“Phillips Brooks gave expression to the sentiment: ‘One generation gathers the material, and the next generation builds the palaces.’ As I understand it, he wished to inculcate the idea that one generation lays the foundation for succeeding generations.” – Booker T. Washington, Future of the American Negro (1899)

Any institutional or organizational leader would be remiss–no fool hearted–if he or she did not first look to, then build upon and, finally, greatly improve upon the foundation of the past–particularly when that foundation is as solid and substantive as that which is founded in 1881 at Tuskegee (Institute) University. (And this writer believes that the founding principal and president of Tuskegee, Booker T. Washington, was prescient enough to know that his was a foundation that any man or woman could build “palaces upon.”)

Preparation, planning, purpose and performance are the hallmarks of sound management practices in any leadership and management paradigm, and a leader must not only prepare and plan on how to ascend to institutional leadership, but what to do with it once he or she gets it. One certain way of doing this is to return to the founder’s “foundation.” Booker T. Washington laid a rock-solid foundation based upon personal and organizational “integrity,” the greatest 9-letter word.

In perusing through some 34 years of this man’s letters, books and correspondence, one finds that “integrity” is the most consistent and persistent attribute permeating within each writing or speech. Whether writing or speaking to persons small or great, he installed a vision on the basis of being truthful, honest and earnest in all his dealings, and such attributes appealed to both external and internal constituents alike-particularly when seeking major, transformational gifts like Booker T. Washington secured. (The best institutional leaders and organizations are “transparent,” “consistent,” “communicative,” and “collaborative”.)

What the man, Booker Washington, spoke, wrote and did concerning Tuskegee University in one arena was consistent with what he spoke, wrote and did concerning Tuskegee University in another arena, thus forming an unbroken chain of integrity on which he built the foundation of Tuskegee. This integrity extended not only to the world-renowned bricks of Tuskegee’s oldest buildings, but also to the foundational philosophy of Tuskegee University and its founder.

Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.
Revelation 3:12

Although some read the book of Revelation for those things that have already been fulfilled, some read it for its many future implications and still others read it for its many present implications; perhaps the most expedient way to read it is to bear all three in mind, simultaneously, particularly for the principle of the pillar.

For having overcome his insecurities, doubts and double-mindedness, Peter (along with James and John) was considered a pillar in the Lord’s house. And surely all who have endured to the very end, overcoming the world and its temptations, trials and afflictions, will become pillars in the temple of God found in Heavenly Jerusalem.

Moreover, we who are presently alive ought to appear as pillars in our present assemblies and communities, (fixed in the faith) grounded and settled-always overcoming-because of it. For the overarching principle of the pillar is one of strength to support and to bear the weight of not only ourselves but others. Most importantly, pillars stand upon truth chiefly expressed through the word of God and in the person of Jesus Christ who is the way, the truth and the life.

[That thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.]

1 Tim. 3:15 KJV

Congratulations to my son Asa as he moves one step closer during today’s Professionalism Ceremony (white coat and pin) to obtaining the DPT doctorate of physical therapy (class of 2028) at Charleston Southern University.👏🏿🙌🏿👑 Rev. 5:10; Col.1:27; Psalm 115:1; Micah 6:8; 2 Chronicles 16:9 Great blessings to Asa and his classmates on their journey towards fulfilling their careers and callings for great purposes for people.

2 Chron 29:34

34 But the priests were too few, so that they could not flay all the burnt offerings: wherefore their brethren the Levites did help them, till the work was ended, and until the other priests had sanctified themselves: for the Levites were more upright in heart to sanctify themselves than the priests.

KJV

Although there have always been ebbs and tides in the quality of the priesthood in the history of Israel and Judah, God has always left a remnant in the midst of His people who would remain upright in heart. While God has often used prophets and priests for such a task, in this instance, it was the Levites who were found faithful due to their willingness to remain faithful to God.

Although all priests were apart of the Aaronic Levitical order, all Levites were not priests; these performed a variety of services (such as singers, scribes, judges etc.) throughout the sanctuary and among the people. And this parallel resembles the body of Christ today. For while some men are full time stewards in the house of God, other members serve in helps ministries as well as fulfilling their own vocational calling in their respective careers and callings in the civic sphere. Yet, most importantly, we find here that God was no respecter of persons in describing the Levites as more upright in heart than the priests; He regarded not the titles of the men who served Him but their hearts:

“For the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart.”- 1 Samuel 16:7

“More than that, a school that is content with merely turning out ladies and gentlemen who are not at the same time something else — who are not lawyers, doctors, business men, bankers, carpenters, farmers, teachers, not even housewives, but merely ladies and gentlemen — such a school is bound, in my estimation, to be more or less a failure.” – Booker T. Washington, _My Larger Education_(1901)

In keeping with his constant emphasis that “style”-however impressive to the eye or palpable to the ear-will never ever be a replacement for “substance,” Booker T. Washington here speaks to the central purpose of a university education: Character (Heart) Competence (Head) and Credentials (Hands).

Make no mistake, appropriate dress and eloquent speech is quite essential for the university-trained man or woman. Grades alone without accompanying poise, presence and posture will not assure one’s entrance into career fields where appearance often factors into personal prejudices and/or preferences.

All the same, “integrity” (character), “knowledge” (competence)—the first and second greatest 9-letter words—coupled with credentials are the most important attributes to be in possession of for the university-trained man or woman for not only the successful entrance into a field of activity but for the successful pursuit of career in concert with calling for the fulfilling of great purposes for people.

Whether in the 19th Century or the 21st Century, one has to possess these three. And the institution that is more concerned with what is upon the backs of her students than what is between the ears of her students, is in the founding principal and president of Tuskegee (Institute) University’s “estimation…more or less a failure.”

ROOMS THAT YOU DO NOT LIKE

“You are going to get rooms that you do not like. They will not be, perhaps, as attractive as your desire, or they will be too crowded. You are going to be given persons for roommates with whom you think it is going to be impossible to get along pleasantly, people who are not congenial to you. During the hot months your rooms are going to be too hot, and during the cold months they are going to be too cold. You are going to meet with all these difficulties in your rooms. Make up your mind that you are going to conquer them. I have often said that the students who in the early years of this school had such hard times with their rooms have succeeded grandly. Many of you now live in palaces, compared to the rooms, which those students had. I am sure that the students who attend this school find that the institution is better fitted every year to take care of them than it was the year previous.” “A Sunday Evening Talk: Some Rocks Ahead,” Booker T. Washington

Among the many priorities Mr. Washington had in relationship to his duties as president of Tuskegee Institute (University), fostering a relationship with his students was high among these. The Sunday evening talks were designed for students to engage the founding principal and president in less formal ways than at official gatherings such as convocations, commencements and formal student body association meetings. Moreover, he used these times to try to instill in them something of the “Tuskegee spirit.”

Yet, try as one might-and in spite of the many positive aspects of the institution that are hardly ever touted-there are always areas of on-going concern for students, or “some…rocks ahead” for students within a university living-learning environment. Here, Mr. Washington addresses one of these: residential living. While it is clear that this address was for Tuskegee Institute (University) students in the 19th century as opposed to the 21st century. (And it is clear that the 21st century institution has a fiscal duty to ensure the best facilities available to its students.) Notwithstanding, there are simply some matters in residential living that are common to all persons living within a university environment that are entirely unavoidable, and a student must simply “conquer them.”

