Black Star: African American Activism in the International Political Economy

7. Stormy Seas: Government Obstruction of BSL Transnational Goals

7 Stormy Seas: Government obstruction of BSl transnational Goals Purchasing a ship through the shipping board minimized the deceptive selling practices the BSL had experienced in the private market. Tedious USSB bureaucratic processing delayed procurement, however. Any ship purchase had to be approved by several departments, including the ship sales division, the legal department, the insurance department, and finally the board of directors. Further, given the BSL’s financial history, the USSB also demanded financial reassurance before finalizing the transaction. These conditions put additional pressure on the BSL because they had to make the down payment on a $350,000 vessel, pay for a performance bond, provide insurance, and be prepared to make payments. On the other hand, the ship was more likely to be classed and seaworthy. There were two other reasons for USSB’s slow response. The USSB was coming under increasing pressure for its own performance. Its primary goal was to sell U.S. and German vessels efficiently into the U.S. merchant marine . Rigorous competition in the international economy demanded that the United States go beyond the advantage of its large production capacity to wield power in the efficient transport of its goods and improve its competitiveness for greater market share. To do this, the USSB was created in part to assist U.S. exporters in purchasing and operating ships. However, businesses complained about the USSB’s incompetence in marketing and some questionable unprofitable leases of ships, which led to charges of patronage politics. The New York Times reported that foreign ships were carrying more American cargo to parts of South America than U.S. ships, and that on the Atlantic coast foreign ships carried over 70 percent of U.S. freight. Indeed, the USSB was losing over $4 million a month, and ships were reportedly rusting in port.1 Thus in late 1921, the USSB management was replaced, and new management probably was trying to improve the agency’s effectiveness and avert growing criticism by thoroughly scrutinizing buyers to insure better revenue intake. Another reason for the USSB’s lassitude may have been a Bureau of Investigation (BI) memorandum to USSB, which stated: The Bureau has been advised by a strictly confidential source, that MARCUS GARVEY, president of the Universal Negro Improvement Association, and head of the Black Star Line, is negotiating at the present time for the purchase of a boat from the U.S. Shipping Board. I am sure that you will recall the activities of Marcus Garvey and I am therefore , referring this information to you for such attention as you may deem advisable.2 The Bureau of Investigation, the forerunner of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and housed in the Justice Department, had been watching the UNIA and its auxiliary organizations since early 1918.3 The federal government was concerned about the rising political activity and resistance of black activists and organizations. Their surveillance covered all organizations regardless of ideology. They hired black informants to report on African American political activity across the nation. The UNIA was considered one of the most dangerous because of its caustic rhetoric and ability to mobilize its membership to follow UNIA’s agenda nationally. Surveillance was conducted in four tiers. There were informants placed within the organization; informants and agents observed the interactions between black organizations and within the community; UNIA divisions around the country were monitored, particularly when Garvey or other officials visited; and finally bureau administrators set and implemented policies, as well as interacted with other governmental surveillance units, in order to contain UNIA activities and influence. The quality of the informants and agents’ reports was varied. Reports with obviously incorrect information are discounted in this study. Most of these seem to have been reports from outside the New York area, when a local police officer in a given city was dispatched to cover a UNIA speech or meeting. Many names were confused or misspelled, UNIA organizational structure was misrepresented, and so forth. Such reports are useful in a few ways, however; they substantiate the attendance numbers and show the extent of surveillance. They also offer insight into systems used to collect contributions in UNIA 124 . black star meetings across the country. I also treat cautiously reports that contain biased or subjective statements. For example, descriptions of participants as “ignorant workers or Negroes” or continuous personal political commentary demonstrate a priori conclusions rather than professional observation. Nevertheless, there were reports that...