Background

The entirety of the Leopold and Loeb case was very bizarre from the very beginning. Two teenage boys, Leopold, 19, and Loeb, 18, brutally murdered their young neighbor, seemingly for no reason at all. All three of the boys came from wealthy Jewish families and resided in Chicago’s Kenwood neighborhood within a walking distance from one another. Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb seemed to have everything in life laid out for them.¹ Despite this, the privileged teenage boys threw away their lives through a single act of violence.

The minds of Leopold and Loeb were complex, revealing, and utterly disturbed. Both boys were excellent scholars, but had something darker residing in their minds. Loeb was popular among his peers, and began studying at the University of Chicago at 14. However, he was also involved with drinking and gambling, and desired to become a “master criminal”.² Additionally, he had always been obsessed with crime. He “read about crime, he planned crimes, and he committed crimes”, but he had never physically harmed someone.³ Leopold had graduated from the University of Chicago and had plans to attend Harvard Law School. Despite excelling academically, he was described as “arrogant” by people he encountered.⁴ Aside from law, Leopold was fascinated with psychology, especially with the works of Friedrich Nietzsche.⁵ Leopold “believed that legal obligations did not apply to those who approached ‘the superman’”, and brought his lover, Richard Loeb, into this mentality.⁶ In return, Loeb tied up Leopold in his crime schemes. When these two minds were put together, they became deadly. Historian Paula S. Fass asks the question of “why two rich, gifted boys would commit a murder embedded in the form of a ransom kidnapping”; a question that will likely never be fully answered.⁷ 

Together, the two boys desired to commit the “perfect crime” and the “crime of the century”. The premeditated murder of a random victim fit this criteria. “The two teenagers spent months discussing and refining a plan that included kidnapping the child of a wealthy parents, demanding a ransom, and collecting the ransom after it was thrown off a moving train as it passed a designated point”, and murder was crucial to get away with the crime.⁸ If murder was not involved, they risked being identified by their victim. Leopold and Loeb started planning this murder in November 1923, 6 months before it actually took place. They ruled against deciding who their victim would be beforehand, and instead opted to make it spontaneous.⁹ In the days leading up to the murder, they began to get their supplies together, including a chisel, which would be the murder weapon.¹⁰ Their last step was to rent a car the morning of the murder. 

Kidnapping and Murder

Bobby Franks was walking home from Harvard School for Boys around 5pm on May 21 following a baseball game.¹¹ At the same time, Leopold and Loeb were circling the area hunting for a victim. Leopold, who was driving the rented car, pulled up next to Franks and “asked him to get in the car to discuss a tennis racquet”, to which he complied.¹² Loeb, who was in the back seat of the car, grabbed Franks, covered his mouth, and “struck the boy with [sic] several times on his head with a chisel”.¹³ Loeb then suffocated young Bobby Franks to death.¹⁴ Sometime between 5:15 PM and 9:30 PM, the boys drove to the Illinois/Indiana border to dispose of the body.¹⁵ Leopold and Loeb shoved Frank’s body into a culvert under a railroad, poured acid on his naked body, and returned to Loeb’s home to burn his clothing.¹⁶ 

At 9:30 PM, Mrs. Franks received a menacing phone call from a man identifying himself as “George Johnson”.¹⁷ “Leopold told Franks that her boy had been kidnapped, but was unharmed, and that she should expect a ransom note soon”; the family received the note the next morning.¹⁸ The note reads: 

Dear Sir: 

As you no doubt know by this time, your son has been kidnapped. Allow us to assure you that he is at present well and safe. You need fear no physical harm for him, provided you live up carefully to the following instructions and to such others as you will receive future communication. Should you, however, disobey any of our instructions, even slightly, his death will be the penalty. 

1. For obvious reasons make absolutely no attempt to communicate with either the police authorities or any private agency. Should you already have communicated with the police, allow them to continue their investigation, but do not mention this letter.

2. Secure before noon today ten thousand dollars. This money must be composed entirely of old bills of the following denominations:

Two thousand dollars in twenty dollar bills, eight thousand dollars in fifty dollar bills. The money must be old. An attempt to include new or marked bills will render the entire venture futile. 

3. The money should be placed in a large cigar box, or if this is impossible, in a heavy cardboard box, securely closed and wrapped in white paper. The wrapping paper should be sealed at all openings with sealing wax.

4. Have the money with you, prepared as directed above, and remain at home after one o’clock P.M. See that the telephone is not in use.

You will receive a further communication instructing you as to your future course.

As a final word of warning, this is an extremely commercial proposition and we are prepared to put our threat into execution should we have reasonable grounds to believe that you have committed an infraction of the above instructions. 

However, should you carefully follow out our instructions to the letter, we can assure you that your son will be safely returned to you within six hours of our receipt of the money.

Yours truly, 

George Johnson¹⁹

A second note was to be placed on the train, but Mr. Franks never received this one. The 2nd note reads:

Dear Sir: 

Proceed immediately to the back platform of the train. Watch the east side of the track. Have your package ready. Look for the first LARGE, RED, BRICK factory situated immediately adjoining the tracks on the east. On top of this factory is a large, black watertower with the word CHAMPION written on it. Wait until you have COMPLETELY passed the south end of the factory – count five very rapidly and then IMMEDIATELY throw the package as far east as you can. Remember that this is your only chance to recover your son.

Yours truly,

George Johnson²⁰

At around 12PM the next day, “Leopold (‘George Johnson’) called Jacob Franks, Bobby’s father, shortly before three o’clock to tell him a taxi cab was about to arrive at his home and that he should take it to a specified drugstore in South Chicago”.²¹ Mr. Franks, of course, refused to do so. A few hours before this call, unbeknownst to the killers or Mr. Franks, a laborer had discovered Bobby’s body.²² Bobby’s uncle went to confirm the identity of the body as soon as he heard the news.²³ It was at the location of the body that a clue to the identity of the killer lay.

Linking Leopold and Loeb to the Crime

Little did he know, Nathan Leopold had lost a pair of eyeglasses at the site where he and Richard Loeb had dumped the body. This specific style of glasses “could be traced to a single Chicago optometrist, who had written only three such prescriptions, including the one to Leopold”.²⁴ Investigators began meticulously questioning Nathan Leopold on May 23, and soon after, Richard Loeb.²⁵ They confirmed each other’s alibis of driving girls around in Leopold’s car, but “state’s attorney Robert Crowe, heading the investigation, was skeptical”.²⁶ Upon further investigation and leads from classmates, prosecutors got ahold of a set of notes from a typewriter that belonged to Leopold, and the flaws matched those of the ransom note.²⁷ Leopold’s chauffeur attempted to defend him by saying the car “the boys claimed they had spent the night driving around with girls, had not left the garage on the day of the murder”.²⁸ He had unknowingly destroyed both the boys’ alibis. 

On May 30, 1924, Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb were arrested for the murder of Bobby Franks.²⁹ The following day, they both confessed to the murder, but neither would own up to actually killing Franks.³⁰ 

Trial

For the trial, “The Loeb and Leopold families hired Clarence Darrow and Benjamin Bachrach to represent the two boys”.³¹ Clarence Darrow was interested in the case due to the opportunity it gave him to “attack the death penalty, which he had called “an abomination”.³² Darrow had persuaded the boys to plead guilty to potentially avoid the death penalty. Professor Douglas O. Linder explains Darrow’s reasoning: 

“It was Darrow’s decision to change the boys’ initial pleas to the charges of murder and kidnapping from “not guilty” (suggesting a traditional insanity defense) to “guilty.” The decision was made primarily to prevent the state from getting two opportunities to get a death sentence. With “not guilty” pleas, the state had planned to try the boys first on one of the two charges, both of which carried the death penalty in Illinois, and if it failed to win a hanging on the first charge, try again on the second. The guilty plea also meant that the sentencing decision would be made by a judge, not by a jury”.³³ 

The defense worked around the testimony of 4 psychiatrists who interviewed the boys.³⁴ The issue was that “the prosecution argued that psychiatric testimony was only admissible if the defendants claimed insanity”, to which the psychiatrists said mental diseases should be considered in the sentencing.³⁵ The judge was convinced and allowed the evidence to be used. The entire trial, which Linder defines as a hearing due to the guilty plea, lasted a little longer than a month.³⁶ The defense claimed that Leopold and Loeb suffered from “emotional immaturity, obsessions with crime and Nietzschean philosophy, alcohol abuse, glandular abnormalities, and sexual longings and insecurities”.³⁷ Leopold was described as paranoid, delusional, and obsessed with Loeb; Loeb was called childish and called out for his lack of judgement.³⁸ Psychiatrist Wiliiam White claimed that “Nathan would never on his own initiative have murdered Bobby Franks. . . And I don’t believe Dickie would have ever functioned to this extent all by himself”, so the two came together to commit the murder.³⁹ The prosecution argued that neither boy was mentally ill.⁴⁰ The Journal of the American Institute of Criminal Law and Criminology highlighted the fact that ”this is probably the first instance of the offer of elaborate psychiatric analyses as the basis for remitting the law’s penalty for a calculated, cold-blooded murder, committed by persons not claimed to be insane or defective in any degree recognized by the law as making them not legally responsible”. This aspect made the case revolutionary when it came to the court becoming less reliant on the death penalty.⁴¹ 

Over the span of 12 hours on August 22, 1924, “Darrow argued that his clients should not bear full responsibility for their crime” due to several external factors.⁴² The basis of Darrow’s argument was that this murder happened due to “a series of infinite chances”; he claimed the boys were victims of nature.⁴³ Darrow had also attempted to sway the jury away from a death sentence by expressing that the boys were too young to have to sit in jail awaiting execution.⁴⁴

Attorney Robert Crowe stated “this was a premeditated crime committed by two remorseless defendants, and the appropriate punishment was obvious”, which he believed to be execution.⁴⁵ After weeks of debating, Nathan Leopold and RIchard Loeb were sentenced to life in prison, mainly due to their age and the inability of the court to determine responsibility.⁴⁶ 

Aftermath

The two boys were held in Joliet Penitentiary in Joliet, Illinois. Richard Loeb was killed here in 1936, and Nathan Leopold was released in 1958 due to his excellent behavior.⁴⁷ Leopold then moved to Puerto Rico, where “he earned a master’s degree, taught mathematics, and worked in hospitals and church missions”.⁴⁸ He passed away on August 30, 1971 following a heart attack.⁴⁹ 

Significance

Newspapers were critical to the entire incident, as well as the 1920s as a whole. Several newspapers provided the public with updated stories about a “sensational kidnap-murder”, provided “the prosecuting attorney with material assistance”, and gathered evidence that helped solve the case.⁵⁰ James Mulroy and Alvin Goldstein, two journalists for the Chicago Daily News, received and “shared some of the reward money as well as the Pulitzer Prize for helping to connect Nathan Leopold, Jr., and Richard Loeb to the abduction and murder of Bobby Franks”.⁵¹ Daily papers ”published the confessions, interviewed the families and friends, and speculated about the nature of the “million-dollar defense” to be mounted by Clarence Darrow and his expensive psychiatric witnesses”; this turned into a type of entertainment for some, and turned this into a nationwide phenomenon.⁵² In addition to keeping the public updated on the case, the newspapers also did some strange things, which are now seen as immoral. “On May 23, 1924, the day the newspapers reported that Bobby had been kidnapped, they also contained a detailed description of his dead body”.⁵³ To expose people, and potentially children, to such a disturbing scene was very odd. Despite this, the case would not have been solved without the contributions of press workers. 

The Leopold and Loeb case related to The Modern Temper by Lynn Dumenil in terms of psychology, beliefs, and human morality. Dumenil touches on the ideas of several individuals, including psychologist John B. Watson. Watson “described humans as hollow shells, formed by their environment, who responded to external stimuli”.⁵⁴ Leopold and Loeb’s minds and behavior was shaped by the privileged environment that they grew up in, and this led them to believe they could get away with murder. Fiction writer Sherwood Anderson wrote “fashioned dark, brooding stories dealing with marriage, morality, and individuals destroyed by success”.⁵⁵ It would be plausible to say that Loepold and Loeb were destroyed by the financial success of their parents and their own intellectual success. 

