the names of such heroes and heroines, poets and artists as Crispus Attucks, the first victim of the American Revolution; Josiah Henson, whose life was partly portrayed in Uncle Tom’s Cabin; Frederick Douglas, Sojourner Truth and all that galaxy of many wonderful, great and unselfish Negroes of our early history and of Abolishionist [sic] days who had lived and sufferred [sic] and worked and died, who have accomplished so much good for the greatest number, many of whom and had become triumphant in all their struggles in order that they might make life a little less difficult and perhaps much better not only for their own fellowmen who came after them, but for all humanity. Yet in all their achievements they remained humble. To mention but a few, of the past as well as some of the living heroes and heroines of today, many of whom have gone down into history, and many others who, I feel sure, will go down not only into history but also and into the Hall of Fame.

X “Booker T. Washington,, George Washingto [sic] Carver, Dr. Du Bois, the Dean of American Letters, Dr. Woodson,a [sic] great philosopher and writer, Mrs. Bethune, the Founder of a University, Dr. Ralph Bunche, one of the great diplomats, philosophers and teachers of today,” (1961) the late Dr. Leonard Stovall, the great humanitarian, Founder and President of the Out Door Life and Health Association, and in whose sanatorium were to be found patients of other colors and creeds, without prejudice, bigotry or discrimination, among whom I had found, upon a visit, white men as well as other men of other nationalities, was the first Negro doctor—at that time—elected as a member at an all-Caucasian convention of Doctors [sic] a few years before he died. All these, and many others were and are great men and women; and those who are still extant are the inheritors who are carrying on in the footsteps of their forerunners.

All have done—and are still doing—better jobs in the fields of their endeavors. Not least was the great American Negro poet, Phyllis [sic] Wheatley, who, at the age of nineteen years, was actually lionized both in London and Boston, in the late 1700’s, just before the Revolution.

Because of those of their race,who, [sic] before them,had [sic] contributed towards the paving of the way,each [sic] had hewn a cleft in his climb of that steep mountain of hardship, deprivation and discrimination by which their followers might find another step to reach the heights, we have, today, some of the most brilliant and excellent citizens among the Negro race, who are helping to make this a better America.

Because of the real liberty and freedom granted to the Negro race in California and several other other states, thousands of highly intelligent and capable Negroes are filling positions of trust and responsibility in our Post Offices, [sic] Libraries, [sic] banks and many other offices where honesty, integrity and capability are required and appreciated.

Let us not be too smug and complacent in believing that the white race is superior to any other. When given the chance of equality before the Law, this type of Negro is to be found among large groups of the highly intelligent and capable. There is no such thing as an inferior race until the white man makes such, of him. Let no one tell us that they are inferior. Given half a chance, they rise to the occasion and to their responsibilities, as indicated in the many foregoing names, and they prove themselves just as spiritually and intellectually superior and modest as white folks of similar capacity, and in some cases supercede [sic] them. Neille Sellasie’s [sic] Ancestors [sic] and the people they so kindly ruled, were an educated and cultured race while their white brethren —metaphorically—still hung from the tree-tops by their tails.

It was not Jefferson , [sic] but Thomas Payne [sic] who first said “All men are born equal.” It has been alleged that it was Payne, [sic] as Jefferson’s friend, who gave him a few ideas regarding The Declaration of Independence. Neither Paine nor Jefferson, I beleive, [sic] meant that all men were born equal intellectually, spiritually or financially. Payne [sic] must have meant—and passed the idea on to Jefferson —that all men were born equall [sic] in having been expelled from the mother’s womb. But every living child after it has been born, regardless of its race or color deserves an equal chance to “Life, Liberty and Happiness.” Given that chance in a democratic country, the Negro can be and is a capable human entity with all the physical and psychological attributes of a normal white man. He has the same desires and feelings of hunger and thirst, love and hate,—love [sic] for his friends of any color or race—and hate for his enemies, even of his own. And even his blood, like that of any other white or colored race, is red. Had Were not the foregoing names of the great Negroes aforementioned not had the chance, we would not have benefitted from thair [sic] services. To mention but one, of recent vintage, but who, unfortunately, passed away too soon.

The late Dr. Leonard Stovall and his highly educated and cultured wife, mother-in-law, sister-in-law (music teacher in the public schools) his daughter, an excellent practicing physicien, [sic] as is also his son; all of them exceedingly handsome by the best standards of beauty, having had the chance in a free democracy—as the standards of their ethics may well attest, may well be emulated by some of the wealthiest white clods.