First, the room may not be as “attractive as you desire.” The living-learning environment is by no means the culmination of one’s career. It is a stop en route to a glorious career path that has as its ultimate destination a home purchase consistent with one’s desires and affordability. (This is often dependent upon your academic success as a student.)

Second, “roommates” may not be “congenial.” Everyone recalls meeting strangers for the first time and though the initial meeting was uncomfortable, these strangers became life-long friends. (Many of our best, life-long friends are cultivated in the college and university living-learning environment, and had we not endured, we would have missed a valuable relationship that might be instrumental in our future successes.)

Third, heating and air challenges are often the case even with respect to one roommate preferring it cold while the other hot. (Universities do their very best to address these situations upon proper reporting to the designated resident advisor, residential hall director, facilities director and Vice President for Student Affairs. It is not the university president who one contacts for these matters until the lines of authority are exhausted.)

Lastly, a balanced perspective recognizes that “many of you now live in palaces, compared to the rooms which [previous generations of] students had” and for most universities, “the students who attend this school find that the institution is better fitted every year to take care of them than it was the year previous.” While the “struggle” of residential living within a university environment is oft-times a real and verifiable one, students would do well to remember the following adage: “Obstacles are what you see when you take your eyes off the goal.” And the goal is the successful completion of a baccalaureate or post-baccalaureate degree.

Ephesians 1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: KJV

In the heavenly places there are found a great many spiritual blessings (mercy, grace, sanctification, revelation, wisdom, etc.) that exceedingly surpass those that are temporal and material. And the weight of scripture suggests that such spiritual blessings will chiefly be realized and accessed through prayer. And Jacob’s wrestling with the heavenly messenger demonstrates much to this end. (Genesis 32:24-32)

Jacob’s wrestling with the manifest presence of God himself in the form of an angel was a unique moment in the history of Judeao-Christian faith, for the resulting spiritual blessing of this wrestling was God’s eternal identification of His people as Israel. Nevertheless, the patriarch’s wrestling contains the same characteristics of those who would labor in prayer to access “all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ.”

First, having done all that ought be done (and could be done) in preparation for facing Esau, Jacob “was left alone, and there wrestled…” Genesis 32:24 Like Jacob, Paul and even our Lord, heartfelt, fervent prayer availeth all the required spiritual blessing that is necessary in the face of trial, and it often resembles a violent, intense wrestling. Secondly, the heavenly messenger served as a strong adversary who stood in opposition to Jacob’s blessing. (Though holy heavenly messengers are not to be classed with demonic, evil beings–as in the case of Daniel, Job and Zechariah and Joshua, the priest–contrarily, we find heavenly messengers contending with such forces in order to render some benefit on behalf of God’s people. Hebrews 1:14)

Thirdly, Jacob wrestled for quite some time, for the messenger relayed, “Let me go, for the day breaketh.”(While there are a great many prayers–short and long–those who would labor for unseen spiritual blessings will often labor long and persistently.) Lastly, Jacob would not let go until he experienced some tangible spiritual blessing: “I will not let thee go, except thou bless me.” (Without fail, one will always experience a tangible, manifest spiritual blessing in the inner man after such travails in prayer, for whenever one draws nigh to God, He will draw nigh to you James 4:8.)

Jacob leaves us with no misunderstanding. Spiritual blessings require spiritual prayer: “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.”-Ephesians 6:12

2 Timothy 2:4 No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier. KJV

He or she that truly desires to please God will find it increasingly difficult to do so if they find themselves entangled with earthly affairs; In fact, it is impossible. To be sure, every man or woman should be engaged in some profitable employment, family matters, secure material goods and become engaged in serviceable engagements in society. Yet and still, (even as a soldier) such things should never require the sacrifice of one’s duties that are consistent with assignments issued by one’s commander. And in this God’s soldiers have often become entangled.

If one’s vocation (calling) is driven by figures and not God’s calling, one has become entangled. Or if one’s expensive home has come at the expense of a goodly family, one has become entangled. Or if one’s financial expenditures serve only ourselves (and creditors) and not others, we have become entangled.  Or finally, if the whole of our service is directed towards pleasing others and not God, we have most certainly become entangled. For there are a great many pursuits that we might be rightfully become engaged in (for here and now) yet those things that will remain hereafter are what pleases the One in whose command we are forever under:

“Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.”-John 15:16

1 Corinthians 2:11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. KJV

Try as we might, there’s very little room to misinterpret what the apostle suggests here: One cannot know and understand the things of God without possessing and having intimate access to His very Spirit. And the apostle bids us to consider ourselves. How many injurious, admirable, awe-inspiring and even curious thoughts run through our minds on a daily basis, which no other man (and rightly so) will ever know save for us through our very own spirit? Unless one (and of course there is none) has access to a person’s most intimate recesses, their very heart and spirit, then there is virtually no way to truly discover what are the thoughts, deliberations and considerations of their minds. In much the same way, one need not frustrate himself or herself trying to understand God without possessing His Spirit. For to possess His Spirit is to be governed by His interests, compassions, motivations, concerns and most importantly, His love. (And without His Spirit, the things of God appear most foolish.):

“For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are the sons of God.” Romans 8:14

Ephesians 6:6 Not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart; KJV

Whether it be loving God, service to God, or fulfilling the purpose for which God has created us, there is but one way that man or woman can do the will of God in any area: “From the heart.” And the apostle Paul’s exposition of the life led by the Spirit as opposed to the life led by the flesh does much to explain why: “[…] Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.” To be sure, Paul is not suggesting that those who have been re-created in the image of Jesus Christ no longer inhabit earthen vessels of carnal flesh, and thus are unable to please God. Instead, he suggests that our carnal mind and flesh is incapable (in and of its own leadership) of fulfilling godly, spiritual aims; all of which explains why one can only do the will of God from the heart. For no matter how determined one may be to do the will of God, if it proceeds from one’s flesh and not from one’s spirit (the heart), the enterprise has failed from the outset:

“But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.”-John 4:23-24  

“We can fill your heads with knowledge, and we can train your hands to work with skill, but unless all this training of head and hand is based upon high, upright character, upon a true heart, it will amount to nothing. You will be no better off than the most ignorant.” – Booker T. Washington, A Sunday Evening Talk

Presidential Commentary by Dr. Brian Johnson 

In this writer’s opinion, “integrity” is the greatest 9-letter word, “knowledge” is the second greatest, and “ignorance” is-by far-the worst and most dangerous. And the founding principal and president of Tuskegee (Institute) University, Booker T. Washington, gives on this Sunday evening talk his oft-repeated conception of “heart-head-hands” to help his students avoid the dread of becoming “no better off than the most ignorant.” One can easily seek the help of professors to develop one’s “head”. (These men and women have as their primary purpose to fill the “heads” of students with “knowledge”.) Likewise, professors are able to help make a student’s “hands”-or their work-“skill”[ful]. (Through repeated instruction and correction a student will either become skillful at their work or they will receive failing grades.) Yet, the matter of the “heart,” Mr. Washington suggests, is one matter where students must begin and complete this work largely alone.