The murder of Bobby Franks by Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb would go down in history as “cautionary story about the dangers of modern youth”.⁵⁶ The profiles of the killers were vastly different from those of a “typical” murderer. Their portrayals “set them apart and represented them as larger than life”, making the case even more sensational.⁵⁷

Citations

1. “The “Perfect Crime”: The Story of Leopold and Loeb and the Murder of Bobby Franks” ︎
2. “The “Perfect Crime”: The Story of Leopold and Loeb and the Murder of Bobby Franks” ︎
3. Douglas O. Linder ︎
4. “The “Perfect Crime”: The Story of Leopold and Loeb and the Murder of Bobby Franks” ︎
5. Douglas O. Linder ︎
6. Douglas O. Linder ︎
7. Paula S. Fass ︎
8. Douglas O. Linder ︎
9. “The “Perfect Crime”: The Story of Leopold and Loeb and the Murder of Bobby Franks” ︎
10. “The “Perfect Crime”: The Story of Leopold and Loeb and the Murder of Bobby Franks” ︎
11. “The Loeb-Leopold Murder of Franks in Chicago, May 21, 1924.”; Douglas O. Linder ︎
12. Douglas O. Linder ︎
13. Douglas O. Linder ︎
14. Douglas O. Linder ︎
15. “The Loeb-Leopold Murder of Franks in Chicago, May 21, 1924.” ︎
16. Douglas O. Linder ︎
17. “The Loeb-Leopold Murder of Franks in Chicago, May 21, 1924.” ︎
18. Douglas O. Linder ︎
19. Nathan F. Leopold, Jr. and Richard Loeb, University of Minnesota Web Archive ︎
20. Douglas O. Linder ︎
21. “The Loeb-Leopold Murder of Franks in Chicago, May 21, 1924.”; Douglas O. Linder ︎
22. “The Loeb-Leopold Murder of Franks in Chicago, May 21, 1924.” ︎
23. Paula S. Fass ︎
24. Douglas O. Linder ︎
25. “The Loeb-Leopold Murder of Franks in Chicago, May 21, 1924.” ︎
26. Douglas O. Linder ︎
27. Douglas O. Linder ︎
28. Douglas O. Linder ︎
29. “The Loeb-Leopold Murder of Franks in Chicago, May 21, 1924.” ︎
30. “The Loeb-Leopold Murder of Franks in Chicago, May 21, 1924.” ︎
31. Douglas O. Linder ︎
32. Douglas O. Linder ︎
33. Douglas O. Linder ︎
34. Douglas O. Linder ︎
35. Douglas O. Linder ︎
36. Douglas O. Linder ︎
37. Douglas O. Linder ︎
38. Douglas O. Linder ︎
39. Douglas O. Linder ︎
40. Douglas O. Linder ︎
41. “The Loeb-Leopold Murder of Franks in Chicago, May 21, 1924.” ︎
42. Douglas O. Linder ︎
43. Douglas O. Linder ︎
44. Douglas O. Linder ︎
45. Douglas O. Linder ︎
46. Douglas O. Linder ︎
47. Douglas O. Linder ︎
48. Douglas O. Linder ︎
49. “Nathan Leopold – Loeb, Murder & Death.” ︎
50. Paula S. Fass ︎
51. Paula S. Fass ︎
52. Paula S. Fass ︎
53. Paula S. Fass ︎
54. Lynn Dumenil, 146 ︎
55. Lynn Dumenil, 153 ︎
56. Paula S. Fass ︎
57. Paula S. Fass ︎

• Dumenil, Lynn. The Modern Temper: American Culture and Society in the 1920s, 1995. 
• Fass, Paula S. “Making and Remaking an Event: The Leopold and Loeb Case in American Culture.” The Journal of American History 80, no. 3 (1993): 919–51. https://doi.org/10.2307/2080409.
• “Leopold and Loeb.” Wikipedia, April 11, 2026. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopold_and_Loeb.
• “Leopold and Loeb Ransom Note: Northwestern Magazine.” Northwestern University. Accessed April 29, 2026. https://www.northwestern.edu/magazine/spring2012/feature/full-of-drama-sidebar/ransom-note.html.
• Linder, Douglas O. “Map of the Scene of the Kidnapping and Murder of Bobby Franks.” Famous Trials. Accessed April 23, 2026. https://famous-trials.com/leopoldandloeb/1750-map.
• Linder, Douglas O. “The Leopold And Loeb Trial: An Account.” The Leopold and Loeb Trial: An account. Accessed April 23, 2026. https://famous-trials.com/leopoldandloeb/1741-home.
• “Nathan Leopold – Loeb, Murder & Death.” Biography, April 7, 2021. https://www.biography.com/crime-figure/nathan-leopold.
• Nathan F. Leopold, Jr. and Richard Loeb, University of Minnesota Web Archive (The Criminal Court of Cook County 1924). 
• O’Connor Davis, Susan. “Lost Hyde Park: Springtime Is for Lovers.” Hyde Park Herald, May 25, 2021. https://www.hpherald.com/news/local/lost-hyde-park-springtime-is-for-lovers/article_c5af7c6e-bd9f-11eb-aacd-779da1769005.html.
• “Psychiatrists’ (‘Alienists’) Phrenological Assessments of Mr. …” ResearchGate. Accessed April 29, 2026. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Psychiatrists-alienists-phrenological-assessments-of-Mr-Nathan-Leopold-and-Mr_fig5_344804194.
• “The Loeb-Leopold Murder of Franks in Chicago, May 21, 1924.” Journal of the American Institute of Criminal Law and Criminology 15, no. 3 (1924): 347–48. https://doi.org/10.2307/1134803.
• “The ‘Perfect Crime’: The Story of Leopold and Loeb and the Murder of Bobby Franks | WTTW Chicago.” WTTW. Accessed April 23, 2026. https://www.wttw.com/chicago-stories/deadly-alliance-leopold-loeb/the-perfect-crime-the-story-of-leopold-and-loeb-and-the-murder-of-bobby-franks. 

More Resources

For the Thrill of It: Leopold, Loeb, and the Murder That Shocked Chicago– Simon Baatz (2008)

The Clarence Darrow Digital Collection

The Leopold and Loeb Trial: A Brief Account– Douglas O. Linder

PBS American Experience: “The Perfect Crime” (2016) (Documentary)

kconley

Ramapo College sophomore majoring in History and minoring in Museum Studies + Music Industry

 

While tension after World War I began to fall slightly, there were still many unresolved issues among countries in Europe. Naturally, this makes sense as World War I was a war the likes of which the world had never seen before, but the attempt at peace after through the Treaty of Versailles would simply be a temporary bandage to these problems. The country that was impacted the most by the Treaty of Versailles was definitely Germany, who had their economy destroyed by the treaty. At the time, Germany was being forced to pay 132 billion gold marks in total ($33 billion) which was an impossible task for them to ask for, especially considering the amount of money they spent on the war.¹ The failure to pay said reparations would cause a crisis for the country after France occupied the Ruhr district, one of Germany’s most profitable areas, in hopes of seizing some profit from their coal mines themselves. Enter Charles G. Dawes and Owen D. Young, two lawyers who turned to economics. These two men, along with eight others, were appointed to the Dawes Plan by the Reparations Committee under the League of Nations. The committee was given the task of easing the heavy burden placed on Germany to bring stability to a very unstable Europe. The plan that these ten men came up with would be known as the “Dawes Plan” which would see noticeable success in the year after its enactment.

Treaty of Versailles

The first major misstep that allowed for the exploitation of Germany during the 1920s was the Treaty of Versailles. As Germany was a part of the Central Powers during World War I, they would be punished by the victors for their actions during the war. The Treaty of Versailles laid the groundwork for an attempt at peace throughout Europe, one that would ultimately prove unsuccessful through certain decisions involving Germany that would lead to the need for the Dawes Plan. While the Treaty of Versailles was very harsh on Germany, it goes without saying that the German narrative complicates the conversation surrounding the success of the treaty. Though there were initial attempts to sign the treaty, they were too disorganized and were not able to make progress in the signing of the treaty. During the creation process, “The Four”, or Woodrow Wilson, David Lloyd George, Georges Clemenceau, and Vittorio Orlando, would come together in an attempt to create peace. In particular, Wilson made his famous “Fourteen Points” in regards to the Treaty of Versailles, which were much too large of an undertaking for Europe, who just came out of a war.³ This lack of unity would allow for unreasonable requirements on the end of Germany to slip through, creating the problem that the Dawes Plan would attempt to fix.

Ruhr District

Upon Germany’s failure to pay the reparations placed by the Treaty of Versailles, the first action taken against Germany was by France in the Ruhr District. At the time, coal amounted to 15-16% of the annual obligation according to France, and 11% according to Germany.⁵ The Ruhr district was easily Germany’s largest producer of coal, which accounted for much of the reparations that Germany was attempting to pay. In response, France and Belgium took matters into their own hands in an attempt to seize control of Germany’s coal production to funnel the reparation funds away from the German economy as punishment.⁶ Much of this desire to occupy the district for the French was out of stubbornness. The French Premier’s Monsieur Poincare said in a speech where he stated the riches contained in the Ruhr district, including 14,000 coke furnaces that he wanted under French control, as well as saying that France did not want to exploit the district, but rather control it.”⁷ The actions from the French can be seen as exploitative in a way, but they also represent the greater flaws of the Treaty of Versailles that allowed for French occupation in the first place.

Charles Dawes and His Committee

Germany would find a light in the darkness of a recession in the form of Charles Dawes. Dawes, who was appointed to the Director of the Budget three years prior in 1920, would show his hand in efficiency and unity in the budget for the United States. His success in his position was so great that he was invited to a committee by the League of Nations to tackle the problem of German reparations.⁸ Created by the Reparations Commission in Germany, the Dawes Committee hired ten of the smartest economic minds from the United States, France, Belgium, Great Britain, and Italy, to handle how much money would need to be estimated for Germany to pay back realistically.⁹ Every member of the committee was paid in full by the Reparations Commission except for the members from the United States, likely due to United States never joining the League of Nations. One of the many goals that the committee aimed to achieve was a “restoration of confidence” in the German nation, allowing it to successfully recuperate into a secure environment in which its economy can grow.¹⁰ Another goal of the committee was to prevent Germany from lacking a fallback, considering the impossible amount in reparations it was required to pay. If Germany was unable to successfully manage its reparations after the committee’s work, then Germany would have to fix the problem itself.

The Dawes Plan

When creating the Dawes Plan, there were a few goals and considerations that the ten experts had to work with. The first thing on the agenda for the committee was dealing with France, who were still occupying the Ruhr district of Germany at the time. While in control of the Ruhr district, France saw little increase in profit from their coal mines and instead saw a rise in inflation. This inflation led to a higher cost of living that was damaging the French economy and the franc currency. Dawes and Young planned on using this to their advantage when working out a reparation deal, as Germany was only causing problems for the French economy.¹² The other thing that came first on the agenda was ensuring that Germany accept the weight that the Dawes Plan would carry. Much of the plan to turn around Germany’s economy can be credited to Owen Young, the other U.S. member on the committee. Young’s outline of the Dawes Plan was to place reparations on Germany that were comparable to the burdens of England and France from having to pay for the war. This was to ensure that Germany would not fall behind in the economy and cause chaos for the rest of Europe, but also to ensure that Germany did not become a superpower that could control the rest of Europe. Young wanted to ensure that Germany could pay off its reparations and serve as an economic force that England and France would have to trade with to gain access to its funds.¹³ This served not only as a way to get Germany out of an endless cycle of debt, but also to get the allies to pay back their debt as well. As the plan was officialized, Germany would have a $1.25 billion mark limit on reparations until the Allies drew on a balance, then moving the limit to $5 billion marks. This ensured that Germany would pay and that the Allies would pay into Germany’s economy in a way.

Dawes Plan in Action

While the process from the rough draft into the Dawes Plan is very important, was it able to actually make an impact on German reparations at the time? The answer is unequivocally yes, though the details of the implementation are also very important. In the very beginning of the plan’s implementation, a loan totaling $200 million would be issued to Germany, $110 million of which was subscribed to by the United States. The German central bank (Reichsbank) would also be reorganized, and the plan would introduce a new monetary unit in the form of the Reichsmark. Possibly the most important action that was initially implemented was the evacuation of the Ruhr District, forcing the French out of the area.¹⁵ The immediate and future economic results from the Dawes Plan also show a great improvement to the German economy. German exports increased by twenty percent from the Dawes Plan, but the Allies did not find themselves receiving much of the expected benefits from the plan.¹⁶ While there was short-term success with the Dawes Plan, it was only a short-term measure that was attempting to solve a long-term problem for Germany.

Significance

The Dawes Plan is one of the earliest examples of how the relations changed between countries across the world. The Post World-War I environment during the 20s was the first opportunity for globalization to kick off. During the 20s, the success of the United States had the side effect of transforming them into the dominant force of globalization. Prior to World War I, there were many examples of the United States interacting with other countries, but it usually concerned trade or warfare. The 20s represented the first time that the U.S. was ahead of the rest of the world in terms of capital, allowing them to give Europe a helping hand. The Dawes Plan was also a result of a change in culture in the U.S. following World War I. There was disappointment among many Americans as a result of the violation of civil liberties, as well as disappointment over the attempt of peace that was the Treaty of Versailles and the failure of the treaty to meet up to the expectations of Wilson’s Fourteen Points.¹⁷ Much of these complaints were what resulted in the decline of pushes for reform, both in and out of the United States. The 20s, however, would change this notion to become more positive. Many aspects of the country would be reconstructed in the new post-war period, as it was seen as “the winning of a new world”.¹⁸ This new wave of progress and reform would bring about a new period in the history of the United States that brought it to its most progressive state domestically. Not only did the U.S. break its own mold domestically, but it also participated in foreign aid, something that was uncharacteristic for them to do during the time. As it stands, the Dawes Plan served as a solution that, while temporary, provided Germany with enough footing that it was able to recuperate more than it would have without the plan. While foreign aid towards Germany is the most talked about in the current day, the U.S. also provided aid to other countries such as Austria, Hungary, and Poland. The Dawes Plan is pivotal for understanding the United States’ first attempts at foreign aid and for understanding how foreign policy in the U.S. would change, going into the 20s and onward.