I must not leave out another highly ethical, cultured couple, Dr.John [sic] and Dr. Vada Somerville his beautiful and gracious wife. Dr John came from the West Indies, as a student in an American High School and…

---

The Story of Phillis Wheatley was written by Shirley Graham Du Bois. The second wife of W.E.B. Du Bois. In my research on the book, I was unable to find out if the story had won any awards. Whether it did or did not, this book is certainly a gem. It’s unclear as to why Sonia referred to the book as Phillis Wheatley First American Negro Poet, for that is not its title, and the only book I was able to find with that name was Phillis Wheatley: First African-American Poet by Carol Greene published in January 1995. Therefore, not the book that Sonia had read. (And no, Carol Greene is not related to Sonia—only a fitting coincidence!)

Sonia had a great deal to say about this book. The book review may seem incomplete, but I have recently found its last page in another PDF which has yet to be transcribed. In some ways, Sonia’s review on Phillis Wheatley was very much an essay to prove the validity of African Americans in our society. This book review/essay was something of a banner for her to wave with untiring advocacy. Nothing undaunted, Sonia integrated a portion of it in her letter to Vice President, Lydon B. Johnson.

Transcription:

Sonia H. Davis

667 S. Hoover St

L.A.5 Feb. 11, 1961

To His Honor

Lydon B. Johnson

Vice-President of the U.S.A

The Capitol, Washington D.C.

My Dear Mr. Vice-President

Greetings. As the presiding officer of the Senate please permit me to call your attention to what I believe to be an oversight—intentional or otherwise—regarding Mr. Weaver, the new Housing administrator.

In the L.A. Times of Feb. 9 I read that Mr. Weaver, as the National Chairman of the NAACP, was, according to my interpretation, persona non grata. Perhaps not quite openly—but tacitly—he was accused of being a radical and a subversive. If this be true, how is it that he was endorsed for his present office? This tacit accusation, was after all, it seems to me, the out cropping, of—shall we say—a mild form of racial bias?

I do not know Mr. Weaver. I have never met him. But if the NAACP is believed to be a subversive organization, then it is a slur upon a fine, religious and dedicated Jew, who has long ago passed on, and who had originally organized the NAACP a great many years ago. I believe he was the father of the late beloved Rabbi, Stephen S. Wise of the former Free Synagogue of N.Y. City.

Rabbi Wise, Senior, as stated above, was a very religious and dedicated Jew, and could not have been a communist, a Socialist or any other sort of radical + subversive. If he can be called radical, so was Abraham Lincoln, the Great Imancipator [sic].

In the early 17th century, the Negro did not emigrate of his own accord. Chained, ill nourished, and badly abused, only 11 survived out of the original 44 that were kidnapped and brought to Jamestown by foul means of force, and sold to such colonists as had the means to buy them.

These slaves and others, that followed by way of the kidnappers, became a great traffic in the South. (Unfortunately, a few northerners were also guilty. In a short time, aided by their white masters, they multiplied far beyond the number that were “shanghai-ed”.

The good Rabbi, in his compassion and wisdom, who well knew that Liberty and Freedom were both born of the Old Testament, sought this freedom for the Negro, who, he knew that under the circumstances would be with us always, and wanted the negro in America to be the best negro in the world. That is why he organized—with the help of others—the National Association for the Advancement of the Colored People.

In 1853, five (5) Jews had banded to-gether [sic] in an effort to save a runaway slave and would not relinquish him to the State Marshall who would have sent him back to his cruel master to be strung to a post and brutally whipped.

The names of these men were: Michael Greenbaum, George Schneider, Adolph Loeb., Julian Rosenthal and Leopold Mayer.

These five men, whose (illegible word) fell upon later Jews, and a few Christians, all took up the spiritual and humane cudgels for the negroes when Lincoln became President. They were among the first to prevail upon him to free the slaves, and were the first to sign the formal demand—calling attention to the Old Testament—for the Declaration of Emancipation.

If this can be called subversive or radical, then Lincoln was subversive and radical and all those compassionate Jews in the South whose homes, business-establishments and Synagogues were pillaged, burned or otherwise destroyed recently, because they wanted to help the negro integrate in the schools and stop the beginning of a civil war, must also be called subversive; as did also many white nonJews, [sic] who tried to do the same, as did President Eisenhower, and I believe our new President also entertained the same idea. This must have been the idea of all those true Americans in the Capitol who endorsed Mr. Weaver.

A great many of the negroes have become spiritually and intellectually of age. And now they deserve to come into their own. Given the same chance before the Law as all other first class citizens, there is no stopping them from becoming the type of American for which Rabbi Wise had hopes.