(Let no man or woman ever presume to become an expert on the subject of another’s heart.) Of all subject matters, it is the one that is deeply personal and unique to the individual. Whereas both the competencies of the “head” (the—soul—emotions, will, intellect—) and the credentials of the “hands” (the body) lie in full view, the character of the “heart” (the spirit of a man or woman) is always hidden from view. Yet, without it, all else “will amount to nothing”. (1 Thessalonians 5:23). For Mr. Washington’s complete configuration of Heart-Head-Hands in education is akin to the strength necessary to shoot arrows a great distance even as universities have shot forth their sons and daughters into rewarding and meaningful careers of service. (The heart or the “spirit” is the unseen and invisible strength that determines how far one can bend the bow to make the arrow go. How far one can bend the bow and shoot the arrow tells you precisely what one needs to know.)

“I have been a slave once in my life-a slave in body. But I long since resolved that no inducement and no influence would ever make me a slave in soul, in my love for humanity, and in my search for truth.” – Booker T. Washington, (1907) The Negro in the South

In a little-known, yet most noteworthy moment in the history of both American and African American literary history, Booker T. Washington jointly published the book _The Negro In the South (1907)_ . It contains 2 essays from himself and 2 other essays from none other than W.E.B. Du Bois. (And this was not their first co-publication. This would be the second book containing these two stalwarts in American and African American educational and intellectual history.)

All the same, in the first of Mr. Washington’s two essays, he makes the distinction between being a “slave in body” versus being a “slave in soul.” Note the following concerning the remarks of the founding principal and president of Tuskegee (Institute) University: He made a strategic, calculated set of decisions to ensure that his outward circumstances would not determine both his inner and his future circumstances. (And these decisions revolved around a “love for humanity” and a “search for truth”, which will always place the “lover” and “seeker” of such beyond the pale of those whose pursuits are self-interested, selfish and slavishly fearful.)

First, a lover of humanity is unafraid to come to learn to love others because he or she has first come to love himself. One can hardly come to love others if one does not possess a deep love for one’s self, and this includes learning to love both the learned and the ignorant. For a man or woman who ascended to leadership, as Mr. Washington had done, not only encountered both but had been both during his long ascent ‘Up From Slavery’. Second, the seeker of truth seeks after that which is right without regard to where this truth leads. Leo Tolstoy eloquently suggests the following about such a principle: “If you wish to know the truth, first of all free yourself from all considerations of self-interest.” Whether the truth Mr. Washington discovered was for the benefit or detriment to himself or not-“integrity” is the single greatest 9-letter word-this pursuit is without question what leads to 34 years of ongoing, consistent and enduring success for Tuskegee (Institute) University.

For unbroken, undivided and unwavering consistency and wholeness is perhaps the closest description of both “truth” and Mr. Washington’s presidency that has served and will continue to serve generations of “humanity.” And this is why we celebrated his accomplishments in this the centennial year of his passing (1915-2015).

“10 For thus saith the Lord, That after seventy years be accomplished at Babylon I will visit you, and perform my good word toward you, in causing you to return to this place. 11For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, saith the Lord, thoughts of peace, and not of evil, to give you an expected end.”-Jeremiah 29:10-11

Whereas Jeremiah 29:11 is an oft-quoted scripture heralded to inspire messages of a “future and a hope,”many hearers—and expositors alike—do not consider that such promises to the people proceeded ‘after seventy years’ of suffering. In a similar fashion, the Jeremiad—the complaints, protestations, prophesying, sermons and lamentations of the prophet Jeremiah recorded in the Book of Jeremiah and the Book of Lamentations—was not simply directed towards the Babylonians for its future invasion, transplanting and subjugation of the people. (It first involved prophecy against his own people for which he was pressed, persecuted and eventually imprisoned for and eventually released and then received favor from the Babylonians even while the people who were transplanted would have to wait a full 70 years of subjugation in Babylon until the coming of Darius of the Medes and Cyrus the Great.)

For the entirety of the 52 chapters of the Book of Jeremiah was first directed to the wrongs of the people before prophesying against the Babylonian invaders that led to ‘seventy years of [Babylonian] captivity,’ which Jeremiah was prosecuted, persecuted and imprisoned for speaking. (And this came at the hands of the people and false prophets who “healed also the hurt of the daughter of my people slightly, saying, peace, peace when there was no peace.” (Jeremiah 6:14). These were also those who comforted the people saying that they should not suffer or be subjugated believing that God was with them in spite of Jeremiah’s declarations, which were proven to be true.

All the same—then and only then—in his final prophecies against Babylon and its eventual demise at the hands of his “anointed” (Isaiah 45:1) deliverer of the people, the Medes and Persians (Darius and Cyrus the Great) who were the executors for the promise of an “expected end” fulfilled. In prophetic fashion, the people were first required to suffer before they would succeed.

“I would not be doing my duty to the school did I permit the present state of things to exist, especially in view of the fact that I am compelled to be away from the school a large part of the year and I am compelled to perform my work almost wholly through the members of the Executive Council and there must be only such persons as I have my complete confidence in and share my desires as to the policy and work of the institution.” “March 26, 1895,” – Booker T. Washington

Of the many important decisions leaders of large organizations must make, deciding upon one’s senior leadership team is perhaps the most important. For these men and women become extensions of a leader so that he or she might be multiplied in many places at once. And this is the founding principal and president of Tuskegee University’s idea, as early as 1895, when he assembled what might now be considered a roster of high caliber senior executives who would be named forever in the annals of Tuskegee’s long and illustrious history. The list reads like a “who’s who’s” in African American higher educational history: Emmett J. Scott (Chief of Staff), Warren Logan (CFO), John H. Washington (Head of Grounds and Facilities), George Washington Carver (Head of Agriculture), and Robert R. Taylor (Head of Architecture). This list does not begin to include Washington’s illustrious wives and First Ladies, Deans of Chapel and Religious Life and the many eminent associates of the institution who played various roles in the institution’s success such as Thomas Fortune, and Paul Laurence Dunbar.

First, Booker T. Washington’s travel often took him away from the home front so that he might represent the interests of the institution both near and abroad. No leader can ever feel comfortable when absent from the organization unless he or she is most certain that affairs will be conducted in a manner that reflects his or her management when they are present. Second, the broadest and widest tents have more than one pole. It is a poor leader who seeks to be the sole source or “pole” of leadership within an organization or unit. (How shall a tent become enlarged with only one pole?) The more poles, the larger and more expansive the tent, and the selection of many poles enable a leader to expand and “work almost wholly through the members” of his or her “Executive Council.” Third, Mr. Washington suggested, “there must be only such persons as I have my complete confidence in and share my desires as to the policy and work of the institution.” Note, competence and credentials are good but character plus competence and credentials is far greater. (Here again, integrity is the greatest 9-letter word.) Men and women who work with integrity will perform their work in view of the organization’s mission and vision, its tradition and trajectory without regard to the presence or absence of the leader.

Moreover, these men and women must possess the confidence of the leader. (How can a quarterback call plays in a huddle of teammates only to discover that the teammates are giving the plays to the opponent?) Much rather, teammates are selected on the basis of their commitment to a common goal, and a leader’s selection of teammates suggests much about who he or she has “complete confidence in,” and who “share[s] [his or her] desires.” For it is “the policy and work of the institution”-not the individual leader or team member-that makes for a highly functional and highly successful organization like Tuskegee Institute (University) during the 34-year tenure of Booker T. Washington from 1881 to 1915.

“Cambridge, Mass.,

April 24, 1905.