Map

Bibliography

“Charles G. Dawes – Biographical.” NobelPrize.org. Accessed May 3, 2025. https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/1925/dawes/biographical/.

“THE FRENCH IN THE RUHR.” Advocate of Peace through Justice 85, no. 3 (1923): 111–13. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20660241.

“One Year’s Dawes Plan” The Milwaukee Leader. September 8, 1925

Allied Experts in Berlin — Flora – Sir R. Kindersley – McFadyean – Pirelli – Allix – Parmentier – Dawes – Young – Houtart – Sir J. Stamp. Bain News Service.

Clayton, John. “Germans Killed in Ruhr.” Chicago Daily Tribune. March 6, 1923.

Costigliola, Frank. “The United States and the Reconstruction of Germany in the 1920s.” The Business History Review 50, no. 4 (1976): 477–502. https://doi.org/10.2307/3113137.

Dawes, Rufus C. The Dawes Plan in the Making, 1929.

Dumenil, Lynn. The Modern Temper: American Culture and Society in the 1920s. United States: Hill and Wang, 2024.

Gilbert, S. Parker. “The Meaning of the ‘Dawes Plan.’” Foreign Affairs 4, no. 3 (1926): i–xii. https://doi.org/10.2307/20028477.

Marks, Sally. “Mistakes and Myths: The Allies, Germany, and the Versailles Treaty, 1918–1921.” The Journal of Modern History 85, no. 3 (2013): 632–59. https://doi.org/10.1086/670825.

Noël Dorville. Recueil de 40 Planches de Portraits Dessinés de Sénateurs, 1902-1903. 

Patterson, Ernest Minor. “The Dawes Plan in Operation.” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 120 (1925): 1–6. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1015627.

Peterecz, Zoltán. “American Foreign Policy and American Financial Controllers in Europe in the 1920s.” Hungarian Journal of English and American Studies (HJEAS) 18, no. 1/2 (2012): 457–85. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43488487.

Schumacher, Hermann. “The Situation in the Ruhr.” The Economic Journal 33, no. 130 (1923): 155–62. https://doi.org/10.2307/2222840.

Additional Resources

Footnotes

1. Ernest Minor, Patterson. “The Dawes Plan in Operation.” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 120 (1925): 1 ︎
2. Noël Dorville. Recueil de 40 Planches de Portraits Dessinés de Sénateurs, 1902-1903.  ︎
3. Rufus C, Dawes. The Dawes Plan in the Making, 1929. P. 18-20 ︎
4. Clayton, John. “Germans Killed in Ruhr.” Chicago Daily Tribune. March 6, 1923. ︎
5. Schumacher, Hermann. “The Situation in the Ruhr.” The Economic Journal 33, no. 130 (1923): 155 ︎
6. Schumacher, Hermann. “The Situation in the Ruhr.” The Economic Journal 33, no. 130 (1923): 156 ︎
7. “THE FRENCH IN THE RUHR.” Advocate of Peace through Justice 85, no. 3 (1923): 111 ︎
8. “Charles G. Dawes – Biographical.” NobelPrize.org. Accessed May 3, 2025. https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/1925/dawes/biographical/. ︎
9. Rufus C, Dawes. The Dawes Plan in the Making, 1929. 18-20 ︎
10. Parker S, Gilbert. “The Meaning of the ‘Dawes Plan.’” Foreign Affairs 4, no. 3 (1926): vi ︎
11. Allied Experts in Berlin — Flora – Sir R. Kindersley – McFadyean – Pirelli – Allix – Parmentier – Dawes – Young – Houtart – Sir J. Stamp. Bain News Service. ︎
12. Frank, Costigliola. “The United States and the Reconstruction of Germany in the 1920s.” The Business History Review 50, no. 4 (1976): 477–502. P. 486 ︎
13. Frank, Costigliola. “The United States and the Reconstruction of Germany in the 1920s.” The Business History Review 50, no. 4 (1976): 477–502. P. 487 ︎
14. “One Year’s Dawes Plan” The Milwaukee Leader. September 8, 1925 ︎
15. Zoltán, Peterecz. “American Foreign Policy and American Financial Controllers in Europe in the 1920s.” Hungarian Journal of English and American Studies (HJEAS) 18, no. 1/2 (2012): 457–85. ︎
16. Ernest Minor, Patterson. “The Dawes Plan in Operation.” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 120 (1925): 3-4 ︎
17. Lynn, Dumenil. The Modern Temper: American Culture and Society in the 1920s. United States: Hill and Wang, 2024. 21 ︎
18. Lynn, Dumenil. The Modern Temper: American Culture and Society in the 1920s. United States: Hill and Wang, 2024. 21 ︎

dthomson

Duncan Thomson is a History Major and Museum and Exhibition Studies minor at Ramapo College of New Jersey.

Overview

The Origin of Winter Sports Competition

Winter sports have existed in some capacity for centuries across the Northern Hemisphere. Speed skating developed in the Netherlands in the thirteenth century, and there are records of cross-country skiing being used as a method of transportation in the ice- and snow-covered countries of Scandinavia for at least 6,000 years.³ However, it was not until the nineteenth century that the more popular and recognizable winter sports developed. Figure skating, while having origins dating back to ancient times, came about in nineteenth-century England. The European Alps officially created alpine skiing around the same time. In the same century, the first ice hockey game was also recorded in Canada in 1875.⁴ With the growing popularity of winter athletics, the predecessor to the Winter Olympics held its first competition. In 1901, the first Nordic Games occurred in Stockholm, Sweden. The winter sports competition was hosted by the Swedish Central Association for the Promotion of Sports. This athletic competition was not only a celebration of winter sports but also of Nordic culture. Instant global attention was brought to the region, especially Sweden, and to the fledgling world of winter sports. These games would occur in the years 1905, 1909, 1913, 1917, 1922, and 1926, always in the month of February and usually hosted in Sweden.⁵

An Olympic Future for Winter Sports

Even though there was not a dedicated winter sports competition under the Olympic name until 1924, two traditional winter sports made appearances at the Summer Games. At the 1908 London Games, figure skating made its Olympic debut. Both male and female athletes competed in the sport, with all three classes of medals—gold, silver, and bronze—being awarded to the top competitors. Following its London debut, figure skating took a twelve-year hiatus from Olympic competition, returning to the list of athletic events for the 1920 Games in Antwerp, Belgium. Once again, both male and female contestants participated in the sport, with all three classes of medals being awarded. Figure skating was not the only winter sport to make an appearance at the Antwerp Games. Ice hockey joined the sports roster for the first time, though the competition was limited to male athletes only. The top three teams from the competition were awarded medals.⁶ 

Following the success of ice hockey and figure skating at the Antwerp Games and taking inspiration from the Nordic Games, France’s Marquis de Polignac came up with the idea for a winter sports competition under the Olympic banner. He presented his idea to the International Olympic Committee at their 1921 biannual meeting in Lausanne, Switzerland. However, there was immediate pushback from the Nordic countries. Norway even stated that they would not participate in a winter sports competition created by the IOC.

Despite the concern from Nordic countries, the International Olympic Committee ultimately decided to accept Polignac’s proposal. Because France was hosting the next Olympic Games, the country would be allowed to hold a Winter Sports Week several months prior to the start of the Paris Games. The following year IOC, with the help of sports federations like the International Ski Congress, started to prepare for this new athletic competition.⁷

The Winter Sports Week of the VIII Olympiad

Between January 25, 1924, and February 5, 1924, 260 athletes from 16 countries gathered in Chamonix, France, for the first Winter Sports Week. 

The Week began on January 25, 1924, with the Opening Ceremony. The event was overseen by Gaston Vidal, the Secretary of State for Physical Education. Athletes from the 16 countries in attendance—Austria, Belgium, Canada, Czechoslovakia, Finland, France, Great Britain, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Norway, Poland, Sweden, Switzerland, the United States, and Yugoslavia—paraded from the city hall to the skating venue.⁸ Each national team had one representative proudly carrying its flag and another its emblem. Both also held the important task of saying the Olympic Oath for their country, which was said in French. For the United States, Clarence Abel carried the flag and Harry Duruy the emblem. As the teams walked through Chamonix, the band, the Twenty-seventh Alpine Blue Devils, played the national anthem of each country. Athletes from the Allied Countries received the most applause from the crowds. Upon reaching the rink, Vidal “declared the official opening of the sports.⁹” Immediately following his declaration, 150 the athletes in attendance put on ice skates and started skating around the rink. In the spirit of friendly competition, some of the athletes held impromptu skating races, which excited the crowds. Approximately 4,000 to 5,000 spectators attended the opening ceremonies.¹⁰ Overall the Opening Ceremony was considered a great success, exciting the world for the coming days of athletic competition.

“We swear that we come to the Olympic Games as loyal competitors, respectful of the rules that govern them and willing to participate in them in a spirit of chivalry for the honor of our countries and the glory of sport,” – Translated from French to English.¹¹

The Athletic Competition

Click to see video

On January 26, 1924, the athletic competition began with speed skating. Over the course of two days, athletes competed in five different events—the 500, 1,500, 5,000, and 10,000 meter races and the all-around. Some of the standout competitors from these events were Charles Jewtraw, Clas Thurnber, and Roald Larsen. Charles Jewtraw won the 500-meter race in 44 seconds.¹² He holds the title of being the first athlete to win an athletic event at the Winter Olympics, an honor that also belongs to the United States of America. Old Glory was the first flag flown in the gold medal position at the Winter Games. Clas Thunberg and Roald Larsen, both accomplished speed skaters, won medals in all five events. Thunberg won the most gold medals in the speed skating competition, returning home to Finland with three for his country.¹³

The most popular event of the Winter Olympic Sports Week began on January 28, 1924: the ice hockey tournament. It lasted a week, ending on February 3, 1924. This event was extremely popular in the United States and Canada. Newspapers in both countries closely followed the dominating gameplay of their respective teams and published titles like “The Canadian Olympic Team Won 22-0 Today¹⁴” and “American Hockey Team Victorious.¹⁵” Being leagues above the six other teams in the competition, some of the more dramatic game scores were the United States’ 19 to 0 win over Belgium and Canada’s 30 to 0 win over the Czechoslovakian team. After a week of dominating the competition, the United States and Canada met for the final on February 3, 1924. Despite the best efforts of the American team, Canada beat the United States 6 to 1. Both teams had extremely good plays, but the Canadian team was able to defend the American offensive, leading to their win.¹⁶ Congratulations were sent to the team, with Premier Mackenzie King saying, “Please extend to members of the Canadian hockey team my heartiest congratulations… All Canada is proud of this latest feather in her cap.”¹⁷ The Canadian win allowed them to defend their Olympic title in ice hockey from the 1920 Antwerp Games. 