“Booker T. Washington, George Washington Carver, Dr. Du Bois, the Dean of American Letters, Dr. Woodson, Mrs. Bethune, the Founder of a University, Dr. Ralph Bunche, one of the greatest diplomats, philosophers and teachers of today; the late Dr. Leonard Stovall, the first negro Doctor invited to an all-white doctors convention, a few years before he died; all these were great men and great lovers of humanity, and those who are still extant are the inheritors who are carrying on in the footsteps of their. All forerunners still have done and are doing, better jobs in the fields of their endeavors. Not least was the great American negro poet, Phylis [sic] Wheatley, who, at 19 yrs. of age, was actually lionized both in London and Boston; in the late 1700’s just before the Revolution.

Because of those of their race, who, before them, had hewn a cleft for them in their trudge of that steep mountain of hardship and deprivation by which their followers might find another step to reach the heights, we have, today, some of the most brilliant and excellent citizens among the negro race, who are helping to make this a better America.

When given the chance of equality before the Law, this type of negro is to be found among large groups of the highly intelligent and capable, filling positions of trust and responsibility, where honesty, integrity and capability are required and appreciated.

Let us not be too smug and complacent in believing that the white race is superior to any other. There is no such thing as an inferior race until the white man makes such, of him. Let no one tell us that they are inferior. Given half the chance they rise to the occasion and to their responsibilities, and prove themselves just as spiritual + intellectually superior and modest as white folks of similar capacity.”

(Last 4 paragraphs are quotations from my essay on Phyllis [sic] Wheatley, the First Negro Poet of renown in America.)

(This writer is a Jewess)

Please believe me to be, my dear Sir, most respectfully and humbly yours

“For an America that may remain Immutably American”

Sonia Haft Davis

---

This letter is chock full of tidbits worth analyzing. Mr. Weaver was Robert C. Weaver, and he was national chairman of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) for only a year. In 1966, despite his reservations regarding Weaver’s political stance, Lyndon B. Johnson, now president, elected Robert Weaver as head of the new Department of Housing and Urban Development in 1966. (Britannica) Another thing worth noting is that it was not a single Jew who originally organized the NAACP. Emil G. Hirsch was one of many who helped fund the NAACP, and other founders consisted of W.E.B. Du Bois, Wells-Barnett, and Mary White Ovington. (Google)

Three years after her letter to the vice president, Sonia briefly mentioned her book review of Phillis Wheatley in a letter to her niece, Leonore Goldberg:

Transcription:

I’ve written several things, but they are resting peacefully in their crypts.

I gave a book-review [sic] on ‘The First Negro Poet in America” the author is or was a negro writer, Shirley Graham. Of course that cannot be published.

---

It’s a mystery as to why Sonia did not think it publishable. If I had to speculate, I’d say she feared disturbing any copyrights surrounding the work. The last thing she ever wanted, and this was a fear instilled within her by August Derleth, was getting sued for publishing articles regarding someone else’s work.

Unlike her faithful summarization of Amos Fortune, Free Man, Sonia’s review on The Story of Phillis Wheatley contains some errors. As much as I’d love to go through all of them and give proper corrections, I’m only going to focus on the obvious and minor mistakes for the sake of length and time. For one, the great strength of the book doesn’t entirely rest in the treatment of slaves, nor does it frankly reveal the vile treatment of slaves. While we do get a glimpse of those for and against slavery during the auction block passage, the actual horror of slavery was hinted at, elaborated through glimpses such as this excerpt:

He brought the ship in without mishap, docking so close to the Old Feather store that the prow almost touched its side; then without a backward glance he slowly made his way to the rail and, climbing overboard, dropped on to the almost deserted wharf. For this sailor was a Boston man; he wanted to get off the ship and away so that no one would know he had shipped on a slaver. He fled from his disgrace but he could not escape the knowledge of what was going on behind him.

They were prying open the hatches, loosing such sights and sounds and smells as would stagger hardier souls than the young pilot. Human beings had been packed and chained and fastened in that hole for three long months.

Water had been passed down and food tossed into the hole but no one on the ship had dared go down. At first the screaming and shouting and wailing had gone on day and night. After a time the awful silence was even more horrible. Of course on every trip much of the cargo “spoiled” but what was left brought a good price. For slavers were men who kidnaped black people in Africa and brought them all the way across the seas to be sold as slaves in America. They referred to themselves as traders in “black ivory.” So many of the Africans died on the way that losses were heavy. It was a nasty business, avoided by decent seamen. So before the people of the town were astir the young sailor had lost himself in the jumble of warehouses and dramshops surrounding the piers. He resolved to choose his next ship more carefully.