My Dear Du Bois…Of course in the heat of discussion I hear of you everywhere. I am rather troubled to find that a great many people suppose that you head a kind of opposition to Booker T. Washington’s ideas; so far as I understand, there is no innate lack of harmony between your purpose in life and his. You take a certain thing which must be done, viz. the higher education of those who can profit by it; he takes another end of the same problem; naturally each of you thinks that his interest is the more important; if you did not, you would exchange activities. But I do not see how either excludes the other. Our bumptious friend has made a great deal of u necessary trouble by his assaults on Mr. Washington, in season and out of season, and I have actually found people who seemed to suppose that you and Trotter were working together.

Sincerely yours,

Albert Bushnell Hart”

Many commentators—including the present one—have tried to look retrospectively to help reconcile the ideas of one Booker T. Washington and one William Edward Burghardt Du Bois. And perhaps Harvard historian, Albert Bushnell Hart, one of Du Bois’s former teachers has already done so in this April 24, 1905 letter to Du Bois in the midst of the heightening tensions between the work of Du Bois and the work of Washington. In this letter to Du Bois, he seeks to gently advise Du Bois concerning his affiliation with William Monroe Trotter and any perceived involvement with this strong-voiced anti-Washington contingent and leader of the “The Boston Riot,” occuring two years earlier with agitators targeting none other than Booker T. Washington.

(In a July 30, 1903 gathering in Boston, Massachusetts at the Zion A.M.E. Church, very strong opposition assembled in the audience to question Booker T. Washington and disrupt his speech that notwithstanding he was able to give. The “riot” included spraying the dias with cayenne pepper, displaying loud “hissing’ towards Washington and provided audience members a list of antagonistic questions to Washington. The full account including Trotter’s arrest and explanation appears in the Boston Globe’s, July 31, 1903, “An Account of the Boston Riot.” To be fantastically clear, it actually should not have actually been termed a riot and Mr. Du Bois was not in attendance.)

All the same, in addition to his concern that Du Bois was being associated with Trotter, he plainly describes the key differences between he and Washington that Du Bois and all future observers can hardly deny: “You [Du Bois] take a certain thing which must be done, viz. the higher education of those who can profit by it; he [Washington] takes another end of the same problem.” Whether in the early 20th century or now in the first quarter of the 21st century, one can hardly disagree with the sentiment that the vocational callings of some men and women require advanced higher education and other callings—no less valuable and perhaps in the long run far more profitable—requires specialized training (outside of higher education) for entrepreneurial and economic success.

Mr. Hart’s intervention perhaps came far too late for his former student. It had been 10 years since Washington’s famous Atlanta Exposition Address and 4 years since his _Up From Slavery_ had solidified his standing in the nation as the undisputed leader of the African American community while serving as the founding principal of the Tuskegee Institute. And with Du Bois’s publication 2 years prior, _The Souls of Black Folk_ (which also included a rather vociferous treatment of Washington in a chapter titled, “Of Booker T. Washington and others”) Du Bois had also become a national leader in scope and in voice. (In fact, Du Bois replied directly and sharply: “I have no personal opposition to him—I honor much of his work. But his platform has done the race infinite harm & I’m working against it with all my might…” ,

To the expressed delight of some and to the deep chagrin of others, this tension led persons and supporters of both men then—like Professor Hart—and still now to make their very best attempts for history to record the ideologies of both Du Bois’s and Washington as ‘not one or the other but both.’

“ Just here arises the need of the trained and scholarly men of a race to employ their knowledge and culture and teaching and to guide both the opinions and habits of the crude masses […] we can spread abroad and widely disseminate that culture and enlightenment which shall permeate and leaven the entire social and domestic life of our people and so give that civilization.”- Alexander Crummell, “Civilization, The Primal Need of the Race” (1897)

One important organization and person in Du Bois’s life that he largely omitted when documenting the story of his intellectual life was that of the American Negro Academy and Alexander Crummell.

Du Bois secured his first academic appointment at Wilberforce University, a religious institution under the auspices of the A.M.E. church. While there, Du Bois would try to maintain a careful, uneasy balance between the religious expectations that the university would require of him and the research, educational, and intellectual expectations that he would require of the university. And it was at Wilberforce University where Du Bois first met Alexander Crummell, a Yale-educated African American preacher and scholar (before the Civil War).

Crummell’s willingness to take his fellow African American clergymen to task for their derisory education, illiteracy, immorality, and a host of other areas proved attractive to Du Bois’s bourgeoning agnosticism. And though Du Bois, and other African American Academy members attempted to craft quasi-religious reform rhetoric to implement the reform aims that Du Bois’s “The Conservation of Races” promoted, it was clear that the question of how to infuse scholarly knowledge into quasi-religious reform rhetoric was never entirely resolved, as this oil-and-water union between Du Bois’s credentials and agnosticism, and the religious dogma associated with Crummell’s rigid adherence to Episcopalian doctrine, would result in Du Bois’s relative silence about this period in his life.

Although no satisfactory explanation has been offered thus far for Du Bois’s failure to describe his time within the American Negro Academy and his relationship with Alexander Crummell, perhaps Du Bois’s silence about this period might be explained in terms of this experience’s frightening similarity with the zeal he exhibited at both Fisk and Harvard (albeit brief). This period probably reminded Du Bois of how closely and organically linked he had become with a fundamentalist para-African American religious organization and preacher, which, in the end, was radically at odds with his lasting agnostic legacy.

“I suppose you’d like to be a Crow and fly over the world and see just everything as I,-and maybe I wouldn’t like to be a dear Brownie!-but since Crows must be Crows and Folks must be Folks, I’ll try to tell you about some things I’ve seen on my flight over the seas!”-William Edward Burghardt Du Bois, _Crisis Magazine_ (July 1920)

While W.E.B. Du Bois’s own descriptions of the crow’s travels through “many and varied nests” appear to explain his idealistic search for a centralized place for his unique and innovative concerns as a scholar, the crow’s prophetic symbolism in relation to the periodical is far more enigmatic. 

As an embodiment of Du Bois himself, the black crow bore a conspicuous resemblance to that of an Old Testament seer or prophet with only one distinction: a biblical seer or prophet possessed a providential mandate for his oracles and writings, whereas Du Bois’s authority-manifested most profoundly in periodical and utilitarian writing-proceeded from his standing as the first African American to receive a Ph.D. from Harvard in 1895- and a Berlin-trained African American who became the father of African American sociology.

Du Bois addressed African American social maladies using truths derived from sociological investigations in the African American community, which heretofore had never been attempted by an African American. He also possessed the unique advantage of being the most qualified African American to pursue African American social questions from an academic standpoint, and, among qualified sociologists, Du Bois was among the few whose work was wholly devoted to African American social problems for reform purposes. 

The black crow embodied in Du Bois’s founding of _Crisis Magazine: A Periodical of the Darker Races_ in 1910 as an arm of the NAACP; with it Du Bois marshaled the periodical’s unique ability to tersely disperse his enormous academic breadth of knowledge for reform and uplift purposes for the national African American and the larger global black communities. By situating the “black” crow “high above,” “looking downward with sharp eyes,” and dropping “bits of news” to the ordinary “folks,” Du Bois was able to metaphorically describe his uniqueness as an African American scholar relaying pertinent historical and contemporary knowledge for the purposes of reforming African Americans as well as protesting on behalf of them.