While ice hockey dominated headlines for much of the Winter Sports Week, there were several other athletic competitions underway. One of these was curling, which remained a largely unknown sport until its appearance at the Games. When a Scottish member of the British curling team was on his way to Chamonix from Switzerland for the competition, he was stopped at the border by French authorities.¹⁸ The French border agents humorously thought the curling stone was some type of precious material. The Scotsman almost received a fine for his sports equipment, but he was eventually allowed to bring the stone into France for free.¹⁹ Following the British win over France in the curling final on January 30, 1924, the same Scotsman said, “Tis a precious stone. Indeed, there’s not so precious to me.”²⁰ Britain beat the French team 46 to 6, placing first in the curling competition, followed in second by Sweden, and finally in third by the French team.²¹

Danger and Dominance in the Competition

Unlike ice hockey and curling, which were followed by exciting headlines and humorous tales in newspapers, bobsledding proved to be infamous for other reasons. The bobsled chute at Chamonix quickly proved to be extremely dangerous, seriously injuring several athletes over the course of the competition. On January 30, 1924, two members of the French bobsled team were injured during a training accident. The captain of the team, Count de la Fregoliere, suffered a broken arm, while another member of his team suffered a skull fracture.²² The following day, the skipper of the British bobsled team seriously broke both of his legs when his bobsled overturned. Thankfully the four other members of his team were unscathed. The chute was closed for a time but reopened to allow the continuation of the competition.²³

The Indianapolis Star said, “The bobsleigh chute has been voted the most difficult in the world to negotiate safely.”²⁴ Similar issues occurred with the sky jump. Work crews had to remove sharp, unsafe corners from it before the skiing competition could occur, which still did not prevent an American skier, Ragnar Omtvedt, from receiving serious injuries that left him bedridden for ten to fifteen days.²⁵ Ultimately, both dangerous pieces of equipment were used in competition. In the bobsled competition, Switzerland took first, Britain took second, and Belgium took third. In the ski jumping competition, two Norwegian athletes, Jacob Tullin Thams and Narve Bonna, took first and second. American athlete Anders Haugen took third.²⁶

The remaining athletic events had little coverage in the news, other than to state Norway’s impeccable dominance. Norway took home both first places in the cross-country skiing competitions at the distances of 18 kilometers and 50 kilometers and all three medals in the Nordic combined, which was a combination of both ski events: cross-country and jumping.²⁷ 

Women at the Winter Olympics 

Of the 260 athletes to compete at the First Winter Sports Week, only 13 of them were women. The 13 female athletes were only allowed to compete in figure skating, which was called “fancy ice skating²⁸” by the newspapers. Figure skating had three divisions of competition. Two individual sections, one for the men and one for the women, and a partnered section where a male and female athlete would skate together. In the individual women’s competition, Austrian skater Herma Plank-Szabo blew the competition away. Beatrix Loughran from the United States took second, and Ethel Muckelt of Great Britain took third.²⁹ In partner skating, the team from Austria took first, Finland second, and France third. Even though several were outnumbered and neglected by the press, the 13 women who competed in these Games laid the foundation for all future female athletes at the Winter Olympics.³⁰ 

Closing Ceremonies

 On February 5, 1924, the Olympic Winter Sports Week came to an end. The medals were distributed to the winners at the Closing Ceremony by the IOC president, Baron Pierre de Coubertin. First place received gold, second silver, and third bronze. Norway ranked first among the participating countries, and Finland was a close second. Surprisingly, most of the athletes had left Chamonix by the time the closing ceremonies happened. People from their respective nations were chosen to receive the medals, standing in place of the absentee athletes. Overall, the winter sports week was considered a great success.³¹

The Winter Olympics

On May 6, 1926, at an IOC meeting in Lisbon, Portugal, a vote was taken, and 23 or 24 members of the International Olympic Committee chose to rename the Chamonix Winter Sports Week into the First Winter Olympic Games. Unfortunately, the growing success of the Winter Olympics meant the death of their predecessor, the Nordic Games, with its last competition being held in 1926.³² In 1928, the Second Winter Olympics would occur in St. Moritz, Switzerland. Like their predecessor, the Games proved successful and marked the first time Germany was allowed to compete in an Olympic competition since the end of World War I.³³ Unfortunately, female athletes would have to wait over a decade until the introduction of Alpine skiing at the 1936 Winter Olympics to finally be allowed to compete in more than just figure skating.³⁴

2024 marked 100 years since the creation of the Winter Olympics, and the upcoming 2026 Games in Milano Cortina will mark the twentieth Winter Olympiad.³⁵ Much has changed since the Games originated, but the desire for global athletic competition and celebration of winter sports remains.

Significance To the 1920s

The Winter Olympics came about during a unique period in history as the world started to look for new and existing forms of entertainment and thinking. Gone were the days of Victorian morality and sensibility. They had been replaced by a collection of new technologies and emerging ideas in the changing academic fields of science, psychology, and the liberal arts. People looked at the world with a more transformative and modern outlook on life than they previously had. The rise of popular media outlets like film and the radio further fueled this shift. ³⁶

Pluralism and The Spirit of the Olympic Games

While Europe was planning the next big international athletic competition, the United States was grappling with its own problems around new cultural ideas. For much of the early twentieth century, the country had been welcoming to immigrants. This changed following the passage of the Emergency Quotas Act of 1921 and the National Origins Act of 1924. Despite these new laws, millions had already made the U.S. their home. They were expected to abandon their own cultures in favor of the historically white Anglo-Saxon Protestant standard of what it meant to be American. This did not sit well with outspoken writers, who instead called for a pluralist culture in America. Hoarse Kallen argued, “Democracy involves not the elimination of differences but the perfection and conversation of differences.”³⁷ Kallen’s words were not directly related to the Olympic Games, but they beautifully encapsulated the spirit of the sporting event. It was an idealist platform where people from diverse cultures could come together, not to erase their differences, but to celebrate them through the shared experience and enjoyment of athletic competition.³⁸

Further expanding on this idea, sociologist Robert Park advocated for the preservation of cultural identity within American society. He proposed the controversial idea that people should retain their heritage and contribute their cultural practices to mainstream society, making it better in the process. This too aligned with the broader Olympic ideals. The Games were a global stage where the nations of the world could showcase their unique cultures and histories. Like all things, though, the vision is often better than the reality. Had the United States chosen to adopt the pluralistic vision presented at the Olympic Games, it would have been a wonderful example to the world about how a diverse country could look and function. Instead the vision was all but ignored, and the world just got an exhibition of winter sports.³⁹ 

The same year the Winter Olympics were introduced, the U.S. continued to battle with increasingly violent waves of racism and hate. The Ku Klux Klan was growing in power, causing major political upheaval, especially at the 1924 Democratic National Convention. The group terrorized Black Americans, as well as Jewish and Catholic communities. These groups faced intense persecution for their race and religious beliefs. The reality of the American political and societal makeup was a stark contrast to the ideals of the Olympics’ global pluralistic message. The United States government only added to the problem by passing increasingly stricter immigration laws.⁴⁰

Kallen and Park’s hopeful vision for a pluralistic society, where cultural differences would be celebrated rather than erased, fell on deaf ears. Instead, the U.S. clung to its exclusionary practices, furthering the divide between different racial, ethnic, and religious groups. Even though the Winter Olympics showcased a potential for global unity and cultural understanding, it would take decades before the U.S. could begin to reflect this ideal in its own society. The Olympics might have presented an opportunity to demonstrate how diverse cultures could coexist and enrich one another, but the U.S. was still entrenched in ideas of racial superiority and segregation.

Further Readings:

De Coubertin, Pierre, Charles Simon, and International Olympic Committee. “The Olympic Oath: A Century of History.” JOH 2. Vol. 2021, 2021. https://isoh.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/johv29n2e1.pdf

Edgeworth, Ron. “The Nordic Games and the Origins of the Olympic Winter Games.” Journal of Olympic History, 2009. https://isoh.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/187.pdf.

Ioc. “Chamonix 1924 Winter Olympics – Athletes, Medals & Results.” Olympics.com, September 26, 2023. https://www.olympics.com/en/olympic-games/chamonix-1924.

Citations:

Foot Notes:

1. “Olympic Messages: Olympic Ideology and Olympic Social Reality,” 50. ︎
2. Young, “The Origins of the Modern Olympics: A New Version” p 271. ︎
3. Kuch, “47 Winter Sports List .” ︎
4. Kuch, “47 Winter Sports List .”  ︎
5. Edgeworth, “The Nordic Games and the Origins of the Olympic Winter Games,” p 68-70. ︎
6. De Groot, “The Winter Olympics: Driving Urban Change, 1924–2022″ p 84. ︎
7. Edgeworth, “The Nordic Games and the Origins of the Olympic Winter Games,” p 70. ︎
8. New York Times “Olympic Ice Games Open at Chamonix: High French Official Formally Declares Classic Sports Festival Under Way.  ︎
9. New York Times, “Olympic Ice Games Open at Chamonix: High French Official Formally Declares Classic Sports Festival Under Way.  ︎
10. New York Times, “Olympic Ice Games Open at Chamonix: High French Official Formally Declares Classic Sports Festival Under Way.  ︎
11. De Coubertin, Simon, and International Olympic Committee, “The Olympic Oath: A Century of History”. ︎
12. Associated Press, “Americans Score First Points At Winter Olympics.” ︎
13. “Finland First, America Third in Skating Race.” ︎
14. “The Canadian Olympic Team Won 22-0 Today.” ︎
15. The North Adams Transcript. “American Hockey Team Victorious.” ︎
16. “Canada Again Wins Olympic Hockey Title.” ︎
17. “Canada Again Wins Olympic Hockey Title.” ︎
18. “United States with Three Wins Reaches the Hockey Semi-Finals.” ︎
19. “United States with Three Wins Reaches the Hockey Semi-Finals.” ︎
20. “United States with Three Wins Reaches the Hockey Semi-Finals.” ︎
21. “Norway Leads in Olympic Sports.” ︎
22. “Two Contestants Turn in Accident.” ︎
23. “Skipper of British Entry Is Injured.” ︎
24. “England, 11 to 0, in Hockey Competition.” ︎
25. “Olympic Victors Receive Medals: Baron De Coubertin, President of International Body, Bestows Awards.” ︎
26. Ioc, “Chamonix 1924 Winter Olympics – Athletes, Medals & Results.” ︎
27. “Olympic Victors Receive Medals: Baron De Coubertin, President of International Body, Bestows Awards.”  Ioc, “Chamonix 1924 Winter Olympics – Athletes, Medals & Results.” ︎
28. “‘For Countries’ Honor and the Glory of Sport.” ︎
29. “‘For Countries’ Honor and the Glory of Sport.’” ︎
30. Ioc, “Chamonix 1924 Winter Olympics – Athletes, Medals & Results.”  ︎
31. “Olympic Victors Receive Medals: Baron De Coubertin, President of International Body, Bestows Awards.” ︎
32. Edgeworth, “The Nordic Games and the Origins of the Olympic Winter Games,” p 71. ︎
33. Lapchick, “A Political History of the Modern Olympic Games.” ︎
34. Gilgien et al., “The Training of Olympic Alpine Ski Racers.” ︎
35. “Milano Cortina.” ︎
36. Dumenil, 146, 149. ︎
37. Dumenil, 166. ︎
38. Dumenil, 167. Patsantaras, “Olympic Messages: Olympic Ideology and Olympic Social Reality,” 50. ︎
39. Dumenil 167-168. Patsantaras, “Olympic Messages: Olympic Ideology and Olympic Social Reality” 51. ︎
40. Dumenil 240-243. ︎

Bibliography:

“American Hockey Team Victorious.” The Berkshire Eagle. January 28, 1924. https://www.newspapers.com/image/545008772/?match=1&terms=olympics.

Associated Press. “Americans Score First Points At Winter Olympics.” Livingston Enterprise. January 27, 1927. https://www.newspapers.com/image/956756619/?match=1&terms=the%20first%20winter%20olympics.

“Canada Again Wins Olympic Hockey Title.” The Leader-Post. February 4, 1924. https://www.newspapers.com/image/495426061/?match=1&terms=olympics.

“The Canadian Olympic Won 22-0 Today.” The Expositor. January 29, 1924. https://www.newspapers.com/image/732874415/?match=1&terms=olympics.

De Coubertin, Pierre, Charles Simon, and International Olympic Committee. “The Olympic Oath: A Century of History.” JOH 2. Vol. 2021, 2021. https://isoh.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/johv29n2e1.pdf.

De Groot, Stephen J. Essex and Jiska. “The Winter Olympics: Driving Urban Change, 1924–2022.” In Routledge eBooks, 84–109, 2016. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315735887-13.

Dumenil, Lynn. The Modern Temper: American Culture and Society in the 1920s. First Edition. Hill and Wang, 1995.

Edgeworth, Ron. “The Nordic Games and the Origins of the Olympic Winter Games.” Journal of Olympic History, 2009. https://isoh.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/187.pdf.

“England, 11 to 0, in Hockey Competition.” The Indianapolis Star. February 1, 1924. https://www.newspapers.com/image/104804404/?match=1&terms=bobsled%20winners.

“Finland First, America Third in Skating Race.” The Morning Union. January 28, 1924. https://www.newspapers.com/image/1067079773/?match=1&terms=olympics.

“For Countries’ Honor and the Glory of Sport.” The Kanas City Star. February 21, 1924. https://www.newspapers.com/image/654089163/?match=1&terms=fancy%20ice%20skating%20olympics.

Gilgien, Matthias, Robert Reid, Christian Raschner, Matej Supej, and Hans-Christer Holmberg. “The Training of Olympic Alpine Ski Racers.” Frontiers in Physiology 9 (December 21, 2018). https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2018.01772.

Hearst Networks EMEA. “Homepage,” March 7, 2025. https://www.history.com/articles/ellis-island#Ellis-Island-Timeline.

Ioc. “Chamonix 1924 Winter Olympics – Athletes, Medals & Results.” Olympics.com, September 26, 2023. https://www.olympics.com/en/olympic-games/chamonix-1924.

Kuch, Max. “47 Winter Sports List (Sorted by Popularity).” SportsFoundation, November 16, 2023. https://sportsfoundation.org/winter-sports-list/.

Lapchick, Richard E. “A Political History of the Modern Olympic Games.” Journal of Sport and Social Issues 2, no. 1 (March 1, 1978): 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/019372357800200102.