The Story of Phillis Wheatley, Shirley Graham Du Bois, pp. 14-15.

The great strength of the book lies on Phillis’ adjustment to her new surroundings—relinquishing certain tribal rites and overcoming fears such as learning the difference between the house cat and a jungle cat—then inevitably on her genius. After the ship’s arrival with the “black ivory”, the reader is immediately introduced to John Wheatley and his wife, Susannah Wheatley, enjoying a morning out in the market. Yet, like a dark cloud rolling in to overrun a sunny day, their simple outing was darkened by the commotion at the auction block.

We can only ever imagine the vending savagery of auction blocks, and we get a crisp and daunting picture of such a scene when Mr. and Mrs. Wheatley came upon the sight. Immediately, we share in the same anguish as Susannah Wheatley, refusing to believe that such wickedness could be presented with such shameless transparency. In spite of her husband’s insistence to walk and look away, Susannah stood boldly and refused to turn a blind eye:

“Here, my dear, never mind Prince. Don’t look at them. We’ll go this way!” He was endeavoring to lead her away. But Mrs. Wheatley held back.

“No, no, John! Let’s not run away. They’re human beings.”

The Story of Phillis Wheatley, Shirley Graham Du Bois, p. 18.

Her declaration was a testament to how the Wheatley family treated their slaves. In fact, the first sentence in the following passage gives another reminder of the family’s opposition toward slavery:

The Wheatleys had three slaves, though they would have indignantly repudiated the system. Aunt Sukey had been with Susannah Wheatley’s family since Mrs. Wheatley was a girl and had gone with her young mistress to her new home on King Street. There she had organized the house and nursed the twins through many ailments.

Now she was old and did little work, though she continued to keep a sharp eye on everything and would countenance no “sass” from the children. Lima was a very black Portuguese woman. Mr. Wheatley had come across her one evening down on the wharves where she was begging for work, declaring that she was “va’ strong” and good cook.” It was evident that she had escaped from one of the ships, but as she showed signs of horrible abuse, he gave her shelter in the shop and later took her home where she proved to be even better than her word. “Board and keep” was all she asked for long and faithful work and she soon slipped into a permanent place in the kitchen.

Black Prince, the third slave, was a different matter. Mr. Wheatley had obtained him through a business transaction which he always suspected as being shady. Prince was a well-proportioned, intelligent young fellow. After a time master and slave entered into a bargain whereby the slave would buy his own freedom. Prince did all sorts of odd jobs during his spare time. In rush seasons he worked in the tailor shop and Mr. Wheatley paid him a small wage.

The Story of Phillis Wheatley, Shirley Graham Du Bois, p. 32.

In that passage, we get further insight on the slaves who helped the Wheatley family. Particularly of the ones that Sonia mentioned in her review, such as Black Prince and Lima, the woman John Wheatley rescued. Upon purchasing the little girl, who would become Phillis Wheatley, Sonia did accurately paraphrase, and in some places even copied word for word, the exchange of Susannah and the onlooker:

“You gotta jerk the string” a tough, uncouth onlooker informed her as he stepped forward to show her how. Seizing the cord in his hand, he gave it a sudden, quick pull. “Oh no!” cried Mrs. Wheatley in a distressed voice as the child almost fell to the ground. The man handed her the cord, but Mrs. Wheatley’s distress was such that she did not thank him.

Sonia H. Davis, Book Review of Phillis Wheatley First American Negro Poet.

“You gotta jerk the string!” an onlooker informed her.

He stepped forward, “Here, I’ll show you.” Seizing the cord in his own hand he gave it a sudden, quick pull.

“Oh, no!” The cry was wrung from Mrs. Wheatley as the child almost fell to the ground.

“See, that does it,” the man handed her the cord.

“Now, she’s moving.”

Mrs. Wheatley’s distress was such that she did not thank him.

The Story of Phillis Wheatley, Shirley Graham Du Bois, p. 23.

After this ordeal was behind them, Phillis Wheatley was welcomed and adored by the rest of the family. Mary Wheatley, the daughter of John and Susannah, would take it upon herself to teach and raise Phillis. As glossed over by Sonia, the narrative elaborates on some of the teaching moments between Mary and Phillis:

Mary sat on a stone bench, a table strewn with papers and books in front of her. Now she placed her finger on the table, fixed her eyes sternly on the child and asked, “What am I touching?”

“Rocky! Rocky! Rocky!” The small one made a song, rocking in rhythm to her words.