Although the imagery surrounding the crow remains cryptic, it is certain that Du Bois was prescient enough to to know that the figure of the crow would personify an African American with unparalleled possibilities in the realm of utilitarian periodical writing that few could ignore, including major white editors and their national white audience. 

From such progressive, liberal and religious platforms, Du Bois could finally be seen and finally disseminate what he saw in a manner that he could not through the many academic and scholarly works that many non-academics would never encounter. His most famous work, (1903) _The Souls of Black Folk_ contains 9 of the book’s 14 essays that were first published via periodical publication.

Finding alternative means for communicating to the masses information gleaned from many long years of study and research makes W.E.B. Du Bois a progenitor for modern-day social media pundits. One need only imagine how W.E.B. Du Bois might have utilized social media for the purposes of communicating his research.

“The first book I knew was the Bible, and it is the book from which I have received the greatest amount of instruction and information. The part of the Bible which interested me perhaps more than any other was that which told the story of the way in which Moses led the people out of the House of Bondage.

For many years the Bible was the only book the colored people knew. Even in slavery, when very few could read or write, the older people managed some how or other to gain a pretty good acquaintance with the Bible, and the younger generation have not yet forgotten what they learned on their mother’s knees.”-Booker T. Washington to J.S. Dickerson, managing editor of The Standard, November 10, 1911

To understand Booker T. Washington’s life and vocation one would do well to understand the Bible. Similarly, when discerning the lived lives of men and women—and the opinions many arrive at concerning them—one would do well to understand the Bible. And here Booker T. Washington’s ‘Statement on the Bible’ published in The Standard discloses the central tenet of his vocational life: “…it is the book from which I have received the greatest amount of instruction and information.” As his letters, writings, speeches and biographies—Up From Slavery, The Story of My Life and Work and My Larger Education—intimate, Mr. Washington’s vocational life was rooted in a profound regard for biblical principles that for him was not a mere late 19th century and early 20th century notion that would be forgotten, forsaken or considered fanatical and fundamentalist. For he believed that through observing the Bible he would provide sufficient historical record concerning it with his life hence his adage: “Let examples answer.”

For at times his profound sense of calling—prophetic in formation and demonstration, including both his flaws and foibles until the time of his passing in 1915—found itself at odds at times with members of his own race and against the system of American racism which had enslaved him. All of which is quite telling when one considers his explicit reference to the biblical telling of the personage of Moses. And one need not be a seminarian or theologian to consider what Washington was doing here with this statement referencing Moses leading the people out of the ‘House of Bondage’. For the life of Mr. Washington and the life of the personage of Moses contains many striking parallels that would not have escaped his screwed perception.

“I have been a slave once in my life-a slave in body. But I long since resolved that no inducement and no influence would ever make me a slave in soul, in my love for humanity, and in my search for truth.” – Booker T. Washington, (1907) _The Negro in the South_

In a little-known, yet most noteworthy moment in the history of both American and African American literary history, Booker T. Washington jointly published the book _The Negro In the South (1907)_ . It contains 2 essays from himself and 2 other essays from none other than W.E.B. Du Bois. (And this was not their first co-publication. This would be the second book containing these two stalwarts in American and African American educational and intellectual history.)

All the same, in the first of Mr. Washington’s two essays, he makes the distinction between being a “slave in body” versus being a “slave in soul.” Note the following concerning the remarks of the founding principal and president of Tuskegee (Institute) University: He made a strategic, calculated set of decisions to ensure that his outward circumstance would not determine his future circumstances. (And these decisions revolved around a “love for humanity” and a “search for truth”, which will always place the “lover” and “seeker” of such beyond the pale of those whose pursuits alternatively lead to self-interest and “slavishly” fearful actions designed solely for self preservation.

First, a lover of humanity is unafraid to come to learn to love others because he or she has first come to love himself. One can hardly come to love others if one does not possess a deep love for one’s self, and this includes learning to love both the learned and the ignorant. For a man or woman who ascended to leadership, as Mr. Washington had done, not only encountered both but had been both during his long ascent ‘Up From Slavery’.

Second, the seeker of truth seeks after that which is right without regard to where this truth leads. Leo Tolstoy eloquently suggests the following about such a principle: “If you wish to know the truth, first of all free yourself from all considerations of self-interest.” Whether the truth Mr. Washington discovered was for the benefit or detriment to himself or not—“integrity” is the single greatest 9-letter word—this pursuit is without question what leads to ongoing, consistent and enduring “character”—the second greatest 9-letter word. (Character is not your highest moment nor your lowest moment but your most consistent moment.) And unbroken, undivided and unwavering consistency in character is perhaps the closest description of those who seek “truth” in the interest of “lov[ing] humanity.”

My dear Dr. Grimke: You cannot realize how much satisfaction your kind words of congratulation bring to me. I know that no utterance comes from your lips that are not sincere. The reception given my words at Atlanta has been a revelation to me. I had no idea that a Southern audience would treat a black man’s utterances in the way that it did. The heart of the whole South now seems to be turned in a different direction. You can easily see that I had rather a difficult task. First I wanted to be very sure to state the exact truth and of not compromising the race. Then there were some things that I felt should be said to the colored people and some others to the white people; and aside from these considerations I wanted to so deport myself as not to make such an impression as would prevent a similar opportunity being offered to some other colored man in the south.” – September 24, 1895, Booker T. Washington

Presidential Commentary by Dr. Brian Johnson 

In the days and weeks following Booker T. Washington’s “Atlanta Exposition Address (1895),” he received several commendations and congratulatory messages from a host of well wishers for this now historic address. In addition to remarks received from Francis James Grimke who was instrumental in the founding of the NAACP, W.E.B. (William Edward Burghardt) Du Bois-his noted rival-remarked, “My Dear Mr. Washington: Let me heartily congratulate you upon your phenomenal success at Atlanta-it was a word fitly spoken.”

In deed and in truth, the founding principal and president of Tuskegee Institute (University) “had rather a difficult task” in delivering such an address that has profound reverberations, even in this present century. Mr. Washington’s detractors-including many who praised him in private-decried against the address calling it the “Atlanta Compromise” because of its emphasis upon industrial education and developing economic independence for African-Americans as opposed to pressing for social justice during that volatile period.

Yet, what many failed to appreciate then about Washington-and fail to appreciate now about men and women in leadership situated similar to Washington-is that such men and women have multiple constituencies and audiences to appeal to. In 1895, in the Deep South, where Mr. Washington had spent 15 years building an institution of higher learning for formerly enslaved African-Americans, he needed to be especially keen, prudent and cautious about enflaming the fires of lynching, unprovoked beatings and murder, and the burning down of his facilities during a dark and infamous period in American history that is all too well documented.

(For this man, unlike many of his detractors was in a position of leadership over students whose parents entrusted them to him, and if the institution were burned to the ground with several casualties because he spoke what others thought he should speak, one need only have a rudimentary historical imagination to understand the consequences of this.) On the other hand, he could hardly deny that the racial atrocities and social injustices committed against African-Americans solely based upon their ancestry and skin color could go unnoticed or unspoken on such a prominent platform. Thus, he-like most persons who have ever led or spoken to diverse and multiple constituencies-followed a three-prong approach in his address:

1. “First [he] wanted to be very sure to state the exact truth…” (One will never go awry in speaking a plain statement of facts to audiences without regard to how such facts are received. As J.K. Miller wrote: “It is not the truth that people cannot handle. It is the consequences that stem from that truth.”)