“Milano Cortina.” Olympic.com. Accessed May 7, 2025. https://milanocortina2026.olympics.com/en.

Nikolaos Patsantaras, “Olympic Messages: Olympic Ideology and Olympic Social Reality,” Xophia Choregia Sport Management International Journal 4, no. Number 1 (2008): 45–55, https://eclass.uoa.gr/modules/document/file.php/PHED268/o.k….15.%2010%20Olympic%20Messages.%20Olympic%20Ideology%20and%20Olympic%20social%20reality.pdf.

“Nordic Games Hockey Match on the Nybroviken  1901 – Antique Bandy | HockeyGods,” n.d. https://hockeygods.com/images/14171-Nordic_Games_Hockey_Match_on_the_Nybroviken__1901___Antique_Bandy.

“Norway Leads in Olympic Sports.” The Ottawa Citizen. January 30, 1924. https://www.newspapers.com/image/455775740/?match=1&terms=curling%20.

“Olympic Ice Games Open at Chanoix: High French Official Formally Declares Classic Sports Festival 

Under Way. 150 Athletes in Parade March to Rink and Take Oath of Amateurism Before Clamping on Skates. Competitions Start Today Cold Weather Makes Conditions Good For Speed Events – Americans are Confident.” New York Times (1923-), Jan 26, 1924. http://library.ramapo.edu:2048/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/olympic-ice-games-open-at-chamonix/docview/103255490/se-2.

“OLYMPIC VICTORS RECEIVE MEDALS: BARON DE COUBERTIN, PRESIDENT OF INTERNATIONAL BODY, BESTOWS AWARDS. HAUG CROWNED CHAMPION NORWEGIAN STAR OFFICIALLY IS CALLED SKI KING FOR CAPTURING THAT EVENT THREE TIMES.” New York Times (1923-), Feb 06, 1924. http://library.ramapo.edu:2048/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/olympic-victors-receive-medals/docview/103396308/se-2.

“Skipper of British Entry Is Injured.” Nanaimo Daily News. January 31, 1924. https://www.newspapers.com/image/325387717/?match=1&terms=bobsled.

“Two Contestants Turn in Accident.” The Ottawa Journal. January 30, 1924. https://www.newspapers.com/image/48175058/?match=1&terms=bobsled.

“United States with Three Wins Reaches the Hockey Semi-Finals.” The Berkshire Eagle. January 31, 1924. https://www.newspapers.com/image/533876474/?match=1&terms=curling%20.

“U.S. Team in Third Place at End of First Day of Winter Olympic Sports.” Brooklyn Eagle. January 27, 1924. https://www.newspapers.com/image/57546865/?match=.

Young, David C. 1987. “The Origins of the Modern Olympics: A New Version.” The International Journal of the History of Sport 4 (3): 271–300. doi:10.1080/09523368708713633.

faythe

I am an undergraduate teacher education student at Ramapo College, minoring in history. As a future teacher, I hope to inspire my students to love the subject of history and to understand its importance in their lives.

One of the most significant examples of this was the creation of the Winter Olympics. The games began during a very unique period in human history. Technologies like the automobile, radio, and film emerged. At same time, the academic fields of science, psychology, and the liberal arts saw great shifts. The combination of these events lead people farther and farther away from the Biblical centered view of the past towards a more transformative and modern outlook on life. The rise of popular media outlets further fueled this shift.¹ In 1921, the International Olympic Committee decided that France could hold a one week winter sports exhibition to coincide with the Summer Olympics of 1924. Taking inspiration from the Norse Games of the prior decades, the First Winter Olympics was attended by sixteen countries. The athletes competed in sixteen different sport disciplines. This new modern take on winter sports proved successful enough. Four years later the Second Winter Olympics happened in 1928, and the tradition of global winter sports competition officially began.

At the same time the Winter Olympics were taking shape in Europe, the United States was grappling with its own problems around new cultural ideas. For much of the early twentieth century, the country had been welcoming to immigrants. This changed following the passage of the Emergency Quotas Act of 1921 and the National Origins Act of 1924. Despite these new laws, millions had already made the U.S. their home. They were expected to abandon their own cultures in favor of the historically white Anglo-Saxon Protestant standard of what it meant to be American. This did not sit well with outspoken writers, who instead called for a pluralist culture in America. Hoarse Kallen argued, “Democracy involves not the elimination of differences but the perfection and conversation of differences.²” Kallen’s words, were not directly related to the Olympic games, but they beautiful encapsulated the spirit of the sporting event. It was an idealist platform where people from diverse cultures could come together, not to erase their differences, but to celebrate them through the shared experience and enjoyment of athletic completion.³

Further expanding on this idea, sociologist Robert Park advocated for the preservation of cultural identity within American society. He proposed the controversial idea that people should retain their heritage and contribute their cultural practices to mainstream society, making it better in the process. This too aligned with the broader Olympic ideals. The Gams were a global stage where the nations of the world could showcase their unique cultures and histories. Like all things though, the vision is often better than the reality. Had the United States chosen to adopt the pluralistic vision presented at the Olympic Games, it would have been a wonderful example to the world about how a diverse country could look and function. Instead the vision was all but ignored, and the world just got an exhibition of winter sports.⁴

The same year the Winter Olympics were introduced, the U.S. continued to battle with increasingly violent waves racism and hate. The Ku Klux Klan was growing in power, causing major political upheaval, especially at the 1924 Democratic National Convention. The group terrorized Black Americans, as well as Jewish and Catholic communities. These groups faced intense persecution for their race and religious beliefs. The reality of the American political and societal make up was a stark contrast to the ideals of the Olympics global pluralistic message. The United States government only added to the problem by passing increasingly stricter immigration laws. ⁵

Kallen and Park’s hopeful vision for a pluralistic society, where cultural differences would be celebrated rather than erased, fell on deaf ears. Instead, the U.S. clung to its exclusionary practices, furthering the divide between different racial, ethnic, and religious groups. Even though the Winter Olympics showcased a potential for global unity and cultural understanding, it would take decades before the U.S. could begin to reflect this ideal in its own society. The Olympics might have presented an opportunity to demonstrate how diverse cultures could coexist and enrich one another, but the U.S. was still entrenched in ideas of racial superiority and segregation.

Citations

Footnotes

1. Dumenil, 146, 149. ︎
2. Dumenil, 166. ︎
3. Dumenil, 167. Patsantaras, “Olympic Messages: Olympic Ideology and Olympic Social Reality,” 50. ︎
4. Dumenil 167-168. Patsantaras, “Olympic Messages: Olympic Ideology and Olympic Social Reality” 51. ︎
5. Dumenil 240-243. ︎

Biography

Chamonix 1924 Winter Olympics – athletes, medals & results. Accessed April 2, 2025. https://www.olympics.com/en/olympic-games/chamonix-1924. 

Dumenil, Lynn. The Modern Temper: American Culture and Society in the 1920s. First Edition. Hill and Wang, 1995.

Nikolaos Patsantaras, “Olympic Messages: Olympic Ideology and Olympic Social Reality,” Xophia Choregia Sport Management International Journal 4, no. Number 1 (2008): 45–55, https://eclass.uoa.gr/modules/document/file.php/PHED268/o.k….15.%2010%20Olympic%20Messages.%20Olympic%20Ideology%20and%20Olympic%20social%20reality.pdf.

Hearst Networks EMEA. “Homepage,” March 7, 2025. https://www.history.com/articles/ellis-island#Ellis-Island-Timeline.

faythe

I am an undergraduate teacher education student at Ramapo College, minoring in history. As a future teacher, I hope to inspire my students to love the subject of history and to understand its importance in their lives.

In the 1920s, American culture was increasingly becoming more secularized, creating tensions between modernity and traditional religious values. The first “Miss America” pageants embodied these conflicts, as it became both a target of religious resistance and a reflection of a callback to older ideas. Americans struggled to balance adapting to modernity while preserving their traditional beliefs and values. Religion was losing its influence on Americans with many standards straying away from the strictness of Victorian attitudes. Religion and Protestantism was no longer a dominant force in cultural norms and in efforts to maintain religion, urban churches started programs that created places of worship alongside spaces for social, recreational, and educational purposes. However, many religious leaders, including Protestant ministers and Jewish leaders, faced declining attendance and decreasing support for missionary efforts. These leaders viewed the popular culture of the 1920s, dominated by materialism and the pursuit of wealth, as a decline in religious values. Religious fundamentalists and Evangelical Christians also feared that the country was experiencing a moral and spiritual decline.¹ The first “Miss America” pageants of the 1920s serve as an example of an event that religious groups sought to oppose through protests, aiming to dismantle what they considered a moral decline. The “Miss America” pageant included a bathing suit competition, which many religious groups opposed. They sought to combat the rise of swimwear in the 1920s, particularly for women, viewing it as immoral and immodest. Moral outrage from clergymen contributed to the censorship of physical appearances on public beaches, as they insisted that women cover their knees.² This influenced the “Miss America” pageant because of its emphasis on “bathing beauties”. The pageant was met with further resistance with religious groups claiming it damaged the good choices, reputation, and morals of young women. Groups like Southern Baptists and the “Atlantic County Federation of Church Women”, joined in resistance and protest. Not only did they believe it damaged women’s morals, but they also viewed it as the exploitation of women for financial gain and corrupting them by encouraging rivalry among themselves.³ These protests are credited as having an important role in why the pageant was temporarily paused in 1928 through the early 30s.

Ironically, while traditional religious groups opposed the pageant for being “immoral”, it was an event that eagerly promoted a “traditional” and “conservative” idea of femininity. The “Miss America” pageant aimed to uphold the image of a more traditional woman, distancing itself from  the “New Woman,” represented by women in politics and flappers. Before the “Miss America” pageant was established in 1921, suffragettes held suffrage pageants. They dressed up as influential women in history, seeking to raise public awareness and funds for their political efforts.⁴ However, the “Miss America” pageant focused only on beauty, based on what men and the audience viewed as beautiful. In addition, the pageant strived to distance itself from the flapper image. Flappers were young, single women who strayed away from Victorian constraints by wearing bobbed hair, shorter and less shaped skirts, darker makeup, and smoked. In contrast, the “Miss America” pageant praised “non threatening” women who had conservative hairstyles such as longer hair, were more subservient, viewed beauty as an important goal, and demonstrated capability of being a good wife, homemaker, and mother.⁵ Contestants who had longer hair were more often praised than those with bobbed or bobbed-like hair. It was an important characteristic for “Miss America” to have, especially in the earlier competitions. Pageant organizers also tried to portray the event as “above alcohol” or other habits such as smoking. Overall, the pageant wished to portray its winners as symbols of what a 1920s American woman “should be and look like”. While religious traditionalists viewed it as immoral, the pageant still sought to revive a more traditional ideal of Victorian-like femininity and virtue.

Bibliography

Dumenil, Lynn. The Modern Temper: American Culture and Society in the 1920s. New York: Hill and Wang, 1995.

Riverol, Armando. Live from Atlantic City: The History of the Miss America Pageant Before, After, and in Spite of Television. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University Popular Press, 1992.

Latham, Angela J. “Packaging Woman: The Concurrent Rise of Beauty Pageants, Public Bathing, and Other Performances of Female ‘Nudity.'” Journal of Popular Culture 29, no. 3 (1995): 149–67. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-3840.1995.00149.x.

Watson, Elwood, and Darcy Martin. “The Miss America Pageant: Pluralism, Femininity, and Cinderella All in One.” Journal of Popular Culture 34, no. 1 (June 1, 2000): 105–26. doi:10.1111/j.0022-3840.2000.3401_105.x.  

Watson, E., ed. “There She Is, Miss America”: The Politics of Sex, Beauty, and Race in America’s Most Famous Pageant. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004.

Bettmann Archive. Policewomen Checking Length Violations. Chicago, Illinois, 1921.

Bettmann Archive. 1924 Miss America from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Ruth Malcomson. 1924.

Thomas, Bob. Cinema Personalities, 1923, American Actress Colleen Moore. Popperfoto/Getty Images, 1923.

Featured Photo: Atlantic Foto Service. Contestants of the 1925 Miss America Pageant. Atlantic City, New Jersey, 1925.