“No, Phillis!” At the sharp command the child stopped and her eyes grew large.

“Hear me, now!” Once more Mary made a large gesture of pressing her finger against the table. “Tell me. What do I touch?”

The child’s attention was focused. For a moment she was very still, her eyes wrinkled. Then her lips formed a syllable.

“Wa-” she stopped, watching Mary’s face. And Mary shook her head.

“What is this, Phillis?” Mary asked again, unhurried, patient. “Remember, I told you yesterday. Ta—” she started the word and stopped.

At this a broad smile spread over the little dark face.

“Tay-bah!” she shouted the word triumphantly.

“Table! That’s it, Phillis, that’s it!”

The Story of Phillis Wheatley, Shirley Graham Du Bois, pp. 39-40.

While Nathaniel Wheatley, Mary’s brother, also taught Phillis, his “tragic end”, as described in the book review, was not because he was harassed for his “close propinquity as her teacher”. The truth is, many families in Boston knew Phillis and loved her poetry. A lot of the wives in the neighborhood would invite her over for tea. The only ones who did not entirely join her side were the husbands of these very wives, and that was only when Mary sought to publish Phillis’ poetry. It wasn’t until Phillis proved herself the poet that she was publicly accepted. Granted, the narrative perhaps doesn’t reveal the darker sides of these accounts, since it, too, is a children’s book. A single sentence, however, reveals the death of Nathaniel Wheatley:

Years later he learned that the reason Nathaniel Wheatley did not come to them that summer of 1783 was that he had passed away in London.”

The Story of Phillis Wheatley, Shirley Graham Du Bois, p. 166.

The “he” in the sentence was Phillis’ husband, John Peters. He had hoped Nathaniel would come to visit his family, but when he did not, he grew resentful. The actual cause of Nathaniel’s death was not explained in the narrative.

While the life stories of Phillis and Sonia are different in many ways, they are similar in other smaller ways. They both endured the initial hardships of living in a foreign land, ultimately rising the ranks of high society, then meeting with hardships toward the end of their lives. One line that particularly sealed the undeniable similarity between the two women is from Sonia’s review:

“Her last days were spent in extreme want.”

It’s a simple sentence, but heavy words that Sonia most certainly felt—probably even while writing the book review. After the passing of Nathaniel A. Davis on April 6, 1945, Sonia struggled with her finances and sadly, she had struggled with it to the very end of her life. Sonia understood what it felt like to be in need, in spite of the small gifts of money that her family occasionally provided for urgent necessities.

Life in Boston was difficult after the American Revolution, and after marrying and beginning a family with John Peters, Phillis struggled. John Peters tried his best to provide for his family, but after accruing a great amount of debt, he was sent to prison. Selling everything of value, and barely making enough as a scullery maid, Phillis scarcely had enough for bare necessities. On December 5, 1784, at the age thirty-one, Phillis passed away. Phillis had contracted pneumonia, and most sources claim that was the single cause of death. Another source claims that while dealing with pneumonia, Phillis passed away after giving birth to her daughter, who also passed away on the same day. The narrative and the Phillis Wheatley Historical Society claims Phillis was buried with her baby daughter.

The life stories of Amos Fortune and Phillis Wheatley, on the other hand, are far similar than different. Amos and Phillis lived simultaneously in Boston, Massachusetts, until Amos went to live in Jaffrey, New Hampshire in 1781. The obvious differences lie in their profession and age. Unlike the fiction of Jesmyn Ward, whose dark prose reveals the harrowing shades of slavery, the lighter prose of Amos Fortune, Free Man and The Story of Phillis Wheatley gives proof that there’s always hope when all seems dark—kindhearted rescuers in a crowd of evil-minded suppressors. Both Amos and Phillis were taken in by caring, Christian folk, who stood against slavery, even though these kind “masters” were put in the difficult position of participating in the auctioning block in order to save these slaves. Living in Boston, who knows how often Amos and Phillis crossed paths in the markets, in the streets, attending to their masters.

After reading the two books myself, I can see why Sonia was impacted by these books, and why she admired them. They portray what a person can achieve when they believe and trust, regardless of the hardships one faces. Each book was beautifully written in their own way. I know how these books stirred my own soul, and I can only imagine, given the times Sonia lived in, how much more they moved her, giving her reason to speak up against prejudices. I personally recommend acquiring copies of these two books. The Story of Phillis Wheatley by Shirley Graham Du Bois is harder to come by at a reasonable price, but the Internet Archive does have it available to borrow for an hour. Amos Fortune, Free Man by Elizabeth Yates is affordable and easily attainable.