2. Second, “there were some things that I felt should be said to the colored people and some others to the white people;”(It is a poor, paltry and partial speaker or leader indeed who makes one-dimensional arguments and directs messages of truth to one racial, socioeconomic, ethnic or cultural group or another.) The greatest speakers and leaders transcend such categorizations and will inevitably share truth that falls wherever it may.

3. Third, “aside from these considerations [he] wanted to so deport [himself] as not to make such an impression as would prevent a similar opportunity being offered to some other colored man in the south.”

To be sure, one’s words and actions in leadership always set precedent for those who come afterward. While one’s conscience and sense of “speaking one’s mind” may lead one to offer a torrent of remarks without regard to one’s constituency, the prudent leader exercises restraint for he or she knows that his words and leadership impacts someone other than himself. And this final regard is the hallmark of Booker T. Washington’s leadership at the helm of Tuskegee Institute (University). Possessing real and actual responsibility with respect to others deepens one’s commitment and capacity for serving others and lessens one’s commitment and capacity for serving one’s self.

“My Dear Dr. Washington,

I am writing you this letter in fear & trembling because of the fact that I am uncertain as to the out-come of it, but deep down in my heart I hope that it will not have been written in vain.

I closed you will find 2 clippings from a recent letter that I received from Mr. T. Thos. Fortune of the Age [newspaper] which will give you an inkling of the mission of this letter. Also my authority for writing it.

I am a friend of Mr. Fortune’s and have been for a number of years. I am also a great & staunch admirer of you, not because of your great work alone, but because of your friendship to me when I could not help myself. This being the case it occurred to me that it was a national calamity for the greatest Negro Educator living, or dead and the greatest living Negro Editor to be estranged from each other when the union of two such great forces meant and means so much to our people.

Being constantly in touch with Mr. Fortune’s I have finally gotten his consent in touch with Mr. Fortune I have finally gotten his consent to approach you in this delicate subject and I now feel he is ready to smoke the pipe of peace and make any amends for his part in the enstrangement…” “Thomas B. Patterson to Booker T. Washington, July 2, 1913″

Besides his voluminous correspondence with his modern-day chief of staff, Mr. Emmett J. Scott, T. and Mr. Warren Logan his chief financial officer, Thomas Fortune was the next most voluminous correspondent with Booker T. Washington for nearly 20 years of his 34-year presidency of Tuskegee Institute. Their letters date from as early as 1887 to roughly 1907. In fact, in their earliest correspondence they were to discuss a national periodical and intellectual clearinghouse coming out of none of thee than Tuskegee Institute. See ‘He stood between Giants’: https://intersectionoffaithandlearning.com/2026/02/02/he-stood-between-giants-t-thomas-fortune-booker-t-washington-and-w-e-b-du-bois/

T. Thomas Fortune had not only help edit–and likely ghostwrote later revisions–Booker T. Washington’s first attempt at autobiography, the 1900 The Story of My Life and Work, he was his most fierce ally in the periodical press with his editorship of The New York Age, which at the time was the largest African American periodical with national circulation. Their published correspondence reveals a steady-stream of political intrigue, professional gossip, disagreements, commendations, counsel, encouragements, stratagems and also personal admonitions from Mr. Washington to Mr. Fortune about his personal affairs. Sadly, these affairs in part—and Mr. Washington’s own part in the dissolution of their relationship—led to their eventual estrangement in 1907. And in this 1913 letter from one Mr. Thomas Patterson to Booker T. Washington—if not at the behest of T. Thomas Fortune, he notably agreed to it —sought to reconcile ‘the greatest Negro educator and the greatest Negro editor.’

Though professional in nature, the correspondence between Fortune and Washington reveals a sort of sibling bond with Mr. Washington. Due to his positioning as Principal of Tuskegee and his own personal wealth, Mr. Washington would likely be considered the elder sibling. (A forthcoming commentary on Washington’s personal wealth would be intriguing. A 1903 gift from Andrew Carnegie in the amount of $600,000 would be the largest gift to Tuskegee in history with a present-day value of $22 million, $150,000 of which, was to go to Booker T. Washington directly.) All the same, Washington’s remonstrations directed towards Fortune covered a wide array of matters which most notably involved Fortune’s financial handling of his personal and business affairs. (No less intriguing were Fortune’s appeals and petitions to Washington for financial assistance beyond payments received for his work.)

Notwithstanding, although they worked very successfully on a number of matters in Tuskegee’s interests against public opposition, Fortune had long been conflicted about his service to Booker T. Washington when his own reputation was one of a firebrand and agitator for the rights of African Americans which must have made it extremely troubling for him to oppose men like W.E.B. Du Bois on behalf of Mr. Washington. Furthermore, Fortune’s financial dependency upon the ‘Wizard’ and the ‘Tuskegee Machine’ coupled with his own management of his financial affairs all came to a head in 1907.

While it is well-established that in 1907 Booker T. Washington secretly financed the purchase of Fortune’s paper to Fred Moore during a time when Mr. Fortune was suffering from mental and health breakdowns, the circumstances are no so clear. First, none of Booker T. Washington’s reveal clear evidence of his involvement nor with his attempts to influence other African American news periodicals. (The overwhelming weight of circumstantial evidence and careful readings of what he has written to others reveal otherwise.) Second, Mr. Fortune finances had been in disarray throughout his life owing to what appears to be alcoholism and Mr. Washington was privy to this and sought to assist him in several ways. Lastly, Fortune himself was seeking to sell his interest in the paper. All the same, the matter of this newspaper’s sale was the principal incident which led to the dissolution of their relationship.

All the same, Mr. Patterson’s letter likely did not lead to any reconciliation owing to Mr. Washington’s death two years later and his health being in a steady decline for many years due to his strenuous workload. Mr. Washington’s reply as usual was straightforward, astute and it did not betray any abuse to Mr. Fortune or Mr. Patterson: “I do not regard myself as being estranged from Mr. Fortune, and I do not know as he regards himself as being estranged from me in any manner of mutual interest. I am sure we will be able in the future as in the past to work together.”

At the time of Booker T. Washington’s passing in 1915, there is no record that this commentator has seen to suggest that this powerful working relationship resumed. However, the extraordinary amount of good that Fortune did for Mr. Washington and Tuskegee is still so magnificently present in articles, speeches, writings and books that a future forensic historian might be able to see Fortune’s fingerprints—literally and figuratively—littered all upon both Washington and Tuskegee’s legacy.

May 22, 1905

Mr. Theodore Roosevelt

Sir:

I learn that you are expecting to visit Atlanta this fall and I want to ask you to visit Atlanta University. This is asking a good deal, but I am not making the request lightly. Atlanta University has stood for nearly forty years as an institution peculiarly devoted to the high aspirations of the American Negro. We have suffered for this—we are suffering for it but we are sticking to our ideals. At the same time we think we deserve something of the American people and therefore of you as their Chief representative. We were glad to have President McKinley-come to Atlanta even though he did not visit us, and we were glad when he visited a sister institution where many of our graduates teach. Yet when we face the prospect of your doing the same we feel differently.