Citations

1. Lynn Dumenil, The Modern Temper: American Culture and Society in the 1920s (New York: Hill and Wang, 1995), 169-186. ︎
2. Angela J. Latham, “Packaging Woman: The Concurrent Rise of Beauty Pageants, Public Bathing, and Other Performances of Female ‘Nudity,’” Journal of Popular Culture 29, no. 3 (1995): 158, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-3840.1995.00149.x. ︎
3. Armando Riverol, Live from Atlantic City: The History of the Miss America Pageant Before, After, and in Spite of Television (Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University Popular Press, 1992), 24. ︎
4. Elwood Watson, ed., “There She Is, Miss America”: The Politics of Sex, Beauty, and Race in America’s Most Famous Pageant (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004), 28-29. ︎
5. Watson, “There She Is, Miss America”, 32. ︎

grlynn

Grlynn is a Ramapo College senior majoring in history

The Nixon Nitration Works was a factory that manifactured highly flamable materials like cellulose nitrate and the lack of supervison in the factory caused the huge disater of March 1, 1924 which destroyed forty buildings and killed twenty people at the company’s New Jersey facility on the Raritan River. After the explosion, the Nixon factory was rebuilt into a smaller factory then kept functioning for a while but Lewis Nixon died due to the exposure of the deadly chemicals. Stanhope Nixon was the son of Lewis Nixon who also took over the factory but his son couldnt keep the busines going causing the closore of the nixon factory after a while the location was donated to the state of New Jersey and has since been re-named Edison, near New Brunswick.

The company was founded by naval architect Lewis Nixon in 1915 to manufacture cellulose nitrate, besides the production of celluloid, this factory used to supply some European nations with gunpowder and other materials for World War 1. When the war ended, these facilities were put to broader uses, were involving other explosive materials and dangerous chemicals The nitrate made the material highly flammable, but at the works cellulose nitrate was maintained in large sheets and had been piled in buildings. Within the works, Nixon leased a building to the Ammonite Company which was salvaging the contents of artillery shells for use as agriculture fertilizer. When the Ammonite building exploded, the shock was felt and the sound heard as far away as Manhattan and Brooklyn. After the initial explosion massive fires spread to other buildings.

Additionally, On March 1, 1924, an explosion, likely originating from an Ammonite Company building within the works that was processing ammonium nitrate from artillery shells, triggered a fire that spread rapidly through the surrounding building The disaster resulted in at least 20 deaths, with dozens more injured, many suffering from severe burns, inhalation of toxic fumes, and blunt force trauma from collapsing buildings and flying debris. Some victims were never recovered due to the intensity of the blast. The explosion leveled approximately 40 buildings within the chemical plant, reducing the once-thriving industrial hub to rubble. Fires burned for hours, fueled by volatile chemicals, making it nearly impossible for firefighters to contain the blaze immediately. Nearby factories and homes were also damaged due to the shockwave and subsequent fires. The explosion released toxic chemicals into the air and local waterways, contaminating soil and water supplies. Given the lack of environmental regulations at the time, the full extent of the damage was not immediately addressed, but the effects likely persisted for years.

The History

The workplace accidents/deaths are connected to how harsh the environment was in the workplace during the 1920s. The United States of America during the 1920s was in the revolutionary era when big factories, industrial work, construction, mining, oil rigs, mechanics, soldiers, hard labor, and big-name companies started to rise. All men had to go to work every day to survive and yet most men died at their jobs in the 1920s. Additionally, workplace injuries/deaths were common, and, in many cases, labor conditions were nothing less than grueling. Moreover, the main cause of death was not because of the jobs, they were due to exposure to harsh/deadly chemicals to the body. People were not as knowledgeable as today and many resources we have today they did not have 100 years ago. For example, men who worked in the mines all died due to Tuberculosis and lung cancer for not having the right oxygen mask protection. Mining is one of the deadliest industries, with cave-ins, explosions, and toxic gas exposure causing many deaths. Factories and manufacturing plants also had unsafe machinery with little to no protective measures, leading to crushing, amputations, and fatal injuries. Additionally, the 1920s had very unsafe workplace safety, leading to early labor protections, but this did not change until stricter regulations and enforcement significantly reduced workplace fatalities, like OSHA, ASSP, ANSI, and CSB. These organizations were designed to protect workers from unsafe work environments. During the 1920s, the jobs were extremely limited when it came to women. Additionally, women were only allowed to work as nurses and teachers during the 1920s but given this, women were not exposed to harsh workplace environments as men did.

In the book, The Modern Temper chapter three mentions how the country was expanding to the consumer culture in the late 1920s causing many new jobs to arise for the automobile factories due to its 3.7 million car production number. Chapter 3 mentioned how in the 1930s the American Federation of Labor was extremely focused on the labor movement and making the work environment safer. Furthermore, the AFL association was extremely racist because it did not help Mexicans, African Americans, Asians, and women. The connection this book has with Nixon’s Nitration Work is about the industrial expansion of evolution in factories and construction. The Nixon Nitration Company was founded by Lewis Nixon in 1915. The factories manufacture cellulose nitrate and the production of celluloid and other early plastics. The nitrate made the material highly flammable, and the cellulose nitrate was supported in large sheets and had been piled in buildings. There was an explosion that started in one of the buildings, and the fire spread taking down a few nearby buildings along with 20 people’s lives. All those chemical materials stored together made the fire spread much quicker. Additionally, this is just one of the many accidents that happened during the 1920s due to unsafe procedures in the workplace.

Map

Over time, the site of the Nixon Nitration Works was redeveloped, with much of the area now consisting of residential and commercial properties. The industrial nature of Nixon faded as Edison, NJ, transformed into a suburban community. Additionally, In 1951, the company downsized and donated 48 acres of land and a dam to the city of New Brunswick. The site of the Nixon Works is now a part of Middlesex County College and the Raritan Center Industrial Park.

The End of the accident

The Nixon Nitration Works disaster of 1924 remains a significant event in the history of industrial accidents in the United States. It was a tragedy that claimed lives, devastated a community, and exposed critical weaknesses in industrial safety procedures. The explosion exposed the dangers associated with chemical manufacturing and the need for better safety measures to protect workers and the public. Additionally, this heartbreaking event ultimately contributed to the evolution of industrial safety regulations and environmental protection policies. Today, industries operate under much stricter guidelines, reducing the likelihood of similar catastrophes. The lessons from the Nixon Nitration Works explosion continue to be relevant, serving as a reminder that safety must always be a top priority in hazardous industries.

Citations

Bibliography

“March 03, 1924 – Topics on Newspapers.com.” Topics, www.newspapers.com/topics/century-ago-today/march-1924/march-03-1924/.

‌“1924 Nixon Nitration Works Disaster.” Wikipedia, 1 Oct. 2023, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1924_Nixon_Nitration_Works_disaster.

‌

Women’s lives had changed significantly from the late 19th century into the 1920s. They became more involved in politics and increasingly joined the workforce. This challenged the traditional ideas of women’s roles within society. Social and sexual norms surrounding women had also changed, leading to new ideas about womanhood and femininity. Many women had moved away from restrictive clothing of the Victorian era, as seen with the example of flappers. 

In the 1920s, Nellie Tayloe Ross achieved a historic title. She was elected Governor of Wyoming in 1924. She took office in 1925, becoming the first woman to ever serve as a governor in the U.S.A. Ross represents the “new woman” but in a way that differs from the stereotypical image of the carefree flappers of the 1920s. She was an older woman actively involved in politics. During the late 19th century and into the 1920s, women had entered the political arena. They became political actors, supported suffrage, and sought progressive and urban reforms. One popular reform was prohibition, a law infamously tied to the image of the 1920s. Ross was one of these women. She was a firm supporter of prohibition. Ross had believed that the consumer was just as guilty as the bootlegger. She was even once requested to authorize an investigation of the Park County Sheriff, who had been accused of accepting pay from an alleged bootlegger. 

The “new woman” of the 1920s would agree on one thing: women’s roles within society were changing, and their roles would be different from the old restrictive version of womanhood. However, this did not prevent disagreement and tension. Women’s ideas of feminism and women’s rights were sometimes at odds. Some women, like Julia Lathrop and Frances Perkins, believed in women’s distinctiveness. They believed that women needed special protections that aligned with their sex. While many women supported the Equal Rights Amendment, which promoted equal rights between men and women, many women like Lathrop and Perkins felt indifferent to it. They feared this would create barriers to sex-based labor legislation that specifically protected working women. Ross is an example of a woman who possessed different ideas of women’s newfound roles and power. Feminists and suffragists did view Ross’ election as a victory and a step towards women’s political voices. However, some women’s rights movement leaders were disappointed with Ross’ refusal to prioritize her influence on the movement. She believed in women’s capabilities within the political field but was not a “hardcore feminist”. Echoing the traditional views during the previous century, she stated that a woman’s role as a wife and mother was of the highest importance. She would become cautious with her involvement in feminism because of its negative image within the politics of the time. This cautiousness prevented her from appointing more women in government positions. Nevertheless, Ross firmly believed in women’s roles within the political sphere. While she promoted femininity, she sought to prove it did not have to dismiss a woman’s right to exercise political power. Her status as the first woman governor still inspired other “new women” to get involved in the field of politics. 

Bibliography

Bettmann Archive. USA: Clara Bow in Get Your Man. 1927. Photograph. Bettmann Archive. https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/clara-bow-in-get-your-man-news-photo/514892606.

Bettmann Archive. Portrait of Actress Louise Brooks. Photograph. Bettmann Archive. https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/actress-louise-brooks-poses-for-a-portrait-session-in-news-photo/514205164.

Evening Star (Washington, D.C.). October 24, 1929. Chronicling America: Historic American Newspapers. Library of Congress. https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83045462/1929-10-24/ed-1/seq-3/.

Bettmann Archive. Activist Julia Clifford Lathrop Posing with Her Supporters. Photograph. https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/julia-clifford-lathrop-lead-the-way-for-improving-american-news-photo/517294142.

Dumenil, Lynn. The Modern Temper: American Culture and Society in the 1920s. New York: Hill and Wang, 1995.

Mackey, Mike. “Nellie Tayloe Ross and Wyoming Politics.” Journal of the West 42, no. 3 (2003): 25–34. https://research-ebsco-com.library2.ramapo.edu:2443/linkprocessor/plink?id=f5cae36e-3b49-3ace-ba5b-0cabe6b1f206.

Scharff, Virginia. “Feminism, Femininity, and Power: Nellie Tayloe Ross and the Woman Politician’s Dilemma.” Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies 15, no. 3 (1995): 87–106. https://doi.org/10.2307/3346786.

grlynn

Grlynn is a Ramapo College senior majoring in history

The 1920s aimed to bring American society to the modern world amidst the political corruption, victimization of industrialization, and growth of the Socialist Party.¹ During this time, many social justice and humanitarian laws were produced, such as milk codes, child labor laws, public health laws, and workers’ compensation.² Amidst this was another very overlooked action: the changing of the death penalty.

The first state execution using lethal gas was at Nevada State Prison in Carson City, Nevada, where Gee Jon, a twenty-nine-year-old Chinese immigrant, was the first human to be given this penalty. The switch occurred because lethal gas was considered more humane than the usual execution style of a firing squad, hanging, and electrocution. If done correctly, people would inhale the gas and, within seconds, become unconscious and choke to death. However, it was almost always done incorrectly, and those would suffer for up to twenty minutes in excruciating pain.³

First, officials initially attempted to pump the gas directly into Gee Jon’s cell while he was asleep. However, it was unsuccessful, as the gas leaked out of his cell. In response, a makeshift gas chamber was set up outside of the prison, in the old butcher shop. The gas chamber was eleven feet long, ten feet wide, and eight feet high and killed at least one cat to test the effectiveness of the gas. When Gee Jon was put inside at 10:00 a.m., after eating a last meal of ham, eggs, toast, and coffee, the electric heater failed. The chamber should have been at 75 °F, the ideal temperature, but was instead at 52 °F due to the broken heater. This caused acid to form a toxic puddle on the ground.^{4 5}

One testimony states that after about five seconds, Gee Jon seemed to lose consciousness, and his head nodded up and down for six minutes. After about ten minutes, he was completely immobile.⁶ However, other sources claim he was in more apparent pain and was being berated by the prison officials. It cannot be precisely known what occurred as it was a closed event, and there are few records. The records that are there contradict each other.

Not everyone was in favor for this execution. Four guards who did not want to participate immediately resigned. Many others, some important officials, sent letters to Nevada State Prison pleading to halt the execution and change his sentence. They thought it was cruel and unusual punishment, and that Gee Jon did not deserve to die.

“From my observations of Gee Jon… I am of the opinion that he is in a mental collapse and in a state of mental irresponsibility amounting to insanity… I hope at this time that you… can see your way clear to commute the sentence of Gee Jon to life imprisonment.”

Nevada State Prison. Record Blank. 15.

During the execution, witnesses claim they thought they smelled almond blossoms, which is believed to be the odor of cyanide, leaking from the chamber. That caused Warden Dickerson, who was present at the time of the execution, to clear the area. After Gee Jon’s death, they opened a vent and put on a fan in the gas chamber to clear the air, and waited to open the door until the puddle on the floor evaporated. At 12:20 p.m., Gee Jons’ body was removed and taken to the prison hospital. Seven doctors pronounced him officially dead, but Warden Dickerson said an autopsy was not allowed because they were worried his body would release the toxic gas.⁷

Official records claim that there is no correlation between using an immigrant for the first gas execution. However, one can infer that it symbolizes progressiveness or shows the deep-rooted racism towards immigrants. First, there is symbolism in using an Asian immigrant for the most modern and humane execution style. It shows a step towards a more accepting country, especially since other countries used “outdated” options. For example, the United Kingdom and Japan primarily used hanging, and the Soviet Union and France used the guillotine. Nevertheless, it can also be viewed in a negative light.