You are yourself a college man and have enunciated the highest ideals fearlessly. This institution is the child of Harvard and Yale. It has sent into the world 500 black men and women who mean something. You are coming to our very threshold—will you not step in a moment and tell us and the world you have the same faith in the right sort of college-bred black men that you have in the right sort of artisans and working men?

I sincerely hope you can. A.U. Is right in the city—a mile from the post office so that a call will take by a little time. I beg to remain, Sir,

W. E. B. Du Bois, Washington, May 25, 1905

It is no small institutional feat to have a member of the highest office in the the land—the Office of the President of the United States of America—and no less, the President himself, to come speak on an institution’s campus grounds. Unlike most requests that proceed from the institution’s President, W.E.B. Du Bois, the most well known African American scholar, having become the first African American Ph.D. recipient from Harvard University ten years earlier, inquires directly to the nation’s 26th President, Theodore Roosevelt, as to whether he would come to then Atlanta University to the address the campus. However, more than an address to a campus, Du Bois surreptitiously seeks an endorsement for his own program of education for African Americans from the highest office in the land while explicitly distinguishing between his work at Atlanta University from the work of his ideological rival Booker T. Washington at Tuskegee Institute.

Clandestinely invoking the 25th President of the United States, President William McKinley, and his 1898 visit to the campus of Washington’s Tuskegee, which signalled his endorsement of the program there, Du Bois unapologetically made clear the differences between the then Atlanta University and the then Tuskegee Institute in a manner that would cause unintended readers of this over a-century-old correspondence to blush: “We were glad to have President McKinley-come to Atlanta even though he did not visit us, and we were glad when he visited a sister institution where many of our graduates teach…will you not step in a moment and tell us and the world you have the same faith in the right sort of college-bred black men that you have in the right sort of artisans and working men?”

And while President Roosevelt did not speak at Atlanta University—he did in fact speak in Atlanta at Georgia Tech in 1905—the secretary to the President afforded Du Bois the magnanimity of the following reply: “Your wishes will be bourne in mind and given consideration when the details of the trip are taken up.” All the same, what Du Bois made clear to the highest office in the land was that there were different ways to train “college-bred” black men and women, and his work at Atlanta University deserved attention.

While other commentaries address plainly Du Bois’s conceptual framing of the ‘Talented Tenth’ and his partial disavowal of the abuse it caused among college-trained black men and women who viewed the kind of training he advocated as a honorific as opposed to a vocational call to service, one thing is clear: In this letter, Du Bois believed that his emphasis upon a kind of 20th century vocational liberal arts and intellectual training deserved a hearing, and upon a platform equivalent to Atlanta’s ‘sister institution’ the then Tuskegee Institute.

“Cambridge, Mass.,

April 24, 1905.

My Dear Du Bois…Of course in the heat of discussion I hear of you everywhere. I am rather troubled to find that a great many people suppose that you head a kind of opposition to Booker T. Washington’s ideas; so far as I understand, there is no innate lack of harmony between your purpose in life and his. You take a certain thing which must be done, viz. the higher education of those who can profit by it; he takes another end of the same problem; naturally each of you thinks that his interest is the more important; if you did not, you would exchange activities. But I do not see how either excludes the other. Our bumptious friend has made a great deal of u necessary trouble by his assaults on Mr. Washington, in season and out of season, and I have actually found people who seemed to suppose that you and Trotter were working together.

Sincerely yours,

Albert Bushnell Hart”

Many commentators—including the present one—have tried to look retrospectively to help reconcile the ideas of one Booker T. Washington and one William Edward Burghardt Du Bois. And perhaps Harvard historian, Albert Bushnell Hart, one of Du Bois’s former teachers has already done so in this April 24, 1905 letter to Du Bois in the midst of the heightening tensions between the work of Du Bois and the work of Washington. In this letter to Du Bois, he seeks to gently advise Du Bois concerning his affiliation with William Monroe Trotter and any perceived involvement with this strong-voiced anti-Washington contingent and leader of the “The Boston Riot,” occuring two years earlier with agitators targeting none other than Booker T. Washington.

(In a July 30, 1903 gathering in Boston, Massachusetts at the Zion A.M.E. Church, very strong opposition assembled in the audience to question Booker T. Washington and disrupt his speech that notwithstanding he was able to give. The “riot” included spraying the dias with cayenne pepper, displaying loud “hissing’ towards Washington and provided audience members a list of antagonistic questions to Washington. The full account including Trotter’s arrest and explanation appears in the Boston Globe’s, July 31, 1903, “An Account of the Boston Riot.” To be fantastically clear, it actually should not have actually been termed a riot and Mr. Du Bois was not in attendance.)

All the same, in addition to his concern that Du Bois was being associated with Trotter, he plainly describes the key differences between he and Washington that Du Bois and all future observers can hardly deny: “You [Du Bois] take a certain thing which must be done, viz. the higher education of those who can profit by it; he [Washington] takes another end of the same problem.” Whether in the early 20th century or now in the first quarter of the 21st century, one can hardly disagree with the sentiment that the vocational callings of some men and women require advanced higher education and other callings—no less valuable and perhaps in the long run far more profitable—requires specialized training (outside of higher education) for entrepreneurial and economic success.

Mr. Hart’s intervention perhaps came far too late for his former student. It had been 10 years since Washington’s famous Atlanta Exposition Address and 4 years since his _Up From Slavery_ had solidified his standing in the nation as the undisputed leader of the African American community while serving as the founding principal of the Tuskegee Institute. And with Du Bois’s publication 2 years prior, _The Souls of Black Folk_ (which also included a rather vociferous treatment of Washington in a chapter titled, “Of Booker T. Washington and others”) Du Bois had also become a national leader in scope and in voice. (In fact, Du Bois replied directly and sharply: “I have no personal opposition to him—I honor much of his work. But his platform has done the race infinite harm & I’m working against it with all my might…” ,

To the expressed delight of some and to the deep chagrin of others, this tension led persons and supporters of both men then—like Professor Hart—and still now to make their very best attempts for history to record the ideologies of both Du Bois’s and Washington as ‘not one or the other but both.’

“To Robert Curtis Ogden…

Dear Mr. Ogden:

Replying to yours of May 21 I would state that in order to be absolutely sure of retaining Mr. Taylor’s services, in my opinion I am sure we will have to add four or five hundred dollars to his present salary. The Oklahoma people are very insistent and very tempting in their offers. As I have told Mr. Peabody, I should consider it a far-reaching calamity for us to lose Mr. Taylor at Tuskegee.

Yours very truly,

Booker T. Washington, May 28, 1906

Robert R. Taylor arrived at Tuskegee Institute in 1892, and most agree that he was—near certainly—the first African American graduate of Massachusetts Institute of Technology, as well as the country’s first African American architect. In relatively short order, he replaced Booker T. Washington’s brother John H. Washington as the head of the building program and director of mechanical industries. (To appreciate the significance of this change for Mr. Washington and Tuskegee Institute’s future, Taylor’s expertise was so greatly valued that he replaced Washington’s elder brother—his own brother, Mr. John H. Washington.) This John H. Washington is not to be mistaken for his adopted brother James Washington who would also serve in important roles at Tuskegee.