It is no secret that Americans and the government disliked immigrants. The National Origins Act, passed in 1924, heavily excluded the amount of Asian immigrants in the United States.⁸ This act highlights the anti-Asian sentiment during the mid-nineteenth century, specifically on the West Coast and among the Chinese.⁹ Chinese immigrants were particularly discriminated against, which is reflected in a law passed in 1882 that stated the Chinese were a “vilified…debased, corrupting race.”¹⁰ Immigrants as a whole were seen as challenging to American culture and society.¹¹ Americans linked immigrants to the crisis of the cities, making immigration seem like a multifaceted threat to American society.¹²

“CHINESE KILLER MUST DIE TODAY.” Nevada State Journal. February 8, 2024.

People

Hughie Sing was a newly recruited Hip Sing Tong gang member and Gee Jon’s apprentice of two months. Sing found and pointed to Tom Quong Kee as the target for the murder. Sing was nineteen at the age of the shooting and got life imprisonment instead of the death penalty. Sing was born in the United States, which helped his case, unlike Gee Jon who was described as an “illiterate Chinese unacquainted with American customs.” Sing was bilingual, unlike Gee Jon, and was told to cooperate more with the authorities. He was released on parole in 1938.^{13 14} The treatment of Sing versus Gee Jon shows a vast difference. Since Sing was more “American,” he was sentenced to a lesser degree.

Tom Quong Kee was an elderly member of the rival gang, the Bing Kung Tong, in Mina, Nevada. Gee Jon murdered him with a .38 caliber revolver with two shots to the heart.¹⁵

James M. Frame was Hughie Sing’s attorney and Fiore Raffetto was Gee Jon’s attorney. Sing and Gee Jon both pled not guilty. Frame argued that Gee Jon’s punishment was a cruel and unusual punishment, but the appeal was denied. Raffetto filed a writ of certiorari but was unsuccessful. Frame and Raffetto tried to keep the execution from happening up until the deed was done.^{16 17}

Denver S. Dickerson was the warden at the time of Gee Jon’s death and oversaw the execution. Warden Dickerson thought the use of lethal gas was impractical and that the best method of execution was the firing squad.¹⁸

Events and Timeline

America in the 1880s had a very negative view of Chinese immigrants, which marked the height of anti-Chinese sentiment. Like most immigrants, Chinese immigrants were more likely to work in cheap labor jobs. This “took away” job security for Americans, and were perceived as a threat. They were also discriminated against due to their cultural and religious differences.

The death penalty in America in the 1880s was much different than it is now. Hanging was the primary execution style; each state had its own laws regarding the death penalty and execution. Public executions were still common, and people started to advocate more for ending it.

• May 6, 1882: The Chinese Exclusion Act was passed.²¹

From 1900 to 1919, America still had a negative view of Chinese immigrants. Their racial stereotypes were strong in popular culture, which highlighted anti-Chinese sentiment.

The death penalty in American in the 1900-1919 had a shift in thinking. The electric chair was starting to replace hanging as it was considered more humane, execution rates had times of increased and decreased, and there was a stricter checklist to qualify for the death penalty.

• 1913: Nevada invents an “automated firing squad.” This is an execution method where three rifles are mounted on an iron frame, and all fire simultaneously. It is used one time in the execution of Andriza Mircovich.²²

In the 1920s, America regarding the death penalty showed a time of change. They now introduced lethal gas, but it was still not widespread. Execution rates decreased, and instead of the death penalty, there was greater advocacy for rehabilitation, reformative justice, and the right to live.

• March 17, 1921: Assembly Bill No. 104 was passed, which authorized the use of lethal gas in Nevada.
• August 28, 1921: Gee Jon murders Tom Quong Kee.
• February 8, 1924: Twenty-nine-year-old Gee Jon dies by lethal gas in Carson City, Nevada.
• May 26, 1924: The National Origins Act passed, which heavily limited the number of Asian immigrants into the United States.

From the 1940s to the 2000s, America experienced major changes regarding Chinese immigrants. During World War II, America and China were allies against Japan, leading to a better portrayal of Chinese people and immigrants in America. An increase in Chinese immigrants in America in 1965 made them more visible, and there was significant political and social reform advocating for their rights.

From the 1940s to the 2000s America, the death penalty had a significant change. Hanging and electric chair were the most common, yet towards the 2000s, lethal injection was the most favored, the legal procedures and reasons why a person is given the death penalty is stricter than ever, there was an increase in abolishing the death penalty, and the execution rates still fluctuated.

• December 17, 1943: The Chinese Exclusion Act is repealed.
• 1955: Eleven U.S. states adopted lethal gas as their primary method of execution.²³
• May 4, 1990: Donald Harding, also known as Jesse Tafero, was executed by lethal gas in Florida. He was convicted of murder in 1976.
• 1996: A federal appeals court says that California’s statute authorizing lethal gas violated the U.S. Constitution’s Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishments. The primary execution style was replaced by lethal injection.²⁴
• The early 2000s: In California and Missouri, there is a right to choose between lethal gas or injection.

In America in the 2020s, anti-Chinese sentiment grew due to the COVID-19 pandemic. While things are better than they were a hundred years ago, Chinese immigrants and Chinese-Americans are still treated unjustly and unfairly.

In America in the 2020s, a hundred years later after the first lethal gas execution, lethal injection is the primary style as it is the most painless, and more and more people want to end the death penalty.

• January 25, 2024: Kenneth Smith is given the lethal gas execution in Alabama. It is likely to constitute torture, which violates international human rights treaties ratified by the U.S.

Significance

While browsing lesser-known events of the 1920s, this immediately piqued my interest. I had never given the death penalty’s history much thought, so it stood out to me. As I started researching more and more, I realized there was more to this topic than it seemed. The death penalty has been around since humans began walking and has since been a widely debated topic for centuries, with the controversy still ongoing. It is just a prevalent topic now, as it was a hundred years ago when Gee Jon was executed. It also ties into Chinese immigration, which also spans human history. Studying the historiography of the death penalty, not just in the United States, is very interesting, just as the history of immigration. As I was researching, it was fascinating to see the change in the death penalty and Chinese immigration within the United States and compare to how it is now. Presently, the death penalty is still a highly controversial topic that causes quite a stir, which shows the increasing fight for human rights. Chinese immigration and the way Americans view the Chinese and Chinese Americans is a shaky relationship, too. Due to racism and xenophobia, Chinese immigrants and citizens are still heavily discriminated against in the United States. A prime example is the COVID-19 pandemic when anti-Chinese sentiment peaked in the early 2020s. This topic both shows the history of the death penalty and Chinese immigration, where in the present-day conversation, it is vital to stay knowledgeable in the history of it and how it is viewed in the American past.

While lethal gas execution may still whisper within the United States, this torturous method remains largely unused. Nevada State Prison, the infamous starter to the deadly gas execution, executed thirty-two men with this method from 1924-1979. Since then, it has stopped, yet the state’s execution chamber that killed Gee Jon a hundred years ago still remains.²⁵

More Resources

Newspapers.com

“Past to Present: 100 Years Since the United States’ First Lethal Gas Execution, a Recently Renowed Practice.” Death Penalty Information Center. https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/news/past-to-present-100-years-since-the-united-states-first-lethal-gas-execution-a-recently-renewed-practice.

Bibliography

Bye, Raymond T. “Recent History and Present Status of Capital Punishment in the United States.” Journal of the American Institute of Criminal Law and Criminology 17, no. 2 (1926): 234–45. https://doi.org/10.2307/1134506.

Chan, Loren (1975). “Example for the Nation: Nevada’s Execution of Gee Jon”. Nevada Historical Society Quarterly.

“Chinese Killer Must Die Today.” Nevada State Journal. February 8, 2024. https://www.newspapers.com/article/nevada-state-journal/144232683/.

“Death Penalty Information Center.” Death Penalty Information Center, December 1, 2023. https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/.

Denno, Deborah W.. “gas chamber”. Encyclopedia Britannica, 20 Oct. 2023, https://www.britannica.com/topic/gas-chamber.

Gerber, Rudolph Joseph; Johnson, John M. (2007). The Top Ten Death Penalty Myths: The Politics of Crime Control. Greenwood Publishing Group.

“History of the Death Penalty.” Death Penalty Information Center. https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/state-and-federal-info/state-by-state/nevada.

Lynn Dumenil, The Modern Temper (Hill and Wang).

Nevada State Prison. Record Blank.

Reid, John Bevis; James, Ronald Michael (2004). Uncovering Nevada’s Past: A Primary Source History of the Silver State. The University of Nevada Press.

“Waiting on Nevada’s Death Row… 55 years ago.” Nevada State Journal. September 23, 1979. https://www.newspapers.com/article/nevada-state-journal/144232683/.

Wikipedia contributors, “Gee Jon,” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gee_Jon&oldid=1213442489.

Featured Image: Nevada State Prison. Gee Jon Mug Shot. Photograph.

Citations

1. Lynn Dumenil, The Modern Temper (Hill and Wang). 17. ︎
2. Modern Temper. 18. ︎
3. Reid, John Bevis; James, Ronald Michael (2004). Uncovering Nevada’s Past: A Primary Source History of the Silver State. University of Nevada Press. ︎
4. Chan, Loren (1976). Example for the Nation: Nevada’s Execution of Gee Jon. Chinese Historical Society of America. ︎
5. “Descriptions of Execution Methods: Gas Chamber”. Death Penalty Information Center. 2010. ︎
6. Reid. ︎
7. Christianson, Scott (2010). Fatal Airs: The Deadly History and Apocalyptic Future of Lethal Gases That Threaten Our World. ABC-CLIO. pp. 49–51. ︎
8. Dumenil. 207. ︎
9. Dumenil. 208. ︎
10. Dumenil. 208. ︎
11. Dumenil. 204. ︎
12. Dumenil. 205. ︎
13. Reid, 108. ︎
14. Chan, 90-106 ︎
15. Wikipedia contributors, “Gee Jon,” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gee_Jon&oldid=1213442489. ︎
16. Chan, 90–106. ︎
17. Gerber, Rudolph Joseph; Johnson, John M. (2007). The Top Ten Death Penalty Myths: The Politics of Crime Control. Greenwood Publishing Group. pp. 9–10. ︎
18. Reid, 108. ︎
19. “Waiting on Nevada’s Death Row… 55 years ago.” Nevada State Journal. September 23, 1979. https://www.newspapers.com/article/nevada-state-journal/144232683/. ︎
20. Nevada State Prison. Record Blank. ︎
21. Dumenil. 207. ︎
22. “Death Penalty Information Center.” Death Penalty Information Center, December 1, 2023. https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/. ︎
23. Denno, D. W.. “gas chamber.” Encyclopedia Britannica, October 20, 2023. https://www.britannica.com/topic/gas-chamber. ︎
24. Denno,”gas chamber.” ︎
25. “History of the Death Penalty.” Death Penalty Information Center. https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/state-and-federal-info/state-by-state/nevada. ︎

Isabella Apgar

History major and Human Rights and Genocide Studies minor at Ramapo College of New Jersey class of 2025.

Following the end of World War I, The United States had adopted an isolationist mindset in regards to international affairs. This meant that the U.S. government would aim to strengthen its borders and focus more on domestic matters than getting involved in the businesses of Europe. While fears of Communism in the East were spreading across the country, immigration became a major issue for Americans. The Johnson-Reed Immigration Act was a response to the increased hostility towards immigrants and is a document which placed numerical restrictions on immigration from certain countries along with establishing what we know today as the Visa process in order to legally reside in the country. 

Before the Act

Prior to the Immigration Act being passed by Congress, it is important to understand how the United States was experiencing immigration and what attitudes towards immigrants were. Throughout the late 19th century and early 20th century the U.S. experienced a wave of immigration, largely in cities where unskilled labor work was readily available. In 1917 Congress passed one of its first restrictive laws on immigration that included a literacy test to be performed before entering the country, it increased taxes for new immigrants and gave more power to border officials on who should and should not enter the United States. The 1917 act also excluded all immigrants from anyone born in Asia, except Japan and the Philippines.

Despite the U.S. government establishing new barriers to limit immigration numbers, the 1917 act was not enough to prevent new immigrants from entering the country. It was during the 1920s that the idea of implementing quotas was brought up as a method in which immigration could be hindered. Republican Senator William P. Dillingham introduced action of setting a three percent rule on all forign born citizens of the United States. This would mean that passed on the percentages taken from the previous census, only a specific number of Visas would be granted for each country. Dillingham’s policy was established in 1922 and would continue to be praised until 1924 when the Johnson-Reed Act made some changes to the quota system that greatly shifted the narrative of immigration for the following decades.

The Immigration Act of 1924

So what changed in 1924? While the major point of using a quota system to limit immigration remained intact, there were some changes regarding exactly how many of each ethnicity was allowed into the U.S. Another change was that the previous measure from 1917 that excluded immigration from the far East and Asia would now include immigrants from Japan. 

As a result of increasing the calculations of Americans of British descent, the quotas for The United Kingdom and other countries in Western Europe increased, while Southern and Eastern European countries saw a decrease in available Visas. In the act there are dramatic jumps between countries such as Greece who have a 307 immigrant quota restriction and Germany who has an allowed quota of 25,957. These differences not only restricted the overall number of immigrants coming from those countries, but also who was most likely to be granted citizenship. In countries with severely restricted quotas such as Egypt(100), Armenia(100), Turkey(226) those of higher status and more educated would be more likely to gain one of the allotted hundred spots available. The disproportions of the quotas highlighted the racialized system of achieving citizenship in the U.S. Through the law nationality was able to remain designated for white Europeans who fit in with Western values. 

Japan

The Immigration Act of 1924 greatly angered the Japanese. This is because in 1907 the Japanese government had made an agreement with then president Theodore Roosevelt which included an increased quota for Japan given that the country makes an effort to restrict its own citizens from leaving. Yet the 1924 act neglected the agreement in favor of severe restrictions at a loss to Japan, causing the Japanese government to lose respect for American leadership. 

Public Perception

In general the American public was pretty split on the issue of Immigration during the 1920s. While many naturalized citizens supported the act as they believed their job opportunities had dwindled due to new immigrants, there were also those who felt that the principals on which America was founded upon were being thrown away. World War I had a great impact on identity politics and increased nationalism within the U.S., making something like the Johnson-Reed Act appear to be in favor of maintaining America’s national identity. Fear of the “other” coming from Communist Eastern Europe or Asia caused many to support a more restrictive policy on who was able to enter the country. 

There was this idea that immigrants from the South or East would have a more difficult time adjusting to American customs and way of life. There was also the belief that they would bring unfamiliar traditions or traits into American society. There was an increased stigma about anyone from countries with a predominantly Jewish or Muslim population and those with starkly different racialized features that stood out against the white majority. 

Mapping the Johnson-Reed Immigration Act

The 1920s

The Johnson-Reed Immigration Act of 1924 is a product of its decade and a result of the uncertainty many felt as they entered into the 20th century. While many Americans supported the act in favor of an isolationist mindset, the act is a reminder of how immigration policies are reflective of the society that makes them. Despite the artistic and technological revolutions of the 1920s, there was still incredible prejudice against immigrants from Asia, Eastern Europe, the Middle East and South America. The Immigration Act of 1924 is an example of how the United States government continued to look inward during the 1920s, instead of embracing the global landscape surrounding them. The restrictions placed during the decade have implications that continue to be felt in the 21st century as attitudes about Visa status and citizenship are continued to be debated along racial and ethnic lines.

Significance

The legacy of the Johnson-Reed Act can be seen in a heightened border security system and a more regulated Visa process. The ethnic makeup of the country is a direct result of immigration policies which allowed for increased quotas for Western European countries. It is also a foundation that sets a standard for who is deemed a greater asset to American society, and which group of people is undesired by the government. Although a bill like the Johnson-Reed Act could never be passed in 2021, discussions about physical walls and militarized border security have roots stemming from the immigration policy of the 1920s.

I chose this topic because I believe it is important to understand the lasting impact on historical policies and note how certain legal measures can still be felt today. As the world continues to grow more interconnected it is essential to reflect on how immigration policy impacts our views on certain cultures and ethnicities in order to move forward in favor of more inclusive measures that are not based on racial, political or xenophobic foundations.

Citations

Ngai, Mae M. “The Architecture of Race in American Immigration Law: A Reexamination of the Immigration Act of 1924.” The Journal of American History 86, no. 1 (1999): 67-92. Accessed April 19, 2021. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2567407 

Ngai, Mae M. “Nationalism, Immigration Control, and the Ethnoracial Remapping of America in the 1920S.” OAH Magazine of History 21, no. 3 (2007): 11-15. Accessed April 19, 2021. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25162123. 

Jaret, Charles. “Troubled by Newcomers: Anti-Immigrant Attitudes and Action during Two Eras of Mass Immigration to the United States.” Journal of American Ethnic History 18, no. 3 (1999): 9-39. Accessed April 19, 2021. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27502448. 

Milestones: 1921- 1936: https://history.state.gov/milestones/1921-1936/immigration-act

Library of Congress: https://www.loc.gov/item/uscode1925-003008006/

President Calvin Coolidge signs into law the Immigration Act of 1924: https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/coolidge-signs-stringent-immigration-law

The 1924 Law That Slammed the Door on Immigrants and the Politicians Who Pushed it Back Open: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/1924-law-slammed-door-immigrants-and-politicians-who-pushed-it-back-open-180974910/

Closing the Door on Immigration: https://www.nps.gov/articles/closing-the-door-on-immigration.htm

Lauren S

Senior History and American Studies student at Ramapo College of New Jersey enrolled in Discovering Digital History course taught by Dr. Hajo during Spring 2021.

To be born and raised in the United States of America but denied citizenship and the right to vote; this was the unfortunate reality for Native Americans all over the nation. Within their own communities, Indigenous Peoples were often based on chiefdoms, whether they were hereditary or through social status, which served as a type of self-government. Nonetheless, they were still barred from participating in the United States government and were not seen as citizens in the eyes of government officials. The Snyder Act, also called the Indian Citizenship Act, was put into action in 1924 and granted citizenship, and thus the right to vote, to Native Americans. The debate of whether Native Americans should be considered citizens in the eyes of the United States was still heavy in the air; so much so that the Snyder Act was left up to the states to decide if they would follow through with granting Native Americans the right to vote. While now Native Americans were recognized as citizens and taxed as such, they still could not use their voices in many states for decades after the Snyder Act was enacted. Several other laws sought out to privatize and distribute Native American reservation to white, non-Indigenous land owners for several years before the Snyder Act was passed. This became possible through the Dawes Act and later the Burke Act.

Through the Dawes Act, or General Allotment Act of 1887, the government divided Native American reservation into plots allotted for certain members of several communities. The government considered many Native Americans to be incapable of running their allotment, as well as all of the financial dealings that came along with it, and thus their land was seized and put back into the hands of the government. From there, it could be distributed and sold to private landowners who were not Ten years earlier, the Fifteenth Amendment barred the restriction of voting rights based on race. Even then, Native Americans were not included and could not yet take part in elections. Once the Snyder Act was passed, they were explicitly granted access to vote through the bill attached with a sneaky loophole; the state government had control over whether they would adopt voting rights for Native Americans. This led to many states still restricting Native Americans to vote, even though they should have had access. Their rights were never guaranteed nor protected by the government.

Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendment

The Fourteenth Amendment was added to the Constitution in 1868 and granted citizenship to all persons born within the US. Before this, the government had made it clear that Native Americans did not belong to any part of the United States government due to the fact that Native Americans had their own tribal legislation and government. Even if an individual were to leave his or her tribe to assimilate, they would most likely be unable to obtain rights as a U.S. citizen considering they were not white and not seen as equal.

The Fifteenth Amendment, however, was added to the Constitution two years later and stated that no citizen shall be denied the right to vote based on their race or skin color. Keeping in mind that the United States government did not see Native Americans as citizens, they still could not gain access to a seemingly inalienable right. It was not until many years later that an amendment would attempt to patch the division through the Snyder Act and even many years after that.

The Dawes Act and the Burke Act

Just seven years after the Fifteenth Amendment, in 1887, the government passed the General Allotment Act or the Dawes Act. This was a blatant division and destruction of Native land hidden under the guise of government aid, as control of the reservation was often taken away from the Native Americans and put into the hands of the government instead. Not only this, but the Dawes Act enabled the possibility white landowners to take control of Native American reservation instead of the intended owners. It privatized land ownership instead of being own by the tribe as a whole. This had been exacerbated in 1906 when the Burke Act passed and explicitly put the government in charge of determining the competence of Native American landowners. Once the government had determined the owner as fully able to control their own land, the land was then taxed which led to financial turmoil for many Native Americans and resulted in a mass loss of reservation. If the government deemed the owner unfit to care for their land, it was taken from them and put into other hands. This meant that Native American reservations were not always controlled by the rightful owner.

The Snyder Act

With so many amendments and bills passed with little to no change in Native American rights, the Snyder Act seemed like it would be a change headed in the right direction; and it was, for some Native Americans. The 1920s were proving to be a more progressive era than the nation had seen in the past. Social norms were changing rapidly and Americans were shifting their beliefs. As mentioned earlier, the policy varied from state to state, as the federal government left it up to the states to make the final decision. This meant that many states refused to grant voting rights to Native Americans for nearly forty years. An argument against suffrage for Native Americans was that since they still partially belonged to their tribe, then they could not be full United States citizens as their loyalty was already pledged elsewhere. It was an unfair ruling that left many Native Americans stuck between two worlds; their culture had been decimated and assimilated through colonization and the new nation responsible for this refused to see them as equals. They had little to no control of their land and, at every second, the government was seeking new loopholes to restrict them of their rights.

Protection of Native Americans

There was opposition to this discrimination; Zitkala-Ša, Marie Louise Bottineau Baldwin, and Carlos Montezuma were all Native Americans who spoke out and made significant strides for suffrage and equality. They knew of the secrecy and deceit within the Constitution and amendments so they actively worked against it to move towards a nation that accepted everyone. Zitkala-Ša formed the National Council of American Indians in 1926, just two years after the passing of the Snyder Act. She worked tirelessly for Native American voters and equality for all through several different organizations that she established. The NCAI aimed to protect Native Americans and keep their culture and history alive. She was adamant on keeping the voice of Native Americans alive and strong through voting drives, lectures, and fundraisers.

Ša, Montezuma, and Baldwin worked together, as well, through the Society for American Indians which was formed in 1911 by Montezuma. The SAI deviated from other groups for suffrage, as it encouraged assimilation and submission of land when the Dawes Act first was enacted. It also focused on ways to provide health services and education to Native Americans as well as how they can invoke change in the government.

Relation to the 1920s

The 1920s are often thought to be a time of glamor and new-age ideals; women courted and wore short skirts, businesses began to adopt leisure activities, and there was a rise in the entertainment industry. While these were all true aspects of the 1920s, these luxuries only applied to a portion of the American population. Native Americans, even with the passing of the Snyder Act, could not vote in every state. There were multiple laws in action, leading up to the Snyder Act and following it, that intentionally kept Native Americans apart from becoming US citizens. The Snyder Act seemed to be a very progressive law that would ignite change for civil rights, especially within the Native American community, however it left many open gates for states to continue to deny suffrage to them. In states where Native Americans could vote, there was always the chance of voter intimidation or suppression tactics such as voting literacy tests and turning away Native Americans at the polls.

The Native American fight for suffrage in America rose during 1924 after the Snyder Act, as they had come so close to gaining the right to vote yet it was inaccessible to many. They gained citizenship in a country they spent their entire lives in, yet they could not vote.

Bibliography

“Carlos Montezuma.” Wassaja: A Carlos Montezuma Project. http://wassaja.lib.asu.edu/people-archive/carlos-montezuma

“Fighting for a Voice: Native Americans’ Right to Vote in Arizona.” Arizona Historical Society. July 15, 2020. https://arizonahistoricalsociety.org/2020/07/15/fighting-for-a-voice-native-americans-right-to-vote-in-arizona/

“History of Federal Voting Rights Laws.” The United States Department of Justice. https://www.justice.gov/crt/history-federal-voting-rights-laws

“Indian Citizenship Act.” Library of Congress. https://www.loc.gov/item/today-in-history/june-02/

“Land Tenure History.” Indian Land Tenure Foundation. https://iltf.org/land-issues/history/

Maltz, Earl M., “The Fourteenth Amendment and Native American Citizenship.” University of Minnesota Law School. 2000. https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1299&context=concomm

“Marie Louise Bottineau Baldwin.” National Park Service. https://www.nps.gov/people/marie-louise-bottineau-baldwin.htm

“Society of American Indians.” National Historical Publications and Records Commission. https://www.archives.gov/nhprc/projects/catalog/society-of-american-indians

“Voting Rights for Native Americans.” Library of Congress, https://www.loc.gov/classroom-materials/elections/right-to-vote/voting-rights-for-native-americans/“Zitkala-Ša (Red Bird/Gertrude Simmons Bonnin).” National Park Service. https://www.nps.gov/people/zitkala-sa.htm

Sarah Grider

Sarah Grider is a student of the 2021 Spring Discovering Digital History class at the Ramapo College of New Jersey. She is currently studying History and Museum & Exhibition Studies. She is an editorial assistant for the Jane Addams Papers Project.