Notwithstanding, in this 1906 letter of reply to his board member, Robert Ogden, regarding the unusual petition to grant his request to “add four or five hundred dollars” to the salary of an employee who was none other than Robert R. Taylor, Washington would make it emphatically clear: “I should consider it a far-reaching calamity for us to lose Mr. Taylor at Tuskegee.” To this request, Mr. Ogden, a supportive university board member interested in the institution’s success, replied in a subsequent letter: “You are authorized to add four hundred dollars to salary as suggested.”

To further appreciate Mr. Taylor’s enormous contributions to Tuskegee Institute, consider the fact that he drew nearly all of the plans and specifications for Tuskegee Institute’s buildings and facilities on its campus including its first chapel. This also includes the Slater-Armstrong Memorial Trades Building which was the largest building on the Tuskegee Institute grounds at the time of its opening on January 10, 1900–9 years after the start of Mr. Washington’s presidency in 1881. What’s still more remarkable is that Mr. Taylor’ architectural work was for a campus which gradually increased to over 5000 acres owned making it not only the largest HBCU in terms of acreage owned, to date, by nearly 2500 acres. (Amongst all U.S. universities in the United States, this commentator has seen published reports ranking Tuskegee in acreage owned as high as 8th and as low as 20th.)

Beyond his visible contributions that serve as a testament to his legacy, Mr. Taylor served collaboratively and confidentially when called to participate on several internal university committees dedicated to both student and other important matters. (This eventual architectural giant was yet only a member of a committee to arrange the Tuskegee exhibit at the Atlanta Exposition where Mr. Washington delivered his now infamous address in 1895 which would be prior to George Washington Carver’s arrival in 1896.)

Rather remarkably, there is very little written correspondence from Mr. Taylor directly and personally (not as a committee representative) found in Mr. Washington’s papers and correspondence—except one where his opinion was requested. (It appears from what we know concerning Mr. Taylor that he was a man of deep and profound humility. One might easily imagine this was owing to his many long years of service working alongside Booker T. Washington whose lifelong work sought to inculcate one of his more understated aphorisms found in his writings: “Let examples answer.”

All the same, in the letter he was requested to provide, Mr. Taylor submits his recommendation that Robert R. Moton succeed Mr. Washington—joining many others the most notable of which was Mrs. Margaret Murray Washington—in believing that Mr. Moton not Mr.Emmett J. Scott, Washington’s modern day chief of staff or Mr. Warren Logan, Washington’s modern day chief financial officer should become Tuskegee’s second president. (To their credit, neither Logan or Scott openly expressed interest in the position though both possessed many supporters.)

Some 73 years after his passing, Robert Taylor would be formally recognized in a United States Postal Service unveiling ceremony on February 12, 2015. (He would be represented at the ceremony by his great granddaughter Valerie Jarrett, the then senior advisor to the President of the United States of America.) With it he became the third Tuskegee Institute faculty or staff member possessing a U.S. postage stamp in his honor along with Washington, the first among all African Americans, and George Washington Carver. (Alfred Anderson, representing the Tuskegee Airmen, would also receive this honor.) And while the person in back of most of the iconic buildings appearing on the campus was perhaps not as voiced as many of his Tuskegee contemporaries, especially Booker T. Washington, these buildings speak and continue to speak. And how ironic that this speech extends to Mr. Taylor’s passing. For he passed in the very chapel he created and designed upon his return visit to Tuskegee in 1942.

“My dear Dr. Grimke:

You cannot realize how much satisfaction your kind words of congratulation bring to me. I know that no utterance comes from your lips that are not sincere. The reception given my words at Atlanta has been a revelation to me. I had no idea that a Southern audience would treat a black man’s utterances in the way that it did. The heart of the whole South now seems to be turned in a different direction. You can easily see that I had rather a difficult task. First I wanted to be very sure to state the exact truth and of not compromising the race. Then there were some things that I felt should be said to the colored people and some others to the white people; and aside from these considerations I wanted to so deport myself as not to make such an impression as would prevent a similar opportunity being offered to some other colored man in the south.” 

– September 24, 1895, Booker T. Washington

In the days and weeks following Booker T. Washington’s “Atlanta Exposition Address (1895),” he received several commendations and congratulatory messages from a host of well wishers for this now historic address. In addition to remarks received from Francis James Grimke who was instrumental in the founding of the NAACP, W.E.B. (William Edward Burghardt) Du Bois-his noted rival-remarked, “My Dear Mr. Washington: Let me heartily congratulate you upon your phenomenal success at Atlanta-it was a word fitly spoken.” Indeed, the founding principal and president of Tuskegee Institute (University) “had rather a difficult task” in delivering such an address that had profound reverberations, even in this present century. Mr. Washington’s detractors-including many who praised him in private-decried against the address calling it the “Atlanta Compromise” because of its emphasis upon industrial education and developing economic independence for African-Americans as opposed to pressing for social justice during that volatile period. Yet, what many failed to appreciate then about Washington-and fail to appreciate now about men and women in leadership situated similar to Washington-is that such men and women have multiple constituencies and audiences.

In 1895, in the Deep South, where Mr. Washington had spent over 14 years building an institution of higher learning for formerly enslaved African-Americans, he needed to be especially keen, prudent and cautious about enflaming the fires of lynching, unprovoked beatings and murder, and the burning down of his facilities during a dark and infamous period in American history that is all too well documented. (For this man, unlike many of his detractors was in a position of leadership over students whose parents entrusted them to him, and if the institution were burned to the ground with several casualties because he spoke what others thought he should speak, one need only have a rudimentary historical imagination to understand the consequences of this.)

On the other hand, he could hardly deny that the racial atrocities and social injustices committed against African-Americans solely based upon their ancestry and skin color could go unnoticed or unspoken on such a prominent platform. Thus, he-like most persons who have ever successfully led or spoken to diverse and multiple constituencies-followed a three-prong approach in his address:

1. “First [he] wanted to be very sure to state the exact truth…” (One will never go awry in speaking a plain statement of facts to audiences without regard to how such facts are received. As J.K. Miller wrote: “It is not the truth that people cannot handle. It is the consequences that stem from that truth.”) 2. Second, “there were some things that I felt should be said to the colored people and some others to the white people;”(It is a poor, paltry and partial speaker or leader indeed who makes one-dimensional arguments and directs messages of truth to one racial, socioeconomic, ethnic or cultural group or another.) The greatest speakers and leaders transcend such categorizations and will inevitably share truth that falls wherever it may. Third, “aside from these considerations [he] wanted to so deport [himself] as not to make such an impression as would prevent a similar opportunity being offered to some other colored man in the south.”

Make no mistake, one’s words and actions in leadership always set precedents for those who come afterward. While one’s conscience and sense of “speaking one’s mind” may lead one to offer a torrent of remarks without regard to one’s constituency, the prudent leader exercises restraint for he or she knows that his words and leadership impacts someone other than himself. And this final regard is the hallmark of Booker T. Washington’s leadership at the helm of a university. Possessing real and actual responsibility with respect to others deepens one’s commitment and capacity for serving others and lessens one’s commitment and capacity for serving one’s self.

Shemeka and I honoring the legacy of Pastor Robyn Gool. He made such a profound impact upon my life and my family. (I even dedicated my dissertation to him in 2003.) 👏🏾🙌🏾👑 Psalm 115:1 “Not unto us, O Lord, Not unto us, But unto thy name give glory for thy mercy and truth’s sake.”